Full text of "Tracts on the points at issue between the Churches of England and Rome"

See other formats

eget nee PETE et bodes IDebie PRG DEIR bd —* ‘Sretearwetees Mas =. va .
MESS fat LO A! Apney ed tre g koh pao Sengeres ‘ ae heer! NVR ¥Pr tee on ee
Det is Sipe [ote theehay Peale tay Ss aoa be ns hp ot hi ai ty - tint HAPS Heaps 1 oie ~~
partie e I Ot nt cee atid ok ad : Daray TPR ae “FPPM ADEN ES me vane

ve peer vary fpr ap ah ca PU NITN b, ohe egeatimrts 45 °
det : MO ontere py Aeapeett ddd’ sdnadd cehesl. side

ie eetetbeses tee ee

PTL Hs oeeisbhetenhtnen?,

. ys 4 oa -
PSR ETA y weigh Ot rarery ~ "s my . . mee .
. ay . x Bd dee Td oy . PROC Y One Dn. Or ee we
TOES Rey -cogemyp pn sae eT OE EA Rap pale Psi, lhigk dapat bea tatoanecogimndiibe demain teas aoe pli od nee ae ->
t eepen ban eee ’ ’ PSpr a repay months” S/F Py mre, pep evey RM rere rarer ate Pete em s Tefen ewe
etd Mee grees. hindidbdigetebad: Atos siblieis Inthe hee ee nd ee eee 2b GR ge mere rope A As 6l) meted nase, SOE Midhdistnigdee dale ee peered oe Sie -:
2 > ——- FOO Eo pee “F8 e=ape 0s
een RTP eR Sy SET CNT LEE tre ering RY ONSET PEIEN NEEM ay biyy, ab PERSE Ry. oP Piphdthenete anne =~ abetted aes rue meee tues, oe
sda OPP ewarPe har etry cea y mr ONT pnt rh £6088 1 Rte e GP ERATED Rene We Rts eset tePe Ray be EORROP EPs on i dhe Ner ab alitotd pao eee tne ie ee -
Barwin; @ - aaa rovyfetecyyaniaaierass tv SF LIED LTO EDL OMY Rae BET Mang 4 Reng tins Seay OR ante peng OF AOE EE DAP Oy 2-8 Men Bohs way: ee denied a apd viestieces es _—
. rtf stey. ag ne snione pares pated Spr ata en rahe Aen mig peel RGadpddnes YAN Mabdiemeed tee Pret OPO hy +210 Pasesrn. Aa wh a: medidas Seeiiteteliihtendies one nad) oti een >
anti ahi ont ae eee 2 all 5 ee ee pee Cg hem Bp ome te rt .
7 2a. ’ r a9F% : et WoPte “ - FOE? 2 rye Pay we, ~ _—s eye °
Stet tren: eteechdine PAM RE ENTE me ROO oe mene cmeewe ga eT mE REI) aheee 28 ag ime lt A oe el pie nae eee Ln me bo aney ee nel tad fn ra
ee LT Mee ee Ses te eed See ee wre ¥ FFP PIER over Sh te rpm, Sear rete: ee >
LOE Sever gen ty a9 geomet Hob al EP ene gnoe, eresyet= Taos Tt hme cutie hat sehaeedisd ie ded ee oedan aidlibvenetibptennes *) ak io. - eatin — . een oe
° on sates biiea Wittent ota lacahmeasenaere no ; eibatdbit.me at aotins idl otedaliee eeniien iden
sruingy herve ate Fiseli > os rer te 8 team eete 9 POTS ine ong tBeger we Beni ee ee ote pod alias
nd PM Dray tea Bs tes) Pan SPR Dao bares PAY tg AMD went t Se prennen, ar tres ane ti aga ee PN tate ee worry om owe ae
Renee anger= pery e by - ~ - -* — a
a wrote - sly we NT ont perth p ARTs: SIN tee einneereracen haa i i Ne eee eee o ea
SAE NS PAH REDS ety s RMT TP EIS EP ATE Thre eee Reg MT” ~ at LPIA 0 penngs ap a be wi? Se aa Teton ome Pin jm
ahha Te hy onde bok La Sittin £3 reads ncn te at PPtPeen eps pdahabbdscaheite ian ee a isle ten ne Pee 8 ~oa
PON rit P- cte Lepage e rye te nT et wae BET TOT Pm OY eL » ete - ee er tga e ~< tee eho: ee Sens ~
ay tere Bata te NTO OM erat NS Shik ation etn Oe MPP RP Naseem | EAC Re Sheree tg ne pT Nitediest
AGM wim beedisdin dle Oe petra diepie, eee ee Pre aren. a en rene — ta
See eee bet. ener Pare ene st 5, tone NES ere ie ee Pap Soom, *-
’ tnd EET pel Oy Pre, RPE POT pene 2 or" eee ,
Peper tele oo ey cw per ery pifiedanen bwoonss§rs wiai Atieieeee Mihuien - er te ae we wee men, ta «- 4
A 8 BRe tee FOL one beer mew mye ong ee éideaae at nt ee ee - *.
torre rears teres) (Mero ees THT OFF hires ee ee repre tm 5. ad oo a, - way, ryeed
lees dia alte ds dee ata nt a ence Tan Maat aba a eee etal aa ln nciiie nee, ademas he
RPP ere Npenteg pif tate abhi PO Fa a fa pene ny ee melee o- te -
ee mar Pg? Se em Anata : —_—
! wpa ele, REE NTS, ~ nae resis mr one em ee eee
=. andivegasueaie alduidintdabdtbaetead et ee ogo CREE te OP cae 5 cena Stan nets ended bes
mer gee rr Sercsumamererttey emir . A NRL PR hes = BPM oe bere, Dee ON FOR A wcpertm partie dlacee eye wage esas ith odin See
i ada a “ PEFR orp oe egng to =“ nT BP Re ote. die ele ™ TOO coe ne .
idnadjiii ty nit deat iad NiodeeeitashapheRdsrietane ) Ty Seerst Nes maa. meme Fee eee dee Rinne meee ee eet eben arn geen RETR Wee oe mae ee he
RT joss, 3 ? ITE LEPC I se Bee ape BNP Meg ofay"? + tere gnore, ~ wee Menno
TS ences, OS hf Sheng WER ty ny err eens “~~ . : ie. . 4 on Mee OT ee a eee ad
Qetess Pte tree > _ PET inte SIO me wi. tg PR en BOER ey ~ ID me Ota OTH EE Oe a tm » halite ond he "we ns Le
SFE 98 to snus TTT Ea WE ay er LM Tee bey OEpas TOIE Soh AMEND Pine tietihhe ben shh ee Sot ree nee Wha a dies atl > deen renee my
png SOREN SUC NT ken pene epee RAPP DD bled Bs)? gets SIRE AEP Pa wena g entre gre Te ae eRBATY , “pl pee -, Pe cmm Oe
A FOP Sg RY Oe OP rele gon Sere od aOUT EF ES PRES ort vet PORT aco TEENS ane 8p otters thse Sr tr ematliiatilt Ret ile oat wt eenen
ee Salacee = i tte 2 _— . : a+ wt pre - -
ae rte BARRO p em Tr Sree race tL tne heereremrye, Ponte warty és avers — Seton hamenienand — re some i ~ net. fee ae
Sredytrta sas tees, we LET Od Se hata e Sg ry PTs cette rng SARE . iecuna a le a by i 2 ee ae,
"SP LD tare + Pays seh s Pes Shmhhe * . noni ommes ;
Lott - - ns. nae ti
" Sine tpratent ee re
wad WO Ogee ee ~d
- . Rex one,
08 Pett,
“ ,o 208 98 ae o
Nm rebel -
Gere ~ -
_
2" oe Bp aeage
* wer -
Bh chad "ott
oo ->-*.
a te
. i. Sk | a
a ~~ | -
= gtsttce
~. ned FP ngs te
- a) —
a
7 Page OO em
- es —
a “
' - - °
°
--°
” — -
bet ~ ° —
# Ones ’ * -
Por ets .
onttom menos
- --
-- eT ree
~~ aitten bis
el hee de
— te .2 7 -"
- rH 928 1 Pyee +
. PT eee ggg? =? Sine
_— et ean Pe ee one
. ’ne TF DP ean oe 2 1*
oor > ‘- pod - . 4 ’ al — po)
Wid realest isl coy Miter. Sap are renee ibifar Spa aii cabana eae tS edad a eo) a Fa Ole stl al High gh ici}
Or 2 pores \peyte = ooeer hie, or VY abd PPS Pease a orpeght st TOMS es WER gre preers, pereen. alates ap a Hadatede ne yi5) ee OO peene ts pe bol ger
TET Lr? HON dd SSO, we gOS 55) ne OT Y* Rar Pte geoes PRS APM nee? Prete (Pens) we -—i_ hen Looe poyeom . i...

pre 5 eehes
s a s
NY at

> Saree if pa bier

s% af = Pr, ; _ 2 iS ‘ - ¢* S . os —
+e ea, = Hann ete ae oe ce i - co > a ee <r pee ee” . = c

oz 2

-— onli
ork ‘ = »F —— aoe ag rom hg e~ panes ~ ms _ he ; :
7 a. p ; rs oe ‘Wwe ay 5 -
—_~- es p 7 <_* oe © ie © dhe, «We? gas a « pe v4 ee: : Pa - — : 7) >
: =, Be gt a pa Sa) ne ow ' eel at Mie ee Fal * ~~ + SS er got eee
« ’ % wal =) ry <> PRP AIS © (i ee 2 tte ¢@ i) . a aes a ee ~~ aa -
.. a gs. Ohm _— — a ie : eo. Ot “y oto am b, PY J Wri =, = <n od a. a >
a * ” 2 ' 4 ie tiest 1 7 < ng i 7 . 4 ’ 7 up gia o> “ i = On =
“ee, ——. oJ 4 5 § . et i *, A oe i el Daal ; —— ‘ ts 7 -
es as] _ ww, —— 2 i - —abie gh Pa >: ¥ . + < _ = z =
ai ae i _— - 7 sonal ge ke 7 Y ae 7; 4% Gal >. ‘? oh an ee — e =~? 4*
ee c, he 234 ee ve PEL bat ke i ea ee i oe py ge et ay, ne Mets Sat : ae a =
a, i yin Ak: 7 Po a Ful eg fh rere ——. oo i » <A se PD. at ?
- rt Sete ae i a De he 7 i. o* Ae For a Ps T a Si é . J, 4 al ; a *, ay 7 PR i ».% 7
— ” 3,> 1 for Ver, A ye fia Ss : + i a aah. a 4 ~, > . a ae in ° ey =
ee” eee » <7 a ae Bs "seh a eet cere tele cat inde A tt Ee cs aS .
P : pa a ~ ee et aC ft : e - af TE 5) — b. ”* a : ta
sil ed . 7 @ - ?> - iv as a Th * a a oe a an od _ > =e? 2 < a . 7
» aa » * =? id ri & i -~<é ~ a4! - ~¢ = ] ~i&. i. -) ee a 6 alt z wi A b
a =_—-a Fe a > i 4p ORE Twigh\ = ry oe ee "are i —_ of a a; a ae =
e a “3 a — A eee a * » “<, a oe cy, wi + 4 a — a4 ee Pts = a a a
. : *5 a o to » a , a gee ww =, Pe sz an ‘> 2.2 Be. a - y « 7 e
7 1% t a hes Oe eee wie = e . Ao =e in 64 2 an - . <
ee f es ak te te = iz a » ee Np cee ee TS ae r ie - (ue t. eke * a orm
i ° = 7 ~, 4 af =» 7 ~ \ 7 9 Y a
. - ee 7 aS 7 a re é Sh ea “ eT a ee hed i 7 = “" . i. \ coe a. ae i» rt
. 7 - eo aig - ye oot 6 ws a! jf ee Phe he de 4+ D uae En - eer T . , we he :
® ‘ $ a "P- Z “ ' >). > Dinan ge” 4 ‘ <m,
= aoe 7 os ~e at >) >, a Zs . j - pales @ ‘- —— 4 a | nm o Se 6 - a oo a nie
=% ve = “Mee. Ne Yu, eel - (a9 a 7 et, TR 9, ee ne ‘cy ~ S, ee™. 24:54 aes 4 7 Pn
re he ‘ i. ede? bee a A ee ee et ey oy a bd oe ee ee ie
, © vers be, ee ¢ » ye SS a er oa —— ae Se Oot : » a. eee 7 5
Vie @ Fn) ie 2 Le Ae eer -< 7 aT? a 4 ae att. hg ae a ¢ ¢ a

¥. <; a .
Ao) & ee
Be SM -

Tus :

ENCHIRIDION THEOLOGICUM
ANTI-ROMANUM.

TRACTS

THE POINTS AT ISSUE

BETWEEN THE

CHURCHES OF ENGLAND AND ROME.

Ee
DR.ISAAC BARROW’S TREATISE ON THE POPE’S SUPREMACY,
AND

HIS DISCOURSE ON THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH.

OXFORD:
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

M.DCCC,LII.

7 - 7 :
7
: ; a
a 7 ela)
= ,
1 )
c
a a

Jus wy # OgTSe 4

7, ¢

YET A ATRO UAE ties

| . : ee 2 , : ae
=e a
Fe Heeb, Fi. 62 CIOS

’ lt “a
>

FEL Rtn Ae

\%? PU TOT ATT OF TA ar? Cae
VV’ ee

ras i irl 1K

2
=)

PREFACE.

THIS second volume of Tracts on the points at issue
between the Churches of England and Rome contains
the Treatise of the Pope’s Supremacy and the Discourse
concerning the Unity of the Church, the learned and
able productions of Dr. Isaac Barrow.

They were first published after his death® by Dr.
Tillotson, then Dean and afterwards Archbishop of
Canterbury, the first of them having been particularly
described by its Author on his death-bed, as “ indif-
ferent perfect, though not altogether as he intended it,
if God had granted him longer life.” The reputation
however, which it has since acquired, will be better
expressed in the words of its Publisher. “It is not
only a just but an admirable Discourse upon this sub-
ject; which many others have handled before, but he
hath exhausted it: insomuch that no argument of
moment, nay, hardly any consideration properly belong-
ing to it, hath escaped his large and comprehensive
mind. He hath said enough to silence the controversy
for ever, and to deter all wise men, of both sides, from
meddling any further with it.”

The Discourse concerning the Unity of the Church

has been commended, not only as containing a power-

a He died in the year 1677.

iv PREFACE.

ful argument against the Supremacy of the Pope, but
also as forming a just estimate of less important dif-
ferences. It was written in opposition to the views
entertained by Mr. Herbert Thorndike”, Prebendary of
Westminster, a contemporary and friend of the writer;
and it possesses in a high degree the characteristics
which Dr. Barrow could not fail to communicate to his
works, learning, clearness of comprehension, soberness
and piety.
K. C.

Sr. Aupan’s Hatt,

Oct. 18, 1836.

> See his “Epilogue to the Tragedy of the Church of England.”
London, fol. 1659.

TREATISE

OF THE

POPE'S SUPREMACY.

INTRODUCTION.

§. 1. THE Roman party doth much glory in unity and cer-
tainty of doctrine, as things peculiar to them, and which no
other men have any means to attain: yet about divers mat-
ters of notable consideration, in what they agree, or of what
they are certain, it is hard to descry.

They pretend it very needful that controversies should be
decided, and that they have a special knack of doing it: yet
do many controversies of great weight and consequence stick
on their hands unresolved, many points rest in great doubt
and debate among them.

The xvpiar dé€ac of the Roman sect (concerning doctrine,
practice, laws and customs of discipline, rites and ceremonies)
are of divers sorts, or built on divers grounds. 1. Some esta-
blished by (pretended) general synods. 2. Some founded on
decrees of popes. 3. Some entertained as upon tradition,
custom, common agreement. 4. Some which their eminent
divines or schoolmen do commonly embrace. 5. Some pre-
vailing by the favour of the Roman court, and its zealous
dependants.

Hence it is very difficult to know wherein their religion
eonsisteth : for those grounds divers times seem to clash,
and accordingly their divines (some building on these, some
on others) disagree.

This being so in many points of importance, is so particu-
larly in this.

2 A Treatise of the

For instance, the head of their church (as they call it) is,
one would think, a subject about which they should thoroughly
consent, and which they, by this time, should have cleared
from all disputes; so that (so far as their decisive faculty
goeth) we might be assured wherein his authority consisteth,
and how far it doth extend; seeing the resolution of that
point so nearly toucheth the heart of religion, the faith and
practice of all Christians, the good of the church, and peace
of the world; seeing that no one question (perhaps not all
questions together) hath created so many tragical disturb-
ances in Christendom, as that concerning the bounds of papal
authority?.

This disagreement of the Roman doctors about the nature
and extent of papal authority is a shrewd prejudice against it.
If a man should sue for a piece of land, and his advocates (the
notablest could be had, and well paid) could not find where it
lieth, how it is butted and bounded, from whom it was con-
veyed to him, one would be very apt to suspect his title. If
God had instituted such an office, it is highly probable we
might satisfactorily know what the nature and use of it were:
the patents and charters for it would declare it.

Yet for resolution in this great case we are left to seek ;
they not having either the will, or the courage, or the power,
to determine it. This insuperable problem hath baffled all
their infallible methods of deciding controversies ; their tra-
ditions blundering, their synods clashing, their divines wran-
gling endlessly about what kind of thing the pope is, and what
power he rightly may claim.

b There is (saith a great divine among them) so much con-
troversy about the plenitude of ecclesiastical power, and to what
things it may eatend itself, that few things in that matter are
secure-——.

This is a plain argument of the impotency of the pope’s
power in judging and deciding controversies, or of his cause
in this matter; that he cannot define a point so nearly con-
cerning him, and which he so much desireth an agreement in;

a Agitur de summa rei Christiane. _ versia de plenitudine ecclesiastice potes-
Bell. Pref. de Rom. Pont. Upon this tatis, et ad que se extendat, ut pauca
one point the very sum and substance _ sint in ea materia secura . Almain.
of Christianity depends. de Auct. Eccl. cap. 3.

> Tanta est inter doctores contro-

Pope’s Supremacy. 3

that he cannot settle his own claim out of doubt; that all his
authority cannot secure itself from contest.

So indeed it is, that no spells can allay some spirits; and
where interests are irreconcilable, opinions will be so.

Some points are so tough and so touchy, that nobody dare
meddle with them, fearing that their resolution will fail of
success and submission. Hence even the anathematizing de-
finers of Trent (the boldest undertakers to decide controver-
sies that ever were) did wave this point; the legates of the
pope being enjoined, ‘to advertise, That they should not for any
cause whatever come to dispute about the pope’s authority.

It was indeed wisely done of them to decline this question,
their authority not being strong enough to bear the weight
of a decision in favour of the Roman see, (against which they
could do nothing,) according to its pretences; as appeareth
by one clear instance. For whereas that council took upon it
incidentally to enact, that any prince should be excommunicate,
and deprived of the dominion of any city or place, where he
should permit a duel to be fought ; the prelates of France in
the Convention of Orders, anno 1595, did declare against that
decree, as infringing their king’s authority4.

It was therefore advisedly done not to meddle with so tick-
lish a point. But in the mean time their policy seemeth greater
than their charity; which might have inclined them not to
leave the world in darkness and doubt, and unresolved in a
point of so main importance ; (as indeed they did in others
of no small consequence, disputed among their divines with
obstinate heat, viz. the Divine right of bishops, the necessity
of residence, the immaculate conception, &c.)

The opinions therefore among them concerning the pope’s
authority, as they have been, so they are, and in likelihood
may continue, very different.

§. Il. There are among them those who ascribe to the pope
an universal, absolute, and boundless empire over all persons

ce di avertire, Che non si venga dominio temporali, respectu cujus nul-
mai per qual causa si sia alla disputa lum superiorem recognoscit. Bochel.
dell’ autorita di papa. Concil. Trid. 1. v. tit. 20. c. 45. This article is against
lib. ii. p. 159. the authority of the king, who cannot

4 Hic articulus est contra authorita- be deprived of his temporal dominion,
tem regis, qui non potest privari suo wherein he acknowledges no superior.

nr 2

4 A Treatise of the

indifferently, and in all matters ; conferred and settled on him
by Divine immutable sanction : so that all men, of whatever
degree, are obliged in conscience to believe whatever he doth
authoritatively dictate, and to obey whatever he doth prescribe.
So that if princes themselves do refuse obedience to his will, he
may excommunicate them, cashier them, depose them, extir-
pate them. If he chargeth us to hold no communiion with our
prince, to renounce our allegiance to him, to abandon, oppose,
and persecute him, even to death, we may without scruple, we
must in duty obey. If he doth interdict whole nations from
the exercise of God’s worship and service, they must comply
therein. So that, according to their conceits, he is in effect
sovereign lord of all the world ; and superior, even in temporal
or civil matters, unto all kings and princes.

It is notorious, that many canonists (if not most) and many
divines of that party do maintain this doctrine ; affirming, that
all the power of Christ (the Lord of lords, and King of kings,
to whom all power in heaven and earth doth appertain) is
imparted to the pope, as to his vicegerent °.

This is the doctrine which almost 400 years ago Augustinus
Triumphus‘, in his egregious work concerning ecclesiastical
power, did teach; attributing to the pope an incomprehensible
and infinite power ; because great is the Lord, and great is his
power, and of his greatness there 1s no end.

This is the doctrine which the leading theologue of their
sect, their angelical doctor, doth affirm, both directly, saying,
that § in the pope is the top of both powers ; and by plain con-

e Prima sententia est, summum pon-
tificem jure divino habere plenissimam
potestatem in universum orbem terra-
rum, tam in rebus ecclesiasticis quam
civilibus. Ita docent Aug. Triumphus,
Alvarus Pelagius, Panormitanus, Hos-
tiensis, Silvester, et alii non pauci.
Bell. y.1. The first opinion is, that
the pope hath a most full power over
the whole world, both in ecclesiastical
and civil affairs. This is the doctrine
of Aug. Triumphus, &c. and of many
others.

f Scripsit egregiam summam de po-
testate ecclesia. Bell. de Script. an.
1301. Error est, non credere pontifi-
cem Rom. universalis ecclesie pastorem,
Petri successorem, et Christi vicarium,

supra temporalia et spiritualia univer-
salem non habere primatum; in quem
quandoque multi labuntur, dictz potes-
tatis ignorantia ; que cum sit infinita,
eo quod magnus est Dominus, et magna
virtus ejus,et magnitudinis ejus non est
finis, omnis creatus intellectus in ejus
perscrutatione invenitur deficere. Aug.
Triumph. de Potest. Eccl. in pref. ad
P. Joh. XXII.

g Thomas in fine Secun. Sentent.
dicit in papa esse apicem utriusque —
potestatis. Bell. v. 1. Quum quis per
sententiam denunciatur propter apo-
stasiam excommunicatus, ipso facto ejus
subditi a dominio, et juramento fideli-
tatis ejus liberati sunt. 7h. ii. Secund.
qu. 12. art. 2.

Pope’s Supremacy. 5

sequence, asserting, that when any one is denounced excommu-
nicate for apostasy,ehis subjects are immediately freed from his
dominion, and their oath of allegiance to him.

This the same Thomas (or an author passing under his
name, in his book touching the Rule of Princes) doth teach,
affirming, that the pope, as supreme king of all the world,
may impose taxes on all Christians, and destroy towns and
castles for the preservation of Christianity.

This (as cardinal Zabarell near 300 years ago telleth us) is
the doctrine ‘which, for a long time, those who would please
popes did persuade them, that they could do all things, what-
ever they pleased; yea, and things unlawful; and so could do
more than rod.

According to this doctrine then current at Rome, in the
last Lateran great synod, under the pope’s nose and in his ear,
one bishop styled him, ‘prince of the world ; another orator
ealled him, !Aing of kings, and monarch of the earth ; another
great prelate said of him, that ™he had all power above all
powers both of heaven and earth. And the same roused up
pope Leo X. in these brave terms; "Snatch up therefore the
two-edged sword of Divine power, committed to thee; and enjoin,
command, and charge, that an universal peace and alliance be
made among Christians for at least ten years ; and to that bind
kings in the feters of the great King, and constrain nobles by
the iron manacles of censures: for to thee is given all power in
heaven and in earth.

This is the doctrine which Baronius, with a Roman confi-
dence, doth so often assert and drive forward, saying, that

h S. Thomas (in lib. iii. de Regim.
Prine. cap. 10, 19.) affirmat summum
pontificem jure divino habere spiritua-
lem et temporalem potestatem, ut su-
premum totius mundi regem, adeo ut
etiam taleas omnibus Christianis possit
imponere, et civitates ac castra destru-
ere pro conservatione Christianitatis.
Bell. v. 5.

i Que jura sunt notanda, quia male
considerata sunt per multos assenta-
tores, qui voluerunt placere pontifici-
bus, per multa retro tempora, et usque
ad hodierna suaserunt eis, quod omnia
possent ; et sic quod facerent quicquid
liberet, etiam illicita, et sic plus quam
Deus. Zab. de Schism.

k Orbis princeps. Epise. Spal. sess. i.
p- 24.

1 Regum rex, et orbis terrarum mon-
archa. Del Rio, sess. viii. p. 87.

m—Virum, in quo erat potestas su-
pra omnes potestates, tam coeli, quam
terre. Episc. Patrac. sess. X. p. 132.

n Arripe ergo gladium divine potes-
tatis tibi creditum, bis acutum ; et jube,
impera, manda, ut pax universalis et
colligatio per decennium inter Christi-
anos ad minus fiat; et reges ad id in
compedibus magni regis liga, et nobi-
les in manicis ferreis censurarum con-
stringe: quoniam tibi data est omnis
potestas in coelo et in terra. Ibid. p.

133-

An. 1555.

6 A Treatise of the xo

there can be no doubt of it, but that the civil principality ts
subject to the sacerdotal: and, that PGod hath made the pol
tical government subject to the dominion of the spiritual
church.

§. III. From that doctrine theop inion in effect doth not
differ, which Bellarmine voucheth for the common opinion of
catholics, that Ydy reason of the spiritual power, the pope, at
least indirectly, hath a supreme power even in temporal mat-
ters.

This opinion, so common, doth not, I say, in effect and
practical consideration, anywise differ from the former; but
only in words devised to shun envy, and veil the impudence
of the other assertion: for the qualifications, by reason of the
spiritual power, and, at least indirectly, are but notional, in-
significant, and illusive, in regard to practice: it importing -
not, if he hath in his keeping a sovereign power, upon what
account, or in what formality he doth employ it; seeing that
every matter is easily referrible to a spiritual account; seeing
he is sole judge upon what account he doth act; seeing expe-
rience sheweth that he will spiritualize all his interests, and
upon any occasion exercise that pretended authority ; seeing
it little mattereth, if he may strike princes, whether he doth it
by a downright blow, or slantingly.

§. IV. That such an universal and absolute power hath been
claimed by divers popes, successively for many ages, is ap-
parent from their most solemn declarations and notorious
practices; whereof (beginning from later times, and rising
upwards toward the source of this doctrine) we shall represent
some.

The bull of pope Sixtus V. against the two sons of wrath,
Henry, king of Navarre, and the prince of Condé, beginneth
thus; 'The authority given to St. Peer and his successors,

quandam, eamque summam, in tempo-
ralibus. Bell. v. 1.
r Ab immensa eterni Regis potentia

P Politicum imperium subjecit spiri-
tualis ecclesie dominio. Ibid. §. 53.

4Tertia sententia media et catholi-
corum communis, pontificem ut pontifi-
cem non habere directe et immediate
ullam temporalem potestatem, sed so-
lum spiritualem, tamen ratione spiritu-
alis habere saltem indirecte potestatem

B. Petro ejusque successoribus tradita
auctoritas omnes terrenorum regum et
principum supereminet potestates—In-
concussa profert in omnes judicia
Et si quos ordinationi Dei resistentes
invenit, severiore hos vindicta ulcisci-
tur, et, quamvis potentiores, de solio
dejiciens, veluti superbientis Luciferi

Pope’s Supremacy. 7

by the immense power of the eternal King, excels all the
powers of earthly kings and princes—It passes uncontrollable
sentence upon them all—And if ut find any of them resisting
God’s ordinance, it takes more severe vengeance of them, cast-
ing them down from their thrones, though never so puissant,
and tumbling them down to the lowest parts of the earth, as
the ministers of aspiring Lucifer. And then he proceeds to
thunder against them, We deprive them and their posterity for
ever of their dominions and kingdoms; and accordingly he
depriveth those princes of their kingdoms and dominions, ab-
solveth their subjects from their oaths of allegiance, and for-
biddeth them to pay any obedience to them. ‘By the au-
thority of these presents, we do absolve and set free all persons,
as well jointly as severally, from any such oath, and from all
duty whatsoever in regard of dominion, fealty, and obedience ;
and do charge and forbid all and every of them, that they do
not dare to obey them, or any of their admonitions, laws,
and commands.

Pope Pius V. (one of the holiest popes of the last stamp,
who hardly hath escaped canonization until nowt) beginneth
his bull against our queen Elizabeth in these words; "He
that reigneth on high, to whom is given all power in heaven and
in earth, hath committed the one holy catholic and apostolic
church, out of which there is no salvation, to one alone on
earth, namely, to Peter, prince of the apostles, and to the Ro-
man pontiff, successor of Peter, to be governed with a pleni-
tude of power: this one he hath constituted prince over all
nations, and all kingdoms, that he might pluck up, destroy,
dissipate, ruinate, plant, and build.—And in the same bull he

ministros, ad infima terre deturbatos
prosternit——. Dominiis, regnis, &c.
nos illos illorumque posteros privamus
in perpetuum .

s A juramento hujusmodi, ac omni
prorsus dominii, fidelitatis et obsequii
debito, illos omnes tam universe quam
singulatim auctoritate presentium ab-
solvimus et liberamus ; precipimusque
et interdicimus eis universis et singulis,
ne illis eorumque monitis, legibus et
mandatis audeant obedire. Bulla Sixti
V. contra Henr. Navarr. R. &c.

t Pius V.—Quem mirum est in albo
sanctorum nondum relatum esse. Briet.

Chr. anno 1572.

u Regnans in excelsis, cui data est
omnis in coelo et in terra potestas, unam
sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam ec-
clesiam, extra quam nulla est salus, uni
soli in terris, videlicet apostolorum prin-
cipi Petro, Petrique successori Romano
pontifici, in potestatis plenitudine tra-
didit gubernandam: hunc unum super
omnes gentes et omnia regna principem
constituit, qui evellat, destruat, dissi-
pet, disperdat, plantet et wdificet.—P.
Pius V. in Bull. contra R. Eliz.
(Camb. Hist. anno 1579.)

An. 1570.

An. 1346.

An. 1311.

An. 1294.

8 A Treatise of the

declares, that ‘he thereby deprives the queen of her en
right to the kingdom, and of all dominion, dignity, and pri-
vilege whatsoever; and absolves all the nobles, subjects, and
people of the kingdom, and whoever else have sworn to her, from
their oath, and all duty whatsoever, in regard of dominion,
fidelity, and obedience.

Pope Clement VI did pretend to depose the emperor
Lewis IV.

Pope Clement V, in the great synod of Vienna, declared
the emperor subject to him, or standing obliged to him by a
proper oath of fealty *.

Pope Boniface VIII hath a decree oactaiind in the eanon law
running thus; YWe declare, say, define, pronounce it to be of
necessity to salvation, for every human creature to be subject
to the Roman pontiff. The which subjection, according to his
intent, reacheth all matters ; for he there challengeth a double
sword, and asserteth to himself jurisdiction over all temporal
authorities: for, 2 One sword, saith he, must be wnder another,
and the temporal authority must be subject to the spiritual
power ;—whence, if the earthly power doth go astray, i must
be judged by the spiritual power. The which aphorisms he
proveth by scriptures admirably expounded to that purpose.

This definition might pass for a rant of that boisterous pope,
(2a man above measure ambitious and arrogant,) vented in his
passion against king Philip of France, if it had not the ad-
vantage (of a greater than which no papal decree is capable) of
being expressly confirmed by one of their general councils ; for,
b We (saith pope Leo X in his bull read and passed in the
Lateran council) do renew and approve that holy constitution,
with approbation of the present holy council. Accordingly
Melch. Canus saith, °that the Lateran council did renew and

v Ipsam pretenso regni jure, nec
non omni quocunque dominio, dignitate
privilegioque privamus; et iterum pro-
ceres, subditos, &c. P. Pius V. in

de necessitate salutis. Hatrav. com.
lib. i. tit. 8. cap. 1.
z Oportet gladium esse sub gladio, et

temporalem authoritatem spirituali sub-

Bull. contra R. Eliz. (Camb. Hist. anno
1570.)

x Apostolica auctoritate de fratrum
nostrorum consilio declaramus, illa jura-
menta predicta fidelitatis existere et
censeri debere. Clem. lib. ii. tit. 9.
Vide Conc. Vienn. p. 909.

y Subesse Romano pontifici omni hu-
mane creature declaramus, dicimus,
definimus, et pronunciamus omnino esse

jici potestati. Ibid. Ergo si deviat ter-
rena potestas, judicabitur a potestate
spirituali. Ibid.

a Vir super modum ambitiosus et ar-
rogans. ( Binius in Vita Bonif. VITI.)

b Constitutionem ipsam, sacro pre-
senti concilio approbante, innovamus et
approbamus. Concil. Lateran. sess. xi.
Pp. 153-

Pope’s Supremacy. 9

approve that extravagant (indeed extravagant) constitution :
and Baronius saith of it, that 4a// do assent to it, so that none
dissenteth, who doth not by discord fall from the church.

The truth is, pope Boniface did not invent that proposition,
but borrowed it from the school ; for Thomas Aquinas, in his
work against the Greeks, pretendeth to shew, that ¢7t is of ne-
cessity to salvation to be sulject to the Roman pontiff. The
which scholastical aphorism pope Boniface turned into law,
and applied to his purpose of exercising domination over
princes ; offering, in virtue of it, to deprive king Philip of his
kingdom.

The appendix to Mart. Pol. saith of pope Boniface VIII,
Regem se regum, mundi monarcham, unicum in spiritualibus et
temporalibus dominum promulgavit ; that he openly declared
himself to be king of kings, monarch of the world, and sole lord
and governor both in spirituals and temporals.

Before him, pope Innocent IV did hold and exemplify the An. 1245.
same notion; declaring the emperor Frederick II his vassal,
and denouncina, in his general council of Lyons, a sentence of
deprivation against him in these termst: We having about the
FSoregoing and many other his wicked miscarriages had before
a careful deliberation with our brethren and the holy council,
seeing that we, although unworthy, do hold the place of Jesus
Christ on earth, and that it was said unto us in the person of
St. Peter the apostle, Whatever thou shalt bind on earth—the
said prince (who hath rendered himself unworthy of empire and
kingdoms, and of all honour and dignity, and who for his ini-
quities is cast away by God, that he should not reign or com-
mand, being bound by his sins and cast away, and deprived by
the Lord of all honour and dignity) do shew, denounce, and
accordingly, by sentence, deprive ; absolving all who are held
bound by oath of allegiance from such oath for ever; by apo-
stolical authority firmly prohibiting, that no man henceforth
do obey or regard him as emperor or king; and decreeing,
that whoever shall hereafter yield advice, or aid, or favour to

approbavit concilium Lateranense sub mano pontifici sit de necessitate salutis.
Leone X. Canus loc. vi. 4. ( Thom. in Opuse. contra Grecos.)

4 Hee Bonifacius, cui assentiuntur f Nos itaque super premissis, &c.
omnes, ut nullus discrepet, nisi qui dis- P. Innoc. IV. in Conc. Lugd. Matt.
sidio ab ecclesia excidit. Baron. ann. Paris (anno 1253.) saith, he deemed
1053. §. 14. kings mancipia pape.

€ Ostenditur etiam quod subesse Ro-

Jer. i. 10.

An, 1099.

An, 1088.

10 A Treatise of the

him as emperor or king, shall immediately lie under the band of
excommunication.

Before him, pope Innocent the Third (that ftrwe wonder of
the world, and changer of the age) did affirm &the pontifical au-
thority so much to exceed the royal power, as the sun doth the
moon ; and applieth to the former that of the prophet Jere-
miah; Ecce, constitui te super gentes et regna ;—See, I have set
thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to
pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, &e.

Of this power that pope made experiment, by deposing the
emperor OtholV; ! whom, saith Nauclerus, as rebellious to the
apostolical see, he first did strike with an anathema ; then him
persevering in his obstinacy did in a council of prelates, held at
Rome, pronounce deposed from empire.

The which authority was avowed by that great council under
this pope’, (the which, according to the men of Trent, did re-
present or constitute the church, ) wherein it was ordained, that
if a temporal lord, being required and admonished by the church,
should neglect to purge his territory from heretical filth, he
should by the metropolitan and the other comprovincial bishops
be noosed in the band of excommunication ; and that if he should
slight to make satisfaction within a year, it should be signified
to the pope, that he might from that time denounce the subjects
absolved from their fealty to him, and expose the territory to be
seized on by catholics, &e.

Before that, pope Paschal II. deprived Henry IV. and ex-
cited enemies to persecute himi; telling them, that they could
not offer a more acceptable sacrifice to God, than by impugning
him, who endeavoured to take the kingdom from God's church.

Before him, pope Urban II. (called Turban by some in his

lium ecclesia statuit, &c. Syn. Tid.
sess. xiv. cap. 5. Si vero dominus tem-
poralis requisitus et monitus. Conc.

f Vere stupor mundi, et immutator
seculi. Matt. Par. anno 1217.
& Ut quanta est inter solem et lunam

tanta inter pontifices et reges differentia
cognoscatur. P. Innoc. III. in Decret.
Greg. lib. i. tit. 33. cap. 6.

h Imperatorem—ut rebellem sedi apo-
stolice et inobedientem anathemate pri-
mum, deinde in pertinacia perseveran-
tem, in concilio presulum, quod Rome
tum Innocentius celebrabat, ab imperio
depositum percussit et pronunciavit.
Naucel. anno 1212.

i Neque enim per Lateranense conci-

Later. cap.3. in Decret. Greg. lib. v.
tit. 7. cap. 13.

j Nam in hac non tantum parte, sed
ubique, cum poteris, Henricum, heereti-
corum caput, et ejus fautores pro viri-
bus persequaris. Nullum profecto gra-
tius Deo sacrificium, quam si eum im-
pugnes, qui se contra Deum erexit, qui
ecclesie regnum auferre conatur. P.
Pasch. Ep. vii. ad Rob. Fland. Com.

Pope’s Supremacy. 11

age) did preach this doctrine, recommended to us in the de-
erees, that ‘subjects are by no authority constrained to pay the
fidelity which they have sworn to a Christian prince, who opposeth
God and his saints, or violateth their precepts. An instance
whereof we have in his granting a privilege to the canons of
Tours ; ! which, saith he, if any emperor, king, prince, &c. shall
wilfully attempt to thwart, let him be deprived of the dignity of
his honour and power.

But the great apostle (if not author) of this confounding
doctrine was pope Gregory VII. (a man of a bold spirit and
fiery temper, inured even before his entry on that see to bear
sway, and drive on daring projects; possessed with resolution
to use the advantages of his place and time in pushing for-
ward the papal interest to the utmost,) who did lift up his
voice like a trumpet, kindling wars and seditions thereby over
Christendom. His dictates and practices are well known, being
iterated in his own epistles, and in the Roman councils under
his, extant™: yet it may be worth the while to hear him
swagger in his own language.

"For the dignity and defence of God’s holy church, in the
name of Almighty God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, I de-
pose from imperial and royal administration king Henry, son
of Henry sometime emperor, who too boldly and rashly hath
laid hands on thy church ; and I absolve all Christians subject
to the empire from that oath whereby they were wont to plight
their faith unto true kings: for it is right that he should be
deprived of dignity, who doth endeavour to diminish the majesty
of the church.

°Go to therefore, most holy princes of the apostles, and what

k Fidelitatem enim quam Christiano et Spiritus Sancti, Henricum regem,

principi jurarunt, Deo ejusque sanctis
adversanti, eorumque precepta, nulla
cohibentur auctoritate persolvere. Caus.
Xv. qu. 7. cap. 5.

1 Si quis imperator, rex, princeps—
contra hanc constitutionem venire ten-
taverit—potestatis honorisque sui digni-
tate careat—. P. Urb. II. Ep. 12.

m Vide ejus dictata apud Bin. post.
Ep. lib. 2. Ep. lv. Ep. iv. 2. viii. 21. et
passim. Ep. i. 58. ii. 5, 12, 13, 18, 32.
lil. 10. iv. I, 2, 3, 7, 22.

n Hac itaque fiducia fretus, pro dig-
nitate et tutela ecclesie sue sancte,
Omnipotentis Dei nomine, Patris, Filii,

Henrici quondam imperatoris filium,
qui audacter nimium et temerarie in
ecclesiam tuam manus injecit, imperato-
ria administratione regiaque dejicio; et
Christianos omnes imperio subjectos ju-
ramento illo absolvo, quo fidem veris re-
gibus prestare consueverunt: dignum
enim est, ut is honore careat, qui ma-
jestatem ecclesiz imminuere causatur.
Plat. in Greg. VII. et tom. 7. Cone.
Rom, iii. apud Bin. p. 484.

© Agite igitur, apostolorum sanctis-
simi principes, et quod dixi—. Plat. in
Greg. VII. Cone. Rom. vii, apud Bin.
tom. vii. p. 491.

Job xxxiv.
18, 30.

12 A Treatise of the

I said, by tnterposing your authority, confirm ; that all men
may now at length understand, if ye can bind and loose in
heaven, that ye also can upon earth take away and give empires,
kingdoms, and whatsoever mortals can have: for if ye can
judge things belonging unto God, what is to be deemed con-
cerning these inferior and profane things? And vf it is your
part to judge angels, who govern proud princes, what becometh
it you to do toward their servants? Let kings now, and all
secular princes, learn by this man’s example, what ye can do
in heaven, and in what esteem ye are with God ; and let them
henceforth fear to slight the commands of holy church: but put
forth suddenly this judgment, that all men may understand, that
not casually, but by your means, this son of iniquity doth fall
From his kingdom.

So did that pope, not unadvisedly in heat or passion, but out
of settled judgment, upon cool deliberation, express himself in
his synods at Rome.

This pope is indeed by many held the inventor and broacher
of this strange doctrine; and even those, who about his age
did oppose it, did express themselves of this mind; calling it
Pthe novel tradition, schism, heresy of Hildebrand.

4 Pope Hildebrand (saith the church of Liege, in their an-
swer to the epistle to pope Paschal) ts author of this new schism,
and first did raise the priest’s lance against the royal diadem.—
Who first did girt himself, and by his example other popes, with
the sword of war against the emperors.

‘This only novelty, saith Sigebert, not to say heresy, had not
ya sprang up in the world, that the priests of him who saith
to the king, Apostate, and who maketh hypocrites to reign for
the sins of the people, should teach the people that they owe no
subjection to bad kings; and although they have sworn allegi-
ance to the king, they yet owe him none, and that they who take

P Quod ex novella traditione Hilde-

brandus. £ccl. Leod. apud Bin. tom.
Vil. p. 521.

q Hildebrandus P. author est hujus
novelli schismatis, et primus levavit sa-
cerdotalem lanceam contra diadema reg-
ni. Jhid. p. 522. Qui primus se, et suo
exemplo alios pontifices, contra imp. ac-
cinxit gladio belli. Ibid. p. 523.

r Hec sola novitas, ne dicam heresis,
nondum in mundo emerserat, ut sacer-

dotes illius qui dicit regi, Apostata, et
qui regnare facit hypocritas propter pec-
cata populi, doceant populum, quod ma- _.
lis regibus nullam debeant subjectionem,
et licet ei sacramentum fidelitatis fece-
rint, nullam tamen fidelitatem debeant ;
nec perjuri dicantur, qui contra regem
senserint ; imo, qui regi paruerit pro ex-
communicato habeatur ; qui contra re-
gem fecerit, a noxa injustitiz et perjurii
absolvatur. Sigeb. Chron. anno 1088.

Pope’s Supremacy. 13

part against the king may not be said to be perjured ; yea, that
he who shall obey the king may be held excommunicate ; he that
shall oppose the king may be absolved from the crime of injustice
and perjury.

Indeed certain it is, that this man did in most downright
strains hold the doctrine, and most smartly apply it to prac-
tice ; yet did he disclaim the invention or introduction of it ;
professing that he followed the notions and examples of his
predecessors, divers of which he allegeth in defence of his
proceedings. *We, saith he, holding the statutes of our holy
predecessors, do by apostolical authority absolve those from their
oath who are obliged by fealty or sacrament to excommunicate
persons, and by all means prohibit that they observe fealty to
them.

And so it is, that (although for many successions before
pope Hildebrand the popes were not in condition or capacity
to take so much upon them; there having been a row of
persons intruded into that see, void of virtue, and of small
authority, most of them very beasts, who depended upon the
favour of princes for their admittance, confirmation, or sup-
port in the place ; yet) we may find some popes before him,
who had a great spice of those imperious conceits, and upon
occasion made very bold with princes, assuming power over
them, and darting menaces against them. For

Pope Leo IX. telleth us, that Constantine M. ‘did think it
very unbecoming, that they should be subject to an earthly empire
whom the Divine Majesty had set over an heavenly: and surely
he was of his author’s mind, whom he alleged ; although in-
deed this pope may be supposed to speak this and other say-
ings to that purpose, by suggestion of Hildebrand, by whom
he was much governed.

u Pope Stephanus VI. told the emperor Basilius, that he ought
to be subject with all veneration to the Roman church.

8 Nos, sanctorum predecessorum sta- Majestas prefecit coelesti. P. Leo LX.

tuta tenentes, eos qui excommunicatis Ep

fidelitate aut sacramento constricti sunt,
apostolica auctoritate a sacramento ab-
solvimus, et ne eis fidelitatem observent
omnibus modis prohibemus. Greg.V LI.
> viii. 21. Caus. xv. qu. 7. cap. 4:
t Valde indignum fore arbitratus,
terreno imperio subdi, quos Divina

i. cap. 12.

u Plat. in Vita Leon. IX. Quis te
seduxit, ut pontificem cecumenicum
scommatibus lacesseres, et S. Romanam
ecclesiam maledictis incesseres, cui cum
omni veneratione subditus esse debes ?
Steph. VI. Ep.i. Baron. ann. 885.

§. 11.

An. 873.

An. 858.

An. 772.

14 A Treatise of the

x Pope John VIII. (or LX.) did pretend obedience due to
him from princes ; and in default thereof threatened to ex-
communicate them.

Pope Nicolas I. cast many imperious sayings and threats
at king Lotharius: these among others. Y We do therefore by
apostolical authority, under obtestation of the Divine judgment,
enjoin to thee, that in Triers and Oolen thou shouldest not suffer
any bishop to be chosen, before a report be made to our apostle-
ship. (Was not this satis pro imperio?) And again, * That
being compelled thou mayest be able to repent, know, that very
soon thou shalt be struck with the ecclesiastical sword; so that
thou mayest be afraid any more to commit such things in G'od’s
holy church.

And this he suggesteth for right doctrine, that subjection
is not due to bad princes ; perverting the apostle’s words to
that purpose ; *Be subject to the king as excelling, that is, saith
he, in virtues, not in vices: whereas the apostle meaneth emi-
nency in power.

Pope Gregory VII. doth also allege pope Zachary, » who,
saith he, did depose the king of the Franks, and did absolve all
the French from the oath of fidelity which they had taken unto
him, not so much for his iniquities, as because he was unfit for
such a power.

This indeed was a notable act of jurisdiction, if pope Gre-
gory’s word may be taken for matter of fact; but divers main-
tain, that pope Zachary did only concur with the rebellious
deposers of king Chilperick in way of advice or approbation,
not by authority.

It was pretty briskly said of pope Adrian I. ¢ We do by

x —. cuncti venire per inobedientiam
neglexistis. Joh. VIII. Ep. 119. dein-
ceps excommunicamus omnes, &c. Ibid.

Y Idcirco apostolica authoritate, sub
Divini judicii obtestatione, injungimus
tibi, ut in Trevirensi urbe et in Agrip-
pina Colonia nullum eligi patiaris, ante-
quam relatum super hoc nostro aposto-
latui fiat. Grat, Dist. xiii. cap. 4.

z Ut saltem compulsus resipiscere
valeas, noveris, te citissime mucrone
ecclesiastico feriendum ; ita ut ulterius
talia in 8. Dei ecclesia perpetrare for-
mides. P. Nic. I. Ep. 64.

a Regi quasi precellenti, virtutibus
scilicet, non vitiis, subditi estote. P.
Nic. I. Epist. 4. Append. p. 626.

b Alius item Rom. pontifex, Zacha-
rias scilicet, regem Francorum, non tam
pro suis iniquitatibus, quam pro eo quod
tant potestati erat inutilis, deposuit—
omnesque Francigenas a juramento fide-
litatis quod illi . Decret. ii. part.
Caus. xv. q. 6.

© Generali decreto constituimus, ut
exsecrandum anathema sit, et veluti —
prevaricator catholicee fidei semper apud
Deum reus existat, quicunque regum,
seu episcoporum, vel potentum, dein-
ceps Romanorum pontificum censuram
in quocunque crediderit, vel permiserit
violandam. P. Had. I. Capit. apud
Grat. Caus. xxv. qu. I. cap. 11.

Pope’s Supremacy. 15

general decree constitute, that whatever king, or bishop, or po-
tentate, shall hereafter believe, or permit, that the censure of the
Roman pontifis may be violated in any case, he shall be an exe-
crable anathema, and shall be quilty before God, as a betrayer
of the catholic faith.

4 Constitutions against the canons and decrees of the bishops
of Rome, or against good manners, are of no moment.

Before that, pope Gregory II. because the eastern emperor An. 730.
did cross the worship of images, did withdraw subjection from
him, and did thrust his authority out of Italy. ¢He, saith
Baronius, did effectually cause both the Romans and Italians to
recede from obedience to the emperor.

This was an act in truth of rebellion against the emperor,
in pretence of jurisdiction over him ; for how otherwise could
he justify or colour the fact? f So, as Baronius reflecteth, he
did leave to posterity a worthy example, (forsooth,) that heretical
princes should not be suffered to reign in the church of Christ, if,
being warned, they were found pertinacious in error.

And no wonder he then was so bold, seeing the pope had
obtained so much respect in those parts of the world, that
(as he told the emperor Leo Isaurus) £ al/ the kingdoms of the
west did hold St. Peter as an earthly god: of which he might
be able to seduce some to uphold him in his rebellious prac-
tices.

This is the highest source, as I take it, to which this ex-
travagant doctrine can be driven. For that single passage of
pope Felix II. though much ancienter, will not amount to it.
h]t is certain, that, in causes relating to God, it is the safest
course for you, that, according to his institution, ye endeavour
to submit the will of the king to the priests, &e.

For while the emperor did retain any considerable authority

ad Constitutiones contra canones et
decreta presulum Romanorum, vel bo-
nos mores, nullius sunt momenti. Dis-
tinct. x. cap. 4-

e Tum Romanos tum Italos ad ejus
obedientia recedere penitus fecit. Baron.
anno 730. §. 4.

f Sic dignum posteris reliquit exem-
plum, ne in ecclesia Christi regnare si-
nerentur heretici principes, si spe mo-
niti, in errore persistere obstinato animo

invenirentur. Baron. ibid.

& “Ov ai waca Bactrcia Tis dSicews
@s Oedby emlyewov ~xovo:. Greg. II.
Epist. i. Bin. tom. v. p. 508.

h Certum est, rebus vestris hoc esse
salutare, ut, cum de causis Dei agitur,
juxta ipsius constitutionem, regiam vo-
luntatem sacerdotibus Christi studeatis
subdere, non preferre—&c. P. Felix
IIT. (anno 483.) Dist. x. cap. 3.

An. 680.

16 A Treatise of the

in Italy, the popes were better advised than to vent such no-
tions ; and while they themselves did retain any measure of
pious or prudent modesty, they were not disposed to it. And
we may observe divers popes near that time in word and
practice thwarting that practice. For instance,

Pope Gelasius, a vehement stickler for papal authority,
doth say to the emperor Anastasius, 'J, as being a Roman
born, do love, worship, reverence thee as the Roman prince. And
he saith, that * the prelates of religion (knowing the empire
conferred on him by Divine Providence) did obey his laws.
And otherwhere he discourseth, that | Christ had distinguished
by their proper acts and dignities the offices of ecclesiastical and
civil power, that one should not meddle with the other; so
disclaiming temporal power due to himself, being content to
screw up his spiritual authority.

After him, as is well known, pope Gregory I (as became a
pious and good man) did avow the emperor for ™ his lord, by
God's gift superior to all men, to whom he was subject, whom he
in duty was bound to obey; and supposed it a high presumption
for’ any one to" set himself above the honour of the empire, by
assuming the title of universal bishop.

After him, pope Agatho, in the acts of the sixth general
council, doth call the emperor Constantine Pogonatus /is
lord ; doth avow ° himself, together with all presidents of the
churches, servants to the emperor; doth say, that his see and
his synod were subject to him, and did owe obedience to
him.

Presently after him, pope Leo II, who confirmed that ge-
neral synod, doth call the emperor P the prototype son of the

i Te, sicut Romanus natus, Roma-
num principem amo, colo, suspicio.
P. Gelas. I. Eypist. 8. (ad Anast.
Imp.)

k —— cognoscentes imperium tibi su-
perna dispositione collatum, legibus tuis
ipsi quoque parent religionis antistites.
Ibid.

1 Christus, dispensatione magnifica
temperans, sic actionibus propriis dig-
nitatibusque distinctis officia potestatis
utriusque discrevit, &c.

m Ad hoc potestas dominorum meo-
rum pietati coelitus data est super omnes
homines.

Ego indignus famulus vester.
Ego quidem jussioni subjectus.
P. Greg. I. Ep. ii. 26.
n Qui honori quoque imperii vestri
se per privatum vocabulum superponit.
Ep. iv. 32.
© Acondta Kal réxva. Act. Syn. vi.
Pp: 53+ nets SovAaL TOU Bacihéws. P- 304.
neeTépa SovAcla. p. 32. Tav eKKAnTI@V
mpdedpor of SovAa TOU XpioTLaviKwTaTOU
tay Kkpadrous. p. 94. BovdrKds buay Kad’
nuas Opdvos. p- 64. evexev bwako7s, hs
opelAouev. p- 33, 34+
P Ipwrdétumov éxxanolas réxvov. Act.
Syn. VI. p. 303.

Popes Supremacy. 17

church ; and acknowledgeth the body of priests to be servants4
(meanest servants) of his royal nobleness.

After him, pope Constantine, (the immediate predecessor of An. 709.
pope Gregory II,) when the emperor did command him to
come to Constantinople, ‘the most holy man, saith Anastasius
in his Life, did obey the imperial commands.

Yea, pope Gregory II himself, before his defection, (when
perhaps the circumstances of time did not animate him there-
to,) did, in his epistle to Leo Isaurus, acknowledge him as
emperor to be sthe head of Christians, and himself consequently
subject to him.

This Gregory therefore may be reputed the father of that
doctrine, which, being fostered by his successors, was by pope
Gregory VII brought up to its robust pitch and stature.

I know, pope Gregory VII, to countenance him, doth allege Greg. VII.
pope Innocent I excommunicating the emperor Arcadius for get
his proceedings against St. Chrysostom: and the writers of 407. §. 23.
St. Chrysostom’s Life, with others of the like age and credit, prar
do back him therein. But seeing the baisticieans who lived in Chrys. cap.
St. Chrysostom’s own time, and who write very carefully about Aan, Wik
him, do not mention any such thing; seeing that, being the Ch'Ys: “p-
first act in the kind, must have been very notable, and have Socrates,
made a great noise ; seeing that story doth not suit with the Thendane:
tenor of proceedings, reported by those most credible histo- Palladius.
rians, in that ease; seeing that fact doth nowise sort to the
condition and way of those times; that report cannot be true,
and it must be numbered among the many fabulous narrations,
devised by some wanton Greeks, to set out the life of that ex-
cellent personage.

The same pope doth also allege St. Gregory M. denouncing
excommunication and deprivation of honour to all kings, bishops,
judaes, &e. who should violate the privilege granted to the

monastery of St. Medard'‘.

G 'H Baoircxh ebyévera Tois eoxdros
éavTijs JolAors ovyxaréBave. Ibid. p.
304.

r Misit imp. ad Constantinum P. sa-
cram, per quam jussit eum ad regiam
ascendere urbem ; qui sanctiss. vir jus-
sis imperialibus obtemperans. Anast. in
Vit. P. Const.

8 ‘Qs Baciwre’s cal nepadrdh Tav Xpi-

But this (as are many such

oriavav. P.Greg. II. ad Leon. Is. Ep. i.
(p. 502.) = .

t Siquis autem regum, antistitum, ju-
dicum, vel quarumcumque secularium
personarum, hujus apostolice auctorita-
tis, et nostra preceptionis decreta vio-
laverit cujuscunque dignitatis vel
sublimitatis sit, honore suo privetur.
Greg. M. post Epist. xxxviii. lib. 2.

18 A Treatise of the

privileges) is a rank forgery, unworthily imposed on pope
Gregory, (that prudent, meek, and holy man,) much to his
wrong and disgrace: which I will not be at trouble to confute,
having shewed St. Gregory to have been of another judgment
and temper than to behave himself thus towards princes; and
seeing that task is abundantly discharged by that very learned

Epist. pars man, monsieur Launoy.

aa Indeed, (upon this occasion to digress a little further,) it
doth not seem to have been the opinion of the ancient popes,
that they might excommunicate their sovereign princes : for if
they might, why did they forbear to exercise that power, when
there was greatest reason, and great temptation for it ?

Why did not pope Julius or pope Liberius excommunicate
Constantius, the great favourer of the Arians, against whom
Athanasius, St. Hilary, and Lucifer Calar. do so earnestly in-
veigh, calling him heretic, antichrist, and what not ? How did
Julian himself escape the censure of pope Liberius? Why did
not pope Damasus thunder against Valens, that fierce persecu-
tor of catholics? Why did not Damasus censure the empress
Justina, the patroness of Arianism? Why did not pope Siri-
cius censure Theodosius I for that bloody fact, for which
St. Ambrose denied him the communion? How was it that
pope Leo I (that stout and high pope) had not the heart to
correct Theodosius Junior in this way, who was the supporter
of his adversary Dioscorus, and the obstinate protector of the
second Ephesine council, which that pope so much detested ?
Why did not that pope rather compel that emperor to reason
by censures, than supplicate him by tears? How did so many
popes connive at Theodoric, and other princes professing Ari-
anism at their door? Wherefore did not pope Simplicius or
pope Felix thus punish the emperor Zeno, the supplanter of
the synod of Chalcedon, for which they had so much zeal?
Why did neither pope Felix, nor pope Gelasius, nor pope
Symmachus, nor pope Hormisdas, excommunicate the em-
peror Anastasius, (yea, did not so much, pope Gelasius saith,
as Ytouch his name,) for countenancing the oriental bishops in
their schism, and refractory noncompliance with the papal au-

u Quid sibi vult autem, quod dixerit meus non solum minime nomen ejus at-
imperator a nobis se in religione dam- _tigerit ? P. Gelas. I. Epist. 4.
natum, cum super hac parte decessor

Pope’s Supremacy. 19

thority? Those popes did indeed clash with that emperor, but
they expressly deny that they did condemn him with others
whom he did favour. * We, saith pope Symmachus, did not
excommunicate thee, O emperor, but Acacius.—If you mingle
yourself, you are not excommunicated by us, but by yourself.
And, Jf the emperor pleaseth to join himself with those con-
demned, saith pope Gelasius, it cannot be imputed to us.

Wherefore Baronius doth ill, in affirming pope Symmachus Baron. an.
to have anathematized Anastasius: whereas that pope plainly 5° > 17°
denied that he had excommunicated him, yea, denied it even
in those words which are cited to prove it, being rightly
ready: for they are corruptly written in Baronius and Binius ;
ego (which hath no sense, or one contradictory to his former
assertion) being put for nego, which is good sense, and agree-
able to what he and the other popes do affirm in relation to
that matter.

Why do we not read that any pope formally did excommu-
nicate, though divers did zealously contradict and oppose, the
princes who did reject images ?

In fine, a noble bishop above 500 years ago did say, 7 read
and read again the records of the Roman kings and emperors, and
I nowhere find that any of them before this was excommunicated
or deprived of his kingdom by the Roman pontiff.

Surely therefore the ancient popes did either not know their
power, or were very negligent of their duty.

Such have been the doctrine and behaviour of popes in
reference to their power.

§. V. This doctrine of the popes universal power over all
persons in all matters may reasonably be supposed the senti-
ment of all popes continually for a long time, even for more
than 500 years unto this present day. For,

1. If this doctrine be false, it implieth no slight error, but

x Nos te non excommunicavimus, im-
perator, sed Acacium.—Si te misces,
non a nobis, sed a te ipso excommuni-
catus es. P. Symmachus I. Ep.7. Siisti
placet se miscere damnatis, nobis non
potest imputari. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 4.

y Dicis quod, mecum conspirante se-
natu, excommunicaverim te. Ista qui-
dem ego, (nego,) sed rationabiliter fac-
tum a decessoribus meis sine dubio sub-
sequor. P. Sym. Ep.7. You say, that

[excommunicated you by the joint con-
sent of the senate. This I deny: but
I undoubtedly follow what was with
good reason done by my predecessors.

* Lego et relego Romanorum regum
et imperatorum gesta, et nusquam in-
venio quenquam eorum ante hune a
Romano pontifice excommunicatum, vel
regno privatum. Otho Frising. Chron.
lib. vi. cap. 35.

20 A Treatise of the

one of a very high nature and most dangerous consequence ;
which inyolveth great arrogance and iniquity, which tendeth to
work enormous wrongs and grievous mischiefs: whence, if any
pope should conceive it false, he were bound openly to dis-
claim, to condemn, to refute it; lest the authority of his pre-
decessors, and his connivance, should induce others into it, or
settle them in it; as it is (in regard to pope Honorius) charged
upon pope Leo II, who did not, as it became the apostolical
authority, extinguish the flame of heretical doctrine beginning,
but did by neglecting cherish it. In such a case a pope must
not be silent: for, >No small danger, saith pope Gelasius,
lieth upon popes in being silent about what agreeth to the ser-
vice of God: and, ¢ Tf, saith pope Paschal, a pope by his silence
doth suffer the church to be polluted with the gall of bitterness
and root of impiety, he should nowise be excusable before the
eternal Judge: and, *Error, saith pope Felix III, which is
not resisted, (by those in eminent office,) is approved; and
truth which is not defended is oppressed: and, ¢He is not free
JSrom suspicion of a close society in mischief, who ceaseth to ob-
ciate it: and, f We, saith pope Gregory I, do greatly offend, if
we do hold our peace at things that are to be corrected. But all
popes since the time specified have either openly declared for
this doctrine, or have been silent, and so have avowed it by
tacit consent.

2. Any pope disapproving that tenent were bound to re-
nounce communion with those that hold and profess it; or at
least to check and discountenance it. But on the contrary, they
have suffered it to be maintained in their presence and au-
dience ; and have hugged that sort of men with especial favour,
as their most affectionate and sure friends: they have suspected,
discountenanced, and frowned on those who have shewed dis-
like of it.

* —— cum Honorio, qui flammam
heretici dogmatis non, ut decuit apo-
stolicam authoritatem, incipientem ex-
tinxit, sed negligendo confovit. P. Leo
II. Ep. 2.

b Non leve discrimen incumbit ponti-
ficibus siluisse pro divinitatis cultu quod
congruit. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 8.(ad Ana-
stas. Imp.)

¢ Si vero nostro silentio pateremur
ecclesiam felle amaritudinis et impietatis
radice pollui, qua ratione possemus apud

eeternum Judicem excusari? P. Paschal.
II. Ep. 3. (ad Anselm. Cant.)

d Error cui non resistitur, appro-
batur; et veritas que minime defen-
satur, opprimitur. P. Felix III. Ep.t.
(ad Acavium.)

e Non caret scrupulo societatis oc-
cultz, qui evidenter facinori desinit ob-
viare. Id. ibid.

f Si ea que nobis corrigenda sunt ta-
cemus, valde delinquimus. P. Greg. I.

Ep. ii. 37.

Pope’s Supremacy. 21

Those men indeed who vouch this doctrine may reasonably
be deemed to do it as accomplices with the popes, on purpose
to gratify and curry favour with them, in hopes of obtaining
reward and preferment of them for ité.

3. The chief authors and most zealous abettors of these
notions (popes, synods, doctors of the school) have continually
passed for most authentic masters of divinity, and have retained
greatest authority in the church governed and guided by the
pope.

4. The decrees containing them do stand in their canon law,
and in their collections of synods, without any caution or mark
of dislike; which is a sufficient indication of their constant
adherence to this doctrine.

5. The common style of the papal edicts or bulls doth im-
port their sense ; which is imperious, in regard to all persons
without exception: Let no man (say they) presume to infringe
this our will and command, &e.

6. Popes of all tempers and qualifications (even those who
have passed for the most wise and moderate among them) have
been ready to practise according to those principles, when
occasion did invite, and circumstances of things did permit ;
interdicting princes, absolving subjects from their allegiance,
raising or encouraging insurrections; as appeareth by their
transactions not long since against our princes, and those of
France; which shews the very see imbued with those notions.

7. They do oblige all bishops most solemnly to avow this
doctrine, and to engage themselves to practise according to it.
For in the oath prescribed to all bishops they are required to
avow, that 5 they will observe the apostolical commands with all
their power, and cause them to be observed by others ; that
ithey will aid and defend the Roman papacy and the royalties
of St. Peter against every man ; that * they will to their power
persecute and impugn heretics, schismatics, and rebels to the
pope or his successors, without any exception; which was, I
suppose, chiefly meant against their own prince, (if occasion

& Ob pdvoy abra mowiow, GAAG kai Petri adjutor eis ero ad retinendum et
guvevdoKova: Tois mpaogovei, Rom. i. 32. defendendum contra omnem hominem.

They not only do the same, but have k Hereticos, schismaticos et rebelles
pleasure in them that do them. eidem Domino nostro vel successoribus

h Mandata apostolica totis viribus ob- _preedictis pro posse persequar et impug-
servabo, et ab aliis observari faciam. nabo.

i Papatum Romanum et regalia 5.

Greg. De-
cret. lib. ii.

tit. 24. cap.

4. Concil.
Rom. vi.
apud Bin.
p- 489.

Decret.

Greg. lib. i.
tit. 6. cap.4.

22 A Treatise of the

should be ;) together with divers other points, importing their
acknowledgment and abetting the pope’s universal domination.

These horrible oaths of bishops to the pope do seem to have
issued from the same shop with the high Hildebrandine dic-
tates: for the oath in the Decretals is ascribed to pope Gre-
gory, (I suppose Gregory VII.) And in the sixth Roman
synod under Gregory VII there is an oath of like tenor
exacted from the bishop of Aquileia; perhaps occasionally,
which in pursuance of that example might be extended to all.

And that before that time such oaths were not imposed doth
appear from hence; that when pope Paschal II did require
them from some great bishops, (the bishop of Palermo, and
the archbishop of Poland,) they did wonder and boggle at it,
as an uncouth novelty; nor doth the pope, in favour of his de-
mand, allege any ancient precedent, but only proposeth some odd
reasons for it. | You have signified unto me, most dear brother,
that the king and his nobles did exceedingly wonder, that an oath
with such a condition should be every where offered you by my
commissioners, and that you should take that oath, which I had
written, and they tendered to you.

§. VI. All Romanists, in consistence with their principles,
do seem obliged to hold this opinion concerning the pope’s
universal power. For, seeing many of their standing masters
and judges of controversies have so expressly from their chair
declared and defined it; all the row for many ages consenting
to it and countenancing it; not one of them having signified
any dissent or dislike of it: and considering that, if in any
thing they may require or deserve belief, it is in this point ;
for in what are they more skilful and credible than about the
nature of their own office? ™ What, saith Bellarmine wisely,
may they be conceived to know better than the authority of their
own see? Seeing it hath been approved by their most great
and famous councils, which they hold universal, and which
their adored synod of Trent doth allege for such, (the Late-
ran under pope Innocent III, that of Lyons under pope
Innocent IV, the other Lateran under pope Leo X,) seeing
it hath been current among their divines of greatest vogue and

1 Significasti, frater charissime, regem mentum, quod a nobis scriptum detule-
et regni majores admiratione permotos, rant, jurares. P. Pasch. II. Ep. 6.
quod passim tibi ab apocrisiariis nostris m Ipsis precipue debet esse nota suze
tali conditione oblatum fuerit, si sacra~ sedis authoritas. Bell. iv. 3.

Pope’s Supremacy. 23

authority, the great masters of their school; seeing by so large
a consent and concurrence, during so long a time, it may pre-
tend (much better than divers other points of great importance)
to be confirmed by tradition or prescription; why should it not
be admitted for a doctrine of the holy Roman church, the
mother and mistress of all churches? How can they who dis-
avow this notion be true sons of that mother, or faithful scho-
lars of that mistress? How can they acknowledge any au-
thority in their church to be infallible, or certain, or obliging
to assent ?

How can they admit the pope for authentic judge of con-
troversies, or master of Christian doctrine, or in any point cre- .
dible, who hath in so great a matter erred so foully, and se-
duced the Christian world; whom they desert in a point of so
great consideration and influence on practice; whom they, by
virtue of their dissent from him in this opinion, may often be
obliged to oppose in his proceedings ?

How can they deny, that bad doctrines might creep in, and
obtain sway in the church, by the interest of the pope and his
clients ?

How can they charge novelty or heterodoxy on those who
refuse some dictates of popes, of papal councils, of scholastic
divines, which stand upon no better grounds than those on
which this doctrine standeth ?

Why hath no synod, of the many which have been held in
all parts of Christendom, clearly disclaimed this opinion ; but
all have let it slip, or have seemed by silence to approve it ?

Yea, how can the concord and unity of that church well
consist with a dissent from this doctrine? For,

No man, apprehending it false, seemeth capable with good
conscience to hold communion with those who profess it : for,
upon supposition of its falsehood, the pope and his chief ad-
herents are the teachers and abettors of the highest violation
of divine commands, and most enormous sins; of usurpation,
tyranny, imposture, perjury, rebellion, murder, rapine, and
all the villainies complicated in the practical influence of this
doctrine.

It seemeth clear as the sun, that, if this doctrine be an
error, it is one of the most pernicious heresies that ever was
vented ; involving the highest impiety, and producing the

24 A Treatise of the

greatest mischief. For if he that should teach adultery, incest,
simony, theft, murder, or the like crimes, to be lawful would
be a heretic; how much more would he be such that should
recommend perjury, rebellion, regicide, (things inducing wars,
confusions, slaughters, desolations, all sorts of injustice and
mischief.) as duties !

How then ean any man safely hold communion with such
persons? May we not say with pope Symmachus, that "Zo
communicate with such is to consent with them? with pope
Gelasius, that it is worse than ignorance of the truth to commu-
nicate with the enemies of truth? and, that he who communi-
cateth with such an heresy is worthily judged to be removed from
our society ?

§. VII. Yet so loose and slippery are the principles of the
party which is jumbled in adherence to the pope, that divers
will not allow us to take this tenent of infinite power to be a
doctrine of their church; for divers in that communion do not
assent to it.

For there is a sort of heretics (as Bellarmine and Baronius
call them) sculking every where in the bosom of their church,
all about Christendom, and in some places stalking with open
face, who restrain °the pope's authority so far, as not to allow
him any power over sovereign princes in temporal affairs ;
much less any power of depriving them of ther kingdoms and
principalities.

P They are all branded for heretics, who take from the church
of Rome, and the see of St. Peter, one of the two swords, and
allow only the spiritual. This heresy Baronius hath nominated
the heresy of the politics.

This heresy a great nation, otherwise sticking to the Roman
communion, doth stiffly maintain, not enduring the papal so-
vereignty over princes in temporals to be preached in it.

m An communicare non est consen-
tire cum talibus? P. Sym. I. Ep. 7.
Quasi non sit deterius, et non igno-
rasse veritatem, et tamen communicasse
cum veritatis inimicis. P. Gelas. J.
Ep.t. Cuicunque hzresi communicans
merito judicatur a nostra societate re-
movendus. Jd. ibid. Vide Ep. xiii.
p- 642.

pontificem ex jure divino nullam ha-
bere temporalem potestatem, nec posse
ullo modo imperare principibus secula-
ribus, nedum eos regnis et principatu
privare . Bell. v. 1.

p Heresis errore notantur omnes qui
ab ecclesia Rom. cathedra Petri e duo-
bus alterum gladium auferunt, nec nisi
spiritualem concedunt. Baron. anno
1053. §. 14. Heresis Politicorum, Ba-
ron. an. 1073. §. 13.

Pope’s Supremacy. 25

There were many persons, yea synods, who did oppose pope
Hildebrand in the birth of his doctrine, condemning it for a
pernicious novelty, and branding it with the name of heresy;
as we before shewed.

Since the Hildebrandine age there have been in every nation Otto Fri-
(yea, in Italy itself) divers historians, divines, and lawyers, ;\"% eco
who have in elaborate tracts maintained the royal sovereignty Ubsp. Oc-
against the pontifical. ee

This sort of heretics are now so much increased, that the ©
Hildebrandine doctrine is commonly exploded. Which, by
the way, sheweth, that the Roman party is no less than others
subject to change its sentiments; opinions among them gain-
ing and losing vogue, according to circumstances of time and
contingencies of things.

§. VIII. Neither are the adherents to the Roman church
more agreed concerning the extent of the pope’s authority
even in spiritual matters.

For, although the popes themselves plainly do claim an
absolute supremacy in them over the church ; although the
stream of divines who do flourish in favour with them doth
run that way; although, according to their principles, (if they
had any principles clearly and certainly fixed,) that might
seem to be the doctrine of their church: yet is there among
them a numerous party, which doth not allow him such a
supremacy, putting great restraints to his authority ; (as we
shall presently shew.) And as the other party doth charge
this with heresy, so doth this return back the same imputation
on that.

§. IX. That their doctrine is in this matter so various and
uncertain, is no great wonder ; seeing interest is concerned in
the question, and principles are defective toward the resolu-
tion of it.

1. Contrary interests will not suffer the point to be decided,
nor indeed to be freely disputed on either hand.

On one hand, the pope will not allow his prerogatives to be
discussed ; according to that maxim of the great pope Inno-
cent III. 9 When there is a question touching the privileges of the
apostolic sce, we will not that others judge about them. Whence

4 Cum super privilegiis sedis aposto- per alios judicari. Greg. Deer. lib. i.
lice causa vertatur, nolumus de ipsis tit. i. cap. 12.

26 A Treatise of the

(as we before touched) the pope did peremptorily command
his legates at Trent, in no case to permit any dispute about
his authority.

On the other hand, the French will not permit the supre-
macy of their king in temporals, or the privileges of their
church in spirituals, to be contested in their kingdom. Nor,
we may suppose, would any prince admit a decision prejudicial
to his authority and welfare, subjecting and enslaving him to
the will of the Roman court. Nor (we may hope) would any
church patiently comport with the irrecoverable oppression of
all its rights and liberties by a peremptory establishment of
papal omnipotency.

2. Nor is it easy for their dissensions to be reconciled upon
theological grounds, and authorities to which they pretend
deference. For, not only their schools and masters of their
doctrine do in the case disagree, but their synods do notori-
ously clash. |

§. X. Yea, even popes themselves have shifted their
pretences, and varied in style, according to the different
circumstances of time, and their variety of humours, designs,
interests.

In time of prosperity and upon advantage, when they might
safely do it, any pope almost would talk high, and assume
much to himself: but when they were low, or stood in fear of
powerful contradiction, even the boldest popes would speak
submissly or moderately. As, for instance, pope Leo I, after
the second Ephesine synod, when he had to do with Theodo-
sius IT, did humbly supplicate, and whine pitifully; but after
the synod of Chalcedon, having got the emperor favourable,
and most of the bishops complacent to him, he ranted bravely.
And we may observe, that even pope Gregory VII, who did
swagger so boisterously against the emperor Henry, was yet
calm and mild in his contests with our William the Con- |
queror ; who had a spirit good enough for him, and was far
out of his reach.

And popes of high spirit and bold face, (such as Leo I,
Gelasius I, Nic. I, Gregory II, Gregory VII, Innocent III,
Boniface VIII, Julius 11, Paul IV, Sextus V, Paulus V, &c.)
as they did ever aspire to screw papal authority to the highest
peg; so would they strain their language in commendation of

Pope’s Supremacy. Q7

their see as high as their times would bear. But other popes
of meeker and modester disposition (such as Julius I, Ana-
stasius II, Gregory I, Leo II, Adrian VI, &c.) were content
to let things stand as they found them, and to speak in the
ordinary style of their times ; yet so, that few have let their
authority to go backward or decline.

We may observe, that the pretences and language of popes
have varied according to several periods, usually growing
higher as their state grew looser from danger of opposition
or control.

In the first times, while the emperors were pagans, their
pretences were suited to their condition, and could not soar
high ; they were not then so mad as to pretend to any tem-
poral power, and a pittance of spiritual eminency did content
them.

When the empire was divided, they could sometimes be P. Nich. ad
more haughty and peremptory; as being in the west, shrouded ap he
under the wing of the emperors there, (who commonly did
affect to improve their authority, in competition to that of
other bishops,) and at distance from the reach of the eastern
emperor.

The cause of Athanasius having produced the Sardican
canons, concerning the revision of some causes by the popes,
by colour of them they did hugely enlarge their authority
and raise their style; especially in the west, where they had
great advantages of augmenting their power.

When the western empire was fallen, their influence upon
that part of the empire which came under protection of the
eastern emperors rendering them able to do service or disservice
to those emperors, they, according to the state of times, and
the need of them, did talk more big or more tamely.

Pope Boniface III, having by compliance with the usurper
Phocas obtained a declaration from him concerning the head-
ship of the Roman church, did make a considerable step for-
ward toward the height of papal greatness.

After that pope Gregory II had withdrawn Italy from the
oriental empire, and Rome had grown in a manner loose and
independent from other secular powers ; in the confusions of
the west, the pope interposing to arbitrate between princes,
trucking and bartering with them, as occasion served, for

28 A Treatise of the

mutual aid and countenance, did grow in power, and answer-
ably did advance his pretences.

The spurious Decretal Epistles of the ancient popes (which
asserted to the pope high degrees of authority) being foisted
into men’s hands, and insensibly creeping into repute, did
inspire the pope with confidence to invade all the ancient
constitutions, privileges, and liberties of churches ; and having
got such interest every where, he might say what he pleased,
no clergyman daring to check or cross him. Having drawn
to himself the final decision of all causes, having got a finger
in disposal of all preferments ; having by dispensations, ex-
emptions, and grants of privileges, tied to him so many de-
pendents, what might not he say or do?

Pope Gregory VII, being a man of untamable spirit, and
taking advantage from the distractions and corruptions of his
times, did venture to pull a feather with the emperor; and
with success having mated him, did set up a peremptory claim
to sovereignty over all persons in all causes.

In his footsteps his successors have trodden, being ever
ready upon occasion to plead such a title, and to practise
according to it. No pope would forego any power which had
been claimed by his predecessors. And popes would ever be
sure to have dancers after their pipe, numberless abettors of
their pretences.

No wonder then that persons deferring much regard to the
authority of popes, and accommodating their conceits to the
dictates of them, (or of persons depending on them,) should
in their opinions vary about the nature and extent of papal
authority ; it having never been fixed within certain bounds,
or having in several ages continued the same thing.

§. XI. Wherefore intending by God’s help to discuss the
pretended authority of the pope, and to shew that he by no
Divine institution and by no immutable right hath any such
power as he doth claim ; by reason of this perplexed variety
of opinions I do find it difficult to state the question, or to .
know at what distinct mark I should level my discourse.

§. XII. But seeing his pretence to any authority in tem-
porals, or to the civil sword, is so palpably vain, that it hardly
will bear a serious dispute, having nothing but impudence and
sophistry to countenance it; seeing so many in the Roman

Pope’s Supremacy. 29

communion do reject it, and have substantially confuted it ;
seeing now most are ashamed of it, and very few (even among
those sects which have been its chief patrons) will own it ; see-
ing Bellarmine himself doth acknowledge it a novelty devised
about 500 years ago in St. Bernard’s time’; seeing the popes
themselves, whatever they think, dare now scarce speak out,
and forbear upon sufficient provocation to practise according
to it; I shall spare the trouble of meddling with it, confining
my discourse to the pope’s authority in ecclesiastical affairs ;
the pretence whereto I am persuaded to be no less groundless,
and no less noxious than the other to Christendom ; the which
being overthrown, the other, as superstructed on it, must also
necessarily fall.

§. XIII. And here the doctrine which I shall contest
against is that in which the cordial partisans of that see do
seem to consent, which is most common and current, most ap-
plauded and countenanced in their theological schools ; which
the popes themselves have solemnly defined, and declared for
standing law, or rule of jurisdiction; which their most au-
thentic synods (whereby their religion is declared and distin-
guished from others) have asserted or supposed; which the
tenor of their discipline and practice doth hold forth ; which
their clergy by most solemn professions and engagements is
tied to avow; which all the clients and confidents of Rome do
zealously stand for, (more than for any other point of doce-
trine;) and which no man can disclaim without being deemed
an enemy or a prevaricator toward the apostolic see.

§. XIV. Which doctrine is this, That (in the words of the
Florentine synod’s definition) the apostolical chair and the”tr: dbpl¢o-
Roman high priest doth hold a primacy over the universal“”™ ii

av amrooTo-
church; and that the Roman high priest is the successor of — dh
St. Peter, the prince of the apostles, and the true lieutenant of r $b
Christ, and the head of the church ; and that he is the father Fler. defn.
and doctor of all Christians; and that unto him, in St. Peter, ee
full power is committed to feed, and direct, and govern the catho-
lic church under Christ ; according as is contained in the Acts of
General Councils and in the Holy Canons.

r Primi qui temporalem potestatem _ firstithat yield the pope te mporal power
summo pontifici ex Christi institutione by Christ’s institution, seem to be Hugo,

tribuunt, videntur esse Hugo de 8. Vie- &c.
tore, Bernardus, &c. Bell. v. 5. The

Bell. iv. 22.

30 A Treatise of the

That (in the words of pope Leo X approved by the Late-
rane synod) ‘Christ, before his departure from the world, did in
solidity of the rock institute Peter and his successors to be his
lieutenants, to whom it is so necessary to obey, that who doth not
obey must die the death.

That to the pope, as sovereign monarch, by Divine sanction
of the whole church, do appertain royal prerogatives, (regalia
Petri, the royalties of Peter, they are called in the oath pre-
scribed to bishops.) Such as these which follow :

To be superior to the whole church, and to its representa-
tive, a general synod of bishops. To convocate general synods
at his pleasure ; all bishops being obliged to attend upon sum-
mons from him. ‘To preside in synods, so as to suggest mat-
ter, promote, obstruct, overrule the debates in them. To
confirm or invalidate their determinations, giving like to them
by his assent, or subtracting it by his dissent. To define points
of doctrine, or to decide controversies authoritatively ; so that
none may presume to contest or dissent from his dictates. To
enact, establish, abrogate, suspend, dispense with ecclesiastical
laws and canons. To relax or evacuate ecclesiastical censures
by indulgence, pardon, &e. To void promises, vows, oaths,
obligations to laws by his dispensation. To be the fountain of
all pastoral jurisdiction and dignity. To constitute, confirm,
judge, censure, suspend, depose, remove, restore, reconcile
bishops. To confer ecclesiastical dignities and benefices by
paramount authority, in way of provision, reservation, &. To
exempt colleges, monasteries, &c. from jurisdiction of their
bishops and ordinary superiors. To judge all persons in all
spiritual causes, by calling them to his cognizance, or dele-
gating judges for them, with a final and peremptory sentence,
To receive appeals from all ecclesiastical judicatories; and to
reverse their judgments, if he findeth cause. To be himself
unaccountable for any of his doings, exempt from judgment,
and liable to no reproof. To erect, transfer, abolish episcopal
sees. ‘To exact oaths of fealty and obedience from the clergy.
To found religious orders; or to raise a spiritual militia for —
propagation and defence of the church. To summon and

8 Christus—migraturus ex mundo ad_ ita obedire necesse est, ut qui non obe-
Patrem, in soliditate petre Petrum dierit, morte moriatur. P. Leo X. in
ejusque successores vicarios suos insti- Conc. Later. sess. xi. p. 151.
tuit, quibus ex libri Regum testimonio

Pope’s Supremacy. 31

commissionate soldiers by croisade, &c. to fight against infidels,
or persecute infidels.

Some of these are expressed, others in general terms couched
in those words of pope Eugenius, telling the Greeks what they
must consent unto. ‘'Zhe pope, said he, will have the prero-
gatives of his church; and he will have appeals to him; and to
feed all the church of Christ, as shepherd of the sheep. Beside
these things, that he may have authority and power to convoke
general synods, when need shall be ; and that all the patriarchs
do yield to his will.

That the pope doth claim, assume, and exercise a sovereignty
over the church endowed with such prerogatives, is sufficiently
visible in experience of fact, is apparent by the authorized
dictates in their canon law, and shall be distinctly proved by
competent allegations, when we shall examine the branches of
this pretended authority.

In the mean time it sufficeth to observe, that in effect all
clergymen do ayow so much, who dona fide and without pre-
yarication do submit to take the oaths and engagements pre-
scribed to them of course by papal appointment. For this
surely, according to the pope’s meaning, (by which their obli-
gation is to be measured,) is designed in the profession ordained
by pope Pius IV, wherein every beneficed clergyman is en-
joined to say, "And I do promise and swear true obedience to
the Roman pontiff, the successor to St. Peter, and the vicar of
Jesus Christ. Which profession was appointed in pursuance
of a sanction made by the Trent council, that all such persons
*should vow and swear to abide in obedience to the Roman
church; and consequently, how hard soever its yoke should
be, they would not shake it off: which inferreth most absolute
sovereignty of that church, or of the pope, who ruleth the
roast in it.

But what that true obedience doth import, or how far the

t @érc: rdvta Ta mpovduia Tis exxAn-
alas avrov, nal OéAcr Exew Thy exKAn-
tov, kal iddvew Kal romalvew macay Thy
éxxAnolay trod Xpiotov, dowep rowdy
Tav mpoBdtwr* mpds trovros, iva exn
éEouclay Kal Bivauw ocuyKporeiv ctvodov
oixoupevixhy, bre dehoese, kal wdvtas Tovs
mwatpidpyas bwelkew TH OeAtuarti adTod.
Cone. Flor. p. 846.

u Romanoque pontifici, B. Petri suc-
cessori, ac Jesu Christi vicario, veram
obedientiam spondeo ac juro. Bull.
Pii IV. super forma juram.

X Provisi de beneficiis—in Romane
ecclesize obedientiase permansuros spon-
deant ac jurent. Conc. Trid. sess. xxiv.
cap. 12.

32 A Treatise of the

papal authority in the pope’s own sense, and according to the
public spirit of that church, doth stretch, is more explicitly
signified in the oath which all bishops at their consecration,
and all metropolitans at their instalment, are required to take;
the which, as it is extant in the Roman pontificaly, set out by
order of pope Clement VIII, doth run in these terms:

z1 N. elect of the church of N. from henceforward will be
faithful and obedient to St. Peter the apostle, and to the holy
Roman church, and to our lord, the lord N. pope N. and to
his suecessors, canonically coming in. I will neither advise,
consent, or do any thing that they may lose’ life or member,
or that their persons may be seized, or hands anywise laid

Y Pontif. Rom. Antwerp. anno 1626.
P- 59; 86.

z EgoN. electus ecclesie N. ab hac
hora in antea fidelis ef obediens ero
B. Petro apostolo, sancteeque Romane
ecclesiz, et domino nostro, domino NV.
pape N. suisque successoribus canonice
intrantibus. Non ero in consilio, aut
consensu, vel facto, ut vitam perdant,
aut membrum; seu capiantur mala cap-
tione; aut in eos manus quomodolibet
ingerantur; vel injurie alique inferan-
tur, quovis quesito colore. Consilium
vero quod mihi credituri sunt, per se,
aut nuncios suos, seu literas, ad eorum
damnum, me sciente, nemini pandam.
Papatum Romanum et regalia Sancti
Petri adjutor eis ero ad defendendum
et retinendum, salvo meo ordine, contra
omnem hominem. Legatum apostolice
sedis in eundo et redeundo honorifice
tractabo, et in suis necessitatibus adju-
vabo. Jura, honores, privilegia, et auc-
toritatem sancte Romane ecclesia, do-
mini nostri pape et successorum pre-
dictorum, conservare, defendere, augere,
promovere curabo. Neque ero in consi-
lio, vel facto, seu tractatu in quibus con-
tra ipsum dominum nostrum, vel eandem
Romanam ecclesiam aliqua sinistra vel
prejudicialiapersonarum, juris, honoris,
status et potestatis eorum machinentur.
Et si talia a quibuscungue tractari vel
procurari novero, impediam hoc pro
posse, et quanto citius potero significabo
eidem domino nostro, vel alteri per quem
possit ad ipsius notitiam pervenire. Re-
gulas sanetorum Patrum, decreta, ordi-
nationes, seu dispositiones, reservationes,
provisiones et mandala apostolica totis
viribus observabo, et faciam ab aliis ob-
servari. Hereticos, schismaticos, et re-

belles eidem domino nostro vel successo-
ribus predictis pro posse persequar et
impugnabo. Vocatus ad synodum ve-
niam, nisi prepeditus fuero canonica
prepeditione. Apostolorum limina sin-
gulis trienniis personaliter per me ipsum
visitabo, ef domino nostro ac successori-
bus prefatis rationem reddam de toto
meo pasiorali officio ac de rebus omnibus
ad mee ecclesi@ staium, ad cleri, et po-
puli disciplinum, animarum denique que
mee fidei tradite sunt, salutem quovis
modo pertinentibus, et vicissim mandata
apostolica humiliter recipiam et quam di-
ligentissime exequar. Quod si legitimo
impedimento detentus fuero prefata om-
nia adimplebo per certum nuncium ad
hoc speciale mandatum habentem de gre-
mio mei capituli, aut alium in dignitate
ecclesiastica constitutum, seu alias perso-
nulum habentem ; aut, his mihi defici-
entibus, per diceecesanum sacerdotem ; et
clero deficiente omnino per aliquem alium
preshbyterum secularem vel regularem
spectate probitalis et religionis de supra-
dictis omnibus plene instructum. De
hujusmodi autem impedimento docebo per
legitimas probationes ad sancte Romane
ecclesia cardinalem proponentem in con-
gregatione sacri concilit per supradictum
nuncium transmittendas. Possessiones
vero ad mensam meam pertinentes non
vendam, nec donabo neque impignorabo,
nec de novo infeudabo vel aliquo modo
alienabo, etiam cum consensu capituli .
ecclesia mee, inconsulto Romano ponti-
Jice. Et si ad aliquam alienationem de-
venero, penas in quadam super hoc edita
conslitutione contentas eo ipso incurrere
volo. Sic me Deus adjuvet et hee sancta
Dei evangelia.

Pope’s Supremacy. 33

upon them, or any injuries offered to them, under any pretence
whatsoever. The counsel which they shall intrust me withal,
by themselves, their messengers, or letters, I will not know-
ingly reveal to any to their prejudice. I will help them to
defend and keep the Roman papacy, and the royalties of
St. Peter, saving my order, against all men. The legate of
the apostolic see, going and coming, I will honourably treat
and help in his necessities. The rights, honours, privileges, and
authority of the holy Roman church, of our lord the pope, and
his foresaid successors, I will endeavour to preserve, defend,
increase, and advance. I will not be in any counsel, action,
or treaty, in which shall be plotted against our said lord, and
the said Roman church, any thing to the hurt or prejudice of
their persons, right, honour, state, or power; and if I shall
know any such thing to be treated or agitated by any whatso-
ever, I will hinder it to my power; and as soon as I can will
signify wt to our said lord, or to some other, by whom it may
come to his knowledge. The rules of the holy fathers, the
apostolic decrees, ordinances, or disposals, reservations, pro-
visions, and mandates, I will observe with all my might, and
cause to be observed by others. Heretics, schismatics, and rebels
to our said lord, or his foresaid successors, I will to my
power persecute and oppose. I will come to a council when I
am called, unless I be hindered by a canonical impediment.
I will by myself in person visit the threshold of the apostles
every three years; and give an account to our lord and his
foresaid successors of all my pastoral office, and of all things
anywise belonging to the state of my church, to the discipline
of my clergy and people, and lastly to the salvation of souls
committed to my trust; and will in like manner humbly re-
ceive and diligently execute the apostolic commands. And if
I be detained by a lawful impediment, I will perform all the
things aforesaid by a certain messenger hereto specially em-
powered, a member of my chapter, or some other in ecclesias-
tical dignity, or else having a parsonage; or in default of
these, by u priest of the diocese; or in default of one of the
clergy [of the diocese|, by some other secular or regular priest
of approved integrity and religion, fully instructed in all
things above mentioned. And such impediment I will make out
by lawful proofs to be transmitted by the foresaid messenger
D

Greg. Dec.
lib. ii. tit.
24. Cap. 4.

34 A Treatise of the

to the cardinal proponent of the holy Roman church in the
congregation of the sacred council. The possessions belonging
to my table I will neither sell, nor give away, nor mortgage,
nor grant anew in fee, nor anywise alienate, no, not even with
the consent of the chapter of my church, without consulting the
Roman pontiff. And if I shall make any alienation, I will
thereby incur the penalties contained in a certain constitution
put forth about this matter. So help me God and these holy
Gospels of God.

Such is the oath prescribed to bishops, the which is worth
the most serious attention of all men, who would understand
how miserably slavish the condition of the clergy is in that
church, and how inconsistent their obligation to the pope is
with their duty to their prince.

And in perusing it we may note, that the clauses in a dif-
ferent character are in the more ancient oath extant in the
Gregorian Decretals: by which it appeareth how the pope
doth more and more enlarge his power, and straiten the
bands of subjection to him. And it is very remarkable that
the new oath hath changed those words, regulas sanctorum
patrum, into regalia Sancti Petri, i. e. the rules of the holy
fathers into the royalties of St. Peter.

§. XV. I know there are within the Roman communion
great store of divines, who do contract the papal sovereignty
within a much narrower compass, refusing to him many of
those prerogatives, yea, scarce allowing to him any of them.

There are those who affirm the pope, in doctrine and disci-
pline, subject to the church, or to a general synod represent-
ing it. Which opinion thwarteth a proposition, in Bellar-
mine’s opinion, even almost an article of faith; but to be even
with him, they do hold his proposition to be quite heretical :
2The pope is simply and absolutely above the universal church ;
—this proposition is almost an article of faith, saith Bellar-
mine: the cardinal of Lorrain on the contrary, *But J, saith
he, cannot deny but that I am a Frenchman, and bred up in
the church of Paris, which teaches that the Roman pontiff’ is

z Summus pontifex simpliciter et ab- Gallus sim, et Parisiensis ecclesiz alum-
solute est supra ecclesiam universam; nus, in qua Rom. pontificem subesse
hee propositio est fere de fide. concilio tenetur, et qui docent ibi con-
Bell. de Cone, ii. 17. trarium, ii tanquam heretici notantur.

a Ego vero negare non possum quin Card. Loth. apud Laun. Ep.i.t.

Pope’s Supremacy. 35

subject to a council, and they who teach the contrary are there
branded as heretics. |
There are those who affirm the pope, if he undertake
points of faith without assistance of a general synod, may teach
heresy ; (which opinion, as Bellarmine thought, doth closely Que sen-
border on heresy :) and those who conceive that popes may be ‘2 “ide

tur omnino
and have been heretics; whence Christians sometimes are not erronea et

obliged to admit their doctrine, or observe their pleasure. wrcatitia

There are those who maintain the pope, no less than other 2e”. iv. 2.
bishops, subject to the canons, or bound to observe the con-
stitutions of the church; that he may not infringe them, or
overrule against them, or dispense with them: and that to
him attempting to do so obedience is not due.

There are those who maintain, that the pope cannot sub-
vert or violate the rights and liberties of particular churches,
settled in them agreeably to the ancient canons of the church
universal.

There are those who assert to general councils a power of
reforming the church, without or against the pope’s consent.

There are those who, as Bellarmine telleth us, do allow Bell. de
the pope to be no more in the ecclesiastical republic than as©°"® *'*
the duke of Venice in his senate, or as the general of an order
in his congregation ; and that he therefore hath but a very
limited and subordinate power.

There are consequently those who conceive the pope, noto-
riously erring, or misdemeaning himself, to the prejudice of
the Christian state, may be called to an account, may be
judged, may be corrected, may be discarded by a general
synod.

Such notions have manifestly prevailed in a good part of
the Roman communion, and are maintained by most divines in
the French church; and they may be supposed every where
common, where there is any liberty of judgment, or where
the inquisition doth not reign. '

There have been seasons wherein they have so prevailed, as
to have been defined for catholic truths in great synods, and
by them to have been applied to practice. For,

In the first great synod of Pisa it was declared, that councils An. 1409.
may reform the church sufficiently both in head and members : nenagd ers
and accordingly that synod did assume to judge two popes

Primo de-

clarat quod

ipsa syno-
dus, &c.
Sess. 4, 5.

36 A Treatise of the

(Gregory XII and Benedict XIII) contending for the
papacy, (whereof one was the true pope,) and deposing them
both, did substitute Alexander V, >who for one year, (as An-
toninus reporteth,) according to the common opinion, did hold
the seat of Peter.

The synod of Constance declared, that the synod lawfully
assembled in the Holy Ghost, making a general council repre-
senting the catholic church militant, hath immediately power
from Christ; to which every one, of whatever state or dignity
he be, although it be papal, is bound to obey in those things
which belong to faith, and the eatirpation of (the said) schism,
and the general reformation of the church of God in head and
members.

The which doctrine they notably put in practice, exercising
jurisdiction over popes, and for errors, misdemeanours, or
contumacies, discarding three, (of whom it is hard if one were
not true pope,) and choosing another, who afterward did pass
for a right pope, and himself did confirm the acts of that
council. (So that this semi-heresy hath at least the authority
of one pope to countenance it.) © Our most holy lord the pope
said in answer thereunto, that he would maintain and inviolably
observe all and every of those things that were conciliarly deter-
mined, concluded, and decreed, by the present council, in matters
of faith.

The synod of Basil declared the same point, 4that councils
are superior to popes, to be a truth of catholic faith, which who-
ever doth stiffly oppose is to be accounted a heretic: *Nor (say
they) did any skilful man ever doubt the pope to be subject to
the judgment of general synods in things concerning faith. 'In
virtue of which doctrine, and by its irresistible authority, the
synod did sentence and reject pope Eugenius as criminal,
heretical, and contumacious.

b Qui anno uno sedem Petri tenuit,
secundum communem opinionem. An-
ton. de Concil. Pis. cap. v. §. 3-

¢ Sanctiss. Dominus noster papa dixit,
respondendo ad preedicta, quod omnia
et singula determinata, conclusa et de-
creta in materiis fidei per praesens con-
cilium conciliariter tenere, et inviolabi-
liter observare volebat. Conc. Const.
sess. Xlv. p.1119.

4 Veritas de potestate concilii supra
papam —— est veritas fidei catholice

cui pertinaciter repugnans est cen-
sendus hereticus. Conc. Bas. sess. xxxiii.
(p- 95-) Pane

e Nec unquam aliquis peritorum du-
bitavit, summum pontificem in his que
fidem concernunt judicio earundem ge-
neralium synodorum esse subjectum.
Cone. Bas. sess. xly. p. 117.

f Vigore cujus, ac ineflabili et inex-
pugnabili authoritate . Sess. xxxviii.
p- 101.

Pope’s Supremacy. 37

These synods, although reprobated by popes in counter- (Concil.
synods, are yet by many Roman catholic divines retained in **)
great veneration; and their doctrine is so current in the famous
Sorbonne, that (if we may believe the great cardinal of Lor- Ego vero
rain) the contrary is there reputed heretical. Sai

§. XVI. Yet notwithstanding these oppositions, the former
opinion averring the pope’s absolute sovereignty, doth seem to
be the genuine doctrine of the Roman church, if it hath any.

For those divines, by the pope and his intimate confidents, Nam ad-
are looked upon as a mongrel brood, or mutinous faction ; arash oe
which he by politic connivance doth only tolerate, because he clesia tole-
is not well able to correct or suppress them. He is afraid to (7? tT
be violent in reclaiming them to his sense, lest he spend his ar- tentiam se-

tillery in vain, and lose all his power and interest with them. }ey, Paya

Nor indeed do those men seem to adhere to the Roman
party out of entire judgment or cordial affection; but in com-
pliance with their princes, or upon account of their interest, or
at best with regard to peace and quiet. ‘They cannot con-
veniently break with the pope, because his interest is twisted
with their own, so as not easily to be disentangled.

For how can they heartily stick to the pope, whenas their
opinion doth plainly imply him to be an usurper and a tyrant,
(claiming to himself and exercising authority over the church,
which doth not rightfully belong to him;) to be a rebel and
traitor against the church, (invading and possessing the sove-
reignty due to it; for such questionless the duke of Venice
would be, should he challenge and assume to himself such a
power over his commonwealth, as the pope hath over Christ-
endom;) to be an impostor and seducer, pretending to in-
fallible conduct, which he hath not.

How can they honestly condemn those who (upon such
grounds) do shake off such yokes, refusing to comply with the
pope, till he correct his errors, till he desist from those usur-
pations and impostures, till he restore to the church its rights
and liberties !

How are the doctrines of those men consistent or congruous
to their practice? For they call the pope monarch of the
church, and universal pastor of Christians, by God’s appoint-
ment, indefectibly ; yet will they not admit all his laws, and
reject doctrines which he teacheth, particularly those which

Heb. v. 4.

38 A Treatise of the

most nearly touch him, concerning his own office and au-
thority. They profess themselves his loyal subjects, yet pre-
tend liberties which they will maintain against him. They
hold that all are bound to entertain communion with him, yet
confess that he may be heretical, and seduce into error. They
give him the name and shadow of a supremacy, but so that
they can void the substance and reality thereofs.

In fine, where should we seek for the doctrine of the Roman
church, but at Rome, or from Rome itself? where these doc-
trines are heterodoxies.

’ §. XVII. We shall not therefore have a distinct regard to
the opinion of these semi-Romanists ; nor consider them other-
wise, than to confirm that part of truth which they hold, and
to confute that part of error which they embrace ; allowing, at
least in word and semblance, more power to the pope than we
can admit as due to him. Our discourse shall be levelled at
him as such as he pretendeth himself to be, or as assuming to
himself the forementioned powers and prerogatives.

§. XVIII. Of such vast pretences we have reason to re-
quire sufficient grounds. He that demandeth assent to such
important assertions ought to produce clear proofs of them:
he that claimeth so mighty power should be able to make out
a good title to it; for, No man may take this (more than pon-
tifical) honour to himself, but he that is called by God, as was
Aaron. They are worthily to be blamed, who tumultuously
and disorderly fall upon curbing or restraining those who by no
law are subject to them.

We cannot well be justified from a stupid easiness, in ad-
mitting such a lieutenancy to our Lord, if we do not see ex-
hibited to us manifest and certain patents assuring its com-
mission to us. We should love the church better than to yield
up its liberty to the will of a pretender, upon slight or no
ground. Their boldly claiming such a power, their having
sometime usurped such a power, will not excuse them or usi.

& Manifestum autem schismatis argu-
mentum est, cum quis se communioni
subtrahit apostolic sedis. Balus. not.
ad Agobard. p.112. It is a manifest
argument of schism, when any man
withdraws himself from communion
with the apostolic see.

h Jure culpandi sunt, qui turbide at-

que inordinate in eos coercendos insi-
liunt, qui nulla sibi lege subjecti sunt.
Aug. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 17.

i Nemo sibi et professor et testis est.
Tertul. vy. 1. adv. Mare. None can be
both a claimer and a witness for him-
self,

Pope’s Supremacy. 39

Nor will precarious assumptions, or subtle distinctions, or
blind traditions, or loose conjectures serve for probations in
such a case.

§. XIX. Such demands they cannot wholly balk: where-
fore for satisfaction to them, not finding any better plea, they
hook in St. Peter; affirming that on him by our Lord there
was instated a primacy over his brethren, all the apostles and
the disciples of our Lord, importing all the authority which
they claim; and that from him this primacy was devolved by
succession to the bishops of Rome, by right indefectible for all
future ages.

Which plea of theirs doth involve these main suppositions,

I. That St. Peter had a primacy over the apostles.

Il. That St. Peter's primacy with its rights and prerogatives
was not personal, but derivable to his successors.

Ill. That St. Peter was bishop of Rome.

IV. That St. Peter did continue bishop of Rome, after his
translation, and was so at his decease.

_V. That the bishops of Rome (according to God's institution,
and by original right derived thence) should have an universal
supremacy and jurisdiction over the Christian church.

VI. That in fact the Roman bishops continually from St. Peter's
time have enjoyed and exercised this sovereign power.

VII. That this power is indefectible and unalterable.

The truth and certainty of these propositions we shall in
order discuss; so that it may competently appear, whether
those who disclaim these pretences are (as they are charged)
guilty of heresy and schism; or they rather are liable to the
imputations of arrogancy and impiety who do obtrude and
urge them.

oean « Dirst air al matin
| — dovils oy sagt. oy

tiem elvclye ie Soureag. a boast
agitad, Vie. spiibesih 4) tar uff om ogi
. ANY al egy my tnd Deg
sorties MLS ae} Tis re cnr: aca tH {oe
hve resto dane @H2 tla gacuin qe beige
a baelors!) Cw Toamrney ich cunts AG

fal shiombehni dais yd ced : ag. id6

ve it Bors = oe
eon sare Qiaith ory dt wet lorat. ‘ph
writnny al +] vr Y ny tite

seartinarryid, hen then i Ai ¥ ve EN % Jy a .
“ee ¥ A gy} widoekih, “ss
¥ : eh ae CA vi ngi) eal voit 4

mR iin etaeoy) i. ntinl sya tea, rh, ? nae ae

il i? hAWN, Vo on)

*~
pbeiniens . wor) 0) yaaa] rey} S) yhtee “aN, a noah 94 7
Maney tits: HO WIA Whar (nga J higns om), Baie a. 7
jpn Bye i Ly) bash y “Y KAN wehags :

een. Rie Taal igbbonts eros iY Tara 1oha! wo) . A okt ee i

. Lo thts whys SVLOh ahi\) ay ey’ ipod. wie
Sray'se' Hye: HA) OMEN KD i Py, A a ay
mi bes, a7 BCI erty Omg h ke. Diet i bog
wpbtviin SPAM Ws MSO UHOD: Earl "I Lu ts Dine

at : Stat ¥% na i) wt aenddaty, awadh) vet ivilt

oil} Be aiti| 1 wattle ¥: ij ta) Pinto beiayy, P

oe ; of f y hd : 'd
Baa, absivs2ci On. vii x wey ba ESM as,

TREATISE

OF THE

POPES SUPREMACY.

Mart. x. 2.

Now the names of the twelve apostles were these; the first, Simon, tparos Xf-
who is called Peter. pwr.

AMONG the modern controversies there is scarce any of
greater consequence than that about universal supremacy,
which the bishop of Rome claimeth over the Christian church;
the assertion whereof on his side dependeth upon divers suppo-
sitions ; namely these :

I. That St. Peter by our Lord's appointment had a primacy,
implying a sovereignty of authority and jurisdiction over the
apostles.

Il. That the rights and prerogatives of this sovereignty
were not personal, but derivable, and transmitted to succes-
sors. ‘

Ill. That St. Peter was bishop of Rome.

IV. That St. Peter did continue bishop of Rome after his trans-
lation, and was so at his decease.

V. That hence of right to the bishops of Rome, as St. Peter’s
successors, an universal jurisdiction over the whole church of
Christ doth appertain.

VI. That in fact the said bishops continually from S. Peter's
time have enjoyed and exercised this power.

VII. That this power is indefectible; such as by no means can
be forfeited or fail.

In order to the discussion and resolution of the first point,
I shall treat upon the primacy of St. Peter; endeavouring to

42 A Treatise of the

shew what primacy he was capable of, or might enjoy ; what
he could not pretend to, nor did possess.

SUPPOSITION I.

The first supposition of those who claim universal jurisdiction
to the pope over the church is, That St. Peter had a primacy
over the apostles.

IN order to the resolution of this point, we may consider
that there are several kinds of primacy, which may belong to
@ person in respect of others; for there are,

1. A primacy of worth, or personal eacellency.

2. A primacy of reputation and esteem.

3. A primacy of order, or bare dignity and precedence.

4. A primacy of power or jurisdiction.

To each of these what title St. Peter might have, let us in
order examine.

I. As for the first of these, (@ primacy of worth, or merit,
as some of the ancients call it,) we may well grant it to St.
Peter, admitting that probably he did exceed the rest of his
brethren in personal endowments and capacities, (both natural
and moral,) qualifying him for the discharge of the apostolical
office in an eminent manner; particularly that in quickness of
apprehension, in boldness of spirit, in readiness of speech, in
charity to our Lord, and zeal for his service, in resolution, ac-
tivity, and industry he was transcendent, may seem to appear
by the tenor of the evangelical and apostolical histories; in the
which we may observe him upon all occasions ready to speak
first, and to make himself the mouth, as the fathers speak, of
the apostles, in all deliberations nimble at propounding his
advice, in all undertakings forward to make the onset; being
mavtaxod Oepyos, always hot and eager, always prompt and
vigorous, as St. Chrysostom often affirmeth concerning him :
@these things are apparent in his demeanour, and it may not
be amiss to set down some instances.

When our Lord, observing the different apprehensions men

a’ Evmeplotpopos yap ael mws hv bvOpw-
ToS, KEeKEvTpwmevos ov peTplws eis THY
én) Tb Spaoa Kal eiweivy mpobuulay. Cy-
rill. in Joh. xxi. 15. He was a very
active and stirring man, exceedingly
spurred on with much promptness and

alacrity in doing and speaking. Mayvta-
xov etplaxera amd ré00v dpyav. Chrys.
in Joh. Or. xii. (13, 24.) Aw mdvrwv
kal ev raow Thy avrhy eupalve: Cepudrn-
ta. Chrys. tom. v. Or. 59.

Pope’s Supremacy. 43

had concerning him, asked the apostles, But whom say ye that Matt. xvi.
I am? up starteth he, tpo7nda cal tpordapBavera, he skippeth '» 16.
forth, and preventeth the rest, crying, Thou art the Christ, the

Son of the living God. The other apostles were not igno-

rant of the point; for they at their conversion did take Jesus John i. 42,
for the Messias, which (even according to the common notion jit. xxvi.
of the Jews) did imply his being the Son of God; Nathanael 63- big
(that is, St. Bartholomew, as is supposed) had in terms con- Matt. xiv.
fessed it; the whole company, upon seeing our Lord walk on 33-

the sea, had avowed it; St. Peter before that in the name of

them all had said, ‘Hyeis wemorevxapev, cal éyvdxapyev, We John vi. 69.
have believed, and have known, that thou art the Christ, the

Son of the living God. ‘They therefore had the same faith,

but he, from a special alacrity of spirit, and expedition in
utterance, was more forward to declare it; ° He was more hot,

saith St. Gregory Nazianzen, than the rest at acknowledging

Christ.

When our Saviour walked on the sea, who but he had the Matt. xiv.
faith and the courage to venture on the waters towards him? **

When our Lord was apprehended by the soldiers, presently John xviii.
up was his spirit, and out went his sword in defence of him. '®

When our Lord predicted, that upon his coming into trouble
all the disciples would be offended, and desert him, he was
ready to say, Though all men shall be offended because of thee, Matt. xxvi.
yet will I never be offended; and, Though I should die with thee, $3 35-...
yet will I not deny thee: such was his natural courage and con- 37.
fidence,

When our Lord was discoursing about his passion, he Matt. xvi.
suddenly must be advising in the case, and urging him fo*”
spare himself; upon which St. Chrysostom biddeth us to con-
sider, ‘not that his answer was unadvised, but that it came from
a genuine and fervent affection.

And at the transfiguration, he fell to proposing about mak-
ing an abode there, not knowing what he said; so brisk was he M» «ides 6
in imagination and speech. Mok ix: 6

Upon the good woman’s report that our Lord was risen Luke ix. 33.
from the dead, he first ran to the sepulchre, and so (as St. a) Pah:
John xx. 3.

» Licet ceeteri apostoli sciant, Petrus Xpiorod. Greg. Naz. Or. 34.
tamen respondet pro ceteris. Ambr. in d M? tovro éerdowuer, br: awepiaxe-

Luce. lib. vi. cap. 9. mros i amdxpiois* GAA’ Sri yenalov wé-
© @epudrepos Tay tAAwy cis eriyywow Gov hv Kal Céovros. Tom, vy, Or. 59.

Kowhy ™po- him

A Treatise of the

Paul implieth) did obtain the first sight of our Lord after the
resurrection® ; such was his zeal and activity upon all occa-

sions.

At the consultation about supplying the place of Judas, he
rose up, proposed, and pressed the matter.

At the convention of the apostles and elders about resolving
the debate concerning observance of Mosaical institutions, he
first rose up, and declared his sense. .

In the promulgation of the gospel, and defence thereof
before the Jewish rulers, he did assume the conduct, and con-
stantly took upon him to be the speaker; the rest standing by

, implying assent, and ready to avow his word; Peter,
gwrhy, xa Saith St. Luke, standing with the rest, lift up his voice, and said

unto them; so did they utter a common voice, saith St. Chryso-
stom, and he was the mouth of all.

fThat in affection to our Lord, and zeal for his service, St.
Peter had some advantage over the rest, that question, Simon
Peter, dost thou love me more than these? may seem to imply:
(although the words zActov rovrwy may bear other interpreta-
tions, whereby the seeming invidiousness of the question, ac-

cording to that sense, will be removed.)

However, that he

had a singular zeal for promoting our Lord’s service, and pro-
pagation of the gospel, therein outshining the rest, seemeth
manifest in the history, and may be inferred from the peculiar
regard our Lord apparently did shew to him.

Upon these premises we may well admit that St. Peter had
a primacy of worth; or that in personal accomplishments he
was most eminent among the twelve apostles; (although after-
ward there did spring up one, who hardly in any of these re-

1Cor.xy. spects would yield to him; who could confidently say, that he

did not come behind the very chief apostles, and of whom St.

€ Kal ort HpOn Kno, elra Tots dHdeKa.
1 Cor. xv. 5. And that he appeared to
Cephas, after that to the twelve.

f Aug. in Joh. Tract. 123. “O wavinds
éparths Tov Xpiorov. Chrys. tom. v.
Or. 24. An extreme lover of Christ.
Sezpe diximus nimii ardoris, amorisque
quam maximi fuisse Petrum in Domi-
num. Hier. in Matt. xvi. 22. We
have often said that Peter was trans-
ported with too much heat, and extra-
ordinary great love of our Lord. Ipse

23, §- xiii Ambrose saith, § Neither was Paul inferior to Peter ——being

enim Petrus in apostolorum ordine
primus, in Christi amore promptissi-
mus, sepe unus respondet pro omni-
bus. Aug. Serm. xiii. de verb. Dom. in
Matt.i. For Peter himself being first
in the order of the apostles, and most
prompt and forward in the love of
Christ, answered oftentimes alone for
all the rest.

& Nec Paulus inferior Petro——cum
primo quoque facile conferendus, et nulli
secundus. Ambr. de Sp. S. ii. 12.

Pope’s Supremacy. 45

well to be compared even to the first, and second to none: and
St. Chrysostom, » For what was greater than Peter, and what
— equal to Paul?) This is the primacy which Eusebius attri-
buteth to him, when he calleth him ' the excellent and great
apostle, who for his virtue was the prolocutor of all the rest.

II. As to a@ primacy of repute; which St. Paul meaneth,
when he speaketh of the of doxotvres, those which had a special Gal. ii. 2, 6,
reputation, of those who seemed to be pillars, of the inp Alav?
andaotodo., the supereminent apostles ; this advantage cannot be 2 Cor. xi-5.
refused him; being a necessary consequent of those eminent '’
qualities resplendent in him, and of the illustrious perform-
ances achieved by him, beyond the rest.

This may be inferred from that advantageous renown which
he hath had propagated from the beginning to all posterity.

This at least those elogies of the fathers (styling him the'O émavé-

oTaTOS Tay

chief, prince, head of the apostles) do signify. retary ye
This also may be collected from his being so constantly rena

. . - . isp.

ranked in the first place, before the rest of his brethren. cont. Arie

_ IIL. As to @ primacy of order, or bare dignity, importing “™ P: *?'
that commonly, in all meetings and proceedings, the other
apostles did yield him the precedence, the zponyopfa, or pri-
vilege of speaking first, (whether in propounding matters for
debate, or in delivering his advice,) in the conduct and mode-
ration of affairs; that this was stated on him, may be ques-
tioned ; for that this were a kind of womanish privilege ; and
that it doth not seem to befit the gravity of such persons, or
their condition and circumstances, to stand upon ceremonies
of respect; for that also our Lord’s rules do seem to exclude
all semblance of ambition, all kinds of inequality and distance
between his apostles; for that this practice doth not seem
constantly and thoroughly to agree to his being endowed with
this advantage ; especially seeing all that practice which fa-
voureth it may fairly be assigned to other causes; for that
also the fathers’ authority (if that be objected, as a main ar-
gument of such a primacy) in points of this nature, not bor-
dering on essentials of faith, is of no great strength ; they in
such cases speaking out of their own ingeny and conjecture ;

h Ti yap Mérpou pei(ov ; ri Bt TavaAov orddwy, Tov dperijs tvexa Ta¥ oma
Yoov. Chrys. tom. v. Or. 167. amdytwy mpotyyopov. Euseb. Hist. ii.
i Toy xaprepdy wal uéyay Tay aro- 14.

46 A Treatise of the

and commonly indulging their imaginations no less freely than
other men.

But yet this primacy may be granted, as probable upon
divers accounts of use and convenience ; it might be useful to
preserve order, and to promote expedition; or to prevent con-
fusion, distraction, and dilatory obstruction in the management
of things ; yea, to maintain concord, and to exclude that ambi-
tion or affectation to be foremost, which is natural to men.

For seeing all could not go, speak, or act first, all could
not guide affairs, it was expedient that one should be ready
to undertake it, knowing his cue; ‘See (saith St.Chrysostom,
noting on Acts ii. 14, where St. Peter speaketh for the rest)
the concord of the apostles ; they yield unto him the speech, for
they could not all speak: and, | One, saith St. Jerome, is chosen
among the twelve, that a head being appointed, an occasion of
schism might be removed.

Cyp. Ep. St.Cyprian hath a reason for it somewhat more subtle and
Eat a mystical, supposing our Lord did confer on him a preference

of this kind to his brethren, (who otherwise in power and au-

thority were equal to him,) that he might intimate and recom-
Intypouni- mend unity to us; and the other African doctors (Optatus
PY and St. Austin) do commonly harp on the same notion: I ean
— iii discern little solidity in this conceit, and as little harm.

i However, supposing this primacy, (at least in respect to
the fathers, who generally seem to countenance it,) divers
probable reasons may be assigned why it should especially be
conferred on St. Peter™.

1. It is probable that St. Peter was first in standing among
the apostles ; I mean not that he was the first disciple, or first
converted to faith in Christ ; but first called to the apostolical
office ; " or first nominated by our Lord, when out of all his

rag a disciples he chose twelve, and called them apostles; Simon,

18. k Skéma tev GroordéAwy Thy dudvo.ay,
a’tol rapaxwpovow abT@ Tis Snunyoplas,
ob yap tea mdvras pbéyyerOa. Chrys.
in Act. ii. 14.

1 Inter duodecim unus eligitur, ut ca-
pite constituto schismatis tolleretur oc-
casio. Hier. in Jovin. i. cap. 14.

m Petrus—natura unus homo erat,

by a more abundant grace one and the
same prime apostle. Ipse enim Petrus in
apostolorum ordine primus, in Christi a-
more prom ptissimus, seepe unus respondet
pro omnibus. Aug. de verbis Dom. sup. ©
Matt.i. Serm.13. For Peter himself being
the first in the order of the apostles, the
most forward in the love of Christ, he

gratia unus Christianus, abundantiore
gratia unus idemque primus apostolus.
Aug. in Joh. Tract. 123. Peter was by
nature one man, by grace one Christian,

alone ofttimes answers for all the rest.

D [Tlporl@no. 5t TMérpov Kat ’Avdpéay,
6id7t Kal mpwrdkAnta. Theoph. in
Matt. x.]

Pope’s Supremacy. 47

whom he called Peter, and Andrew lis brother. He was one Mark i. 16.
of the first believers at large; he was perhaps the first that '"° “+
distinctly believed our Lord’s divinity ; he was probably the
very first apostle; ° as the fittest person in our Lord’s eye
for that employment. PHe, saith St. Hilary, did first believe,
and is the prince (or first man) of the apostleship. %He, saith
St. Cyprian, was the first whom the Lord chose. * He, saith
St. Basil, was by judgment preferred before all the disciples.
He by other ancients is called $ the firstfruits of the apostles.
And according to this sense St. Jerome, I suppose, doth call Hier. in
him and his brother Andrew principes apostolorum, that is, seta
(according to frequent usage of the word princeps in Latin,)
the first of the apostles.

So that as in divers churches, (perhaps when time was, in
all,) anciently, priority in ordination did ground a right to
precedence, as it is in ours, with some exception; so might
St. Peter, upon this account of being first ordained apostle,
obtain such a primacy.
_ 2. St. Peter also might be the first in age; which among
persons otherwise equal is a fair ground of preference ; for
he was a married man; and that before he was called, as is
intimated in St. Luke; and may be inferred from hence, that Luke iv. 38.
he would not have married after that he had left all, and\;/;,
devoted himself to follow our Lord. Upon which account of 27.
age St. Jerome did suppose that he was preferred before the
beloved disciple; ‘Why, saith he, was not St. John elected,
being a bachelor? it was deferred to age, because Peter was
elder, that a youth, and almost a boy, might not be preferred
before men of good age.

I know that Epiphanius" affirmeth St. Andrew to have been
the elder brother; but it doth not appear whether he saith it
from conjecture, or upon any other ground. And his authority,
although we should suppose it bottomed on tradition, is not

P Primus credidit, et apostolatus est
princeps. Hil. in Matt. Can. 7.

4 Quem primum Dominus elegit.
Cypr. Ep. 71. p. 127.

r'O wdvtwy tay wabntay mpoxpi0els.
Bas. de Judicio Dei, tom. ii. p. 268.

8’Arapxh Tav droordAwy. Modest.

apud Phot. Cod. 275. Clem. ad Jac.

t Sed cur non Joannes electus est
virgo? wtati delatum est, quia Petrus
senior erat; ne adhuc adolescens et
pene puer progress etatis hominibus
preferretur. Hier. in Jovin. i. 14.

u Mixporépov bytos tod Tlérpov r@
xpévyp ris HAikias. Epiph. Heer. li. 17-
p- 440. Peter being the younger in
age.

Hor. Ep.
i. 19.

Matt. xvi.
16.
Matt. xvii.

I.
Matt. xxvi.

37-

John xiii. 6.
1 Cor. xv. 5.
John xxi.

Hil. in Mat.
Can. xiv.
p- 566.

48 A Treatise of the

great ; tradition itself in such matters being very slippery, and
often one tradition crossing another.

3. The most eminent qualifications of St. Peter (such as we
before described) might procure to him this advantage.

They might breed in him an honest confidence, pushing him
forward on all occasions to assume the former place, and thence
by custom to possess it; for qui sibi fidit, dux regit examen—
it being in all action, as in walking, where he that naturally is
most vigorous and active doth go before the rest.

They might induce others to a voluntary concession thereof*;
for to those who indisputably do excel in good qualities or
abilities, honest and meek persons easily will yield precedence,
especially on occasions of public concernment ; wherein it is
expedient, that the best qualified persons should be first seen.

They probably might also move our Lord himself to settle,
or at least to insinuate this order ; assigning the first place to
him, whom he knew most willing to serve him, and most able
to lead on the rest in his service.

It is indeed observable, that upon all occasions our Lord
signified a particular respect to him, before the rest of his
colleagues ; for to him more frequently than to any of them
he directed his discourse ; unto him, by a kind of anticipation,
he granted or promised those gifts and privileges which he
meant to confer on them all; him he did assume as spectator
and witness of his glorious transfiguration; him he picked out
as companion and attendant on him in his grievous agony; his
feet he first washed ; to him he did first discover himself after
his resurrection, (as St. Paul implieth,) and with him then he
did entertain most discourse, in especial manner recommending
to him the pastoral care of his church: by which manner of
proceeding our Lord may seem to have constituted St. Peter
the first in order among the apostles, or sufficiently to have
hinted his mind for their direction, admonishing them by his
example to render unto him a special deference.

4. The fathers commonly do attribute his priority to the
merit of his faith and confession, wherein he did outstrip his
brethren. Y He obtained supereminent glory by the confession

X Abrol mapaxwpotow aiTg, &c. y Supereminentem beat fidei sus
Chrys. in Act. ii.14. They yield unto confessione gloriam promeruit. Hil.
him, &c. de Trin. lib. vi. p. 121.

Pope’s Supremacy. 49

of his blessed faith, saith St. Hilary. * Because he alone of all the
rest professeth lis love, (John xxi.) therefore he is preferred above
all, saith St. Ambrose.

5. Constantly in all the catalogues of the apostles St. Peter's Matt. x. 2.
name is set in the front; and when actions are reported, in ping
which he was concerned jointly with others, he is usually men- Luke vi. r4.
tioned first, which seemeth not done without careful design, or poaenie e
special reason.

Upon such grounds it may be reasonable to allow St. Peter
a primacy of order; such a one as the ringleader hath in a
dance, as the primipilar centurion had in the legion, or the
prince of the senate had there, in the Roman state; at least, as
among earls, baronets, &c. and others coordinate in degree,
yet one hath a precedence of the rest.

IV. As to a primacy importing superiority in power, com-
mand, or jurisdiction; this by the Roman party is asserted to
St. Peter, but we have great reason to deny it, upon the fol-
lowing considerations.

1. For such a power (being of so great importance) it was
needful that a commission from God, its founder, should be
granted in downright and perspicuous terms; that no man
concerned in duty grounded thereon might have any doubt of
it, or excuse for boggling at it: it was necessary, not only for
the apostles, to bind and warrant their obedience, but also for
us, because it is made the sole foundation of a like duty incum-
bent on us; which we cannot heartily discharge without being
assured of our obligation thereto by clear revelation, or pro-
mulgation of God’s will in the holy scripture ; for it was of old
a current, and ever will be a true rule, which St. Austin in one
case thus expresseth, J do believe that also on this side there
would be most clear authority of the divine oracles, if a man
could not be ignorant of it without damage of his salvation ;

Z Ideo quia solus profitetur amorem
suum (John xxi.) ex omnibus, omnibus
antefertur. Amébr. in Lue. cap. ult.

a It was a reasonable demand, which
was made to our Saviour, Tell us by
what authorily thou doest these things, or
who is he that gave thee this authority 2
(Luke xx. 2.) and the reasonableness of
it our Lord did often avow, declaring
that if by his doctrine and works he had

not vouched the divinity of his anthor-
ity, it had been no sin to disbelieve or
reject him, (John v. 31, 36. x. 25, 37-
XV. 22, 24.)

b Credo etiam hinc divinorum elo-
quiorum clarissima authoritas esset, si
homo sine dispendio promisse salutis
ignorare non posset. Aug. de Pec. Mer.
et Rem. ii. 36.

Luke i. 1.

Matt. x. 1.

50 A Treatise of the

and Lactantius thus, ¢ Those things can have no foundation, or
Jirmness, which are not sustained by any oracle of God's word.

But apparently no such commission is extant in seripture ;
the allegations for it being, as we shall hereafter shew, nowise
clear, nor probably expressive of any such authority granted
by God; but on the contrary divers clearer testimonies are
producible derogating from it.

2. If so illustrious an office was instituted by our Saviour, it
is strange that nowhere in the evangelical or apostolical history
(wherein divers acts and passages of smaller moment are re-
corded) there should be any express mention of that institu-
tion; there being not only much reason for such a report, but
many pat occasions for it: the time when St. Peter was vested
with that authority; the manner and circumstances of his in-
stalment therein ; the nature, rules, and limits of such an of-
fice, had surely well deserved to have been noted, among other
occurrences relating to our faith and discipline, by the holy
evangelists : no one of them, in all probability, could have for-
borne punctually to relate a matter of so great consequence, as
the settlement of a monarch in God’s church, and a sovereign
of the apostolical college; (from whom so eminent authority
was to be derived to all posterity, for compliance wherewith the
whole church for ever must be accountable :) particularly it is
not credible that St. Luke should quite slip over so notable a
passage, who /ad, as he telleth us, attained a perfect under-
standing of all things, and had undertaken to write in order
the things that were surely believed among Christians in his
time ; of which things this, if any, was one of the most con-
siderable.

3. The time of his receiving institution to such authority
ean hardly be assigned. For was it when he was constituted
by our Lord an apostle? Then indeed probably he began to
obtain all the primacy and preeminence he ever had; but no
such power doth appear then conferred on him, or at any time
in our Saviour’s life ; at least, if it was, it was so covertly and
indiscernibly, that both he himself and all the apostles must
be ignorant thereof, who a little before our Lord’s passion did

c Nullum fundamentum aut firmi- narum vocum fulciuntur oraculis. Lact.
tatem possunt habere, que nullis divi- vii. 2.

Pope's Supremacy. 51

more than once earnestly contest about superiority. And it
is observable, that whereas our Lord before his passion did
carefully teach and press on the apostles the chief duties which
they were to observe in their behaviour toward each other ;
the maintenance of peace, of charity, of unity, of humility to- Markix.so.
ward one another; yet of paying due respect and obedience to! pty
this superior he said nothing to them. a ie
The collation of that power could not well be at any time“ '+
before the celebration of our Lord’s Supper, because before
that time St. Peter was scarce an ecclesiastical person; at least
he was no priest, as the convention of Trent under a curse doth
require us to believe’; for it were strange, that an unconse-
crated person, or one who was not so much as a priest, should
be endowed with so much spiritual power.
After his resurrection, our Lord did give divers common in- ’Epread-
structions, orders, and commissions to his apostles, but it doth “«”° 7

amnooTd-

not appear that he did make any peculiar grant to St. Peter ; Aus

for as to the pretence of such an one drawn out of the appendix «Acts i 2.

to St. John’s Gospel, or grounded on the words Pasce oves, we tp A

shall afterward declare that to be invalid. a eager
4. If St. Peter had been instituted sovereign of the aposto- Luke xxiv.

lical senate, his office and state had been in nature and kind Seas

very distinct from the common office of the other apostles; as '>

the office of a king from the office of any subject ; as an ordi-

nary, standing, perpetual, successive office, from one that is

only extraordinary, transitory, temporary, personal, and in-

communicable ; (to speak according to distinctions now in use,

and applied to this case;) whence, probably, as it was ex-

pedient to be, it would have been signified by some distinct

name, or title, characterising it, and distinguishing it from

others; as that of arch-apostle, arch-pastor, high priest,

sovereign pontiff, pope, his holiness, the vicar of Christ, or

the like; whereby it might have appeared that there was such

an officer, what the nature of his office was, what specialty of

respect and obedience was due to him: but no such name or

title (upon any occasion) was assumed by him, or was by the

rest attributed to him, or in history is recorded concerning

4 Si quis dixerit, illis verbis, Hoc fa- xxii. can.2. If any one shall say that
cite in meam commemorationem, Chris- in those words, Do this in remembrance
tum non instituisse apostolos sacerdo- of me, Christ did not ordain his apostles
tes—— anathema sit. Conc. Tid. sess, priests——-let him be accursed.

Ez 2

Eph. iv. 11.

1 Cor. xii.
28.

52 A Treatise of the

him ; the name of an apostle being all that he took on him, or
by others was given to him.

5. There was indeed no office above that of an apostle
known to the apostles, or to the primitive church ; this, saith
St. Chrysostom, was ‘the greatest authority, and the top of
authorities ; there was, saith he, none before an apostle, none
superior, none equal to him: this he asserteth of all the apostles,
this he particularly applieth to St. Paul; this he demonstrateth
from St. Paul himself, who purposely enumerating the chief
officers instituted by God in his church, doth place apostles
in the highest rank; Our Lord, saith St. Paul, gave some, apo-
stles ; some, prophets; some, evangelists; some, pastors and teachers ;
and God hath set some in his church, first apostles, secondarily
prophets, thirdly teachers; mp@tov amoorddovs ; why not first a
pope, an universal pastor, an cecumenical judge, a vicar of
Christ, a head of the catholic church? Could St. Paul be so
ignorant, could he be so negligent or so envious, as to pass
by, without any distinction, the supreme officer, if such a one
then had been? As put case, that one should undertake to
recite the officers in any state, or republic, would he not do
strangely, if he should pretermit the king, the duke, the
consul, the major thereof? Would not any one, confiding in _
the skill, diligence, and integrity of such a relator, be induced
from such an omission to believe there was no such officer
there? St. Chrysostom therefore did hence very rationally
infer, that the apostolical office was the supreme in the
Christian state, having no other superior to it.

St. Peter therefore was no more than an apostle; and as
such he could have no command over those who were in the
same highest rank coordinate to him, and who as apostles
could not be subject to any.

6. Our Lord himself, at several times, declared against this
kind of primacy, instituting equality among his apostles, pro-
hibiting them to affect, to seek, to assume, or admit a supe-
riority of power one above another.

© *Apxh meylatn’ Kopuph Tav apxav.
Chrys. tom. viii. p. 114. Eildes tynadv
xabhuevoy Toy amréatoAov, Kal ovdeva
mpd éxelvov bvTa, ore avdrepov. Ibid.
Tay 5¢ GrogréAwy Ioos obdels yéyover.
Chrys. tom. v. Or. 33. Avrod Tod TMad-
Aov akotoapney apiOuorvTos Tas apxas,

kal év T@ tndrorépw xwply Thy &rooro~
Auchy KadiCovros. Chrys. tom. viii. ubi
supra. We have heard Paul himself
reckoning up powers or authorities, and
placing the apostolical in the highest
place.

Pope's Supremacy. 53

There was (saith St. Luke, among the twelve, at the parti- Luke xxii.
cipation of the holy supper) @ strife among them, who of them)» >+. |
should be accounted the greatest, or who had the best pretence done? elvas
to superiority: this strife our Lord presently did check and ““S*”
quash ; but how? not by telling them, that he already had de-
cided the case in appointing them a superior, but rather by
assuring them, that he did intend none such to be; that he
would have no monarchy, no exercise of any dominion or au-
thority by one among them over the rest: but that, notwith- so doth St.
standing any advantages one might have before the other, (as oo

: : ‘ . rpret
f greater in gifts, or as preceding in any respect.) they should uei(wr, al-
be one as another, all humbly condescending to one another, aac
each being ready to yield help and service to one another;
The kings, said he, of the Gentiles exercise lordship over Luke xxii.
them; and they that exercise authority over them are called 5 2°-

- benefactors: but ye shall not be so; but he that is greater 6 nella.
among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is leader, siyotyevos.
as he that doth minister; that is, whatever privilege any of
you obtaineth, let it not be employed in way of command, but
rather of compliance and subserviency, as occasion shall re-
quire; let him not pretend to be a superior, but rather
behave himself as an inferior: thus our Lord did smother

‘the debate, by removing from among them whatever great-
ness any of them did affect or pretend to; forbidding that
any of them should xvprevew, or efovordfev, exercise any do-
minion or authority over the rest, as worldly princes did over
their subjects.

Again, upon another occasion, (as the circumstances of the
place do imply,) when two of the apostles (of special worth
and consideration with our Lord, St. James and St. John, the
sons of Zebedee) did affect a preeminence over the rest, re-
questing of our Lord, Grant unto us that we may sit, oné Mark x. 37.
on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in oc PUNE
glory, (or in thy kingdom, as St. Matthew hath it; that is, in ©

{"Hrw tis mods, itw duvards yva-
ow ekemeiv, rw copds év diaxploe Ad-
yov, hrw yopyds év &pyois, rorolTw war-
Aov Tamewoppoveiy dpelAc, baw Soxet
MaAAov wel(wy elvar* Kal (yreiv 7d Kol-
vwpedts racw, wh Td éavtov. Clem. ad
Corinth. i. 48. apud Clem. Alex. Strom.
vi. p. 647. Leta man be faithful, let

him be powerful in declaring know-
ledge, let him be wise in discovering
reasons, let him be strenuous in works,
by so much the more ought he to be
humble-minded, by how much the more
he seems to be greater than others; and
to seek the common benefit of all, and
not of himself.

Matt. xx.

25, 26, 27.

54 A Treatise of the

that new state, which they conceived our Lord was ready to
introduce ;) which request doth not seem to import any great
matter of authority; nor probably did they desire so much .as
our adversaries do give to St. Peter; yet our Lord doth not
only reject their suit, but generally declareth, that none of
them were capable of such a preferment in his kingdom;
which therein differed from worldly dominion, because in it
there was no room for such an ambition; especially in that
state of things wherein the apostles were to be placed; which
was a state of undergoing persecutions, not of enjoying dig-
nity, or exercising command; all the preferment which they
reasonably could aspire to being to be dispensed in the future
state, (whereof they were not aware,) according to God’s pre-
paration, in correspondence to the patience and industry any
of them should exert in God’s service ; (upon which account
St. Chrysostom saith,) 82 was a clear case that St. Paul should -
obtain the preference.

It was indeed (as our Lord intimateth) incongruous for
those, who had forsaken all things for Christ, who had em-
braced a condition of disgrace, who were designed, by self-
denial, humility, neglect of temporal grandeur, wealth, and
honour, by undergoing persecution, and undertaking con-
formity to our Lord, (beng baptized with the baptism with’
which he was baptized,) to propagate the faith of a crucified
Master, to seek or take on them authoritative dignity; for
among them there could not well be any need of commanding
or being commanded; it was more fit that all of them should
conspire to help and serve one another, in promoting the com-
mon design and service of their Lord, with mutual condescen-
sion and compliance ; which was the best way of recommend-
ing themselves to his acceptance, and obtaining from him an-
swerable reward. Such was the drift of our Lord’s discourse;
whereunto (as in the other case) he did annex the prohibition
of exercising dominion; Ye know, saith he, that the princes of
nations exercise dominion over them, and they that are great
exercise authority upon them: but wt shall not be so among
you; but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your

g Evénhov bri THs Gvwtdrw amrorab- mpdvo. Tav apxouevwy, &c. Chrys. in
gerat Tush Kal mpoedplas, Chrys.tom.v. Act. i.6. Then the government was
ws not an honour, but a provident care of
h'Tére f n emoracia jv ov Tiuh, GAAG the governed, &c.

Pope’s Supremacy. 55

minister ; and whosoever will be first among you, let him be your
servant: “Os éav 0é\n, whoever among you hath a mind to
special grandeur and preeminence, let him understand, that
there is no other to be attained, beside that which resulteth
from the humble performance of charitable offices to his bre-
thren: the which whoever shall best discharge, he alone will
become greatest and highest in the eye of God.

Again, at another time, the apostles dreaming of a secular
kingdom to be erected by our Lord, disputed among themselves Markix. 34.
who should be the greatest ; and for satisfaction presumed to sprigass
inquire of our Lord about it; when, as they surely were very 1.
ignorant of St. Peter’s being their head, so there was a fair
occasion as could be of our Lord’s instructing them in that
point, and enjoining their duty towards him; but he did not
so, but rather taught him, together with the rest, not to pre-
tend to any such thing as preferment above the rest; He Markix.35.
sitting down called the twelve, and said unto them, If any one
desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of ail.
How could he (considering the occasion and circumstances of
that speech) in plainer terms establish equality, or discounte-
nance any claim to superiority among them? Had St. Peter
then advanced such a plea, as they now affirm of right belong.

* ing to him, would he not thereby have depressed and debased
himself to the lowest degree ?

To impress this rule, our Lord! then calling a little child,
did set him in the midst of them, telling them, that except they
were converted (from such ambitious pretences), and became
like little children, (wholly void of such conceits,) they could
not enter into the kingdom of heaven; that is, could not in
effect be so much as ordinary good Christians; adjoining, that
whosoever should humble himself as did that little child, (not
affecting or assuming more than such an innocent did,) should
be greatest in the kingdom of heaven; in real worth, and in
the favour of God, transcending the rest; so that St. Peter,
claiming superiority to himself, would have forfeited any title
to eminency among Christians.

i Ka) rois wep) rpwrelwy pidoveixodo: friends striving for the preeminence, he
yveplwos peta GrddtyTos Thy icérnTa commends equality together with sim-
mapeyyvG, A€ywv ws Ta wadla abdrods plicity, saying, that they ought to be-

yevérOa: Seiv. Clem. Alex. Strom. v. come as little children.
(p. 660. [663.]) And to those familiar

Matt. xxiii.

8.
els KaOnyn-

Ths.

Chrys. in

1 Tim. iii. 1.
in Eph. Or.
11.Isid. Pel.

56 A Treatise of the

Again, as to the power which is now ascribed to St. Peter
by the party of his pretended successors, we may argue from
another place; where our Saviour prohibiting his disciples to
resemble the Jewish Scribes and Pharisees in their ambitious
desires and practices, their affectations of preeminence, their
assuming places and titles importing difference of rank and
authority, he saith, But be ye not called Rabbi: for there is one
Master (one Guide, or Governor) of you, even Christ; but ye
are brethren. How more pregnantly could he have declared
the nature of his constitution, and the relation of Christians
one to another established therein, to exclude such differences
of power, whereby one doth in way of domination impose his
opinion or his will on others ?

Ye are all fellow-scholars, fellow-servants, and fellow-chil-
dren of God ; it therefore doth not become you to be anywise
imperious over one another; but all of you humbly and lov-
ingly to conspire in learning and observing the precepts of
your common Lord; the doing which is backed with a promise
and a threat suitable to the purpose; He that exalteth himself
shall be abased ; and he that will abase himself shall be exalted ;
the which sentences are to be interpreted according to the
intent of the rules foregoing.

If it be said, that such discourse doth impugn all ecclesi-
astical jurisdiction ; I answer, that indeed thereby is removed
all such haughty and harsh rule, which some have exercised
over Christians ; that avdevria, (arbitrary power ;) that éfovela
avevOuvos, (absolute, uncontrollable authority ;) that rupavviky
mpovoula, (tyrannical prerogative,) of which the fathers com-
plain; that xataxvpiedew rv Kdjpov, (domineering over their

- charges,) which St. Peter forbiddeth. We, saith St. Chry-
. Sostom, were designed to teach the word, not to exercise empire

or absolute sovereignty ; we do bear the rank of advisers, exhort-
omg to duty.

A bishop, saith St. Jerome, differeth from a king, in that a
bishop presideth over those that are willing, the king against
their will’; (that is, the bishop’s governance should be so

k Eis didacxadlay Adyou mpoexerplcOn- lentibus. Hier. Ep. 3. ad Nepot. ‘O
bev, on eis Gpxhv, obdt cis adOevriay’ pévror éExdvTwv dpetAwy Upxew, &e.
TuuBotrwy rdw eréxouev mapavotytwy. Chrys. in Tit. i. 7. He ought to rule
Chrys. in Eph. Or. 11. them so as they may be willing to be

! Ile enim nolentibus preest, hic vo- ruled, &c.

Pope’s Supremacy. 57

gentle and easy, that men hardly can be unwilling to comply

with it ; but should obey, as St. Peter exhorteth, (od« avayxa-1 Pet. v.
ards, Gd’ Exovalos, not by constraint, but of their own accord ;)” *
and, ™ Let, saith he, the bishops be content with their honour ;

let them know themselves to be fathers, not lords ; they should be

loved, not feared.

And, " Thou (saith St. Bernard to pope Eugenius) dost sw-
perintend, the name of bishop signifying to thee not dominion,
but duty.

At least those precepts of our Lord do exclude that power
which is ascribed to St. Peter over the apostles themselves,
the which indeed is greater than in likelihood any Pharisee
did ever affect ; yea in many respects doth exceed any domi-
nation which hath been claimed or usurped by the most abso-
lute monarch upon earth; for the power of St. Peter in their
opinion was the same which now the Roman bishop doth
challenge to himself over the pastors and people of God’s
church, by virtue of succession to him, (St. Peter's power
being the base of the papal, and therefore not narrower than
its superstructure ;) but what domination comparable to that
hath ever been usgd in the world ?

What emperor did ever pretend to a rule so wide in ex-
tent, (in regard either to persons or matters,) or so absolute
in effect ?

Who ever, beside his holiness, did usurp a command, not
only over the external actions, but the most inward cogitations
of all mankind ; subjecting the very minds and consciences of
men to his dictates, his laws, his censures ?

Who ever thundered curses and damnations on all those
who should presume to dissent from his opinion, or to contest
his pleasure ?

Who ever claimed more absolute power, in making, abo-
lishing, suspending laws, or imposing upon men what he
pleased, under obligation of conscience, and upon extremest

penalties ?

m Sed contenti sint honore suo; pa- n Inde denique superintendis, so-
tres se sciant esse non dominos——. nante tibi episcopi nomine non domi-
Hier. Ep. 62. ad Theoph. cap. 3. Amari nium, sed officium. Bern. de Consid.
parens, et episcopus debet, non timeri. ii. 6.

Ibid. cap. 1.

Si papa
suze, &c.

Grat. Dist.

58 A Treatise of the

What prince ever used a style more imperious than is that
which is usual in the papal bulls; °Let et be lawful for no man
whatever to infringe this expression of our will and command,
or to go against it with bold rashness.

What Domitian more commonly did admit the appellation
of Jord, than doth the pope? ? Our most holy lord, is the ordi-
nary style attributed to him by the fathers of Trent, as if
they were his slaves, and intended to enslave all Christendom
to him.

Who ever did exempt his clients and dependents in all na-
tions from subjection to civil laws, from undergoing common
burdens and taxes, from being judged or punished for their
misdemeanours and crimes?

Who eyer claimed a power to dispose of all things one
way or other, either directly or indirectly? to dispose even
of kingdoms, to judge sovereign princes, and to condemn
them, to depose them from their authority, absolving their
subjects from all allegiance to them, and exposing their
kingdoms to rapine ?

To whom but a pope were ever ascribed prerogatives like
those of judging all men, and himself being liable to no judg-
ment, no account, no reproof or blame ; so that, as a papal
canon assureth us, let a pope be so bad, as by his negligence
and maladministration to carry with him innumerable people to

xl. cap. 6. hell, yet no mortal man whatever must presume here to reprove

Concil. Lat
sub Leone

X. sess. xi.

his faults ; because he being to judge all men, is himself to be
judged of no man, except he be catched swerving from the faith ;
which is a case they will hardly suffer a man to suppose
possible.

To whom but to a pope was such power attributed by his
followers, and admitted by himself, that he could hear those

-words applying to him, Al] power is given to thee in heaven

and in earth?
4 Such power the popes are wont to challenge, and when

Poecasion serveth do not fail to execute, as successors of

nam nostre voluntatis et mandati in- q Hac itaque fiducia fretus, &c. Eav-
fringere, vel ei ausu temerario con- commun. Henrici R. in Concil. Rom.
traire. iii. sub Greg. VII. apud Bin. tom. vii.

p Sanctissimus dominus noster. Con- p. 484-

Pope’s Supremacy. 59

St. Peter; to whom therefore consequently they ascribe it:
and sometimes in express terms; as in that brave apostrophe
of pope Gregory VII. (the spirit of which pope hath possessed
his successors generally ;) ‘Go to therefore, (said he, directing
his speech to St. Peter and St. Paul,) most holy princes of the
apostles, and what I have said confirm by your authority ; that
now at length all men may understand whether ye can. bind and
loose ; that also ye can take away and give on earth empires,
kingdoms, and whatever mortal men can have.

Nowif the assuming and exercising such powers be not that
kataxupievey, and Kxatefouo.d¢ew, that exalting one’s self, that
being called rabbi, father, master, which our Lord prohibiteth,
what is so? what then can those words signify? what could
our Lord mean ?

The authority therefore which they assign to St. Peter, and
assume to themselves from him, is voided by those declarations
and precepts of our Lord; the which it ean hardly be well
conceived that our Lord would have proposed, if he had
designed to constitute St. Peter in such a supremacy over his
disciples and church.

7. Surveying particulars, we shall not find any peculiar ad-
ministration committed to St. Peter, nor any privilege conferred
on him, which was not also granted to the other apostles.

Was St. Peter an ambassador, a steward, a minister, a vicar,

(if you please,) or surrogate of Christ? so were they, by no less
immediate and express warrant than he; for, As the Father sent
me, so also I send you, said our Lord presently before his de-
parture ; by those words, as St. Cyprian remarketh, ’ granting
an equal power to all the apostles: and, We, saith St. Paul, are 2Cor.v. 20.
ambassadors for Christ ; we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye
reconciled to God: and, So let a man esteem us, as the ministers 1 Cor. iv. 1.
of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. See

Was St. Peter a rock, on which the church was to be Matt. xvi.
founded? Be it so; but no less were they all; for the wall of ne
Jerusalem, which came down from heaven, had twelve founda- Rev. xxi.
tions, on which were inscribed the names of the twelve apostles '” '*

t Agite apostolorum sanctissimi prin- resurrectionem suam parem potestatem
cipes, &c. Plat. in Greg. VII. In tribuat et dicat, Sicut, &c. Cypr. de
Concil. Rom. yi. apud Bin. p. 491- Un. Ecel. p-195-

8 Et quamvis apostolis omnibus post

60 A Treatise of the

Eph. ii. 20. of the Lamb ; and, We, saith St.Paul, are all built upon the

1 Pet. ii. 5.

1 Cor. iii.
10.

Matt. xvi.
19.

Matt. xvi.
19. XvViii.
18.

John xx.
23.

Eph. iv. 11.
Acts xx. 28.

1 Pet. v. 2.

Joundation of the prophets and apostles, Christ himself being the
chief corner stone; whence tequally, saith St.Jerome, the strength
of the church is settled upon them.

Was St. Peter an architect of the spiritual house (as himself
ealleth the church) ? so were also they; for, J, saith St. Paul,
as a wise masterbuilder, have laid the foundation.

Were the keys of the church (or of the kingdom of heaven)
committed to him? so also were they unto them: they had
a power to open and shut it by effectual instruction and per-
suasion, by dispensation of the sacraments, by exercise of
discipline, by exclusion of scandalous and heretical persons ;
whatever faculty the keys did import, the apostles did use it
in the foundation, guidance, and government of the church ;
and did (as the fathers teach) impart it to those whom they
did in their stead constitute to feed and govern the church.

Had St. Peter a power given him of binding and loosing
effectually ? so had they, immediately granted by our Saviour,
in as full manner, and couched in the same terms; Jf thou
shalt bind on earth, it shall be bound in heaven, said our Lord
to him; and, Whatsoever things ye shall bind on earth, they
shall be bound in heaven, said the same divine mouth to
them ".

Had he a privilege to remit and retain sins? it was then by
virtue of that common grant or promise; Whose soever sins ye
remit, they shall be remitted ; and whose soever sins ye retain,
they are retained.

Had he power and obligation to feed the sheep of Christ,
(all or some’) so had they indefinitely and immediately :
so had others by authority derived from them; who were
nominated pastors; who had this charge laid on them:
Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the
Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God,
which he hath purchased with his own blood; whom he doth
himself exhort, Fved the flock of God which is among you,

t Ex equo super eos ecclesiz fortitudo Phot. Cod. 280. p. 1600. Those who,
solidatur. Hier. in Jovin. i. 14. by succession from them, (viz. the
"Ome ye Kal Tots Gm’ exelywy 7d ap- apostles, ) were endowed with episcopal
XLepariKov Kora Biaboxiv mepiBeBAnuE- authority, we believe to have the same
vos Gflwpa, Thy ai’Thy mpoceivac Tov power of binding and loosing.
decpeiv Kal Avew ekovclay morevopuer.

Pope’s Supremacy. 61

taking the oversight thereof: \et feeding signify what it can,
instruction, or guidance, or governance, or all of them together,
(Regio more impera, if you please, as Bellarmine will have it,)
it did appertain to their charge; to teach was a common duty,
to lead and to rule were common functions ; St. Peter could
not nor would not appropriate it to himself; it is his own ex-
hortation, when he taketh most upon him, Be mindful of the z Pet. iii. 2.
commandment (or precept) of us the apostles of the Lord and
Saviour.
Was his commission universal, or unlimited? so was theirs,
by the same immediate authority; for, Al/ power (said he to Mat. xxviii.
them, when he gave his last charge) is given to me in heaven *®: "9
and in earth; go therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them,
and teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded
you; and, Gio ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every Mar xvi.
creature. locke ae
They, as St. Chrysostom speaketh, *were all in common in- 47.
trusted with the whole world, and had the care of all nations.
Was he furnished with extraordinary gifts, with special
graces, with continual directions and assistances for the dis-
charge of the apostolical office? so were they; for the promise Luke xxiv,
was common of sending the Holy Spirit to lead them into all4?:
truth, and clothing them with power from on high; and of 13, 14, 26.
endowing them with power to perform all sorts of miraculous
works: our Lord before his departure breathed into them, and John xx.
said, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: All of them, saith St. Luke, 4? .. -
were filled with the Holy Ghost ; all of them with confidence
and truth could say, Jt hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost, Acts xv. 28.
and to us; all of them did abundantly partake of that charac-
ter which St. Paul respected, when he did say, The signs of 2 Cor. xii.
an apostle were wrought among you, in signs, and wonders, and ‘*
mighty deeds.
Did St. Peter represent the church as receiving privileges
in its behalf; as the fathers affirm’? so did they, according
to the same fathers; 7J/ therefore (saith St. Austin, citing the

X Tidyres kowh Thy oixoumerny eure z Ergo si personam gerebant eccle size,
otevbéyres. Chrys. tom. viii. p. 115. et sic eis hoc dictum est, tanquam ipsi
tom. v. Orat. 47. in 2 Cor. xi. 28. ecclesiz diceretur, pax ecclesise dimittit

¥ Cui totius ecclesiz figuram gerenti, peccata, &c, dug. de Bapt. cont. Dom.
&e. Aug. Ep. 165. iii. 18.

1 Pet. v. 1.

62 A Treatise of the

famous place, Sicut me misit Pater) they did bear the person of
the church, and this was said to them, as if it were said to the
church itself, then the peace of the church remitteth sins.

What singular prerogative then can be imagined appertain-
ing to St. Peter? what substantial advantage could he pretend
to beyond the other apostles! Nothing surely doth appear ;
whatever the patrons of his supremacy do claim for him is
precariously assumed, without any fair colour of proof; he for
it is beholding, not to any testimony of holy scripture, but to
the invention of Roman fancy: we may well infer with cardi-
nal Cusanus; @We know that Peter did not receive more
power from Christ than the other apostles; for nothing was
said to Peter which was not also said to the other: therefore,
addeth he, we rightly say, that all the apostles were equal to
Peter in power.

8. Whereas St. Peter himself did write two catholic Epistles,
there doth not in them appear any intimation, any air or sa-
vour of pretence to this arch-apostolical power. It is natural
for persons endowed with unquestionable authority, (howso-
ever otherwise prudent and modest,) to discover a spice there-
of in the matter or in the style of their writing ; their mind,
conscious of such advantage, will suggest an authoritative way
of expression ; especially when they earnestly exhort, or se-
riously reprove, in which cases their very authority is a con-
siderable motive to assent or compliance, and strongly doth
impress any other arguments; but no critic perusing those
Epistles would smell a pope in them. he speech of St. Peter,
although pressing his doctrine with considerations of this
nature, hath no tang of such authority.

The elders, saith he, which are among you I exhort, who also
am an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also
a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: by such excellent
but common advantages of his person and office, he presseth
on the clergy his advices.

Had he been what they make him, he might have said, I, _
the peculiar vicar of Christ, and sovereign of the apostles,

@ Scimus quod Petrus nihil plus po- dicimus omnes apostolos esse squales
testatis a Christo recepit aliis apostolis; cum Petro in potestate. Card. Cus. de
nihil enim dictum est ad Petrum, quod Cone. Cath. ii. 13.
aliis etiam dictum non est. Ideo recte

Pope’s Supremacy. 63

do not only exhort, but require this of you: this language
had been very proper, and no less forcible: but nothing like
this, nothing of the spirit and majesty of a pope, is seen in his
discourse; there is no pagina nostre voluntatis et mandati,
which now is the papal style; when he speaketh highest, it is
in the common name of the apostles, Be mindful, saith he, of riisévroajs.
the command (that is, of the doctrine and precepts) of us, the” a
apostles of the Lordand Saviour.

9. In the apostolical history, the proper place of exercising
this power, (wherein, as St. Chrysostom saith, we may see the
predictions of Christ, which he uttered in the Gospels, reduced to
act, and the truth of them shining in the things themselves,) no
footstep thereof doth appear.

We cannot there discern, that St. Peter did assume any ex-
traordinary authority, or that any deference by his brethren
was rendered to him, as to their governor or judge. No in-
stance there doth occur of his laying commands on any one
apostle, or exercising any act of jurisdiction upon any one ; but
rather to the contrary divers passages are observable, which
argue, that he pretended to no such thing, and that others did
not understand any such thing belonging to him.

His temper indeed and zeal commonly did prompt him to
be most forward in speaking and acting upon any emergency
for the propagation or maintenance of the gospel; cand the
memory of the particular charge which our Lord departing
had lately put on him, strongly might instigate him thereto ;
regard to his special gifts and sufficiency did incline the rest
willingly to yield that advantage to him; and perhaps because,
upon the considerations before touched, they did allow some
preference in order to him; but in other respects, as to the
main administration of things, he is but one among the rest,*Erepds rs
not taking upon him in his speech or behaviour beyond others. eae
All things are transacted by common agreement, and in the pos. Chrys.

name of all concurring; no appeal in cases of difference is PH

Tov Adyouv. Chrys. in Act. i. 15. As

b Kal yap ras mpopphoes &s év rots
being a man hot and earnest, and as

ebayyeAious 6 Xpiords mpoavapwrei, Ta’-
Tas eis Epyov évtavdd éotw ideiv, kal én’
abtay Tay mpayudrwy diadduroveay Thy
GAfGeav. Chrys. in Act. 1,

intrusted with the flock by Christ, and
as the foreman of the company, he ever
begins to speak. Elxétws ratra éyévero
3d Thy dpethy Tod avdpds - In Act.
i. 26. Probably so it fell out by reason
of the signal virtue of the man.

64 A Treatise of the

made singly to him; no peremptory decision or decree is made
by him; no orders are issued out by him alone, or in a special
way ; in ecclesiastical assemblies he acteth but as one member;
in deliberations he doth only propound his opinion, and pass-
eth a single vote; his judgment and practice are sometime
questioned, and he is put to render an account of them: he
doth not stand upon his authority, but assigneth reasons to
persuade his opinion, and justify his actions; yea sometimes
he is moved by the rest, receiving orders and employment
from them: ‘these things we may discern by considering the
instances which follow.

Actsi.1s— In the designation of a new apostle to supply the place of

- Judas, he did indeed suggest the matter, and lay the case be-
fore them; he first declared his sense; but the whole company

ver. 23. kal did choose two, and referred the determination of one to lot,

oTnoay ‘ :

Bio. or to God’s arbitration.

Actsvi.2, At the institution of deacons, the twelve did call the multi-
tude of disciples, and directed them to elect the persons; and
the proposal being acceptable to them, it was done accord-
ingly ; ¢they chose Stephen, &c. whom they set before the apo-
stles, and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on
them.

Actsxy.2, In that important transaction about the observance of Mo-

erdecws xa) S2ical institutions, a great stir and debate being started, which

ig hs St. Paul and St. Barnabas by disputation could not appease,
om os" Sat course was then taken? did they appeal to St. Peter, as
to the supreme dictator and judge of controversies? Not so ;

Actsxv.2. but they sent to the apostles and elders at Jerusalem, to in-
quire about the question: when those great messengers were

Actsxv.4. arrived there, they were received by the church, and the apo-

Ver.6. _—_stles, and elders ; and having made their report, the apostles
and elders did assemble to consider about that matter. In

Ver.7._ this assembly, after much debate passed, and that many had
freely uttered their sense, St. Peter rose up, with apostolical
gravity, declaring what his reason and experience did suggest
conducing to a resolution of the point; whereto his words —

4 “Opa Be airbvy werd Kowts wdvta_ periously.
Tovrea yvauns’ ovdty aibeyTiK@s, ovde e Acts vi. 5. kal Hpecev 6 Adyos evd-
apxinas. Chrys. in Act. i. 16. Behold ov rayrds Tod mAhOous: Kal eEeAdtavro
him doing all things by common con- Zrépavoy, &c.
sent; nothing authoritatively nor im-

Pope’s Supremacy. 65

might indeed be much available, grounded, not only upon
common reason, but upon special revelation concerning the
case; whereupon St. James, alleging that revelation, and Acts xv.
backing it with reason drawn from scripture, with much au-'3—'*
thority pronounceth his judgment; ‘Therefore, saith he, I
judge, (that is, saith St. Chrysostom, J authoritatively say,)
that we trouble not them, who from among the Gentiles are
turned to God; but that we write unto them, &c. And the
result was, that, according to the proposal of St. James, it
was by general consent determined to send a decretal letter
unto the Gentile Christians, containing a canon, or advice
directive of their practice in the case; 8 Jt then seemed good to
(or was decreed by) the apostles and elders, with the whole
church, to send—and the letter ran thus, The apostles, and
elders, and brethren, to the brethren of the Gentiles—. Now in
all this action, (in this leading precedent for the manage-
ment of things in ecclesiastical synods and consistories,) where
can the sharpest sight desery any mark of distinction or pre-
eminence which St. Peter had in respect to the other apostles?
Did St. Peter there anywise behave himself like his pretended
successors upon such occasions? what authority did he claim
or use before that assembly, or in it, or after it? did he
summon or convocate it? No; they met upon common agree-
ment. Did he preside there? No; but rather St. James, fo
whom, (saith St. Chrysostom,) as bishop of Jerusalem, the
government was committed. Did he offer to curb or check any
man, or to restrain him from his liberty of discourse there?
No; there was much disputation, every man frankly speaking his
sense. Did he more than use his freedom of speech becoming
an apostle, in arguing the case and passing his vote? No;
for in so exact a relation nothing more doth appear. Did he
form the definitions, or pronounce the decree resulting? No;
St. James rather did that; for (as an ancient author saith)' Peter

f Awd eye xplyw. Acts xv. 19. Ti
dort Kplvw eyd; aytl Tov per eLovalas
A€éyw TovTo elva. Chrys.

& Tére ote rois, &c. Acts xv. 22.
Ta Séyuata 7a Kexpinéva brd Tay Grro-
oréAwy, Kal tay mpecButépwv. Acts
xvi. 4. Kplvavres iets éreotelAauer.
Acts xxi. 25.

h "IdxwBos b &beApds Tod Kuplov riv
exxAnolay réte ereakdmever ev apxh Ty

éy ‘IeporoAvmois, kad Tov €E “lovdalwy m-
orevodytwy TpociothKe: mdvtwy. Chrys.
tom.v. Or. 59. ’Exeivos yap hy thy ap-
xhy eyKexeipiopévos év duvacrela hy.
Chrys. in loc. For he had the govern-
ment committed to him he was em-
powered.

i Tlérpos Snunryope?, GAN’ "IdewBos vo-
po@ere?. Hesych. apud Phot. Cod. 275.

Acts x. 28.
Kal éuol 6

Beds Ceike—
Acts xi. 12.

Acts xi. 2.
Bell. de
Pont. Rom.
iv. 3, 4.

Acts xi. 18.

66 A Treatise of the

did make an oration, but St. James did enact the law. Was,
beside his suffrage in the debate, any singular approbation
required from him, or did he by any bull confirm the decrees ?
No such matter ; these were devices of ambition, creeping on
and growing up to the pitch where they now are. In short,
doth any thing correspondent to papal pretences appear as-
sumed by St. Peter, or deferred to him? If St. Peter was such
a man as they make him, how wanting then was he to himself,
how did he neglect the right and dignity of his office, in not
taking more upon him upon so illustrious an occasion, the
greatest he did ever meet with! How defective also were the
apostolical college, and the whole church of Jerusalem, in
point of duty and decency, yielding no more deference to
their sovereign, the vicar of their Lord! Whatever account
may be framed of these defailances, the truth is, that St. Peter
then did know his own place and duty better than men do
know them now; and the rest as well understood how it be-
came them to demean themselves. St. Chrysostom’s reflec-
tions on those passages are very good; that indeed then
Kthere was no fastuousness in the church, and the souls of those
primitive Christians were clear of vanity ; the which disposi-
tions did afterward spring up and grow rankly to the great
prejudice of religion, begetting those exorbitant pretences
which we now disprove.

Again, when St. Peter, being warned from heaven thereto,
did receive Cornelius, a Gentile soldier, unto communion ;
divers good Christians, who were ignorant of the warrant-
ableness of that proceeding, (as others commonly were, and
St. Peter himself was, before he was informed by that special
revelation,) did not fear d:axpiverOar mpods avrov, to contest with
him about it ; not having any notion (as it seemeth) of his su-
preme unaccountable authority, (not to say of that infallibility,
with which the canonists and Jesuits have invested him ;) unto
whom St. Peter rendereth a fair account, and maketh a satis-
factory apology for his proceedings!; not browbeating those
audacious contenders with his authority, but gently satisfying

k Obrws obddels ripos jv ev TH exkAn- SidaoKdaov akiduart KexpjoOa. Chrys.
alg: oftws Kabapa Sédtns jv avtav 4 See how free he is from pride and vain-
wx. Chrys. ibid. glory ; see how he excuses himself, and

1”’Opa 7d Urupov Kai axevddotov,— thinks himself not worthy to have the
bpa mas &wodovyeiral, kal ov« dt10t TS TOD ~honour of a master.

Pope’s Supremacy. 67

them with reason. But if he had known his power to be such
as now they pretend it to be, he should have done well to have
asserted it, even out of good-will and charity to those good
brethren™ ; correcting their error, and checking their misde-
meanour ; shewing them what an enormous presumption it
was so to contend with their sovereign pastor and judge.
Further; so far was St.Peter from assuming command
over his brethren, that he was upon occasion ready to obey
their orders; as we may see by that passage, where, upon
the conversion of divers persons in Samaria, it is said, that
the apostles hearing wt did send to them Peter and John, who Actsviii.r4.
going down prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy
Ghost. The apostles sent him: that, had he been their sove-
reign, would have been somewhat unseemly and presump-
tuous ; for subjects are not wont to send their prince, or sol-
diers their captain; to be sent being a mark of inferiority, as
our Lord himself did teach; A servant, said he, is not greater John xiii.
than his lord; nor he that is sent areater than he that sent him.**
St. Luke therefore should at least have so expressed this pas-
sage, that the apostles might have seemed to keep their dis-
tance, and observed good manners: if he had said, they
beseeched him to go, that had sounded well; but they sent
him is harsh, if he were dominus noster papa, as the modern
apostles of Rome do style their Peter. The truth is, then,
among Christians there was little standing upon punctilios ;
private considerations and pretences to power then took small
place ; each one was ready to comply with that which the
most did approve; the community did take upon it to pre-
scribe unto the greatest persons, as we see again in another
instance, where the brethren at Antioch did "appoint Paul
and Barnabas (the most considerable persons among them) #o
go up unto Jerusalem. They were then so generous, so merciful,

m Ita ut Petrus quoque timens ne
culparetur ab ipsis. ren. ili. 12, 15.
p. 200. N. In the matter at Antioch,
St. Peter did comply with St. James and
the Judaizers, which did not beseem
such authority.

n”Eratay davaBalvew MavAov kal Bap-
vaBay. Acts xv. 2. xiii. 2. Tls ody ev iuiv
yevvaios; tis ebordAayxvos; tls TemTAn-
popopnuévos arydarns ; cimdrw, ei 50 eue
ardots, kal pis, kal oxlouara, exxwpa,

Brew ov eay BotAnoOe, Kal woid Ta
mpootacadueva rd Tov wAHGovs. Clem.
ad Cor. 54. Who among you is noble
and generous? who has bowels of com-
passion? who is full of charity? Let
him say, If for my sake there be sedi-
tion, and strife, and divisions, I will
depart, and go whither you would have
me, and do what shall be enjoined me
by the multitude.

68 A Treatise of the

so full of charity, as, rather than to cause or foment any disturb-
ance, to recede, or go whither the multitude pleased, and do what
was commanded by it.

10. In all relations which occur in scripture, about contro-
versies incident of doctrine or practice, there is no appeal made
to St. Peter’s judgment, or allegation of it as decisive; no ar-
gument is built on his authority : dissent from his opinion, or
disconformity to his practice, or disobedience to his orders,
are not mentioned as ground of reproof, as aggravation of
any error, any misdemeanour, any disorder; which were very
strange, if then he was admitted or known to be the universal
prince and pastor of Christians, or the supreme judge and arbi-
trator of controversies among them: for then surely the most
clear, compendious, and effectual way to confute any error,
or check any disorder, had been to allege the authority of
St. Peter against it: who then could have withstood so mighty
a prejudice against his cause? If now a question doth arise
about any point of doctrine, instantly the parties (at least some
one of them, which hopeth to find most favour) hath recourse
to the pope to define it; and his judgment, with those who
admit his pretences, proveth sufficiently decisive, or at least
greatly swayeth in prejudice to the opposite party. If any
heresy, or any opinion disagreeing from the current sentiments,
is broached, the pope presently doth roar, that his voice is
heard through Christendom, and thundereth it down: if any
schism or disorder springeth up, you may be sure that Rome
will instantly meddle to quash it, or to settle matters as best
standeth with its principles and interests: such influence hath
the shadow of St. Peter’s authority now: but no such regard
was then had to poor pope Peter himself; he was not so busy
and stirring in such cases: the apostles did not send heretics
to be knocked down by his sentence, nor schismatics to be
scourged by his censure; but were fain to use the long way of
disputation, striving to convince them by testimonies of scrip-
ture, and rational discourse. If they did use authority, it was
their own; which they challenge as given to them by Christ for
edification, or upon account of the more than ordinary gifts
and graces of the divine Spirit conferred on them by God.

11. St. Peter nowhere doth appear intermeddling as a judge
or governor paramount in such cases; yea, where he doth him-

Pope's Supremacy. 69

self deal with heretics and disorderly persons, confuting and
reproving them, (as he dealeth with divers notoriously such,)
he proceedeth not as a pope decreeing, but as an apostle warn-
ing, arguing, and persuading against them.

It is particularly remarkable how St. Paul, reproving the
factions which were among Christians at Corinth, doth repre-
sent the several parties saying, J am of Paul, I am of Apollos, 1 Cor. i. 12.
I am of Cephas, I am of Christ. Now supposing the case" *"
then had been clear and certain, (and if it were not so then,
how can it be so now?) that St. Peter was sovereign of the
apostles, is it not wonderful that any Christian should prefer
any apostle or any preacher before him? as, if it were now
clear and generally acknowledged that the pope is truly what
he pretendeth to be, would anybody stand in competition
with him, would any glory in a relation to any other minister
before him? .

It is observable how St. Clemens reflecteth on this conten-
tion: °Ye were, saith he, less culpable for that partiality ; for
ye did then incline to renowned apostles, and to a man approved
by them: but now, &e.

If it be replied, that Christ himself did come into the com-
parison ; I answer, that probably no man was so vain as to
compare him with the rest, nor indeed could any there pretend
to have been baptized by him, (which was the ground of the
emulation in respect of the others ;) but those who said they
were of Christ were the wise and peaceable sort, who by say-
ing so declined and disavowed faction ; whose behaviour St.
Paul himself in his discourse commendeth and confirmeth,
shewing that all indeed were of Christ, the apostles being only 1 Cor. iii. 5.
his ministers, to work faith and virtue in them. P None, saith
St. Austin, of those contentious persons were good, except those
who said, But I am of Christ.

We may also here observe, that St. Paul, in reflecting upon
these contentions, had a fair occasion of intimating somewhat
concerning St. Peter’s supremacy, and aggravating their blam-
able fondness who compared others with him.

© "AAN’ h mpdockrdois exelyn Frrov 5é, &c. Clem. ad Corinth. 47.
auaptiay ipiv mpoohveyxev’ mpooeKAl- P Falsum est quod illi boni erant,
Onre yap amroordrAos weuaptupnuévois, exceptis eis qui dicebant, Ego autem
cal dvbpl Bedoximacuévp rap abrois* vuvt Christi. Aug. cont. Crescon. i. 27.

70 A Treatise of the

12. The consideration of the apostles’ proceeding in the
conversion of people, in the foundation of churches, and in
administration of their spiritual affairs, will exclude any pro-
bability of St. Peter’s jurisdiction over them.

They went about their business, not by order or license
from St. Peter, but according to special instinct and direction

"Exmeu- Of God’s Spirit, (being sent forth by the Holy Ghost; going
spinal by revelation,) or according to their ordinary prudence, and
éy. the habitual wisdom given unto them; by those aids (without
ag grag troubling St. Peter or themselves more) they founded societies,
Gal.ii.2. they ordained pastors, they framed rules and orders requisite
Kat’ &mroKxd- : 2 ‘
der. for the edification and good government of churches, reserving
2 Fet. it 5- to themselves a kind of paramount inspection and jurisdiction
17. xi. 34. Over them; which in effect was only warpixn émpcdcva, a pater-
nds e nal care over them; which they particularly claimed to them-
Isid. Pel. selves upon account of spiritual parentage, for that they had
Vag ™ begotten them to Christ ; Jf, saith St.Paul to the Corinthians,
A a ie 2. I am not an apostle to others, I am however so to you: why so?
~% ’ because he had converted them, and could say, As my beloved
Ma sons I warn you: for though ye have ten thousand instructors in
Gal. iv. 19. Christ, yet ye have not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have
begotten you through the gospel. This paternal charge they did
exercise without any dependence or regard to St. Peter, none
such appearing, it not being mentioned that they did ever
consult his pleasure, or render him an account of their proceed-
ings; but it rather being implied in the reports of their actions,
that they proceeded absolutely, by virtue of their universal office
and commission of our Lord.
Gal. i. 18. If it be alleged, that St. Paul went to Jerusalem to St. Pe-
foropjou. ter; I answer, that it was fo visit him out of respect and love ;
or to confer with him for mutual edification and comfort ; or
at most to obtain approbation from him and the other apostles,
which might satisfy some doubters, but not to receive his com-
mands or authoritative instructions from him; it being, as we
shall afterwards see, the design of St. Paul’s discourse to dis-
avow any such dependence on any man whatever. So doth
St. Chrysostom note, 4 What, saith he, can be more humble

4 Ti ravtTns Tamewoppovécrepoy yé- pevos, unde Tis exelvou pwrijs, GAN’ iod-
vor’ by ris Wuxis; peta TooadTa Kal Ttimos dv abr@ (wAdoy yap oddty epa
Towle KaToplmuara pndev Tlérpou 5ed- Tews) Suws avépxera ws mpds pelfova,

Pope’s Supremacy. 71

than this soul? after so many and so great exploits, having no
need at all of Peter, or of his discourse, but being in dignity
equal to him, (for I will now say no more,) he yet doth go up
to him, as to one greater and ancienter ; and a sight alone of
Peter is the cause of his journey thither—And, He went, saith
he again, not to learn any thing of him, nor to receive any cor-
rection from him, but for this only, that he might see him, and
honour him with his presence.

And indeed that there was no such deference of the apostles
to St. Peter, we may hence reasonably presume, because it
would then have been not only impertinent and needless, but
inconvenient and troublesome. For,

13. If we consider the nature of the apostolical office, the
state of things at that time, and the manner of St. Peter’s life ;
in correspondence to those things, he will appear uncapable, or
unfit, to manage such a jurisdiction over the apostles as they
assign him.

The nature of the apostolical ministry was such, that the
apostles were not fixed in one place of residence, but were con-
tinually moving about the world, or in procinctu, ready in their 2Cor.xi.25.
gears to move whither divine suggestions did call them, or fair
occasion did invite them, for the propagation or furtherance
of the gospel’.

The state of things was not favourable to the apostles, who 1 Cor. iv. 9.
were discountenanced and disgraced, persecuted, and driven ie
from one place to another, (as our Lord foretold of them ;) Matt. xxiv.
Christians lay scattered about at distant places, so that oppor- lake tia
tunities of dispatch for conveyance of instructions from him, or '*
of accounts to him, were not easily found.

St. Thomas preaching in Parthia, St. Andrew in Scythia, Euseb. iii.r.
St.John in Asia, Simon Zelotes in Britain, sSt. Paul in many progeny

Tertul. ad

kal mpecBirepov’ kal Tis arodnulas ad- and superintendency of all the world, it Jud. cap. 7-

Te THS exei ylvera aitlas H icropla Mé-
Tpov dyn. obx &s uabnoduevds Tt
rap abrov, ovd€ ds didpOwolv tiva 5ekd-
pevos, GAAd 5a TovTO udvov, bote ideiv
abroy Kal tiuijoa TH mapovale. Chrys.
in Gal. i. 18.

r ’Eredav yap tuedAov Tijs oikounéevns
Thy emitpomhy dvadéEacOa, odk fer cum-
mwemréx 0a Aowrdy GAAHAALS* 7 yap dy
MeydAn TodTO TH olkouuervy yéyove Cnula.
Chrys. in Joh, xxi. 23. For seeing they
were to take upon them the inspection

behoveth them not any longer to be
mixed or conjoined together, for this
had been a great loss and hinderance to
the world.

8 ‘O Thy olxounévny oradietoas, Kal
7G wep) tlarews Spduw Toy Kécmoy uiKpdy
&mophvas. Bas. Seleuc. Or. 2. He that
ran his race through the whole universe,
and by his so eager running for the faith
made the world, as it were, too narrow
for him.

12 A Treatise of the

places ; other apostles and apostolical men in Arabia, in Ethi-

Col. i. 6,23. opia, in India, in Spain, in Gaul, in Germany, % the whole

Rom, x. 18

2Cor. iii. 5.

Rom, xv.

15.

world, and in all the creation under heaven, as St. Paul speak-
eth, could not well maintain correspondence with St. Peter ;
especially considering the manner of his life, which was not
settled in any one known place, but movable and uncertain ;
for he continually roved over the wide world, preaching the
gospel, converting, confirming, and eomforting Christian people,
as occasion starting up did induce: how then could he con-
veniently dispense all about his ruling and judging influence ?
how in eases incident could direction be fetched from him, or
reference be made to him by those subordinate governors, who
could not easily know where to come at him, or whence to
hear from him in any competent time? To send to him had
been to shoot at rovers; affairs therefore which should depend
on his resolution and orders must have had great stops; he
could but very lamely have executed such an office; so that
his jurisdiction must have béen rather an extreme inconve-
nience and encumbrance, than anywise beneficial or useful to
the church.

Gold and silver he had none, or a very small purse, to main-
tain dependents and officers to help him, (nuncios, legates a
latere, secretaries, auditors, &c.) infinity of affairs would have
oppressed a poor helpless man; and to bear such a burden
as they lay on him no one could be sufficient.

14. It was indeed most requisite that every apostle should
have a complete, absolute, independent authority in managing’
the concerns and duties of his office; that he might not any-
wise be obstructed in the discharge of them; not clogged with
a need to consult others, not hampered with orders from those
who were at distance, and could not well descry what was fit
in every place to be done.

The direction of him who had promised to be perpetually
present with them, and by his Holy Spirit to guide, to instruct,

. to admonish them upon all occasions, was abundantly suffi- |

cient; they did not want any other conduct or aid beside that
special light and powerful influence of grace which they
received from him; the which ixdvwcey airovs, did, as St. Paul
speaketh, render them sufficient ministers of the new testa-
ment.

Pope’s Supremacy. 73

Accordingly their discourse and practice do thoroughly
savour of such an independence; nor in them is there any
appearance of that being true which Bellarmine dictateth,
that ‘the apostles depended on St. Peter, as on their head and
commander.

15. Particularly the discourse and behaviour of St. Paul
towards St. Peter doth evidence, that he did not acknowledge
any dependence on him, any subjection to him.

St. Paul doth often purposely assert to himself an inde-
pendent and absolute power, inferior or subordinate to none
other, insisting thereon for the enforcement or necessary
defence of his doctrine and practice; (J am become a fool 2 Cor. xii.
in glorying ; ye have compelled me, saith he:) alleging divers age |
pregnant arguments to prove and confirm it, drawn from the
manner of his call, the characters and warrants of his office,
the tenor of his proceedings in the discharge of it, the success
of his endeavours, the approbation and demeanour toward him
of other apostles.

As for his call and commission to the apostolical office, he
maintaineth, (as if he meant designedly to exclude those pre-
tences, that other apostles were only called in partem solicitu- Bell. i. 9,
dinis with St. Peter,) that he was an apostle, not from men, ’* oy 3
nor by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father ; that is, pérav, ob-
that he derived not his office immediately or mediately from a iss
men, or by the ministry of any man, but immediately had @l. i. r.
received the grant and charge thereof from our Lord; as
indeed the history plainly sheweth, in which our Lord telleth
him, that he did “constitute him an officer, and a chosen instru-
ment to him, to bear his name to the Gentiles.

Hence he so often is careful and cautious to express him-
self an apostle by *the will and special grace, or favour and
appointment, and.command of God; and particularly telleth
the Romans that by Christ he had received grace and apo-
stleship.

For the warrant of his office he doth not allege the allow-
ance of St. Peter, or any other, but those special gifts and

t a quo illi tanquam a capite et X Aid OcAfuaros Ocovd. 1 Cor. i. 1.
imperatore suo pendebant. Bellarm. de 2 Cor. i.1. Eph. i. 1. Col. i. 1. 2 Tim.
Pont. i. 16. i,t. Xdpirt. Rom. i. 5. 1 Cor. xv. to.

u Tlpoxeploacbal ve imnpérny, &c. Eph. iii. 7. 1 Tim. i. 12. Kar’ éwita-
Act, ix. 1§. xxii, 21, xxvi. 16. yiv. 1 Tim. i. 3.

Gal. i. 16,
I7-

2 Cor. xiii.
10. x. 8.

Gal. ii. 9.

2 Cor. xi. 5.
xii, 11.

1 Cor. xv. 9.
h. iii. 8.

Eph. iii

74 A Treatise of the

graces which were conspicuous in him, and exerted in mira-

ii. culous performances; Truly, saith he, the signs of an apostle

were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders,
and mighty deeds; and, I will not dare to speak of any of those

things which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles

obedient, by word and deed, through mighty signs and wonders,
by the power of the Spirit of God.

To the same purpose le allegeth his successful industry in
converting men to the gospel; Am I not an apostle? saith he,
are ye not my work in the Lord? If I am not an apostle to
others, I am surely one to you: for the seal of mine apostle-

. ship are ye in the Lord. And, By the grace of God I am what
; Lam: and his grace which was on me became not in vain; but

L laboured more abundantly than they all.

In the discharge of his office, he immediately, (after that he
had received his call and charge from our Saviour,) without
consulting or taking license from any man, did vigorously
apply himself to the work ; Immediately, saith he, I conferred
not with flesh and blood: neither went I up to Jerusalem to
them that before me were apostles: so little did he take himself
to be accountable to any man.

In settling order and correcting irregularities in the church,
he professed to act merely by his own authority, conferred on
him by our Lord; Therefore, saith he, being absent I write
these things, that being present I may not use severity, according
to the authority which the Lord hath given me for anneine
not for destruction.

Such being the privileges which he did assert to himself
with all confidence, he did not receive for it any check from
other apostles; but the chief of them, knowing the grace that
was given unto him, gave unto him the right hand of fellow-
ship ; in token of their acknowledgment and allowance of his
proceedings.

Upon these considerations (plainly signifying his absolute
independence in the reception and execution of his office) he
doth more than once affirm (and in a manner boast) himself
to be inferior in nothing to the very chief apostles: in nothing ;
that is, in nothing pertinent to the authority or substantial
dignity of his place; for as to his personal merit, he professeth
himself much less than the least of the apostles ; but as to the

Pope’s Supremacy. 75

authentieness and authority of his office, he deemed himself

equal to the greatest; being by the grace of God what he was ; 1 Cor. xv.
a minister of the gospel, according to the gift of the grace of Eph. iii. 7.
God, which was given him according to the effectual working

of his power.

When he said he was behind none, he could not forget 2 Cor. xi. 5.
St. Peter; when he said none of the chief, he could not but
especially mean him; (he did indeed, as St. Chrysostom saith, pds robs
intend to compare himself with St. Peter ;) when he said in i
nothing, he could not but design that which was most consi- pac oe
derable, the authority of his place, which in the context he”

did expressly mention. For when he objected to himself the Kara xpod:-
semblance of fondness or arrogance in speaking after that Md ranges
manner, he declared that he did not speak rashly or vainly, 11-i- 16,
but upon serious consideration, and with full assurance, find- ‘

ing it very needful or useful to maintain his authority, or to

magnify his office, as he otherwhere speaketh. Rom. xi.13.

If things had been as now we are taught from the Roman
- school, it is strange that St. Paul should compare himself so
generally, not excepting St. Peter; that he should express
(nor by the least touch intimate) no special consideration for
his, as they tell us, ordinary pastor ; that he should not con- Bell. de
sider how liable such words were to be interpreted in deroga- Pt ' 1!
tion to St. Peter’s due prerogatives.

But it is no wonder that St. Paul, in St. Peter’s absence,
should thus stand on his own legs, not seeming to mind him,
whenas in immediate transactions with him he demeaned him-
self as his fellow, yielding to him no respect or deference as
to his superior. For,

When St. Paul went to Jerusalem, to have conference with
St. Peter and other apostles, who were chief in repute, he
professeth that they did not confer any thing to him, so as to Gal. ii. 2.
change his opinion, or divert him from his ordinary course of
practice, which was different from theirs: this was (it seemeth)
hardly proper or seemly for him to say, if St. Peter had been
his sovereign: but he seemeth to say it on very purpose, to
exclude any prejudice that might arise to his doctrine from
their authority or repute; their authority being none over
him, their repute being impertinent to the case; for what- Gal. ii. 6.
soever, addeth he, they were, it maketh no matter to me; God

Gal. ii. 12
—I4.

Gal. ii. 11,
4.

Hier. ad
Aug. Ep.
11. in Prol.

ad Gal.

76 A Treatise of the

respecteth no man’s person: the which might well be said of

persons greater in common esteem, but not so well of one
who was his superior in office; to whose opinion and conduct,
as of his judge and pastor by God’s appointment, he did owe
a special regard.

Again, St. Paul at Antioch, observing St. Peter out of fear
and policy to act otherwise than became the simplicity and
sincerity of Christians, to the prejudice of evangelical truth, cha-
rity, and liberty, against his own judgment and former practice,
drawing others by his pattern into the same unwarrantable
course of behaviour, did withstand him to the face, did openly
reprove him before all, because he was blamable; did, as pope
Gelasius I. affirmeth y, (to excuse another pope misbehaving
himself,) worthily confute him; did (as St. Augustine often
doth affirm and urge, in proof that greatest persons may some-
times err and fail) correct him, rebuke him, chide him.

Which behaviour of St. Paul doth not well consist with the
supposition, that St. Peter was his superior in office; if that
had been, Porphyrius with good colour of reason might have
objected procacity to St. Paul in taxing his betters; for he then
indeed had shewed us no commendable pattern of demeanour
towards our governors, in so boldly opposing St. Peter, in so
openly censuring him, in so smartly confuting him.

More unseemly also it had been to report the business as
he doth in writing to the Galatians; for to divulge the miscar-
riages of superiors, to revive the memory of them, to register
them, and transmit them down to all posterity, to set forth our
clashing and contests with them, is hardly allowable; if it may
consist with justice and honesty, it doth yet little savour of

y (Vid. P. Pelag. II. apud Bin. tom. lorum sana ratio atque libertas, quod

iv. p. 308. in Epist. ad Eliam.) Nun-
quid ideo aut illa ejus sequenda sunt,
qu merito ejus co-apostolus ejus facta
redarguit. Gelas. I. de Anath, (apud
Bin. tom. iii. p. 645.)

Z Apostolo Paulo monstrante et cor-
rigente. Aug. cont. Crescon. i. 32. ii. 32.
Ep. 19. de Bapt. cont. Don. ii. 1, 2. cor-
reptus, cont. Don. ii. 1. objurgavit, Ep.
8. qui de minore causa conversa-
tionis ambigue Petro ipsi non pepercit.
Tert. v.3. (contra Mare.) who for
a smaller matter of doubtful conver-
sation spared not Peter himself. Cum
laudetur etiam Pauli minimi aposto-

Petrum apostolorum primum adductum
in hypocrisin, et non recta via ince-
dentem ad veritatem evangelii fidenter
improbans, in faciem illi restitit, eum-
que coram omnibus coram objurgavit.
Fac. Her. viii. 6. Whereas the sound
reason and freedom even of Paul, the
least of the apostles, is commended, in
that when Peter, the chief of the apo-
stles, was carried away with dissimu-
lation, and walked not in a right way,
according to the truth of the gospel, he
boldly disliked, and withstood him to
the face, and reproved him openly be-
fore all.

Pope’s Supremacy. 77

gravity and modesty: it would have been more seemly for St.
Paul to have privately and humbly remonstrated to St. Peter,
than openly and downrightly to have reprehended him; at
least it would have become him in cold blood to have repre-
sented his carriage more respectfully, consulting the honour
of the universal pastor, whose reputation was like to suffer by
such a representation of his proceedings. Pope Pelagius II
would have taught St. Paul better manners; who saith, that
they are not to be approved, but reprobated, who do reprove or
accuse their prelates ; and pope Gregory would have taught
him another lesson, namely, that the evils of their superiors
do so displease good subjects, that however they do conceal them
from others ; and, ¢ Subjects are to be admonished, that they do
not rashly judge the life of their superiors, if perhaps they see
them do blamably, &c.
It is plain, that St.Paul was more bold with St. Peter than
any man now must be with the pope; for let the pope commit
never so great crimes, yet should xo mortal, saith the canon Grat. Dist.
law, presume to reprove his faults. a
But if St. Peter were not in office superior to St. Paul, but
his colleague, and equal in authority, although preceding him
in standing, repute, and other advantages; then St. Paul’s free
proceeding toward him was not only warrantable, but whole-
some, and deserving for edification to be recited and recorded;
as implying an example how colleagues upon occasion should
with freedom and sincerity admonish their brethren of their
errors and faults; St. Peter’s carriage in patiently bearing that
correption also affording another good pattern of equanimity
in such cases; to which purpose 4 St. Cyprian (alleged and
approved by St. Austin) doth apply this passage ; for, saith Aug. de
he, neither Peter, whom the Lord first chose, and upon whom he 2. 53"
built his church, when Paul afterward contested with him about
circumcision, did insolently challenge or arrogantly assume any
thing to himself, so as to say that he did hold the primacy, and

a Non Sunt consentiendi, sed repro-
bandi, qui prelatos suos reprehendunt
vel accusant. Pelag. II. Ep. 2.

sitorum suorum vitam temere judicent,
siquid eos fortasse agere reprehensibili-
ter vident, &c.

b Bonis subditis sic prepositorum
suorum mala displicent, ut tamen hee
ab aliis occultent. Greg. M. Moral.
XXV. 15.

¢ Admonendi sunt subditi, ne prepo-

Greg. Past. part, ii.
cap. I. Admon. 5.

d Nam nec Petrus, quem primum
Dominus elegit, &c. Cypr. Ep. 71.
(ad Quint.)

78 A Treatise of the

that rather those who were newer and later apostles ought to obey
him ; neither despised he St.Paul, because he was before a per-
secutor of the church ; but he admitted the counsel of truth, and
easily consented to the lawful course which St. Paul did main-
tain ; yielding indeed to us a document both of concord and pa-
tience, that we should not pertinaciously love our own things, but
should rather take those things for ours which sometimes are pro-
Jitably and wholesomely suggested by our brethren and colleagues,
of they are true and lawful: this St. Cyprian speaketh, upon
supposition that St. Peter and St. Paul were equals, or (as he
ealleth them) colleagues and brethren, in rank coordinate ;
otherwise St. Cyprian would not have approved the action ;
for he often severely doth inveigh against inferiors taking
upon them to censure their superiors ; ‘What tumour, saith
he, of pride, what arrogance of mind, what inflation of heart,
is it, to call our superiors and bishops to our cognizance !
St. Cyprian therefore could not conceive St. Peter to be
St. Paul’s governor, or superior in power; he doth indeed
plainly enough in the forecited words signify, that in his
judgment St. Peter had done zsolently and arrogantly, if he
Aug. cont. had assumed any obedience from St. Paul. St. Austin also
Deptiix, ,, doth in several places of his writings make the like application
Ep.19. of this passage.

The ancient writer contemporary to St. Ambrose, and
passing under his name, doth argue in this manner; ‘ Who
dared resist Peter the first apostle, to whom the Lord did give
the keys of the kingdom of heaven, but another such a one,
who, in assurance of his election, knowing himself to be not
unequal to him, might constantly disprove what he had unad-
visedly done?

8. Cyril. It is indeed well known that Origen, and after him St. Chry-
ay Sac sostom and St. Jerome, and divers of the ancients beside, did
(p. 325.) conceive that St.Paul did not seriously oppose or tax St. Peter,
Jhrys. tom.

e Quis enim hic est superbiee tumor, quod ille sine consilio fecerat? Ambr.
que arrogantia animi, que mentis in- in Gal. ii. 9. Paulus Petrum repre-
fiatio ad cognitionem suam prepositos hendit, quod non auderet, nisi se non ©
et sacerdotes vocare? Cypr. Ep. 69. imparem sciret. (Hieron. vel alius quis

f Nam quis eorum auderet Petro ad Gal. citatus a Grat. Caus. il. qu. 7.
primo apostolo, cui claves regni coelo- cap. 33.) Paul reprehended Peter,
rum Dominus dedit, resistere, nisi alius which he would not have dared to do,
talis, qui fiducia electionis sus, sciens had he not known himself to be equal
se non imparem, constanter improbaret to him.

Pope’s Supremacy. 79

but did only do it seemingly, upon confederacy with him, for v. Or. 59.
promoting a good design. Wuyas-
This interpretation, however strained and earnestly impugn- a
ed by St. Austin, I will not discuss ; but only shall observe, ”
that it being admitted doth rather strengthen than weaken our
discourse: for if St. Peter were St. Paul’s governor, it mak-
eth St. Peter to have consented to an act in all appearance
indecent, irregular, and scandalous ; and how can we imagine
that St. Peter would have complotted to the impairing his
own just authority in the eye of a great church? doth not
such a condescension imply in him a disavowing of superiority
over St. Paul, or a conspiracy with him to overthrow good
order ¢
To which purpose we may observe, that St. Chrysostom, in Chrys. tom.
a large and very elaborate discourse, wherein he professeth to Gases
endeavour an aggravation of the irregularity of St. Paul’s de- 2% 7
meanour, if it were serious, doth not lay the stress of that ait pale:
aggravation upon St. Paul’s opposing his lawful governor, but 7 &¢
his only so treating a co-apostle of such eminency: neither
when to that end he designeth to reckon all the advantages of
St. Peter beyond St. Paul, or any other apostle, doth he men-
tion this, which was chiefly material to his purpose, that he was
St. Paul’s governor; which observations if we do carefully weigh,
we can hardly imagine that St. Chrysostom had any notion of
St. Peter’s supremacy in relation to the apostless.
In fine, the drift of St. Paul, in reporting those passages
concerning himself, was not to disparage the other apostles,
nor merely to commend himself, but to fence the truth of his
doctrine, and maintain the liberty of his disciples, against any
prejudice that might arise from any authority that might be
pretended in any considerable respects superior to his, and
alleged against them; to which purpose he declareth by ar-
guments and matters of fact, that his authority was perfectly
apostolical, and equal to the greatest; even to that of St. Peter,
the prime apostle ; of St. John, the beloved disciple; of St. James,
the bishop of Jerusalem ; the judgment or practice of whom
was no law to him, nor should be to them, further than it
E ‘Os obdév wor Speedos by Mérpov rhy that it is no advantage to me, if, when
Katyyoplay &wocxevacauévov, 6 TladAos Peter has confuted the charge, Paul ap-

galynra: Oapoaréws Kal dwepioxémtws pear to accuse his fellow apostle boldly
TOU GuvamogTéAou KaTHyopay So and inconsiderately.

Gal. i. 12.

Baron. An.
li. §. 32—
34, 35, &e.

Rom. xi.13.

Gal. ii. 7.

2 Cor. xi.
28.

80 A Treatise of the

did consist with that doctrine which he, by an independent
authority, and by special revelation from Christ, did preach
unto them: he might, as St. Chrysostom noteth, have pre-
tended to some advantage over them, in regard that he had la-
boured more abundantly than they all; but he forbeareth to do
so, being contented to obtain equal advantages”.

Well therefore, considering the disadvantage which this
passage bringeth to the Roman pretence, might this history
be called by Baronius a history hard to be understood, a stone
of offence, a rock of scandal, a rugged place, which St. Austin
himself, under favour, could not pass over without stumbling.

It may also be considered, that St.Paul particularly doth
assert to himself an independent authority over the Gentiles,
coordinate to that which St.Peter had over the Jews‘; the
which might engage him so earnestly to contest with St. Peter,
as by his practice seducing those who belonged to his charge ;
the which also probably moved him thus to assert his authority
to the Galatians, as being Gentiles under his care, and thence
obliged especially to regard his authority. They, saith St. Paul,
knowing that I was intrusted with the gospel of uncircumeision,
as Peter was intrusted with that of circumcision,—gave unto me
and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship: the which words do
clearly enough signify that he took himself, and that the other
apostles took him to have, under Christ, an absolute charge,
subordinate to no man, over the Gentiles ; whence he claimeth
to himself, as his burden, the care of all the churches : he there-
fore might well contest for their liberty, he might well insist
upon his authority among them.

Thus did St. Chrysostom understand the case ; for ' Christ,
saith he, committed the Jews to Peter, but set Paul over the
Gentiles ; and, ! He, saith that great father, further doth shew
himself to be equal to them in dignity, and compareth himself,

h Kal tratrn pddiwta Tay arootéAwv
mreovenTioas, wepisodbTEpoy yap ai’Tay
éxotlaca, pnolv, AAG Téws ob KaTacKev-
d{er TovTo, GAN’ ayanG Ta toa pépwr.
Chrys. in Gal. i. 1.

i Plena authoritas Petro in Judaismi
predicatione data dignoscitur, et Pauli
perfecta authoritas in preedicatione Gen-
tium invenitur. Ambr. There is dis-
cerned a full authority given to Peter
of preaching to the Jews, and in Paul

there is found a perfect power and au-
thority of preaching to the Gentiles.
k Tobs pty obv "lovdalous émérpepe

TG Tlérpw, rots 6& “EAAnot Tov TlavAoy ©

éréornoev 6 Xpiotds. Chrys. tom. 5.
Or. 59.

1 Aclevucw abrois dudriov bvTa Aot-
mov, Kal ov Tots AAos EauTov, GAAL TE
Kopupaly avypiver, dexvis Ort THS av-
Tijs ExaoTos aréAavoey Gklas. Chrys. in
Gal. ii. 8.

Pope’s Supremacy. 81

not only to the others, but even to the ringleader; shewing that
each did enjoy equal dignity.

It may also by any prudent considerer easily be discerned, that
if St. Peter had really been, as they assert him, so in authority
superior to the other apostles, it is hardly possible that St. Paul
should upon these occasions express nothing of it.

16. If St. Peter had been appointed sovereign of the church,
it seemeth that it should have been requisite that he should
have outlived all the apostles; for then either the church must
have wanted a head, or there must have been an inextricable
controversy about who that head was. St. Peter died long be-
fore St. John, (as all agree,) and perhaps before divers others
of the apostles. Now, after his departure, did the church
want a head? (then it might before and after have none; and
our adversaries lose the main ground of their pretence.) Did
one of the apostles become head? (which of them was it?
upon what ground did he assume the headship, or who con-
ferred it on him? who ever did acknowledge any such thing,
or where is there any report about it?) Was any other person
made head? (suppose the bishop of Rome, who only pre-
tendeth thereto ;) then did St. John and other apostles become
subject to one in degree inferior to them: then what becometh
of St. Paul’s first apostles, secondly prophets, thirdly teachers ? 1 Cor. xii.
What do all the apostolical privileges come to, when St.John 7°
must be at the command of Linus, and Cletus, and Clemens,
and of I know not who beside? Was it not a great absurdity
for the apostles to truckle under the pastors and teachers of Eph. iv. 11.
Rome ?

The like may be said for St. James, if he (as the Roman
church doth in its liturgies suppose) were an apostle who in
many respects might claim the preeminence; who therefore,
in the Apostolical Constitutions, is preferred before Clement
bishop of Rome.

17. Upon the same grounds on which a supremacy of power
is claimed to St. Peter, other apostles might also challenge a
superiority therein over their brethren; but to suppose such a
difference of power among the rest is absonous; and there-
fore the grounds are not valid upon which St. Peter’s supremacy
is built.

Matt.iv. 21°
Luke v. 10.
Mark. iii.17-

Matt. xvii.

I, 2.
2 Pet.i. 16.
Matt. xxvi.

37-

Mark xiv.
33-

Matt. xx.
20, 21.
Mark x.
35> 37-

John xiii.

Acts xii. 2.

Gal. ii. 9.
2 Cor. xii.
ca. i. §.

82 A Treatise of the

I instance in St. James and St. John, who upon the same
probabilities had (after St. Peter) a preference to the other
apostles. For to them our Saviour declared a special regard ;
to them the apostles afterwards may seem to have yielded a
particular deference; they, in merit and performances, seem
to have surpassed ; they (after St. Peter and his brother) were
first called to the apostolical office; they (as St. Peter) were
by our Lord new christened, (as it were,) and nominated
Boanerges, by a name signifying the efficacy of their endeavour
in their Master’s service; they, together with St. Peter, were
assumed to behold the transfiguration ; they were culled out to
wait on our Lord in his agony; they also, with St. Peter,
(others being excluded,) were taken to attest our Lord’s per-
formance of that great miracle of restoring the ruler’s daughter
to life; they, presuming on their special favour with our Lord,
did pretend to the chief places in his kingdom.

To one of them it is expressed that our Saviour did bear a
peculiar affection, he being the disciple whom Jesus loved, and
who leaned on his bosom: to the other he particularly disco-

.vered himself after his resurrection, and first honoured him

with the crown of martyrdom.
They in blood and cognation did nearest touch our Lord ;

‘being his cousin-germans, (which was esteemed by the ancients

a ground of preferment,) as Hegesippus reporteth™.

Their industry and activity in propagation of the gospel was

most eminently conspicuous.

To them it was peculiar, that St. James dia first suffer for it,
and St.John did longest persist in the faithful confession of it ;
whose writings in several kinds do remain as the richest maga-
zines of Christian doctrine, furnishing us with the fullest testi-
monies concerning the divinity of our Lord, with special histo-
ries of his life, and with his divinest discourses; with most
lively incitements to piety and charity ; with prophetical reve-
lations concerning the state of the church. He therefore was
one of the orvdo, chief pillars and props, of the Christian —

m Tovs 5¢ dmodvbdyras iyyjoac0ou Tav and sent away to govern the churches,
exxAnoiay, as iy 5h udprupas duo Kal as being both witnesses, and also kins-
amd yévous bvTas Tov Kupfov. Hegesipp. men of our Lord.
apud Euseb.iii.20. They being dismissed,

Pope's Supremacy. 83

profession; one of tzép Aiav axdctokn, the superlative apo-
stles.

Accordingly in the rolls of the apostles, and in reports Markiii.17.
concerning them, their names usually are placed after St. ““S* 13
Peter.

Hence also some of the fathers do take them, as St. Peter
was, to have been preferred by our Lord": Peter, saith
St. Gregory Nazianzen, and James and John, who both were
indeed, and were reckoned, before the others—so indeed did
Christ himself prefer them; and, Peter, James, and John,
saith Clemens Alexandrinus, did not, as being preferred by
the Lord himself, contest for honour, but did choose James the
Just, bishop of Jerusalem, (or, as Ruffinus reads, bishop of the
apostles.)

Hence if, by designation of Christ, by the concession of the
apostolical college, by the prefulgency of his excellent worth
and merit, or upon any other ground, St. Peter had the zpo-
reia, or first place; the devrepeta, or next place, in the same
kind, by like means, upon the same grounds, seems to have
belonged unto them; and if their advantage did imply differ-
ence, not in power, but in order only, (not authoritative supe-
riority, but honorary precedence,) then can no more be allowed
or concluded due to him.

18. The fathers, both in express terms, and implicitly or
by consequence, do assert the apostles to have been equal or
coordinate in power and authority.

What can be more express than that of St. Cyprian; ° The
other apostles were indeed that which Peter was, endowed with
equal consortship of honour and power ; and again, P Although
our Lord giveth to all the apostles after his resurrection an equal
power, and saith, As the Father sent me, so I send you— ?

D AaBay tolvuy tovs Kopudalous:
Chrys. in Matth. xvii. 1. Taking there-
fore the chief and principal. Ad ri
TovTous mapadauBdve: udvous ; Sri oT
tav bddAwv joay bwepéxovtes. Chrys.
ibid. Wherefore taketh he these only
with him? Because these were the chief
and principal above the others. Mérpos,
Kal *Id«wBos, kal "Iwdvyns, of mpd Tay
BdAwv Kal dvres Kal dpiOuotpevan
atrn wey ) Xpirrov mpotiunois. Greg.
Naz. Or. 26. Tlérpov pnal cal "IdewBor,
wal "lwdyvny, &s by Kal imd rod Kuplou

mpoTeTiunutvous wr emidindCeoOa ddéns,
GAAG “IdewBov toy Sixaov énickoroy
‘lepogoAtuay édAdoOa. (Ruffinus reddit
apostolorum episcopum.) Clem, Alex.
apud Euseb. ii. 1.

p quamvis apostolis omnibus post
resurrectionem suam parem potestatem
tribuat, ac dicat, &c. Cypr. de Un,
Ecel,

Chrys. in
Gal. i. 8.

Vide Tert.
de Preescr.
cap. 20.

84 A Treatise of the

What can be more plain than that of St. Chrysostom ;
q St. Paul sheweth that each apostle did enjoy equal dignity ?

How again could St. Chrysostom more clearly signify his
opinion, than when, comparing St.Paul to St. Peter, he calleth
St. Paul icdriov aird, equal in honour to him, adding, mAéov
yap ovdév épd réws, for I will not as yet say any thing more, as
if he thought St. Paul indeed the more honourable?

How also could St. Cyril more plainly declare his sense to
be the same, than when he called St. Peter and St. John igori-
pous GdAnAots, equal to one another in honour* ?

Did not St. Jerome also sufficiently declare his mind in the
case, when he saith of the apostles, that ‘the strength of the
church is equally settled upon them ?

Doth not Dionysius (the supposed Areopagite) call tthe
decade of the apostles coordinate with their foreman, St. Peter ?
in conformity, I suppose, to the current judgment of his
age.

What can be more full than that of Isidore, (whose words
shew how long this sense continued in the church?) "Zhe
other apostles did receive an equal share of honour and power ;
who also being dispersed in the whole world did preach the
gospel ; and to whom departing the bishops did succeed, who are
constituted through the whole world in the sees of the apostles.

By consequence the fathers do assert this equality, when
they affirm (as we before did shew) the apostolical office to be
absolutely supreme; when also they affirm (as afterwards we
shall shew) all the apostles’ successors to be equal as such;
and particularly that the Roman bishop, upon account of his
succeeding St. Peter, hath no preeminence above his brethren ;

q Aeixvis, 671 THs abTis ExacTos aré-

eos ecclesiz fortitudo solidetur. Hieron.
Aavoev Gtias. Chrys. in Gal. ii. 8.

in Jovin. i.14. But you will say, the

¥ Tlérpos kal "Iwdvyns iodrimot GAAH-
Aows, KaOd Kal GmrdaroAo Kal Gyo a0n-
rail. Act. Con. Eph. part. i. p. 209.
Peter and John were equal in honour
one to another, as were also the apo-
stles and holy disciples. Did Tertullian
think St. Paul inferior to St. Peter,
when he said, “‘ It is well that Peter is
“even in martyrdom equalled to Paul?”
Bene quod Petrus Paulo et in martyrio
adequatur. Tert. de Prescr. 24.

s At dicis super Petrum fundatur
ecclesia, licet id ipsum alio loco super
omnes apostolos fiat, et ex sequo super

church is founded upon Peter, though
the same thing in another place is affirm-
ed of all the apostles, and that, &c.

tO rév wabntav Kopvpaios, wet TIS
éuotayois ait@ Kal iepapxins Sexddos.
Dionys. de Eccl. Hier. cap. 5.

4 Ceeteri apostoli cum Petro par con-
sortium honoris et potestatis accepe-
runt, qui etiam in toto orbe dispersi
evangelium preedicaverunt, quibusque
decedentibus successerunt episcopi, qui
sunt constituti per totum mundum in
sedibus apostolorum. Isid. Hisp. de Off:
aS

Pope’s Supremacy. 85

for, *wherever a bishop be, whether at Rome, or at Eugubium ;
at Constantinople, or at Rhegium; at Alexandria, or at Thanis;
he is of the same worth, and of the same priesthood: the force
of wealth, and lowness of poverty, doth not render a bishop
more high or more low; for that all of them are successors of
the apostles.

19. Neither is it to prudential esteem a despicable considera-
tion, that the most ancient of the fathers, having occasion
sometimes largely to discourse of St. Peter, do not mention
any such prerogatives belonging to him.

20. The last argument which I shall use against this primacy
shall be, the insufficiency of those arguments and testimonies
which they allege to warrant and prove it.

If this point be of so great consequence as they make it; if,
as they would persuade us, the subsistence, order, unity, and
peace of the church, together with the salvation of Christians,
do depend on ity; if, as they suppose, many great points of
truth do hang on this pin; if it be, as they declare, a main
article of faith, and 2not only a simple error, but a pernicious
heresy, to deny this primacy ; then it is requisite that a clear
revelation from God should be producible in favour of it, (for
upon that ground only such points can firmly stand ;) then it
is most probable, that God (to prevent controversies, occa-
sions of doubt, and excuses for error about so grand a matter)
would not have failed to have declared it so plainly, as might
serve to satisfy any reasonable man, and to convince any fro-
ward gainsayer: but no such revelation doth appear ; for the
places of scripture which they allege do not plainly express it,
nor pregnantly imply it, nor can it by fair consequence be
inferred from them: no man unprepossessed with affection to
their side would descry it in them; without thwarting St.
Peter’s order, and wresting the scriptures, they cannot de- 2 Pet. iii.
duce it from them. This by examining their allegations will '”
appear.

I. They allege those words of our Saviour, uttered by him
upon occasion of St. Peter’s confessing him to be the Son of

x Ubicunque fuerit episcopus, sive &c, Bell. pref. ad lib. de Pontif. R.

Rome sive Eugubii, &c. Hier. ad z Est enim revera non simplex error,
Evagr. Ep. 85. Clem. ad Corinth. Iren. sed perniciosa heresis negare B. Petri
iii, 12. iii. 1, 3. primatum a Christo institutum. Bell.

y Agitur de summa rei Christiane, de Pont. R.i. 10.

Matt, xvi.

18.

Tostat. in

Matt. xvi.

qu. 67.

1 Cor. iii.
iz.

86 A Treatise of the

God, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church.
Here, say they, St. Peter is declared the foundation, that is,
the sole supreme governor of the church.

To this I answer :

1. Those words do not clearly signify any chika to their
purpose; for they are metaphorical, and thence ambiguous, or
capable of divers interpretations ; whence they cannot suffice
to ground so main a point of doctrine, or to warrant so huge a
pretence ; these ought to stand upon downright, evident, and
indubitable testimony.

It is pretty to observe how Bellarmine proposeth this testi-
mony; Of which words, saith he, the sense ts plain and ob-
cious, that it be understood, that under two metaphors the
principate of the whole church was promised ; as if that sense
could be so plain and obvious which is couched under two
metaphors, and those not very pat or revit in application to
their sense.

2. This is manifestly confirmed from that the fathers and
divines, both ancient and modern, have much differed in ex-
position of these words.

[Some, saith Abulensis, say that this rock is Peter
others say, and better, that it is Christ others say, and yet
better, that it is the confession which Peter maketh. ]

For some interpret this rock to be Christ himself, of whom
St. Paul saith, Other foundation can no man lay than that is
laid, which is Jesus Christ.

St. Austin telleth us in his Retractations, that he often had
expounded the words to this purpose, although he did not
absolutely reject that interpretation which made St. Peter

the rock; leaving it to the reader’s choice which is the most
probable¢.

@ §. Romana ecclesia nullis synodicis bus metaphoris promissum Petro totius

constitutis cxteris ecclesiis prelata est,
sed evangelica voce Domini et Salvato-
ris nostri primatum obtinuit; 7 es
Petrus (inquiens) &c. P. Gelas. i. Dist.
21.cap.3. The holy church of Rome
is not preferred before other churches
by any synodical decrees, but has ob-
tained the primacy by the voice of our
Lord and Saviour in the Gospel, saying,
Thou art Peter, &c.

b Quorum verborum planus et ob-
vius sensus est, ut intelligatur sub dua-

ecclesie principatum. Bell. de Pont. i.
10.

¢ Scio me postea seepissime exposu-
isse, ut super hance Petram intelligere-
tur quem confessus est Petrus; harum
autem duarum sententiarum que sit
probabilior eligat lector. Aug. Retr.i.
z1. Vide Aug. in Joh. tr. 124. de Verb.
Dom. in Matt. Serm. 13. Super hance,
inquit, petram quam confessus es, edi-
ficabo ecclesiam meam. Aug. in Joh. tr.
124. et de Verb. Dom. in Matt. Serm.

Pope’s Supremacy. 87

Others (and those most eminent fathers) do take the rock
to be St. Peter’s faith, or profession; ¢Upon the rock, saith
the prince of interpreters, that is, upon the faith of his pro-
Session ; and again, ¢Christ said that he would build his church
on Peter's confession; and again, (he, or another ancient
writer under his name,) Upon this rock: he said not upon
Peer; for he did not build his church upon the man, but upon
his faith.

8O0ur Lord, said Theodoret, did permit the first of the apo-
stles, whose confession he did fix as a prop or foundation of the
church, to be shaken.

[Whence Origen saith, that "every disciple of Christ is
the rock, in virtue of his agreement with Peter in that holy
confession. |

This sense even popes have embracedi.

Others say, ‘that as St. Peter did not speak for himself,
but in the name of all the apostles, and of all faithful people,
representing the pastors and people of the church; so cor-
-respondently our Lord did declare, that he would build his
ehurch upon such faithful pastors and confessors.

Others dojindeed by the rock understand St. Peter’s person, Vide Ri-

but do not thereby expound to be meant his being supreme ms -
ypr. Ep.
governor of the apostles, or of the whole church. 27. 40. 70.
71. 73-69.

The divines, schoolmen, and canonists of the Roman com-
munion do not also agree in exposition of the words; and

13. (tom. 10.) Super hanc petram, id
est, super me eedificabo ecclesiam meam.
Ans. in Matt. xvi. 18.

4 TH wérpa—routéot: TH mires
Tis duodoyias. Chrys. in Matt. xvi. 18.

e thy éxxdAnolay epnoev emi rhv
buoroylav oikodoujoew Thy éxelvov.
Chrys. in Joh. i. 50.

f 'Em) ratty TH wétpa, odk elwev én)
TG Tlérpw" obte yap emi.ta avOpdry,
GAN em) thy miorw Thy éavTov éKKAn-
clay gxoddéunce. Chrys. tom. v. Or. 163.
Super hanc igitur confessionis petram
ecclesiz edificatio est. Hil. de Trin. 6.

g amocréAwy Toy MpaTov, ob Thy
duoroylay olov tiva Kpntida, kal Oeué-
Auov Tis exxAnclas Karémnte, TuvEexapn-
ge cadrevOijva. Theod. Ep. 77.

h Térpa yap was 6 Xpiorov pabnths,
&c. Orig. in Matt. xvi. p. 275.

i In vera fide persistite, et vitam

vestram in petra ecclesiz, hoc est in
confessione B. Petri apostolorum prin-
cipis solidate. Greg. M. Ep. iii. 33. Per-
sist in the true faith, and establish and
fix your life upon the rock of the church,
that is, upon the confession of blessed
Peter, the prince of the apostles. Su-
per ista confessione edificabo ecclesiam
meam. Felix III. Ep. 5. Vide Nic. I.
Ep. ii. 6. Joh. VIII. Ep. 76. ;

k Unus pro omnibus loquens, et ec-
clesiz voce respondens. Cypr. Ep. §5.
One speaking for all, and answering in
the name of the church. Cui ecclesirx
figuram gerenti Dominus ait, Super
hanc—. Aug. Ep. 165. To whom, re-
presenting the whole church, our Lord
saith, Upon this rock, &c. Petrus ex
persona omnium apostolorum profitetur.
Hier. in loc. Peter professes in the per-
son of all the apostles.

Luke xxii.
I4.

Markix. 33.

Matt. xviii.
I.

88 A Treatise of the

divers of the most learned among them do approve the inter-
pretation of St. Chrysostom.

Now then, how can so great a point of doctrine be firmly
grounded on a place of so doubtful interpretation? How can
any one be obliged to understand the words according to their
interpretation, which persons of so good sense and so great
authority do understand otherwise? With what modesty can
they pretend that meaning to be clear, which so perspicacious
eyes could not discern therein? Why may not I exeusably
agree with St. Chrysostom, or St. Austin, in understanding the
place? May I not reasonably oppose their judgment to the
opinion of any modern doctors, deeming Bellarmine as fallible
in his conceptions as one of them? Why consequently may I
not without blame refuse their doctrine, as built upon this
place, or disavow the goodness of this proof ?

3. It is very evident, that the apostles themselves did not
understand those words of our Lord to signify any grant or
promise to St. Peter of supremacy over them; for would they
have contended for the chief place, if they had understood
whose it of right was by our Lord’s own positive determi-
nation? would they have disputed about a question, which to
their knowledge by their Master was already stated? would
they have troubled our Lord to inquire of him who should be
the greatest in his kingdom, when they knew that our Lord
had declared his will to make St. Peter viceroy? would the
sons of Zebedee have been so foolish and presumptuous as to
beg the place, which they knew by our Lord’s word and pro-
mise fixed on St. Peter? ‘would St. Peter, among the rest,
have fretted at that idle overture, whenas he knew the place
by our Lord’s immutable purpose and infallible declaration
assured to him? And if none of the apostles did understand the
words to imply this Roman sense, who can be obliged so to
understand them? yea who can wisely, who can safely so un-
derstand them? for surely they had common sense, as well as
any man living now ; they had as much advantage as we can
have to know our Lord’s meaning ; their ignorance therefore of
this sense being so apparent, is not only a just excuse for not
admitting this interpretation, but a strong bar against it.

1 Matth. xx. 24. "Axotoayres of 5€xa iyyavdnrovv. And when the ten heard
it, they were moved with indignation.

Pope’s Supremacy. 89

4. This interpretation also doth not well consist with our
Lord’s answers to the contests, inquiries, and petitions of his
disciples concerning the point of superiority: for doth he not
(if the Roman expositions be good) seem upon those occasions,
not only to dissemble his own word and promise, but to dis-
avow them, or thwart them? can we conceive that he would in
such a case of doubt forbear to resolve them, clearly to instruct
them, and admonish them of their duty ?

5. Taking the rock, as they would have it, to be the person
of St. Peter, and that on him the church should be built, yet
do not the words being a rock probably denote government; for
what resemblance is there between being a rock and a governor?
at least what assurance can there be that this metaphor pre-
cisely doth import that sense, seeing in other respects, upon as
fair similitudes, he might be called so ?

St. Austin saith, ™¢he apostles were foundations, because their
authority doth support our weakness.

St. Jerome saith, that they "were foundations, because the

faith of the church was first laid in them.

St. Basil saith, that ° St. Peter’s soul was called the rock, be-
cause it was firmly rooted in the faith, and did hold stiff, without
giving way against the blows of temptation.

Chrysologus saith, that P Peter had his name from a rock,
because he first merited to found the church by firmness of
Faith.

These are fair explications of the metaphor, without any
reference to St. Peter’s government.

But however also admitting this, that being such a rock doth
imply government and pastoral charge; yet do they (notwith-
standing these grants and suppositions) effect nothing; for they
cannot prove the words spoken exclusively in regard to other
apostles, or to import any thing singular to him above or be-
side them: he might be a governing rock, so might others be;
the church might be built on him, so it might be on other

m Quare sunt fundamenta apostoli et
prophet, quia eorum auctoritas portat
infirmitatem nostram. dug. in Ps.
Ixxxvi.

u In illis erant fundamenta, ibi pri-
mum posita est fides ecclesiw. Hier. in
Ps. \xxxvi.

plov Tlérpov a@vduacra, dia Td waylws
éveppi@o0u TH mlore, Kal oTepp@s Kal
evevddTws Exew mpds Tas ex meipacpay
évaryouévas wAnyds. Bas. in Is. ii. p.
869.

P Petrus a petra nomen adeptus est,
quia primus meruit ecclesiam fidei fir-
mitate fundare. Chrys, Serm. 53.

Eph. ii. 20.

Cypr. Ep.
71; 73-

90 A Treatise of the

apostles; he might be designed a governor, a great governor,
a principal governor, so might they also be; this might be
without any violence done to those words.

And this indeed was; for all the other apostles in holy
scripture are called foundations, and the church is said to be
built on them.

“Jf, saith Origen, the father of interpreters, you think the
whole church to be only built on Peter alone, what will you say
of John the son of thunder, and of each of the apostles? &c.
largely to this purpose.

t Christ, as St. Jerome saith, was the Rock, and he bestowed it
upon the apostles that they should be called rocks. And, § You
say, saith he again, that the church is founded on Peter; but the
same in another place is done upon all the apostles.

The twelve apostles, saith another ancient author, were the
immutable pillars of orthodoxy, the rock of the church.

t The church, saith St. Basil, is built upon the foundation of
the prophets and apostles; Peter also was one of the moun-
tains ; upon which rock the Lord did promise to build his
church.

St. Cyprian, in his disputes with pope Stephen, did more
than once allege this place, yet could he not take them in their
sense to signify exclusively; for he did not acknowledge any
imparity of power among the apostles or their successors. He
indeed plainly took these words to respect all the apostles and
their successors; our Lord taking occasion to promise that to
one, which he intended to impart to all for themselves and
their successors; "Our Lord, saith he, ordering the honour of
a bishop, and the order of his church, saith to Peter, I say to
thee, &c. Hence through the turns of times and successions,

q Ei 5¢ ém) roy eva, excivoy Mérpoy vo-
ples id Tod Ocod oixodopcicba Thy
macov éxxaAnolay pdvov, Tl ay phous
mepl "Iwdvvov Tov Tis BpovTis viov, 7)
éxdorov Tay GrooréAwy, &c. Orig. in
Matth. xvi. p. 275.

rt Petra Christus est, qui donavit apo-
stolis, ut ipsi quoque petre vocentur.
Hier. in Amos ix. 12.

s Dicis super Petrum fundatur ec-
clesia, licet id ipsum in alio loco super
omnes apostolos fiat. Hier. in Jovin. i.
14.
t’Exranola—¢koddéunrat emt TG Oepe-

Alp trav GroordéAwy Kal mpopntav’ ev
tav bpewy jv nal Tlérpos, ep hs Kal
nétpas ennyyctAato 6 Kipios oikodouh-
cew avrov Thy éxxAnotay. Basil. in Isa.
ii. p. 869.

u Dominus noster episcopi honorem,
et ecclesize suze rationem disponens, dicit
Petro, Ego tibi dico—Inde per tem-
porum et successionum vices episco-
porum ordinatio, et ecclesiz ratio de-
currit, ut ecclesia super episcopos con-
stituatur, et omnis actus ecclesize per
eosdem prepositos gubernetur. Cypr.
Ep. 27. et de Unit. Eccl.

the ordination of bishops and the manner of the church doth run
on, that the church should be settled upon the bishops, and every
act of the church should be governed by the same prelates: as
therefore he did conceive the church to be built, not on the
pope singularly, but on all the bishops; so he thought our
Lord did intend to build his church, not upon St. Peter only,
but on all his apostles.

6. It is not said that the apostles, or the apostolical office,
should be built on him; for that could not be, seeing the apo-
stles were constituted, and the apostolical office was founded,
before that promise; the words only therefore can import, that
according to some meaning he was a rock, upon which the
church, afterward to be collected, should be built; he was *a@
rock of the church to be built, as Tertullian speaketh: the words
therefore cannot signify any thing available to their purpose,
in relation to the apostles.

7. If we take St. Peter himself for the rock, then (as I take
it) the best meaning of the words doth import, that our Lord
‘designed St. Peter for a prime instrumenty (the first mover,
the most diligent and active at the beginning, the most con-
stant, stiff, and firm) in the support of his truth, and propa-
gation of his doctrine, or conversion of men to the belief of the
gospel; the which is called building of the church; according
to that of St. Ambrose, or some ancient homilist under his
name, ’He is called a rock, because he first did lay in the nations
the foundations of faith: in which regard, as the other apostles
are called foundations of the church, (the church being founded
on their labours,) so might St. Peter signally be so called; who,
as St. Basil saith, allusively interpreting our Saviour’s words,
afor the excellency of his faith did take on him the edifying of the
church.

Both he and they also might be so termed, for that upon
their testimonies concerning the life, death, and resurrection of
Christ the faith of Christians was grounded; as also it stands
upon their convincing discourses, their holy practice, their

Pope’s Supremacy.

x Latuit aliquid Petrum edificande
ecclesie petram dictum. Tertul/. de
Preser. cap. 22.

¥ Tlérpos év dmoordAos mpa@ros exh-
pute Tov Xpiordy. Chrys. Peter first of
all the apostles preached Christ.

z Petra dicitur eo quod primus in

nationibus fidei fundamenta posuerit.
Ambr. de Sanctlis, Serm. 2.

a‘O da wlorews irepoxhy ep davrdy
Thy olxodouhv Tis exxAnolas detduevos.
Bas. contra Eunom. lib. 2. Petra edifi-
cande ecclesiw. Tertull. de Preaser.
cap. 22.

Matt. x. 2.
John vy. 69.

miraculous performances ; in all which St. Peter was most
eminent; and in the beginning of Christianity displayed them
to the edification of the church.

This interpretation plainly doth agree with matter of fact
and history; which is the best interpreter of right or privilege
in such cases; for we may reasonably understand our Saviour
to have promised that, which in effect we see performed ; so
bthe event sheweth, the church was built on him, that is by him,
saith Tertullian.

But this sense doth not imply any superiority of power or
dignity granted to St. Peter above his brethren; however it
may signify an advantage belonging to him, and deserving
especial respect; as St. Chrysostom notably doth set out in
these words; ¢ Although John, although James, although Paul,
although any other whoever may appear performing great matters ;
he yet doth surpass them all, who did precede them in liberty of
speech, and opened the entrance, and gave to them, as to a river
carried with a huge stream, to enter with great ease: doing
this, as, I say, it might signify his being a rock of the church,
so it denoteth an excellency of merit, but not a superiority in
power.

8. It may also be observed, that St. Peter, before the speak-
ing of those words by our Lord, may seem to have had a
primacy, intimated by the evangelists, when they report his
call to the apostolical office; and by his behaviour, when in
this confession, and before in the like, he undertook to be their
mouth and spokesman; when, “not being unmindful of his place,
saith St. Ambrose, he did act a primacy; a primacy, addeth
that father, of confession, not of honour ; of faith, not of order :
his primacy therefore (such as he had) cannot well be founded
on this place, he being afore possessed of it, and, as St. Ambrose
conceived, exercising it at that time.

II. They allege the next words of our Lord, spoken in se-
quel upon the same occasion, 7 thee will I give the keys of

A Treatise of the

b Sic enim exitus docet, in ipso ec-
clesia extructa est, id est per ipsum, &c.
Tert. de Pudic. cap. 24.

© Kay "Iwdvyns, Kav "IdKwBos, Kby
TladAos, Kby BAdos baTicody pera Ta’Ta
péya Tt moa palynra, amdvTwy obTos
mreoventel, 5 mpoodorohcas a’Tav TH
nappnoig, Kat diavoltas Thy eloodov, Kal

5ovs abtois Kabdmrep moTap@ TOAAG pepo-
bevy pebuari werd ToAATs delas ereio-
eAbeiv, &c. Chrys. tom. v. Or. 59.

a Loci non immemor sui primatum
egit ; primatum confessionis, non
honoris ; fidei, non ordinis. Ambr. de
Incarn. cap. 4.

the kingdom of heaven ; that is, say they, the supreme power
over all the church; for he, say they, that hath the keys is
master of the house.

To this testimony we may apply divers of the same answers
which were given to the former ; for,

1. These words are figurate, and therefore not clear enough
to prove their assertion.

2. They do admit, and have received, various interpreta-
tions.

3. It is evident, that the apostles themselves did not under-
stand these words as importing a supremacy over them ; that
St. Peter himself did not apprehend this sense ; that our Lord,
upon occasion inviting to it, did not take notice of his promise
according thereto.

4. The words, I will give thee, cannot anywise be assured to
have been exclusive of*others, or appropriated to him. & He
said (as a very learned man of the Roman communion noteth)
to Peter, I will give thee the keys ; but he said not, I will give
them to thee alone; nothing therefore can be concluded from
them to their purpose.

5. The fathers do affirm, that all the apostles did receive
the same keys.

h Are, saith Origen, the keys of the kingdom of heaven given
by the Lord to Peter alone, and shall none other of the blessed
ones receive them? But if this, I will give thee the keys of
the kingdom of heaven, be common, how also are not all the
things common which were spoken before, or are added as spoken
to Peter ?

St. Jerome says in express words, that all ' the apostles did
receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven.

Pope’s Supremacy.

f Per claves datas Petro intelligimus

summam potestatem in omnem eccle-
siam. Bell. de Pont. i. 3.

g Dixit Petro, Dabo tibi claves; at
non dixit, Dabo tibi soli. Rigalt. in
Epist. Firmil.

h “Apa 3¢ TG Tlétpp pudvp dldovra
tmd Tod Kuplouv ai nAcides tis Tay od-
pavav Bacirclas, Kal oddels érepos Tav
pakapiwy abras Aferar; ei 5 Kowdy
éoti Kal mpds ér€pous, TO Séow wu Tas
KAcidas Tis BaciAelas Tay olpavdy, ras
odx) Kal wdyra tdre mpocipnucva, Kal Ta

emipepducva ws mpds Tlérpov AcAeypeva ;
Orig. in Matt. xvi. p. 275.

i Quod Petro dicitur, apostolis dici-
tur. Ambr. in Psal. xxxviii. What is
said to Peter, is said to the apostles.
Licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes
apostolos fiat, et cuncti claves regni
ceelorum accipiant. [Zier. in Jov. i. 14.
Though the same thing in another
place is done upon all the apostles, and
all receive the keys of the kingdom of
heaven.

94 A Treatise of the

k He, saith Optatus, did alone receive the keys of the kingdom
of heaven, (which were) to be communicated to the rest ; that is,
(as Rigaltius well expoundeth those words,) which Christ him-
self would also communicate to the rest.

Theophylact : | Although it be spoken to Peter alone, I will
give thee, yet it is given to all the apostles.

It is part of St. John’s character in St. Chrysostom, ™ He
that hath the keys of the heavens.

6. Indeed, whatever (according to any tolerable exposition,
or according to the current expositions of the fathers) those
keys of the kingdom of heaven do import ", (whether it be a
faculty of opening it by doctrine, of admitting into it by dis-
pensation of baptism and absolution, of excluding from it by
ecclesiastical censure, or any such faculty signified by that
metaphorical expression,) it plainly did belong to all the apo-
stles, and was effectually conferred on them; yea, after them,
upon all the pastors of the church in their several precincts
and degrees ; who in all ages have claimed to themselves the
power of the keys; to be (as the councel of Compeigne calleth
all bishops) clavigeri, ° the key-bearers of the kingdom of
heaven.

So that in these words nothing singular was promised or
granted to St. Peter; although it well may be deemed a singu-
lar mark of favour, that what our Lord did intend to bestow
on all pastors, that he did anticipately promise to him; or, as
the fathers say, to the church and its pastors in him. In
which respect we may admit those words of pope Leo I.P

7. Indeed divers of the fathers do conceive the words
spoken to St. Peter, not as a single person, but as a repre-

k Claves regni coeloruam communican-
das ceteris solus accepit. Opt. lib. 7.
Communicandas ceteris dixit, quas ipse
Christus communicaturus erat et cete-
ris. Rigalt. in Cypr. de Un. Eccl.

1 Ei yap nal mpds Mérpov pdvor eipnrat
70 Bow ot, GAG Kal riot ToIs GrogTé-
Aos 5é50Ta. Theoph. in loc.

m ‘O ras KAcis Exwv Ta ovpavar.
Chrys. in Pref. Evang. Joh.

n Claves intelligit verbum Dei, evan-
gelium Christi. Rigalt. in Cyp Ep. 73.

o Episcopi quos constat esse vica-
rios Christi, et clavigeros regni coelorum.
Cone. Comp. apud Bin. t. vi. p. 361.

P Transivit quidem in apostolos alios
vis istius potestatis, sed non frustra uni
commendatur quod omnibus intimetur.
Petro ergo singulariter hoc creditur,
quia cunctis ecclesize rectoribus Petri
forma proponitur. Leo I. in Nat. Petri
et Pauli. Serm. 2. The efficacy of this
power passed indeed upon all the apo-
stles; yet was it not in vain, that what
was intimated to all, was commended
to one. Therefore this is committed
singly to Peter, because Peter’s pattern
and example is propounded to all the
governors of the church.

; Pope’s Supremacy. 95

sentative of the church, or as standing in the room of each
pastor therein; unto whom our Lord designed to impart the
power of the keys.

4 All we bishops, saith St. Ambrose, have in St. Peter received
the keys of the kingdom of heaven.

8. These answers are confirmed by the words immediately
adjoined, equivalent to these, and interpretative of them; And Aug. supr.
whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven ;— ar gay Bis
the which do import a power or privilege soon after expressly,
and in the very same words, promised or granted to all the
apostles ; as also the same power in other words was by our
Lord conferred on them all after the resurrection.

If therefore the keys of the kingdom of heaven do import
supreme power, then each apostle had supreme power.

9. If we should grant (that which nowise can be proved)
that something peculiarly belonging to St. Peter is implied in
those words, it can only be this, that he should be a prime
man in the work of preaching and propagating the gospel,
-and conveying the heavenly benefits of it to believers ; which
is an opening of the kingdom of heaven ; according to what
Tertullian excellently saith of him: ‘So, saith he, the event
teacheth, the church was built in him, that is, by him ; he did
initiate the key ; see which, Ye men of Israel, hear these words,
Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you, &e.
He, in fine, in the baptism of Christ, did unlock the entrance to
the kingdom of heaven, &c.

John xx,
23.

9 In B. Petro claves regni coelorum
cuncti suscepimus sacerdotes. Ambr. de
Dign. Sac. 1. Ecclesia quee fundatur in
Christo, claves ab eo regni coelorum ac-
cepit, id est, potestatem ligandi solven-
dique peccata. Aug. tract. 124. in Joh.
Vid. tract. 50. The church, which is
founded upon Christ, received from him
the keys of the kingdom of heaven, i. e.
the power of binding and loosing sins.
In typo unitatis Petro Dominus dedit
potestatem . Aug. de Bap. iii. 17.
Our Lord gave the power to Peter, as
a type of unity. Ev rpoodmp tov Kopu-
galov Kal Tots Aowrois THY wabyTav 7
Toavrn éfovala Sé50Ta. Phot. Cod. 280.
Such authority was given to the rest of
the apostles in the person of him who
was the chief. Non sine causa inter

omnes apostolos ecclesiz catholice per-
sonas sustinet Petrus; huic enim eccle-
sie claves regni coelorum datz sunt,
cum Petro datz sunt . Aug. de
Ay. Chr. cap. xxx. in Ps. eviii. Not
without cause does Peter among the
rest of the apostles sustain the person
of the catholic church; for to this
church are the keys of the kingdom of
heaven given, when they are given unto
Peter.

r Sic enim exitus docet, in ipso eccle-
sia extructa est, id est, per ipsum ; ipse
clavem imbuit ; vide quam, Viri Israel-
ite, auribus mandate que dico, Jesum
Nazarenum virum a Deo vobis destina-
tum, &c. Ipse denique primus in Christi
baptismo reseravit aditum coelestis reg-
ni, &c. Tert. de Pud. 21.

96 A Treatise of the

10. It seemeth absurd that St. Peter should exercise the
power of the keys in respect to the apostles: for did he open
the kingdom of heaven to them, who were by our Lord long
before admitted into it ?

11. In fine, our Lord (as St. Luke relateth it) did say to

Luke v. 10. St. Peter, and probably to him first, Fear not, from henceforth

a “thou shalt catch men: might it hence be inferred that St. Peter
had a peculiar or sole faculty of catching men? why might it
not by as good a consequence as this, whereby they would ap-
propriate to him this opening faculty? Many such instances
might in like manner be used.

III. They produce those words of our Saviour to St. Peter,
Feed my sheep ; that is, in the Roman interpretation, Be thou
universal governor of my church.

To this allegation I answer :

1. From words which truly and properly might have been
said to any other apostle, yea, to any Christian pastor what-
ever, nothing can be concluded to their purpose, importing a
peculiar duty or singular privilege of St. Peter.

2. From indefinite words a definite conclusion (especially in
matters of this kind) may not be inferred: it is said, Do thou
Seed my sheep; it is not said, Do thou alone feed all my sheep:
this is their arbitrary gloss, or presumptuous improvement of
the text ; without succour whereof the words signify nothing
to their purpose, so far are they from sufficiently assuring so
vast a pretence: for instance, when St. Paul doth exhort the
bishops at Ephesus to feed the church of God; may it thence
be collected, that each of them was an universal governor of

Acts xx.28.the whole church, which Christ had purchased with his own
blood ?

3. By these words no new power is (assuredly at least)
granted or instituted by our Lords; for the apostles before
this had their warrant and authority consigned to them, when
our Lord did inspire them, and solemnly commissionate them,

Johnxx.21. saying, As the Father did send me, so I send you: to which
commission these words (spoken occasionally, before a few of
the disciples) did not add or derogate. At most the words do

8 Kexewpotéynto pty Hin mpds tiv ordained to the holy apostleship to-

Oeclav &rocroAhv buov Trois éréps wabn- gether with the rest of the disciples.
tais Tlérpos. Cyril. in loc. Peter was

only, as St. Cyril saith, renew the former grant of apostleship,
after his great offence of denying our Lord't.

4. These words do not seem institutive or collative of
power, but rather only admonitive or exhortative to duty;
implying no more, but the pressing a common duty, before
incumbent on St. Peter, upon a special occasion, in an advan-
tageous season, that he should effectually discharge the office
which our Lord had committed to him.

Our Lord, I say, presently before his departure, when his
words were like to have a strong impression on St. Peter, doth
earnestly direct and warn him to express that special ardency
of affection, which he observed in him, in an answerable care
to perform his duty of feeding; that is, of instructing, guid-
ing, edifying, in faith and obedience, those sheep of his; that
is, those believers, who should be converted to embrace his
religion, as ever he should find opportunity”.

5. The same office certainly did belong to all the apostles,
who, as St. Jerome speaketh, Y were the princes of owr discipline,
and chieftains of the Christian doctrine; they at their first
vocation had a commission and command fo go unto the lost Matt. x. 6.
sheep of the house of Israel, that were scattered abroad like sheep™ 36.
not having a shepherd; they before our Lord’s ascension were
enjoined to teach all nations the doctrines and precepts of Matt.xxviii.
Christ ; to receive them into the fold, to feed them with good '% **
instruction, to guide and govern their converts with good dis-
cipline; hence, WA// of them, as St. Cyprian saith, were shep-
herds ; but the flock did appear one, which was fed by the apo-
stles with unanimous agreement.

6. Neither could St. Peter’s charge be more extensive, than
was that of the other apostles; for they had a general and
unlimited care of the whole church; that is, according to
their capacity and opportunity, none being exempted from it,
who needed or came into the way of their discharging pas-
toral offices for them.

Pope’s Supremacy.

t Aid 8 rod pava: roy Kipiov, Boone
7a apvia uov, dvavéwors Sowep tis Tis
H8n S00clans arocroAns abtg yevéoOat
voeira. Cyril. ibid.

« Paulus apostolus boni pastoris im-
plebat officium, quando Christum pre-
dicabat. Aug. in Joh. tr. 47- Paul ful-
filled the office of a good pastor, when

he preached Christ.

VY Principes discipline nostre, et
Christiani dogmatis duces. Hier. in
Jovin. i. 14.

w Pastores sunt omnes, sed grex
unus ostenditur, qui ab apostolis om-
nibus unanimi consensione pascatur.
Cypr. de Un. Eccl.

Acts xx. 28.

98 A Treatise of the

x They were awcumenical rulers, as St. Chrysostom saith,
appointed by God, who did not receive several nations or
cities, but all of them in common were intrusted with the
world,

Hence particularly St. Chrysostom calleth St. John Ya pil-
lar of the churches over the world ; and St. Paul, an apostle of
the world; who had the care, not of one house, but of cities and
nations, and of the whole earth; who undertook the world, and
governed the churches ; on whom the whole world did look, and
on whose soul the care of all the churches every where did hang;
into whose hands were delivered the earth, and the sea, the im-
habited and uninhabited parts of the world.

And could St. Peter have a larger flock committed to him ?
could this charge, eed my sheep, more agree to him, than to
those, who no less than he were obliged to feed all Christian
people every where $

7. The words indeed are applicable to all Christian bishops
and governors of the church; according to that of St. Cyprian
to pope Stephen himself; We being many shepherds do feed
one flock, and all the sheep of Christ: for they are styled
pastors; they, in terms as indefinite as those in this text, are
exhorted to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased
with his own blood; to them (as the fathers commonly sup-
pose) this injunction doth reach, our Lord, when he spake
thus to St. Peter, intending to lay a charge on them all to
express their love and piety toward him in this way, by feed-
ing his sheep and people@.

bWhich sheep, saith St. Ambrose, and which flock, not only

x”Apyovrés eiow bmd ToD Oeod xeipo- Or. 59. ‘O MixaijA 7d Tay "lovdaiwy

tovndevtes of GrdatoAan Upxovtes ove
Z4vn wad wédrceis Siapdpovs AapBdvorTes,
GAAG wayTes KoWw? THY oikoupevny eum-
orevOévres. Chrys. tom. vill. p. 115.

Y ‘O ortAos Tay Kata Thy oikovpévny
éxxaAnai@v. Chrys. Pref. Comment. ad
Joh. Kal yap rijs oixoupévns Gardorodos
fv. Chrys. in 1 Cor. ix.2, Otros 6 otk
viklas wias, GAAG Kal moAéwy, Kal Shpov,
Kal €0vav, cad ddroxAfpou Tis oixoupévns
gpovtida éxwv. Chrys. in 2 Cor. xi. 28.
Ths oixovpévns ayTiAapBdvero wdons,
Kal SiexvBépva tras éxxAnolas. Chrys.
tom. viii. p. 115. ‘H oixoupévn aoa.
mpos abtovy €BArewev, ai ppovtides Tav
TavTaxou Tis vis éxxAnoi@y THs éxelvou
Wuxiis hv e&nptnuévai—. Chrys. tom.v.

Zevos évexeipioOn TadAos 5 iv, Kab
Odvatrray, Kal Thy oikovpévny, Kal Thy
dolxnrov. Chrys. tom. viii. p. 39.

Z Pastores multi sumus, unum tamen
gregem, et oves Christi universas pasci-
mus. Cypr. Ep. 67. ad P. Steph.

a Quanto magis debent usque ad
mortem pro veritate certare, et usque
ad sanguinem adversus peccatum, qui-
bus oves ipsas pascendas, hoc est docen-
das regendasque committit. Aug. in
Joh. tract.123. How much more ought
they to contend for the truth even unto
death, and against sin even unto blood,
to whom he committeth his sheep to be
fed, that is, to be taught and governed.

b Quas oves, et quem gregem non

then St. Peter did receive, but also with him all we priests did
receive tt.

¢cOur Lord, saith St. Chrysostom, did commit his sheep to
Peter, and to those which came after him; that is, to all Christ-
ian pastors, as the scope of his discourse sheweth.

4d When it is said to Peter, saith St. Austin, it ts said to all,
Feed my sheep.

¢And we, saith St. Basil, ave taught this (obedience to supe-
riors) by Christ himself constituting St. Peter pastor after him-
self of the church, ( for, Peter, saith he, dost thou love me more
than these? Feed my sheep ;) and conferring to all pastors and
teachers continually afterward an equal power (of doing so) ;
whereof itis a sign, that all do in like manner bind and do
loose as he.

St. Austin compriseth all these considerations in those
words.

How could these great masters more clearly express their
mind, that our Lord in those words to St. Peter did inculeate
a duty nowise peculiar to him, but equally together with him
belonging to all guides of the church; in such manner, as
when a master doth press a duty on one servant, he doth
thereby admonish all his servants of the like duty? whence
St. Austin saith, §that St. Peter in that case did sustain the
person of the church; that which was spoken to him belonging

Popes Supremacy.

to all its members, especially to his brethren the clergy.
hJt was, saith Cyril, a lesson to teachers, that they cannot

solum tune B. suscepit Petrus, sed et
cum eo nos suscepimus omnes. Ambr.
de Sacerd. 2.

4 Cum dicitur Petro, ad omnes dici-
tur, Pasce oves meas. Ang. de Agone
Christ. 30.

© Kal rovrov rap abrovd Xpiorov mai-
Sevducba, Mérpov mwoméva ped” Eavtdy
Ths exkAnolas kabiotavros, Tlérpe, yap
onal, pircis we wA€ov TobTwY; Toluave
7a mpéBatd wou Kal wacr 5h Trois epetiis
moimeot Kal SidacKddAoas Thy tony map-
éxovtos éEovalav: Kal tobrou onpeioy Td
decuciv Gwavtas duolws, kal Avew dowep
éxeivos. Bas. Const. Mon. cap. 22.

f Et quidem, fratres, quod pastor est,
dedit et membris suis; nam et Petrus
pastor, et Paulus pastor, et ceeteri apo-

stoli pastores, et boni episcopi pastores.
Aug. in Joh. tract. 47. And indeed,
brethren, that which a pastor is, he
gave also to his members; for both
Peter was a pastor, and Paul a pastor,
and the rest of the apostles were pas-
tors, and good bishops are pastors.

* Ut ergo Petrus quando ei dictum
est, Tibi dabo claves, in figura perso-
nam gestabat ecclesiz, sic et quando ei
dictum est, Pasce oves meas, ecclesiz
quoque personam in figura gestabat.
Aug. in Ps. cviii. Od mpds iepéas be
Tovro wdvoy elpnrat, GAAG Kal mpds éxa-
oTov hua@y Tay Kal puikpdy eumremorev-
pévwy tomviov. Chrys. in Matt xxiv.
Or. 77. This was not spoken to those
priests only, but to every one of us,
who have the care even of a little flock
committed to us.

h AddackddAos 8 yra@ois bia Tis Tay

t Pet. v. 2.

Acts xx. 28.

100 A Treatise of the

otherwise please the Arch-pastor of all, than by taking care of
the welfare of the rational sheep.

8. Hence it followeth, that the sheep, which our Saviour
biddeth St. Peter to feed, were not the apostles, who were his
fellow-shepherds, designed to feed others, and needing not to
be fed by him; but the common believers, or people of God,
which St. Peter himself doth call the flock of God; Feed,
saith he to his fellow-elders, the flock of God, which is among
you; and St. Paul, Take heed therefore wnto yourselves, and
to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you over-
seers.

9. Take feeding for what you please; for teaching, for
guiding; the apostles were not fit objects of it, who were im-
mediately taught and guided by God himself.

Hence we may interpret that saying of St. Chrysostom,
which is the most plausible argument they can allege for them,
that our Lord, in saying this, did commit to St. Peter a charge
(or presidency) over his brethren'; that is, he made him a
pastor of Christian people, as he did others; at least, if apo-
oracla tév adedpGv be referred to the apostles, it must not
signify authority over them, but at most a primacy of order
among them ; for that St. Peter otherwise should feed them,
St. Chrysostom could hardly think, who presently after saith,
that ‘seeing the apostles were to receive the admimstration of
the whole world, they ought not afterward to converse with one
another; for that would surely have been a great damage to the
world.

10. But they, forsooth, must have St. Peter solely obliged
to feed all Christ’s sheep ; so they did impose upon him a vast
and crabbed province; a task very incommodious, or rather
impossible for him to undergo. How could he in duty be
obliged, how could he in effect be able, to feed so many flocks
of Christian people scattered about in distant regions, through
all nations under heaven? He, poor man, that had so few
helps, that had no officers or dependents, nor wealth to main-

mpoxeimevov eloBéBnke Oewplas, &s ovK
by érépws ebapeothcesey TH wayTwy ap-
ximowwévs, €i uh TIS TOV AoyiKGy TpoBd-
twv evpwortlas, Kal Tis eis Td eb elvan
Biauov7js mooivto ppovtida. Cyril. ibid.

i ’Eyxepl(es thy mpootaclay Tay a-
SeApav. Chrys. in Joh, xxi. 15. Thy

mpootaciay évemiatevOn Tav adEeApar.
In ver. 21.

k ’Emesday yap fueddrov ris olkoupé-
yns Thy emirpomhy avadbétacbat, on dex
oupmemrAex Out Aovmdy GAAHALS* H yap by
peydaAn TovTo TH olkoupévy yéeyove Cyula.
Ibid. ver. 23.

Pope’s Supremacy. 101

tain them, would have been much put to it to feed the sheep
in Britain and in Parthia; unto infinite distraction of thoughts
such a charge must needs have engaged him.
But for this their great champion hath a fine expedient ;
St. Peter, saith he, did feed Christ’s whole flock, partly by
himself, partly by others ; so that, it seemeth, the other apo-
stles were St. Peter’s curates, or vicars and deputies. This
indeed were an easy way of feeding; thus, although he had
slept all his time, he might have fed all the sheep under hea-
ven; thus any man as well might have fed them. But this
manner of feeding is, I fear, a later invention, not known so
soon in the church; and it might then seem near as absurd to
be a shepherd, as it is now (in his own account) to be a just
man by imputation; that would be a kind of putative pastor-
age, as this @ putative righteousness. However, the apostles,
I dare say, did not take themselves to be St. Peter’s surro-
gates, but challenged to themselves to be accounted the minis- 1 Cor. iv. 1.
ters, the stewards, the ambassadors of Christ himself; from whom 2S"?
‘immediately they received their orders, in whose name they Gal. i. 1.
Tit. i. 3, &e.
acted, to whom they constantly refer their authority, without
taking the least notice of St.Peter, or intimating any depend-
ence on him.

It was therefore enough for St. Peter that he had authority
_ restrained to no place; but might, as he found occasion, preach
the gospel, convert, confirm, guide Christians every where to
truth and duty: nor can our Saviour’s words be forced to sig-
nify more.

In fine, this (together with the precedent testimonies) must
not be interpreted so as to thwart practice and history ; ac-
cording to which it appeareth, that St. Peter did not exercise
such a power, and therefore our Lord did not intend to confer
such an one upon him.

IV. Further, in confirmation of their doctrine, they do draw P. Leo IX.
forth a whole shoal of testimonies, containing divers preroga- An chase si
tives, as they call them, of St. Peter, which do, as they sup- primatus
pose, imply this primacy; so very sharpsighted indeed they rowsng
are, that in every remarkable accident befalling him, in every Be“. +. 17.

! Respondeo, S. Petrum partim per cum gregem, ut sibi imperatum erat pa-
se, partim per alios universum Domini- visse . Bell. de Pont, R.i. 16.

Acts ix. 32.

John xiii.
24.

John xx. 4.

102 A Treatise of the

action performed by him, or to him, or about him, they can
desery some argument or shrewd insinuation of his preemi-
nence; especially being aided by the glosses of some fanciful
expositor. From the change of his name; from his walking
on the sea; from his miraculous draught of fish; from our
Lord's praying for him, that his faith should not fail, and
bidding him to confirm his brethren; from our Lord’s order-
ing him to pay the tribute for them both; from our Lord’s
first washing his feet, and his first appearing to him after the
resurrection ; from the prediction of his martyrdom; from
sick persons being cured by his shadow; from his sentencing
Ananias and Sapphira to death; from his preaching to Cornelius;
from its being said that he passed through all ; from his being
prayed for by the church; from St. Paul’s going to visit him ;
from these passages, I say, they deduce or confirm his au-
thority. Now in earnest, is not this stout argument? Is it
not egregious modesty for such a point to allege such proofs ?
What cause may not be countenanced by such rare fetches?
Who would not suspect the weakness of that opinion, which is
fain to use such forces in its maintenance? In fine, is it honest
or conscionable dealing, so to wrest or play with the holy
scripture, pretending to derive thence proofs, where there is
no show of consequence !

To be even with them, I might assert the primacy of St.
John, and to that purpose might allege his prerogatives, (which
indeed may seem greater than those of St. Peter;) namely,
that he was the beloved disciple, that he leaned on our Lord’s
breast; that St. Peter, not presuming to ask our Lord a ques-
tion, desired him to do it, as having a more special confidence
with our Lord; that St.John did higher service to the church,
and all posterity, by writing not only more Epistles, but also
a most divine Gospel, and a sublime prophecy concerning the
state of the church™; that St. John did outrun Peter, and
came first to the sepulchre, (in which passage such acute de-
visers would find out marvellous significancy ;) that St. John
was a virgin; that he did outlive all the apostles, (and thence
was most fit to be universal pastor;) that St. Jerome, com-

m Infinita futurorum mysteria continentem. Hier. Containing infinite mys-
teries of future things.

Pope’s Supremacy. 103

paring Peter and John, doth seem to prefer the latter ; for
n Peter, saith he, was an apostle, and John was an apostle ; but
Peter was only an apostle ; John both an apostle and an evange-
list, and also a prophet ;—and, saith he, that I may in brief
speech comprehend many things, and shew what privilege belong-
eth to John — yea, virginity in John ; by our Lord a virgin, his
mother the virgin, is commended to the virgin disciple. Thus |
might by prerogatives and passages very notable infer the su-
periority of St.John to St. Peter, in imitation of their reason-
ing; but I am afraid they would scarce be at the trouble to
answer me seriously, but would think it enough to say I trified:
wherefore let it suffice for me in the same manner to put off
those levities of discourse.

V. They argue this primacy from the constant placing St.
Peter’s name before the other apostles, in the catalogues and
narrations concerning him and them.

To this I answer :

1. That this order is not so strictly observed, as not to ad-

-mit some exceptions; for St. Paul saith, that James, Cephas, Gal. ii. 9.
and John, knowing the grace given unto him—so it is com-

monly read in the ordinary copies, in the text of ancient com-
mentators, and in old translations; and, Whether Paul, whether : Cor. iii.
Apollos, whether Cephas, saith St. Paul again ; and, As the other **..,.. 5. ‘.
apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas ; and, Philip,

saith St. John, was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Jouni. 45.
Peter; and Clemens Alexandrinus in Eusebius saith, that

othe Lord, after his resurrection, delivered the special knowledge

to James the Just, and to John, and to Peter; postponing

St. Peter, as perhaps conceiving him to have less of sublime
revelations imparted to him: that order therefore is not so
punctually constant.

In the Apostolical Constitutions, St. Paul and St. Peter be-*rya naé-
ing induced jointly preseribing orders, they begin, J Paul, and?’ *®

: re ; Tlérpos dia-

I Peter, do appoint: so little ambitious or curious of precedence tecadue-

hed thy ted éa—Const.
ey represented. Apost. viii.

n Petrus apostolus est, et Joannes virginitas; a Domino virgine mater vir-
apostolus, maritus et virgo; sed Petrus go virgini discipulo commendatur. Mier.
apostolus tantum, Joannes et apostolus ibid.
et evangelista et propheta, &c. Hier. in © "laxéBy Te Sixalw wal "Iwdvyy Kal
Jovin.i.14. Et ut brevi sermone multa T[érpq mera Thy dvdoracw rapédwre Thy
comprehendam, doceamque cujus privi- yvdow 6 Kips. Euseb. Hist. ii. 1.
legii sit Joannes, ——imo in Joanne

* Chrys.
tom. v. Or.
59. Chrys.
in Joh. xxi.
Cypr. cont.
Jul. ix. (p.
325-)

Aug. Ep. xi.
IQ.

Tort. Tort.
p- 338.
Daill.de Us.
P. lib. i.
cap. 6. p.
158. (et p.
314.)

104 A Treatise of the

2. But it being indeed so constant, as not to seem casual, |
further say, that position of names doth not argue difference
of degree, or superiority in power; any small advantage of
age, standing, merit, or wealth, serving to ground such pre-
cedence, as common experience doth shew.

3. We formerly did assign other sufficient and probable
causes why St.Peter had this place. So that this is no cogent
reason.

VI. Further, (and this indeed is far their most plausible
argumentation,) they allege the titles and elogies given to
St. Peter by the fathers; who call him é£apyov, (the prinee,)
kopupaiov, (the ringleader,) xepadjv, (the head,) * mpdedpor,
(the president,) dpxnydv, (the captain,) mpoyyopov, (the prolo-
cutor,) tpwroardarny, (the foreman,) zpoordrav, (the warden,)
exxpitov TOV azootéAwy, (the choice, or egregious apostle,)
majorem, (the greater, or grandee among them,) primum, (the
first, or prime apostle.)

To these and the like allegations I answer :

1. PIf we should say, that we are not accountable for every
hyperbolical flash or flourish occurring in the fathers, (it
being well known that they in their encomiastic speeches, as
orators are wont, following the heat and gaiety of fancy, do
sometimes overlash,) we should have the pattern of their
greatest controvertists to warrant us; for Bellarmine doth
put off their testimonies by saying, that they do 4 sometimes
speak in way of excess, less properly, less warily, so as to need
benian exposition, &c. as bishop Andrews sheweth; and it is a
common shift of cardinal Perron, whereof you may see divers
instances alleged by M. Daille.

Which observation is especially applicable to this case; for
that eloquent men do never more exceed in their indulgence to
fancy, than in the demonstrative kind, in panegyrics, in their
commendations of persons; and I hope they will embrace this
way of reckoning for those expressions of pope Leo, sounding
so exorbitantly, that St.Peter was by our Lord "assumed into

p The truth is, the best arguments of 12. minus caute. de Purg. i. 11.

the papists in other questions are some r Nune enim in consortium indivi-
flourishes of orators, speaking hyperboli- due unitatis assumptum id quod ipse
cally and heedlessly. erat voluit nominari. P. Leo I. Ep. 89.

a Per excessum loqui. Bell. de Miss. Nihil a bonorum fonte Deo in quenquam
ii. 10. minus proprie, iii. 4. benigna ex- sine Petri participatione transire. P. Leo
positione opus habere. de Amiss. Gr. iv. de Assumpt. sua, Serm. 3.

Pope’s Supremacy. 105

consortship of his individual unity ; and that nothing did pass
upon any from God, the fountain of good things, without the
participation of Peter.

2. We may observe, that such turgid elogies of St. Peter
are not found in the more ancient fathers; for Clemens
Romanus, Irenzeus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertullian, Origen,
Cyprian, Firmilian——when they mention St. Peter, do speak
more temperately and simply, according to the current notions
and traditions of the church in their time ; using indeed fair
terms of respect, but not such high strains of courtship, about
him. But they are found in the latter fathers, who being
men of wit and eloquence, and affecting in their discourses to
vent those faculties, did speak more out of their own invention
and fancy.

Whence, according to a prudent estimation of things in
such a case, the silence or sparingness of the first sort is of
more consideration on the one hand, than the speech, how
free soever, of the latter is on the other hand: and we may
rather suppose those titles do not belong to St. Peter because
the first do not give them, than that they do because the
other are so liberal in doing it.

Indeed if we consult the testimonies of this kind alleged by
the Romanists, who with their utmost diligence have raked all
ancient writings for them, it is strange that they cannot find
any very ancient ones; that they can find so few plausible
ones ; that they are fain (to make up the number) to produce
so many, which evidently have no force or pertinency ; being
only commendations of his apostolical office, or of his personal
merits, without relation to others.

3. We say, that all those terms or titles which they urge
are ambiguous, and applicable to any sort of primacy or pre-
eminency; to that which we admit, no less than to that which
we refuse ; as by instances from good authors, and from com-
mon use, might easily be demonstrated ; so that from them
nothing can be inferred advantageous to their cause.

Cicero calleth Socrates prince of the philosophers ; and Cic.de Nat.

e.° : : eT Deor. lib. ii.
Sulpitius, prince of all lawyers: would it not be ridiculous ¢;,. 4,
thence to infer, that Socrates was a sovereign governor of the ¢lar. Orat.
philosophers, or Sulpitius of the lawyers! The same great

Acts xxiv.
“e

Tpwrocrd-

THY THS TOY

TVEULATO-

106 A Treatise of the

speaker calleth Pompey s prince of the city in all men’s judgment:
doth he mean that he did exercise jurisdiction over the city?
Tertullus calleth St. Paul zpwrocrdrny, a ringleader of the
sect of the Nazarenes ; and St. Basil calleth Eustathius Sebas-
tenus, foreman of the sect of the Pneumatomachi: did Tertul-
lus mean that St. Paul had universal jurisdiction over Christ-

udxev aipé-jans? or St. Basil, that Eustathius was sovereign of those

oews. Bas.

Ep. 74.

Euseb.
Hist. ii. 14.

heretics ?

So neither did prince of the apostles, or any equivalent term,
in the sense of those who assigned it to St. Peter, import au-
thority over the apostles, but eminency among them in worth,
in merit, in apostolical performances, or at most in order of
precedence.

Such words are to be interpreted by the state of things, not
the state of things to be inferred from them ; and in under-
standing them we should observe the rule of Tertulliant.

4. Accordingly the fathers sometimes do explain those elo-
gies signifying them to import the special gifts and virtues of
St. Peter, wherein he did excel; so Eusebius ealleth St. Peter
the most excellent and great apostle, who for his virtue was pro-
locutor of the rest.

5. This answer is thoroughly confirmed from hence; that
even those who give those titles to St. Peter, do yet expressly
affirm other apostles in power and dignity equal to him.

Who doth give higher elogies to him than St.Chrysostom ?
yet doth he assert all the apostles to be supreme, and equal in
dignity; and particularly he doth often affirm St. Paul to be
isdrysov, equal in honour to St. Peter, as we before shewed.

The like we declared of St. Jerome, St. Cyril, &e. And as
for St.Cyprian, who did allow a primacy to St. Peter, nothing
can be more evident than that he took the other apostles to be
equal to him in power and honour.

The like we may conceive of St. Austin, who, having care-

$ Quem omnium judicio longe prin- than to the sound of the word. Od yap
cipem esse civitatis videbat princi- ai Aétas thy pbow mapaipoiyta’ GAAG
pem orbis terre virum . Cic. pro padrdrov 7 ptois Tas Ades eis EavThy
Domo sua. €Akovoa petaBddAdAe. Athan. Orat. iii.

t Malo te ad sensum rei quam ad ady. Ar. (p. 373-) For words do not
sonum vocabuli exerceas. Tert. adv. take away the nature of things, but the
Prax. cap. 3. Thad rather you would nature rather changes the words, and
apply yourself to the sense of the thing, draws them to itself.

Pope’s Supremacy. 107

fully perused those writings of St. Cyprian, and frequently
alleging them, doth never contradict that his sentiment.

Even pope Gregory himself acknowledgeth St. Peter not to
have been properly the head, but only "the first member of
the universal church; all being members of the church under
one head.

6. If pope Leo I, or any other ancient pope, do seem to
mean further, we may reasonably except against their opinion,
as being singular, and proceeding from partial affection to
their see ; such affection having influence on the mind of the
wisest men; according to that certain maxim of Aristotle,
Every man is a bad judge in his own case.

7. The ancients, when their subject doth allure them, do
adorn other apostles with the like titles, equalling those of
St. Peter, and not well consistent with them, according to
that rigour of sense which our adversaries affix to the com-
mendations of St. Peter.

The Epistle of Clemens Romanus to St. James, (an apocry-
-phal but ancient writing,) calleth St. James our Lord’s brother
* the bishop of bishops ; the Clementine Recognitions call him
the prince of bishops ; Ruffinus, in his translation of Eusebius,
the bishop of the apostles ; Y St. Chrysostom saith of him, that
he did preside over all the Jewish believers ; Hesychius, pres-
byter of Jerusalem, calleth him 2 the chief captain of the new
Jerusalem, the captain of priests, the prince of the apostles, the
top among the heads, &e.

The same Hesychius calleth St. Andrew a the firstborn of
the apostolical choir, the first settled pillar of the church, the
Peter before Peter, the foundation of the foundation, the first-
Sruits of the beginning, &e.

Vili. 10. Tay ef "lovdalwy morevodyTwy
mpocioThKe: wavtwy. Chrys. tom. v-

u Certe Petrus apostolus primum
membrum S. et universalis ecclesiae—

sub uno capite omnes membra sunt ec-
clesie. Greg. I. Ep. iv. 38.

x KAquns laxdBey emokdmwy em-
oxéry. Jacobum episcoporum princi-
pem sacerdotum princeps orabat. Clem.
Rec. i. 68. Apostolorum episcopus.
Ruf. Euseb. ii. 1.

Y It is likely that Ruffinus did call
him so, by mistaking that in the Apo-
stolical Constitutions; ‘“fwtp tod ém-

. ~ ,

oxdrov judy “laxéBov. Apost. Const.

Or. 59.

Z Toy ris véas ‘lepovoaAhp apxiotpa-
Tryov, Tav lepéwy tryeuova, TaY arooTd~
Awy Toy Eapxov, Tov év Kepadais Kopu-
ghv, &c. Hesych. Presb. apud Phot.
Cod. 275. (p- 1525-)

a‘O Tov xopod Tav arooTéAwy Tpw-
rétoKos, 5 mpwromayhs Tis exxAnolas
atvAos, 5 mpd TMeérpou Mérpos, d Tov Oe-
peAlou Oeuédsos, 5 Tis apxis arapxIn—-
Hesych. apud Phot. Cod. 269.

108

A Treatise of the

St. Chrysostom saith of St. John, that he was >a pillar of
the churches through the world, he that had the keys of the king-

dom of heaven, &e.

But as occasion of speaking about St. Paul was’ more fre-
quent, so the elogies of him are more copious, and indeed so
high as not to yield to those of St. Peter.

¢ He was, saith St. Chrysostom, the ringleader and guardian

of the choir of all the saints.

d He was the tongue, the teacher, the apostle of the world.
He had the whole world put into his hands, and took care
thereof, and had committed to him all men dwelling upon earth.

He was the light of the churches, the foundation of faith, the

pillar and ground of truth.

¢ He had the patronage of the world committed into his hands.
f He was better than all men, greater than the apostles, and

surpassing them all.

& Nothing was more bright, nothing more illustrious rth he.
h None was greater than he, yea none equal to him.
Pope Gregory I. saith of St. Paul, that he ‘was made head

b‘O ortAos Ta KaTa Thy oikoUmevnY
exxAnoiav, 6 Tas KAEls Exwv THY OUpa-
vav, &c. Chrys. in Joh. i. 1.

c ‘0 Tav aylwy xopod Kopypaios Kal

Chrys. in Rom. xvi. 24.

mpoorarns.
‘O rijs oinoupevns a&méaroAes. Chrys. in
1 Cor. ix. 2.

d‘H yAa@rra Tis oikoupéevns, Td pas
Tav exxarnoiav, 5 Oeuérwos Tis TicTEws,
6 aorbaAos Kal edpalwua Tis GAnOclas. Ti
olkoupévny Gracay eyxexepiouevos. He
had the whole habitable world com-
mitted to his charge. Tis oixovmevns
BiddoKadros By Tos THY iv oikudyTUs
&wavtas émtpamels. He was the teacher
of the world, and had all the inhabit-
ants of the earth committed to his
trust.

e Thy THs oikoupevns mpootaciay ey-
KEXELPLTHEVOS. In Jud. Or. 6. Tis oi-
Kouméevns Th mpograciay emiBeEar bau.
In 1 Cor. Or. 22. Ov Thy oikovpéerny
Enacay eis x«ipas abTow pépwy €Onker 6
@cdés; Tom. vii. p- 2. Did not God put
into his hands the whole world? ‘O
mdons olxoupévns Kpatioas. In 2 Tim.
ii. 1. He had the charge of the whole
world.

f Tdytwv avOpdrwv «pelrtrwv. De
Sacerd. 4. Ths ody amdytwy avOpwrwy

Guclvwy ; Tis 5€ Erepos, GAA’ H 6 oKn-
vorowws éxeivos, 6 Tis olxoupevns dida-
oKados ei tolvuy pelCova T@V aTo-
otéAwy AapBdver aorépavoy, tav &e
amoctéAwy tcos ovdels yéyover, ovTos
de Kanelvwy pei(wy, evSnAov Bri Tis
avwtdtTw amodavceTa TYyunS Kal mpo-
edpias. Tom. v. Or. 33. Who then
was better than all other men? who
else but that tent-maker, the teacher
of the world? If therefore he re-
ceive a greater crown than the apo-
stles, and none perhaps was equal to
the apostles, and yet he greater than
they, it is manifest, that he shall
enjoy the highest honour and pre-
eminence.

& MavaAov Aaumpdrepoy ovdev hy, ovde
MepipaveaTepov. Tom. y. Or. 47:

h Ovdels 5¢ exelvou pel(wy, GAA’ ovd5E
tacos éort. Tom. vi. Or. g. Ovdels Tav-
Aov Yoos Ww. 2 Tim. iii. 15. ‘O mavoo-
os, 6 Tav éxxAnoi@y Upioros apxiTéK-
twv. Theod. Ep. 146. The most wise
and best architect, or chief builder of
the churches. ‘O paxdpios ardaTodos, 6
Tav watépwyv nathp. Just. M. Resp. ad
Orthod. Qu. 119. The blessed apostle,
the father of the fathers.

i Caput effectus est nationum, quia

109

of the nations, because he obtained the principate of the whole
church.

These characters of St. Paul I leave them to interpret, and
reconcile with those of St. Peter.

8. That the fathers, by calling St. Peter prince, chieftain,
&ce. of the apostles, do not mean authority over them, may be
argued from their joining St. Paul with him in the same ap-
pellations; who yet surely could have no jurisdiction over
them ; and his having any would destroy the pretended eccle-
siastical monarchy.

St. Cyril calleth them together, ipatrons, or presidents of the

church.

St. Austin (or St. Ambrose or Maximus) calleth them
kprinces of the churches.

The popes Agatho and Adrian (in their general synods)
eall them !¢he ringleading apostles.

The popes Nicholas I. and Gregory VII, &e. call them Nicol. 1.
princes of the apostles. ao ee ™

St. Ambrose, or St. Austin, or St. Maximus Taur. (choose VII, &c.
you which,) doth thus speak of them; ™Blessed Peter and
Paul are most eminent among all the apostles, excelling the rest
by a kind of peculiar prerogative: but whether of the two be
preferred before the other is uncertain ; for I count them to be
equal in merit, because they are equal in suffering, &e.

nTo all this discourse I shall only add, that if any of the
apostles, or apostolical men, might claim a presidency or au-
thoritative headship over the rest, St. James seemeth to have

the best title thereto; for °Jerusalem was the mother of all Isa. ii. 3.
Luke xxiv.
47°

Pope’s Supremacy.

obtinuit totius ecclesie principatum.
Greg. M. in 1 Reg. lib. 4. Videsis.
Paulus apostolorum princeps. Ep. Spa-
lat. in Lat. Syn. sub P. Jul. I. Sess. i.
p. 25.

i Tlérpos cai TMatAos, of tis éxxAnolas

mpoordra. Cyril. Cat. 6.
k Ecclesiarum principes. Jug. de
Sanct, 27.

1 Kopupaio: GroordéAwy. P. Agatho,
in 6 Syn. Act. iv. p. 35. P. Adrian in
7 Syn. Act. ii. p. 554.

m Beati Petrus et Paulus eminent
inter universos apostolos, et peculiari
quadam preerogativa precellunt ; verum
inter ipsos quis cui preponatur incer-

tum est, puto enim illos equales esse
meritis, quia equales sunt passione, &c.
Ambr. Serm. 66. Aug. de Sanct. 27.
Max. Taur. Serm. 54.

n He voces ecclesiw, ex qua habuit
omnis ecclesia initium. Jren. ili. 12.
These are the words of the church,
from whence every church had its be-
ginning.

© Ecclesia in Hierusalem fundata to-
tius orbis ecclesias seminavit. //eron.
in Isa.ii. The church founded in Je-
rusalem was the seminary of the
churches throughout the whole world.
Theod. v. 9. Vide Tert. de Preser,
cap. 20.

Gal. ii. 12.

110 A Treatise of the

churches, the fountain of the Christian law and doctrine, the
see of our Lord himself, the chief Pastor.

P He therefore who, as the fathers tell us, was by our Lord
himself constituted bishop of that city, and the frst of all
bishops, might best pretend to be in special manner our Lord’s
vicar or successor ; 9 /7e, saith Epiphanius, did first receive the
episcopal chair, and to him our Lord first did intrust his own
throne upon earth.

He accordingly did first exercise the authority of presiding
and moderating in the first ecclesiastical synod, as St. Chryso-
stom in his notes thereon doth remark.

He therefore probably by St. Paul is first named in his re-
port concerning the passages at Jerusalem ; and to his orders
it seemeth that St. Peter himself did conform; for it is said
there, that before certain came from St. James, he did eat with
the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew.

Hence in the Apostolical Constitutions, in the prayer pre-
scribed for the church, and for all the governors of it, the
bishops of the principal churches being specified by name,
St. James is put in the first place, before the bishops of Rome
and of Antioch; 'Let us pray for the whole episcopacy under
heaven, of those who rightly dispense the word of thy truth ; and
let us pray for our bishop James, with all his parishes ; let us
pray for our bishop Clemens, and all his parishes ; let us pray
Sor Euodius, and all his parishes.

Hereto consenteth the tradition of those ancient writers
aforecited, who call St. James the bishop of bishops, the bishop
of the apostles, &c.

P "Ererta SO "laxdBy, Quod doxet
T@ GDEAPG adtov abtds yap abrdy rAé€-
yeTat KEXEpoTOYnKEeval, Kal éxloKotroy ev
‘lepoooAdpots memoinkévar mparTov. Chrys.
int Cor. Or. 11. After that he was
seen of James, I suppose to his brother ;
for he is said to have ordained him,
and made him the first bishop of Jeru-
salem.

4 Tpa@ros obros elanpe thy Kabédpay

THs emioKonis, @ wenlorevke Kipios Tov
Opdvov abrod em) THs yas mpéty. Epiph.
Her. 78.

r 'Yrtp mdons ericxoris ths brd Tov
ovpaviy Ta&v dp0oTomotyTwy Tov Adyov
Tis ons GAnbelas SenOGuev’ xa bwép Too
émiokdmov juav laxkéBov, kal Tav Ta-
pokiay avTov Senbauev’ brtp tov ém-
axdmov ijpav KAfhpevtos, &c. Const.
Ap. viii. 10.

Pope’s Supremacy. 111
SUPPOSITION II.

I proceed to examine the next supposition of the church
monarchists, which is, That St. Peter’s primacy, with its
rights and prerogatives, was not personal, but derivable to his
Successors.

AGAINST which supposition I do assert, that admitting
a primacy of St. Peter, of what kind or to what purpose soever,
we yet have reason to deem it merely personal, and not (ac-
cording to its grounds and its design) communicable to any
successors, nor indeed in effect conveyed to any such.

It is a rule in the canon law, that S@ personal privilege doth
follow the person, and is extinguished with the person; and such
we affirm that of St. Peter; for,

1. His primacy was grounded upon personal acts, (such as
his cheerful following of Christ, his faithful confessing of
Christ, his resolute adherence to Christ, his embracing special
revelations from God;) or upon personal graces, (his great
faith, his special love to our Lord, his singular zeal for Christ’s
service ;) or upon personal gifts and endowments, (his cou-
rage, resolution, activity, forwardness in apprehension and in
speech ;) the which advantages are not transient, and conse-
quently a preeminency built on them is not in its nature
such.

2. All the pretence of primacy granted to St. Peter is
grounded upon words directed to St. Peter’s person, charac- Matt. xvi.
terised by most personal adjuncts, as name, parentage, and 97),
which exactly were accomplished in St. Peter’s personal act- '5—17-
ings; which therefore it is unreasonable to extend further.

Our Lord promised to Simon, son of Jona, to build his Matt. xvi.
church on him: accordingly in eminent manner the church ‘”
was founded upon his ministry, or by his first preaching,
testimony, performances.

Our Lord promised to give him the keys of the heavenly
kingdom: this power St. Peter signally did execute in con-
verting Christians, and receiving them by baptism into the
church, by conferring the Holy Ghost, and the like adminis-
trations.

8 Privilegium personale personam sequitur, et cum persona extinguitur. /teg,
Juris, 7 in Sexto.

John xxi.
15.

Gal. i. 1.

Actsi. 21,
22.

112 A Treatise of the

Our Lord charged Simon, son of Jonas, to feed his sheep :
this he performed by preaching, writing, guiding, and govern-
ing Christians, as he found opportunity: wherefore, if any
thing was couched under those promises or orders singularly
pertinent to St. Peter, for the same reason that they were
singular, they were personal; for

These things being in a conspicuous manner accomplished
in St. Peter’s person, the sense of those words is exhausted ;
there may not with any probability, there cannot with any
assurance, be any more grounded on them; whatever more is
inferred must be by precarious assumption; and justly we
may cast at those who shall infer it that expostulation of Ter-
tullian, * What art thou, who dost overturn and change the
manifest intention of our Lord, personally conferring this on
Peter ?

3. Particularly the grand promise to St. Peter of founding
the church on him cannot reach beyond his person; because
there can be no other foundations of a society than such as
are first laid; the successors of those who first did erect a so-
ciety, and establish it, are themselves but superstructures.

4. The apostolical office, as such, was personal and tempo-
rary; and therefore, according to its nature and design, not
successive or communicable to others in perpetual descendence
from them.

It was, as such, in all respects extraordinary, conferred in a
special manner, designed for special purposes, discharged by
special aids, endowed with special privileges, as was needful
for the propagation of Christianity and founding of churches.

To that office it was requisite that the person should have
an immediate designation and commission from God; such as
St. Paul so often doth insist upon for asserting his title to the
office; Paul, an apostle, not from men, or by man—t Not by men,
saith St. Chrysostom ; this is a property of the apostles.

It was requisite that an apostle should be able to attest con-
cerning our Lord’s resurrection or ascension, either immedi-
ately, as the twelve, or by evident consequence, as St. Paul;
thus St. Peter implied, at the choice of Matthias ; Wherefore

S Qualis es evertens atque commu- Tertul. de Pud. 21.
tans manifestam Domini intentionem t Td 3é ob BC GvOpdrwy, TodTo Tdi0y
personaliter hoc Petro conferentem? tay axoatéAwy. Chrys. in Gal.i. 1.

Pope’s Supremacy. 113

of those men which have companied with us must one be
ordained to be a witness with us of the resurrection ; and, Am: Cor. ix. 1.
I not, saith St. Paul, an apostle? have I not seen the Lord ?**-*:
according to that of Ananias, The God of our fathers hath Acts xxii.
chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just'* '5-
One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth; for thou

shalt bear witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and

heard.

It was needful also that an apostle should be endowed with
miraculous gifts and graces, enabling him both to assure his
authority and to execute his office; wherefore St. Paul calleth
these the marks of an apostle, the which were wrought by him 2 Cor. xii.
among the Corinthians in all patience, (or perseveringly,) imp. ‘ie
signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds. 18.

It was also, in St. Chrysostom’s opinion, properto an apo-
stle, that he should be able, according to his discretion, in a
certain and conspicuous manner to impart spiritual gifts ; as
St. Peter and St. John did at Samaria; which to do, accord-
ing to that father, was the peculiar gift and privilege of the
apostles®.

It was also a privilege of an apostle, by virtue of his com-
mission from Christ, to ¢nstruct all nations in the doctrine and
law of Christ ; he had right and warrant to exercise his func-
tion every where; *His charge was universal and indefinite ;
the whole world was his province; he was not affixed to any
one place, nor could be excluded from any; he was (as St.

Cyril calleth him) Yan ecumenical judge, and an instructor of
all the subcelestial world.

Apostles also did govern in an absolute manner, according
to discretion, as being guided by infallible assistance, to the
which they might upon occasion appeal, and affirm, /¢ hath Acts xv. 28.
seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us. Whence their writings
have passed for inspired, and therefore canonical, or certain
rules of faith and practice.

U Todro yap 7d Sapov udvwy Tay 86- succeed, that they gave the Holy Ghost
Sexa—rovro yap iv Tav axoordAwy éEal- by the laying on of hands.

perov. Chrys. in Act. viii. 18. De solis X *Eweid)) EuedAdov Tijs olxoumevns Thy
Seentella legitur, quorum vicem tenent émirpomhy éridéfac@a. Chrys. in Joh.
episcopi, quod per manus impositionem xxi.
Spiritum 8. dabant. P.Lugenius IV. in Y Kpital olxovperixol, nal rijs dg’
Instit. Arm. It is recorded of the apo- #Alg Kxa@yynral. Cyril. yAa@. in Gen.
stles alone, in whose room the bishops vii.

114 A Treatise of the

It did belong to them to found churches, to constitute pas-
tors, to settle orders, to correct offences, to perform all such
acts of sovereign spiritual power, in virtue of the same Divine
assistance, according to the authority which the Lord had given
them for edification ; as we see practised by St. Paul.

In fine, the 7apostleship was, as St. Chrysostom telleth us,
a business fraught with ten thousand good things; both
greater than all privileges of grace, and comprehensive of
them.

Now such an office, consisting of so many extraordinary
privileges and miraculous powers, which were requisite for the
foundation of the church, and the diffusion of Christianity,
against the manifold difficulties and disadvantages which it
then needs must encounter, was not designed to continue by
derivation ; for it containeth in it divers things, which ap-
parently were not communicated, and which no man without
gross imposture and hypocrisy could challenge to himself.

Neither did the apostles pretend to communicate it; they
did indeed appoint standing pastors and teachers in each
church ; they did assume fellow-labourers or assistants in the
work of preaching and governance: but they did not constitute
apostles, equal to themselves in authority, privileges, or gifts ;
for,? Who knoweth not, saith St.Austin, that principate of apo-
stleship to be preferred before any episcopacy ? and, » The bi-
shops, saith Bellarmine, have no part of the true apostolical
authority <?

Wherefore St. Peter, who had no other office mentioned in
scripture, or known to antiquity, beside that of an apostle,
could not have properly and adequately any successor to his
office; but it naturally did expire with his person, as did that
of the other apostles.

5. Accordingly, whereas the other apostles, as such, had no
successors, the apostolical office not being propagated, the pri-
macy of St. Peter (whatever it were, whether of order or juris-
diction, in regard to his brethren) did cease with him; for

Z Thy drootoAhy, mpayna wuplwy aya- b Episcopi nullam habent partem |
Gav yéuov, Tav xapicpdTey ardytwv Kal vere apostolice auctoritatis. Bell.iv.25.
pei(ov, kat meprextixdy. Chrys. in Rom. i. ¢ The apostles themselves do make
Or. 1. tom. viii. p. 114. the apostolate a distinct office from pas-

@ Quis nescit illum apostolatus prin- tors and teachers, which were the stand-

cipatum cuilibet episcopatui preferen- ing offices in the church. Eph. iv. 11.
dum? Aug.de Bapt. cont. Don. ii. 1. 1 Cor. xii. 28.

Popes Supremacy. 115

when there were no apostles extant, there could be no head or
prince of the apostles in any sense.

6. If some privileges of St. Peter were derived to popes,
why were not all? why was not pope AlexanderVI. as holy as
St. Peter? why was not pope Honorius as sound in his private
judgment? why is not every pope inspired? why is not every
papal epistle to be reputed canonical? why are not all popes
endowed with power of doing miracles? why doth not the pope
by a sermon convert thousands? (why indeed do popes never
preach?) why doth not he cure men by his shadow? (he is,
say they, himself his shadow:) what ground is there of dis-
tinguishing the privileges, so that he shall have some, not
others? where is the ground to be found ?

7. If it be objected, that the fathers commonly do call
bishops successors of the apostles; to assoil that objection we
may consider, that whereas the apostolical office virtually did
contain the functions of teaching and ruling God’s people ; the
which, for preservation of Christian doctrine and edification of
the church, were requisite to be continued perpetually in or-
dinary standing offices, these indeed were derived from the
apostles, but not properly in way of succession, as by univocal
propagation, but by ordination, imparting all the power need-
ful for such offices; which therefore were exercised by persons
during the apostles’ lives concurrently, or in subordination to
them; even as a dictator at Rome might create inferior ma-
gistrates, who derived from him, but not as his successors; for,
as Bellarmine himself telleth us, ‘there can be no proper succes-
sion, but in respect of one preceding; but apostles and bishops
were together in the church.

The fathers therefore so in a large sense call all bishops
successors of the apostles ; not meaning that any one of them
did succeed into the whole apostolical office, but that each did
receive his power from some one (immediately or mediately)
whom some apostle did constitute bishop, vesting him with
authority to feed the particular flock committed to him in way
of ordinary charge; according to the sayings of that aposto-
lical person, Clemens Romanus; ¢TZhe apostles preaching in

d Non succeditur proprie nisi preece- € Kara xwpas cal wéAcis xnpiocovres
denti, at simul fuerunt in ecclesia apo- xaloravov tas dmwapxas abrayv, Soxt-
stoli et episcopi . Bell. de Pont. R. ydoavtes 7G tveduari, els émokdmous
iv. 25. Kal diaxédvous Tay medAdvT@y morTev-

116 A Treatise of the

regions and cities, did constitute their first converts, having ap-
proved them by the Spirit, for bishops and deacons of those who
should afterward believe ; and having constituted the foresaid,
(bishops and deacons,) they withal gave them further charge,
that if they should die, other approved men successively should
receive their office: thus did the bishops supply the room of the
apostles, ‘each in guiding his particular charge, all of them
together, by mutual aid, conspiring to govern the whole body
of the church.

8. In which regard it may be said, that not one single bishop,
but all bishops together through the whole church, do sueceed
St. Peter, or any other apostle; for that all of them, in union
together, have an universal sovereign authority, commensurate
to an apostle.

9. This is the notion which St. Cyprian doth so much insist
upon, affirming that the bishops do succeed St. Peter, and the
other apostles, ey vicarious ordination; that fthe bishops are
apostles; that there is but sone chair by the Lord’s word
built upon one Peter; “one undivided bishopric, diffused in the
peaceful numerosity of many bishops, whereof each bishop doth
hold his share; ‘one flock, whom the apostles by unanimous
agreement did feed, and which afterward the bishops do feed ;
having a portion thereof allotted to each, which he should govern.

So the synod of Carthage, with St. Cyprian‘.

So also St. Chrysostom saith, that 'the sheep of Christ were

ew. Clem. ad Corinth. i. p.54. Karé-

bus unanimi consensione pascatur. De
oTngay Tovs mpoeipnuevous, kal peTakd

erivophy émideddxact, brws eay Koiunda-
ot, diadéEwvran erepor Sedonipacwevae by-

pes Thy Aciroupylav abray. Ibid. p. 57.

d Singulis pastoribus portio gregis
adscripta est, quam regat unusquisque
et gubernet . Cypr. Ep. 55.

e Prepositos, qui apostolis vicaria or-
dinatione succedunt- Ep. 69, 42,75+

f Apostolos, id est, episcopos et pree-
positos Dominus elegit. Ep. 65.

&¢ Cathedra una super Petrum Do-
mini voce fundata . Ep. 40. et Ep.
73. et de Unit. Ecel.

h Episcopatus,unus,episcoporum mul-
torum concordi numerositate diffusus.
Ep. 52. Episcopatus unus, cujus a sin-
gulis in solidum pars tenetur. De Unit.
Ecel.

i Et pastores sunt omnes, sed grex
unus ostenditur, qui ab apostolis omni-

Unit. Eccl. Nam etsi pastores multi su-
mus, unum tamen gregem pascimus, et
oves universas, &c, Hp. 67. For though
we are many pastors, yet we feed one
flock, and all the sheep, &c.

k Manifesta est sententia Domini
nostri Jesu Christi apostolos suos mit-
tentis, et ipsis solis potestatem a patre
sibi datam permittentis quibus nos suc-
cessimus, eadem potestate ecclesiam Do-
mini gubernantes. The mind and mean-
ing of our Lord Jesus Christ is manifest
in sending his apostles, and allowing the
power given him of the Father to them
alone, whose successors we are, govern-
ing the church of God by the same
power.

UTA mpdéBara & 7@ Térpm kai
Tois wet exeivoy évexelpioe. Chrys. de
Sacerd. 1.

Pope’s Supremacy. 117

committed by him to Peter, and to those after him, that is, in
his meaning, to all bishops.

10. Such, and no other power, St. Peter might devolve on
any bishop ordained by him in any church which he did con-
stitute or inspect; as in that of Antioch, of Alexandria, of
Babylon, of Rome.

The like did the other apostles communicate, who had the Hier. ad
same power with St. Peter in founding and settling churches ; meen
whose successors of this kind were equal to those of the same
kind, whom St. Peter did constitute ; enjoying in their several
precincts an equal part of the apostolical power, as St. Cyprian
often doth assert.

11. It is in consequence observable, that in those churches,
whereof the apostles themselves were never accounted bishops,
yet the bishops are called successors of the apostles; which
cannot otherwise be understood than according to the sense
which we have proposed ; that is, because they succeeded those
who were constituted by the apostles ; according to those say-
ings of Irenzeus and Tertullian, ™ We can number those who
were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors ; and,
"AU the churches do shew those, whom, being by the apostles
constituted in the episcopal office, they have as continuers of the

apostolical seed.
So, although St. Peter was never reckoned bishop of Alexan-

dria, yet because it is reported that he placed St. Mark there,
the bishop of Alexandria is said to succeed the apostles?®.

And because St.John did abide at Ephesus, inspecting
that church, and appointing bishops there, the bishops of that
see did refer their origin to himP.

So many bishops did claim from St. Paul.

So St. Cyprian and Firmilian do assert themselves 4 swe-

m Habemus annumerare eos, qui ab
apostolis instituti sunt episcopi, et suc-
cessores eorum usque ad nos . Tren.
iii. 3.
n Proinde utique et ceterz exhibent,
quos ab apostolis in episcopatum consti-
tutos apostolici seminis traduces habent.
Tert. de Prascr. 32.

© Térapros &md tay arogré\wy Thy
Tay avTdds Aerroupylay KAnpovra Tpi-
wos. Kus. Hist. iv. t. Primus is the
fourth from the apostles who was the

bishop of that place, or obtained the
ministry there.

P“Orov pev emoaxdérovs KkaTarriowr,
Swov 5¢ bAas exxAnolas apudcwy, &e.
Clem. Alex. apud Euseb. iii. 23. Ordo
episcoporum ad originem recensus in
Joannem stabit autorem. J'ert. in Mare.
iv. 5. Tert. de Preescr. xxxii.

q Unitatem a Domino et per aposto-
los nobis successoribus traditam. Cypr.
Ep. 42. Adversarii nostri qui apostolis
successimus. F'irmil. in Cypr. Ep. 7§.

118 A Treatise of the

cessors of the apostles, who yet perhaps never were at Carthage
or Ceesarea.

So the church of Constantinople is often, in the Acts of
the Sixth General Council, called this great apostolic church,
being such churches as those of whom Tertullian saith, that
talthough they do not produce any of the apostles or apostolical
men for their author, yet conspiring in the same faith, are no less,
for the consanguinity of doctrine, reputed apostolical.

Hier. ad Yea, hence St. Jerome doth assert a parity of merit and
cai dignity sacerdotal to all bishops ; because, saith he, all of them
are successors to the apostles ; having all a like power by their
ordination conferred on them.
Bell. iv.25, 12. Whereas our adversaries do pretend, that indeed the
y other apostles had an extraordinary charge as legates of Christ,
which had no succession, but was extinct in their persons; but
that St. Peter had a peculiar charge, as ordinary pastor of the
whole church, which surviveth :

To this it is enough to rejoin, that it is a mere figment, de-
vised for a shift, and affirmed precariously: having no ground
either in holy scripture or in ancient tradition; there being
no such distinction in the sacred or ecclesiastical writings ; no
mention oceurring there of any office which he did assume, or
which was attributed to him, distinct from that extraordinary
one of an apostle; and all the pastoral charge imaginable
being ascribed by the ancients to all the apostles in regard to
the whole church, as hath been sufficiently declared.

13. In fine, if any such conveyance of power (of power so
great, so momentous, so mightily concerning the perpetual
state of the church, and of each person therein) had been
made, it had been (for general direction and satisfaction, for
voiding all doubt and debate about it, for stifling these pre-
tended heresies and schisms) very requisite that it should
have been expressed in some authentic record, that a par-
ticular law should have been extant concerning it, that all
posterity should be warned to yield the submission grounded
thereon.

Indeed a matter of so great consequence to the being and

r —__ab illis ecclesiis, que licet nul- tur, tamen in eadem fide conspirantes,
jum ex apostolis, vel apostolicis aucto- non minus apostolice deputantur, pro
rem suum proferant, ut multo posteri- consanguinitate doctrine. Tert. de
ores, que denique quotidie instituun- Preser. 32.

Pope’s Supremacy. 119

welfare of the church could scarce have scaped from being
clearly mentioned somewhere or other in scripture, wherein
so much is spoken touching ecclesiastical discipline ; it could
scarce have avoided the pen of the first fathers, (Clemens,
Ignatius, the Apostolical Canons and Constitutions, Tertul-
lian, &c.) who also so much treat concerning the function and
authority of Christian governors.

Nothing can be more strange, than that in the Statute-book
of the New Jerusalem, and in all the original monuments
concerning it, there should be such a dead silence concerning
the succession of its chief magistrate.

Wherefore, no such thing appearing, we may reasonably
conclude no such thing to have been, and that our adversa-
ries’ assertion of it is wholly arbitrary, imaginary, and ground-
less.

14. I might add, as a very convincing argument, that if
such a succession had been designed, and known in old times,
it is morally impossible that none of the fathers, (Origen,
Chrysostom, Augustine, Cyril, Jerome, Theodoret, &c.) in
their exposition of the places alleged by the Romanists for
the primacy of St. Peter, should declare that primacy to have
been derived and settled on St. Peter’s successor: a point of
that moment, if they had been aware of it, they could not
but have touched, as a most useful application, and direction
for duty.

SUPPOSITION III.
They affirm, That St. Peter was bishop of Rome.

Concernive which assertion we say, that it may with great
reason be denied, and that it cannot anywise be assured; as
will appear by the following considerations.

1. St. Peter’s being bishop of Rome would confound the
offices which God made distinet; for God did appoint first 1 Cor. xii.
apostles, then prophets, then pastors and teachers ; wherefore Eph. ial
St. Peter, after he was an apostle, could not well become a
bishop ; it would be such an irregularity, as if a bishop should
be made a deacon.

2. The offices of an apostle and of a bishop are not in their
nature well consistent ; for the apostleship is an extraordinary

120 A Treatise of the

office, charged with instruction and government of the whole
world, and calling for an answerable care; ("the apostles being
rulers, as St. Chrysostom saith, ordained by God; rulers not
taking several nations and cities, but all of them im common
wmtrusted with the whole world ;) but episcopacy is an ordi-
nary standing charge, affixed to one place, and requiring a
special attendance there; bishops being pastors, who, as St.
Chrysostom saith, ‘do sit and are employed in one place. Now
he that hath such a general care can hardly discharge such a
particular office; and he that is fixed to so particular attend-
ance can hardly look well after so general a charge: either of
those offices alone would suffice to take up a whole man, as
those tell us who have considered the burden incumbent on
the meanest of them; the which we may see described in
St. Chrysostom’s discourses concerning the priesthood.

Baronius saith of St. Peter, that ti was his office not to
stay in one place, but, as much as it was possible for one man,
to travel over the whole world, and to bring those who did not
yet believe to the faith, but thoroughly to establish believers:
if so, how could he be bishop of Rome, which was an office
inconsistent with such vagrancey ?

3. It would not have beseemed St. Peter, the prime apo-
stle, to assume the charge of a particular bishop; it had been
a degradation of himself, and a disparagement to the apostoli-
cal majesty, for him to take upon him the bishoprie of Rome ;
as if the king should become mayor of London; as if the
bishop of London should be vicar of Pancras.

4. Wherefore it is not likely that St. Peter, being sensible
of that superior charge belonging to him, which did exact a
more extensive care, would vouchsafe to undertake an inferior
charge.

We cannot conceive that St. Peter did affect the name of
a bishop, as now men do, allured by the baits of wealth and
power, which then were none: if he did affect the title, why

did he not in either of his Epistles (one of which, as they _

t “Apxovrés eiaw bd Tot Ocov yeipo- t Non erat ejus officii in uno loco
tovnbévres of GrdaroAo Upxovtes ovk consistere, sed quantum homini licuisset
€0vn nad wédcis diapdpous AauBdvovTes, universum peragrare orbem, et nondum
GAAG wdyres Kowh Thy oikovpevny éum- credentes ad fidem perducere, credentes
orevdévres. Chrys. tom. viii. p. 115. vero in fide penitus stabilire. Baron.

8 Of KaOhpevor Kal wep) Eva rémov Ann. lvili. §. 51.
noxornpuéva, Chrys. in Eph. iv. 11.

Pope’s Supremacy. 121

would persuade us, was written from Rome) inscribe himself
bishop of Rome ?

Especially considering that, being an apostle, he did not need
any particular authority, that involving all power, and enabling
him in any particular place to execute all kinds of ecclesiastical
administrations: there was no reason that an apostle (or uni-
versal bishop) should become a particular bishop.

5. Also St. Peter’s general charge of converting and in-
specting the Jews, dispersed over the world, (Ais apostleship, ’Aroarony
as St. Paul calleth it, of the circwmcision,) which required (57 ;."¢”
much travel, and his presence in divers places, doth not well
agree to his assuming the episcopal office at Rome.

Especially at that time when they first make him to
assume it; which was in the time of Claudius, who, as
St. Luke and other histories do report, did banish all the Actsxviii.z.
Jews from Rome, as Tiberius also had done before him: he it R:
was too skilful a fisherman to cast his net there, where there in Tib. 36.
were no fish.

6. If we consider St. Peter’s life, we may well deem him
uneapable of this office, which he could not conveniently
discharge ; for it, as history doth represent it, and may be
collected from divers circumstances of it, was very unsettled ;
he went much about the world, and therefore could seldom
reside at Rome.

Many have argued him to have never been at Rome;
which opinion I shall not avow, as bearing a more civil
respect to ancient testimonies and traditions; although many
false and fabulous relations of that kind having crept into Euseb.iii.3.
history and common vogue, many doubtful reports having
passed concerning him, many notorious forgeries having been
invented about his travels and acts, (all that is reported of
him out of scripture having a smack of the legend,) would
tempt a man to suspect any thing touching him which is
grounded only upon human tradition; so that the forger of
his Epistle to St. James might well induce him saying, “lf
while I do yet survive, men dare to feign such things of me, how
much more will they dare to do so after my decease !

But at least the discourses of those men have evinced, that

U Ei 3¢ euod &71 weplovros Toiadta TOA- ier’ due woreiv of pet’ dut TOAMHGOVE: ;
ba@ow KatapedderOa, réow ye uaddrAoy Petr. ad Jacob.

1 Pet. i. 1.

Col. iv. 11.

2 Tim. iv.

16.

2 Tim. iv.
6, 21.

2 Pet. iii. 2.

122 A Treatise of the

it is hard to assign the time when he was at Rome; and that
he could never long abide there ; for,

The time which old tradition assigneth of his going to Rome
is rejected by divers learned men, even of the Roman party.

He was often in other places; sometimes at Jerusalem,
sometimes at Antioch, sometimes at Babylon, sometimes at
Corinth, sometimes probably at each of those places unto
which he directeth his catholic Epistles; among which Epi-

‘ phanius saith, that x Peter did often visit Pontus and Bi-
- thynia.

And that he seldom was at Rome may well be collected

‘from St. Paul’s writings; for he writing at different times

one Epistle to Rome, and divers Epistles from Rome, (that
to the Galatians, that to the Ephesians, that to the Philip-
pians, that to the Colossians, and the Second to Timothy,)
doth never mention him, sending any salutation to him, or
from him.

Particularly St. Peter was not there when St. Paul mention-
ing Tychicus, Onesimus, Aristarchus, Marcus, and Justus,
addeth, These alone my fellow-workers unto the kingdom of God,
who have been a comfort unto me.

He was not there when St.Paul said, At my fir st defence no
man stood with me, but all men forsook me.

He was not there immediately before St. Paul’s death,
(when the time of his departure was at hand,) when he telleth
Timothy, that all the brethren did salute him, and naming
divers of them, he omitteth Peter.

Which things being considered, it is not probable that
St. Peter would assume the episcopal chair of Rome, he being
little capable to reside there, and for that other needful affairs
would have forced him to leave so great a church destitute of
their pastor.

7. It was needless that he should be bishop, for that by
virtue of his apostleship (involving all the power of inferior
degrees) he might, whenever he should be at Rome, exercise
episcopal functions and authority. What need a sovereign
prince to be made a justice of peace ‘

8. Had he done so, he must have given a bad example of
non-residence ; a practice that would have been very ill relished

x Tlérpos wodAdais Tévrov Kal Biduviay éweckéyato. Epiph. Her. 27.

Pope’s Supremacy. 123

in the primitive church, as we may see by several canons in- Cone. Nic.
terdicting offences of kin to it, (it being, I think, then not so ¢* yom
known as nominally to be censured,) and culpable upon the can. 3.

: - _ Cone. Sard.
same ground; and by the sayings of fathers condemning qa). 5,, 12.
practices approaching to it Y. — Trul.

Even later synods, in more corrupt times, and in the declen- ae
sion of good order, yet did prohibit this practice ”.

Epiphanius therefore did well infer, that it was needful the
apostles should constitute bishops resident at Rome ; «Jt was,
saith he, possible, that, the apostles Peter and Paul yet surviving,
other bishops should be constituted ; because the apostles often did
take journeys into other countries for preaching Christ: but the
city of Rome could not be without a bishop.

9. If St. Peter were bishop of Rome, he thereby did offend
against divers other good ecclesiastical rules, which either
were in practice from the beginning, or at least the reason of
them was always good, upon which the church did afterward
enact them; so that either he did ill in thwarting them, or
the church had done it in establishing them, so as to condemn
his practice.

10. It was against rule, that any bishop should desert one Apost. Can.
church, and transfer himself to another; and indeed against **
reason, such a relation and endearment being contracted be-
tween a bishop and his church, which cannot well be dissolved.

Y Ofdas avaryvois tas ypadpas, HAlkov
dot) 3h fyxAnua Katadiwmmrdvew ericKotov
Thy éxxaAnolay, ka) dGedrcivy TaY TOU Ocod
moiviwy. Athan. Apol.1. Having read
the scriptures, you know how great an
offence it is for a bishop to forsake his
church, and to neglect the flocks of
God. Oportet enim episcopos curis sz-
cularibus expeditos curam suorum agere
populorum, nec ecclesiis suis abesse di-
utius. P. Paschal. IJ. Ep. 22. For bi-
shops ought to be disentangled from
secular cares, and to take charge of their
people, and not to be long absent from
their churches.

% Precipimus ne conductitiis minis-
tris ecclesie committantur, et unaque-
que ecclesia, cui facultas suppetit, pro-
prium habeat sacerdotem. Conc. Lat. 2.
(sub Innoe. II.) can. 10. We enjoin
that churches be not committed to hired
ministers, but that every church, that is
of ability, have its proper priest. Cum
igitur ecclesia vel ecclesiasticum minis-

terium committi debuerit, talis ad hoc
persona queeratur, que residere in loco,
et curam ejus per seipsum valet exer-
cere ; quod si aliter fuerit actum, et qui
receperit, quod contra sanctos canones
accepit, amittat. Conc. Lat. 3. (sub Ale-
xandro III.) cap.13. Therefore when
a church, or the ecclesiastical ministry,
be to be committed to any man, let such
a person be found out for this purpose,
who can reside upon the place, and dis-
charge the cure by himself: but if it
prove otherwise, then let him who has
received lose that which he has taken
contrary to the holy canons.

&@ TIAhv GAAd kal oftws Hddvaro Eri
mepidvtwy Tay drorréAwy, pnul be Ta
mept Tlérpov xa) TavAov, érioxdmous GA-
Aous xaOleracGai, 5a Td Tovs aroaTd-
Aous wodAdnis éml Tas BAAas warpldas
Thy wopelay aréAAevOa, Bia TH KApYyya
Tov Xpiorov" wn divacOa 5& Thy ray
‘Pwualwy wédaw bvev émrioxdrov elvas.
Epiph. Her. 27.

*Axupdoas
authy. A-
thanas.
Apol. ii.
p- 726.

Syn. Nic.
can. 15.
Syn. Chale.
can. 5.
Syn. Ant.
can. 21.

124 A Treatise of the

But St. Peter is by ecclesiastical historians reported (and
by Romanists admitted) to have been bishop of Antioch for
seven years together>.

He therefore did ill to relinquish that church, ¢ that most
ancient and truly apostolic church of Antioch, (as the Con-
stantinopolitan fathers called it,) and to place his see at
Rome.

This practice was esteemed bad, and of very mischievous
consequence ; earnestly reproved, as heinously criminal, by
great fathers; severely condemned by divers synods.

Particularly a transmigration from a lesser and poorer to
a greater and more wealthy bishopric, (which is the present
case,) was checked by them, as rankly savouring of selfish
ambition or avarice.

The synod of Alexandria, (in Athanasius,) in its Epistle
to all catholic bishops, doth say, that Eusebius, by passing
from Berytus to Nicomedia, had annulled his episcopacy, mak-
ing it an adultery, worse than that which is committed by
marriage upon divorce; 4 Eusebius, say they, did not consider
the apostle’s admonition, Art thou bound to a wife? do not seek
to be loosed: for if it be said of a woman, how much more of
a church, of the same bishopric! to which one being tied, ought
not to seek another, that he may not be found also an adulterer,
according to the holy scripture. Surely when they said this,
they did forget what St. Peter was said to have done in that
kind; as did also the Sardican fathers in their synodical
letter, extant in the same Apology of Athanasius, condemning
translations from lesser cities unto greater dioceses ©.

The same practice is forbidden by the synods of Nice I, of
Chalcedon, of Antioch, of Sardica, of Arles I, &e.

In the synod under Mennas, it was laid to the charge of An-
thimus, that having been bishop of Trabisond, he had f adul-

b Tod peydAou Térpov Opdvov 4 Av- 5 auviebels BAAnY od« dpelAct (nreiv,

Tixéwy peyoddmodus exer. Theodor.
Ep. 86. The great city of the Anti-
ochians hath the throne of the great
St. Peter.

d Od ovvopav To mapdyyeApua, 5éde-
cat yuvanl, wh Chrer Adow ef BE emi
yuvaxds To pytov, méow madrdrov éml
exkAnalas ex THs avTis emaKxowhs, h

iva ph Kad poxds mapa tats Oclaus ebpl-
oxerot ypapais. Syn. Alex. apud Athan.
Po 429s

e Tas perabéces Grd uikpov wérAcwv
eis welCovas mapoixtas. Ibid. p. 765.
Hdvrvf0n pmorxikGs Tov THE
ris médcws apxiepatixdy bpaprdca Opd-
vov mapa mévtas Tovs éxKAnoiaaTiKods
Geocuovs kal xavdvas. Conc. sub Menn.

Pp» 9-

Pope’s Supremacy. 125

terously snatched the see of Constantinople, against all ecclesiastical Syn. Sard.

laws and canons. = rp ne
Yea, great popes of Rome, (little considering how peccant ». 22.

. : ; Grat. Caus.
therein their predecessor pope Peter was,) pope Julius and viii. rp

pope Damasus, did greatly tax this practice; whereof the DP 4 |
latter in his synod at Rome did excommunicate all those who apud

should commit it®. regs.
‘ pol. ii.
In like manner pope Leo I. Pp. 744:

These laws were so indispensable, that in respect to them
Constantine M. who much loved and honoured Eusebius, (ac-
knowledging him in the common judgment of the world de-
serving to be bishop of the whole church,) did not like that he
should accept the bishopric of Antioch, to which he was in-
vited ; and commended his waving it, as an act not only con- Euseb. de
sonant to the ecclesiastical canons, but acceptable to God, and bgt 1
agreeable to apostolical tradition: so little aware was the good
emperor of St. Peter being translated from Antioch to Rome.

In regard to the same law, Gregory Nazianzen (a person of
so great worth, and who had deserved so highly of the church
at Constantinople) could not be permitted to retain his bi-
shoprie of that church, to which he had been called from that
small one of Sasima. +The synod, saith Sozomen, observing the
ancient laws and the ecclesiastical rule, did receive his bishopric
From him, being willingly offered, nowise regarding the great merits
of the person; the which synod surely would have excluded
St. Peter from the bishopric of Rome: and it is observable
that pope Damasus did approve and exhort those fathers to
that proceeding*.

& Tovs 5 Grd exxAnoy eis éEvépas
exxAnoias peteaA@dvtas &ypi Tooco’Tov
amd Tis juerépas Kowwvias &dAotplous
exouev, xpi ob mpds abras emavéAOwor
Tas médcis, ev als mp@rov exeipoTrovnin-
cav. Theod. v.11. Those that pass from
their own churches to other churches,
we esteem so long excommunicate, (or
strangers from our communion,) till
such time as they return to the same
cities where they were first ordained.

h Si quis episcopus, mediocritate ci-
vitatis suze despecta, administrationem
loci celebrioris ambierit, et ad majorem
se plebem quacunque occasione transtu-
lerit, non solum a cathedra quidem pel-
latur aliena, sed carebit et propria, &c.
P. Leol, Ep. \xxxiv. c.4. If any bi-

shop, despising the meanness of his city,
seeks for the administration of a more
eminent place, and upon any occasion
whatsoever transfers himself to a greater
people, he shall not only be driven out
of another’s see, but also lose his own,
&e.

i "AAN’ buws 7 otvodos Kal tods ma-
tplous vémous, kal Thy exKkAno.actiKhy
rdiw puddrrovea, 6 dé5wxe rap’ éxdvros
amelAnpe, undty aideaOcioa Tay TOU dy-
dpds wAcoventHnudtwy. Sozom. vii. 7.

k Illud preterea commoneo dilec-
tionem vestram, ne patiamini aliquem
contra statuta majorum nostrorum de
civitate alia ad aliam transduci, et dese-
rere plebem sibi commissam, &e. P. Da-
masi Epist. apud Holsten, p. 41. et

P. Innoc.
ap. Sozom.
Vili. 26.
Opt. I. Ca-
thedra una.

In reme-
dium schis-
matis. Hier.

126 A Treatise of the

We may indeed observe, that pope Pelagius II. did excuse
the translation of bishops by the example of St. Peter; |For
who ever dareth to say, argueth he, that St. Peter the prince of
the apostles did not act well, when he changed his see from Antioch
to Rome ?

But I think it more advisable to excuse St. Peter from being
author of a practice judged so irregular, by denying the matter
of fact laid to his charge.

11. It was anciently deemed a very irregular thing, ™con-
trary, saith St. Cyprian, to the ecclesiastical disposition, contrary
to the evangelical law, contrary to the unity of catholic institu-
tion ; “a symbol, saith another ancient writer, of dissension,
and disagreeable to ecclesiastical law; which therefore was

43- condemned by the synod of Nice, by pope Cornelius, by pope

Innocent I, and others, that two bishops should preside to-
gether in one city.

This was condemned with good reason; for this on the
church’s part would be a kind of spiritual polygamy ; this
would render a church a monster with two heads; this would
destroy the end of episcopacy, which is unity and prevention
of schisms.

But if St. Peter was bishop of Rome, this irregularity was
committed: for the same authority upon which St. Peter's
episcopacy of Rome is built, doth also reckon St. Paul bishop
of the same; the same writers do make both founders and
planters of the Roman church, and the same call both bishops
of it : wherefore, if episcopacy be taken in a strict and proper
sense, agreeable to this controversy, that rule must needs be
infringed thereby.

Irenzeus saith, °that the Roman church was founded and
constituted by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul ;
Dionysius of Corinth calleth it Pthe plantation of Peter and

contra evangelicam legem, contra insti-
tutionis catholice unitatem . Cypr.

R. Marc. v. 21. Moreover this I ad-
vise you, that out of your charity you

would not suffer any one, against the
decrees of our ancestors, to be removed
from one city to another, and to forsake
the people committed to his charge,
&e.

1 Quis enim unquam audet dicere
S. Petrum apostolorum principem non
bene egisse, quando mutavit sedem de
Antiochia in Romam? Pelag. II. Ep.1.

m Contra ecclesiasticam dispositionem,

Ep. 44. (ut et Ep. 46, 52, 55, 58.)

n‘O dbixovolas giuBoddv eaore Kal éx-
KAnoiaoTiKkod Oecpov GAADTpiov. Soz. iv.
15.

6 a gloriosissimis duobus aposto-
lis Petro et Paulo Rome fundata et con-
stituta ecclesia. Jvren. iii. 3. ill. 1.

P Thy amd Tlérpou kal MatAov putelay
. Dionys. Corinth. apud Euseb. ii.

25.

Pope's Supremacy. 127

Paul; Epiphanius saith, that a Peter and Paul were first at
Rome both apostles and bishops ; so Eusebius implieth, saying,
that pope Alexander ‘derived a succession in the fifth place from
Peter and Paul.

Wherefore both of them were Roman bishops, or neither of
them: in reason and rule neither of them may be called so in
a strict and proper sense; but in a larger and improper sense
both might be so styled.

Indeed that St. Paul was in some aeception bishop of Rome
(that is, had a supreme superintendence or inspection of it) is
reasonable to affirm; because he did for a good time reside
there, and during that residence could not but have the chief
place, could be subject to no other; He, saith St. Luke, did Acts xxviii.
abide two whole years in his own hired house, and received all3°
that entered in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and
teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with
all confidence, no man forbidding him.

It may be inquired, if St. Peter was bishop of Rome, how
he did become such? did our Lord appoint him such? did the
apostles all or any constitute him? did the people elect him ?
did he put himself into it? Of none of these things there is
any appearance, nor any probability : non constat.

SUPPOSITION IV.
They affirm, That St. Peter did continue bishop of Rome after
his translation, and was so at his decease.

AGAINST which assertions we may consider :

1. Ecclesiastical writers do affirm, that St. Peter (either
alone, or together with St.Paul) did constitute other bishops;
wherefore St. Peter was never bishop, or did not continue
bishop there.

Irenzeus saith, that 8the apostles founding and rearing that
church, delivered the episcopal office into the hands of Linus ; if
so, how did they retain it in their own hands or persons? could
they give, and have ?

Tertullian saith, ‘that S¢. Peter did ordain Clement.

4 Ev ‘Péun yeydvac: mparo Mérpos 8 @Ocueridcavtes ody Kal oixodouh-
kal TladAos amrdoroAa aitol Kal éxlaxo- caves of paxdpion amdaroAa Thy eeKAn-
wo. Epiph. Her. 27. ciavy, Aivp ris émoKoris Aerroupylay

T Téumrny amd TMérpov wal MavAov eévexelpicay. Lren. apud Euseb. v. 6.
kardywy diadoxhv. Euseb. iv. 1. t Romanorum ecclesie Clementem a

128 A Treatise of the

In the Apostolical Constitutions, (a very ancient book, and
setting forth the most ancient traditions of the church,) the
apostles ordering prayers to be made for all bishops, and
naming the principal, do reckon, not St. Peter, but Clement ;
Let us pray for our bishop James, for our bishop Clemens, for our
bishop Euodius, &e.

These reports are consistent, and reconciled by that which
the Apostolical Constitutions affirm; that 'Linus was first or-
dained bishop of the Roman church by Paul ; but Clemens after
the death of Linus by Peter in the second place.

Others between Linus and Clemens do interpose Cletus, or
Anacletus, (some taking these for one, others for two persons, )
which doth not alter the case*.

Now hence we may infer, both that St. Peter never was
bishop; and upon supposition that he was, that he did not
continue so. For,

2. If he had ever been bishop, he could not well lay down
his office, or subrogate another, either to preside with him, or
to succeed him; according to the ancient rules of discipline,
and that which passed for right in the primitive church.

This practice pope Innocent I. condemned as irregular, and
never known before his time; Y We, saith he in his Epistle to
the clergy and people of Constantinople, never have known these
things to have been adventured by our fathers, but rather to have
been hindered ; for that none hath power given him to ordain another
in the place of one living: he did not (it seems) consider, that
St. Peter had used such a power.

Accordingly the synod of Antioch (to secure the tradition
and practice of the church, which began by some to be in-
fringed) did make this sanction, that 7it should not be lawful

Petro ordinatum edit. Tert. de Preser.
32.
Ex quibus electum magnum plebique
probatum,
Hac cathedra, Petrus qua sederat ipse,
locatum
Maxima Roma Linum primum consi-
dere jussit. Tert. in Marc. iii. 9.
u Ths 5€ “Pwyalov exxdnoias Alvos
pev 6 KaAavdias mparos imdb TMavaou,
KAfhyns 5¢ peta Tov Alvov Odvarov im’
éuod Tléerpov Sebrepos Kexeiporévnras.
Const. Apost. vii. 46.
x Euseb. iii. 4, 13. Aug. Ep. 165.
Epiph. Her. 27. Opt. 2. Tertull. poem.

in Mare. iii. 9. Phot. Cod. 112. (p. 290.)
N. Eusebius (iii. 2.) saith, that Linus
did sit bishop after the martyrdom of
St. Peter: but this is not so probable,
as that which the author of the Consti-
tutions doth affirm, which reconcileth the
dissonancies of writers.

Y Ovde yap wérore wap. Tov waTépwr
raiTa TeToAuicOa eyveKamev’ GAAG
pGAAov Kekwdrvoba, TE wndevi eis Témov
(Gyros xeipotovety GAAov Seddbc0a etov-
giav. P. Inn. I. apud Soz. viii. 26.

Z°Emokdry wh eketvat av@ éavTovd Ka-
Oloracba Erepov, Kav wepl TH TEedEvTH
tov Biov rvyxévn. Syn. Ant. Can. 23.

Pope’s Supremacy. 129

Jor any bishop to constitute another in his room to succeed him ;
although it were at the point of death.

3. But supposing St. Peter were bishop once, yet, by con-
stituting Linus or Clemens in his place, he ceased to be so,
and divested himself of that place; for it had been a great
irregularity for him to continue bishop together with an-
other.

That being, in St. Cyprian’s judgment, the ordination of
Linus had been void and null; for, *Sceing, saith that holy
martyr, there cannot after the first be any second, whoever is after
one, who ought to be sole bishop, he is not now second, but none.

Upon this ground, when the emperor Constantius would
have procured Felix to sit bishop of Rome together with pope
Liberius, at his return from banishment, (after his compliance
with the Arians,) the people of Rome would not admit it, ex-
claiming, One God, one Christ, one bishop; and whereas Felix
soon after that died, the historian remarketh it as >a special
providence of God, that Peter's throne might not suffer infamy,
being governed under two prelates; he never considered that
St. Peter and St. Paul, St. Peter and Linus, had thus governed
that same church.

Upon this account St. Austin, being assumed by Valerius
with him to be bishop of Hippo, did afterward discern and
acknowledge his error¢.

In fine, to obviate this practice, so many canons of councils
(both general and particular) were made, which we before did
mention.

4. In sum, when St. Peter did ordain others, (as story doth
accord in affirming,) either he did retain the episcopacy, and
then (beside need, reason, and rule) there were concurrently
divers bishops of Rome at one time ; or he did quite relinquish,
and finally divorce himself from the office, so that he did not
die bishop of Rome, the which overturneth the main ground

@ Cum post primum secundus esse
non possit; quisquis post unum, qui
solus esse debeat, non jam secundus
ille, sed nullus est. Cypr. Ep. 52.

b Theod, Hist. ii. 17. Tatty mn Tod
cov dioixhoavros, Sore tov Mérpov Opd-
vov uh aBoketv bd Bo jyyeudow lbuvdue-
vov.

¢ Adhuc in corpore posito beats me-
mori patre et episcopo meo sene Vale-

rio episcopus ordinatus sum, et sedi cum
illo, quod concilio Niczno prohibitum
fuisse nesciebam, nec ipse sciebat. Aug.
Ep. 110. While my father and bishop
of blessed memory, old Valerius, was
yet living, I was ordained bishop, and
held the see with him: which I knew
not, nor did he know, to be forbidden
by the council of Nice.

Const. A-
post. vii. 46.
Tren. iii. 3.
Tertull.

130 A Treatise of the

of the Romish pretence’. Or will they say that St. Peter,
having laid aside the office for a time, did afterward before
his death resume it? then what became of Linus, of Cletus,
of Clemens? were they dispossessed of their place, or deposed
from their function? would St. Peter succeed them in it? ©This
in Bellarmine’s own judgment had been plainly intolerable.

5. To avoid all which difficulties in the case, and per-
plexities in story, it is reasonable to understand those of the
ancients, who call Peter bishop of Rome, and Rome the place,
the chair, the see of Peter, as meaning that he was bishop or
superintendent of that church, in a large sense; because he
did found the chureh by converting men to the Christian
faith ; because he did erect the chair by ordaining the first
bishops; because he did, in virtue both of his apostolical
office and his special parental relation to that church, main-
tain a particular inspection over it when he was there: which
notion is not new; for of old Ruffinus affirmeth that he had
it, not from his own invention, but from tradition of others ;
‘Some, saith he, inquire how, sceing Linus and Cletus were
bishops in the city of Rome before Clement, Clement himself, writ-
ing to James, could say, that the see was delivered to him by
Peter: whereof this reason has been given us; viz. that Linus
and Cletus were indeed bishops of Rome before Clement, but
Peter being yet living; viz. that they might take the episcopal
charge, but he fulfilled the office of the apostleship.

6. This notion may be confirmed by divers observations.

It is observable, that the most ancient writers, living nearest
the fountains of tradition, do not expressly style St. Peter
bishop of Rome, but*only say, that he did found that church,
instituting and ordaining bishops there ; as the other apostles
did in the churches which they settled ; so that the bishops

a Ipse sublimavit sedem, in qua etiam
quiescere, et presentem vitam finire
dignatus est. Greg. I. Ep. vi. 37. In-
moc. I. Ep. 21. P. Nic. I. Ep. ix.
p- 509. Grat. Caus. viii. q. i. cap. 1.
He advanced that see, wherein he
vouchsafed both to set up his rest, and
also to end this present life. Bell.
ii. 12. §. At vero.

e€ Petrum apostolum successisse in
épiscopatu Antiocheno alicui ex discipu-
lis, quod est plene intolerandum. Bell.
ii. 6.

f Quidam enim requirunt quo modo,
cum Linus et Cletus in urbe Roma
ante Clementem hune fuerint episcopi,
ipse Clemens ad Jacobum scribens, sibi
dicat a Petro docendi cathedram tradi-
tam; cujus rei hance accepimus esse ra-
tionem, quod Linus et Cletus fuerunt
quidem ante Clementem episcopi in
urbe Roma, sed superstite Petro; vide-
licet ut illi episcopatus curam gererent,
ipse vero apostolatus impleret officium.
Ruffin. in Pref. ad Clem, Recogn.

Pope’s Supremacy. 131

there in a large sense did succeed him, as deriving their
power from his ordination, and supplying his room in the in-
struction and governance of that great church. & Yea their
words, if we well mark them, do exclude the apostles from
the episcopacy. Which words the later writers (who did not
foresee the consequence, nor what an exorbitant superstruc-
ture would be raised on that slender bottom, and who were
willing to comply with the Roman bishops, affecting by all
means to reckon St. Peter for their predecessor) did easily
eatch, and not well distinguishing, did call him bishop, and
St. Paul also, so making two heads of one church.

7. It is also observable, that in the recensions of the Roman
bishops, sometimes the apostles are reckoned in, sometimes
excluded.

So Eusebius calleth Clemens the third bishop of Rome, yet Euseb. iii.
before him he reckoneth Linus and Anacletus. dag yl

And of Alexander he saith, that "he deduced his succession
in the fifth place from Peter and Paul, that is, excluding the
apostles.

And Hyginus is thus accounted sometime the eighth, some- Iren. i. 28.
time the ninth bishop of Rome. hae

The same difference in reckoning may be observed into.
other churches ; for instance, although St. Peter is called no
less bishop of Antioch than of Rome by the ancients, yet
Eusebius saith, that 'Huodius was first bishop of Antioch; and
another bids the Antiocheans remember Euodius, who was first
intrusted with the presidency over them by the apostles.

Other instances may be seen in the notes of Cotelerius upon
the Apostolical Constitutions, where he maketh this general
observation.

k It is an usual custom with the apostles, according to their
power, ordinary or extraordinary, episcopal or apostolical, to

& Fundantes igitur et instruentes Chron. p. 7. Hist. iii. 22. Mvnuovedere

beati apostoli ecclesiam, Lino episcopa-
tum administrande ecclesie tradide-
runt. Jren. iii. 3. The blessed apostles
therefore founding and instructing the
church, delivered the episcopal power of
ordering and governing the church to
Linus.
h Tiéurrny ard TMérpov cal TMatdov
Katdywy diadoxhv. Euseb. iv. 1.
*Avtioxéwy exxdAnolas mp@ros éri-
oKxoros Evddios expnudrioe. Euseb.

Edodiov, bs mparov evexeipla0n bird Tav
arootéAwy iuetépay mpootaciay. Pseud.
Ignat. ad Ant. Eusebius counteth An-
nianus the first bishop of Alexandria,
iii. 21.

k Celebris mos est apostolos pro po-
testate eorum ordinaria vel extraordina-
ria, episcopali vel apostolica, indiculis
antistitum preefigere, aut ex iis eximere,
Cotel. Not. p. 299.

K 2

132 A Treatise of the

prefix, &c.: but it was needless to suppose these two powers
when one was sufficient, it virtually containing the other.

This is an argument that the ancients were not assured in
opinion that the apostles were bishops, or that they did not
esteem them bishops in the same notion with others.

Apostolice 8. It is observable, that divers churches did take denomina-

a tion from the apostles, and were called apostolical thrones, or

Prascr. 32. chairs, not because the apostles themselves did sit bishops

ol 8dym,, there, but because they did exercise their apostleship in teach-

aa oe ing; and !in constituting bishops there, who, as Tertullian saith,
"did propagate the apostolical seed.

mSo was Ephesus esteemed, because St. Paul did found it,
and ordained Timothy there; and because St. John did
govern and appoint bishops there.

So was Smyrna accounted, because Polycarpus was settled
there by the apostles, or by St. John.

So Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, °had a controversy about
metropolitical rights with Acacius, bishop of Cesarea, as presid-
ing in an apostolical see.

So Alexandria was deemed, because St. Mark was supposed
by the appointment of St. Peter to sit there.

fertull. de So were Corinth, Thessalonica, Philippi, called by Tertul-
Preescr. 36.

lian, because St. Paul did found them, and furnish them with
pastors; in which respect peculiarly the bishops of those
places were called successors of the apostles.

So Constantinople did assume the title of an apostolical

1 In canonicis autem scripturis eccle-
siarum catholicarum quamplurium auc-
toritatem sequatur, inter quas sane ile
sunt, que apostolicas sedes habere, et
epistolas accipere meruerunt. Aug. de
Doetr. Ch. ii. 8. Let him follow the
authority of those many catholic
churches in the canonical scriptures,
among which surely are those which
had the honour to have apostolical sees,
and to receive epistles from the apostles.
Proinde utique et cxtere exhibent quos
ab apostolis in episcopatum constitutos
apostolici seminis traduces habent. T'er-
tull. de Preser. 32.

m Sed et que est Ephesi ecclesia a
Paulo quidem fundata, Johanne autem
permanente apud eos usque ad Trajani
tempora, &c. Jren. iii. 3. And also the
church of Ephesus, which was founded

by St. Paul, St. John continuing with
them till the time of Trajan, &c. Ordo
episcoporum ad originem recensus in
Johannem stabit auctorem. Tertull. in
Mare. iv. 5. Tis 5¢ "Epéoou Timddeos
pev bmd TlavaAov, "Iwdvyns bt bm euod
"Iwdyvov. Apost. Const. vii. 46.

n Ab apostolis in ea que est Smyrnis
ecclesia constitutus episcopus. Jren.
iii. 3. Smyrneorum ecclesia habens
Polycarpum ab Johanne conlocatum.
Tertull. de Prescr. 32. Euseb. iii. 36.
Tijs kara Sulpvay éexxAnolas mpds TeV
avtomTa@v, kal dmnpeT@v Tod Kuplov rhv
emrkomhy eykexeiptonevos. Euseb. iii.
36.
© Tlep) untporoAitixayv Sixalwv diepé-
pero mpos “Axd«iov Toy Kawrapeias, ws
eh alan Opdvev iyyoduevos. Sozom.

. eo

Pope’s Supremacy. 133

churchP, probably because, according to tradition, St. Andrew
did found that church, although pope Leo I. would not allow
it that appellation.

Upon the same account might Rome at first be called an
apostolical see; although afterward the Roman bishops did
rather pretend to that denomination upon account of St. Peter
being bishop there: and the like may be said of Antioch.

9. It is observable, that the author of the Apostolical Con- Const. A-
stitutions, reciting the first bishops constituted in several Pt "4°
churches, doth not reckon any of the apostles; particularly
not Peter, or Paul, or John.

10. Again, any apostle wherever he did reside, by virtue of
his apostolical office, without any other designation or assump-
tion of a more special power, was qualified to preside there,
exercising a superintendency comprehensive of all episcopal
functions ; so that it was needless that he should take upon
himself the character or style of a bishop.

*This (beside the tenor of ancient doctrine) doth appear
from the demeanour of St. John, who never was reckoned
bishop of Ephesus ; nor could be, without displacing Timothy,
who by St. Paul was constituted bishop there, or succeeding
in his room; yet he, abiding at Kphesus, did there discharge
the office of a metropolitan ; sgoverning the churches, and in the
adjacent churches here constituting bishops, there forming whole
churches, otherwhere allotting to the clergy persons designed
by the Spirit.

Such functions might St. Peter execute in the parts of Rome
or Antioch, without being a bishop ; and as the bishops of Asia
did, saith Tertullian, ‘refer their original to St. John, so might

P ’ArogroAikod Tovrov Opdvov Kara- r°Amd Tod aylov TimoOdov péexpi viv

gpoveis. Syn. Chale. Act. x. p. 379, K’ émloxora éyévovto’ mavtes ev Epéow
284. Thou despisest this apostolical xepotovi@ncavy. Syn. Chal. Act. 11.
throne. Ed’ @ kal mp@rov éricxomoy 27Tim.i.6. From holy Timothy till

Tov Ociov Stdxuv KaTaoThoas, év éxxAn- now there have been seven and twenty

ola hw exeioe mpOros obtos érftaro. Ni-
ceph. ii. 39. Forasmuch as having ap-
pointed holy Stachys the first bishop, in
the church which he first settled there.
Non dedignetur regiam civitatem, quam
apostolicam non potest facere sedem—.
P. Leol. Ep. 54. Let him not disdain
the royal city, which he cannot make an
apostolic see.

4 Memento quia apostolicam sedem
regis——. Greg. M. Ep. iv. 37. Re-
member you rule an apostolic see.

bishops, and all ordained at Ephesus.
Johanne autem permanente apud eos,
&e. Tren. iii. 3.

8 Tas ard: Sietrev exxAnolas
brov wey emoxdérovs Katactiowr" Sov
8 BAas exxAnolas apudowv Sov 5é
KAhpp eva ye Tiva KAnpdowv tav bwd
Tov Tvetuatos onuavoudvwy. Euseb.
Hist. iii. 23.

t Ordo episcoporum ad originem re-
census in Joannem stabit auctorem.
Tertull. in Mare. iv. 5.

An. Ch. 39.
Baron. §. 8.
Acts ix. 32.
Xi. 20.

Epiph.
Her. 78.

Grot. in
Jac. i. I.

134 A Treatise of the

the bishops of Italy, upon the like ground, refer their original
to St. Peter.

It is observable, that whereas St. Peter is affirmed to have
been bishop of Antioch seven years before his access to Rome,
that is, within the compass of St. Luke’s story, yet he passeth
over a matter of so great moment; as St. Jerome observeth'.

I cannot grant, that if St. Luke had thought Peter sovereign
of the church, and his episcopacy of a place a matter of such
consequence, he would have slipped it over, being so obvious
a thing, and coming in the way of his story.

He therefore, I conceive, was no bishop of Antioch, although
a bishop at Antiochs.

11. If in objection to some of these discourses it be alleged,
that St. James, our Lord’s near kinsman, although he was an
apostle, was made bishop of Jerusalem; and that for the like
reason St. Peter might assume the bishopric of Rome ;

I answer:

1. It is not certain, that St. James the bishop of Jerusalem
was an apostle (meaning an apostle of the primary rank ;) for
Eusebius (the greatest antiquary of the old times) doth reckon
him one of the seventy disciples*.

So doth the author of the Apostolical Constitutions in divers
places suppose”.

Hegesippus (that most ancient historian) was of the same
mind, who saith, that there were many of this name, and that
this James did undertake the church with the apostles*.

Of the same opinion was Epiphanius, who saith, that St.
James was the son of Joseph by another wife.

The whole Greek church doth suppose the same, keeping
three distinct solemnities for him and the two apostles of the
same name.

Gregory Nyssen, St. Jerome, and divers other ancient

r Denique primum episcopum Antio- t Eis d¢ kal ovros Tay pepouevwy Tov
chene ecclesiz Petrum fuisse accepimus, owripos wadnTGv, GdAdAG phy Kal ddeApav
et Romam exinde translatum, quod jv. Euseb.i. 12.

Lucas penitus omisit. Wier. in Gal. 2. u Apost. Const. vi. 12. 14. ii. 55.
Lastly, we have received by tradition vii. 46, &c. ‘Huets of dédexa Gua TH
that Peter was the first bishop of An- “IaxaPy vi. 12. We the twelve apo-
tioch, and from thence translated to stles together with James.

Rome: which Luke has altogether X Avadéxerar St Thy exkAngiay pera
omitted. Tav aroatéAwy & ddeApds tod Kuplov

8 It is the distinction of a pope. Rex “Id«wBos. Euseb. ii. 23.

Etruriz, et rex in Etruria.

Pope’s Supremacy. 135

writers, do concur herein, whom we may see alleged by Gro- Hamm.
tius, Dr. Hammond, (who themselves did embrace the same Leg Pi
opinion,) Valesius, Blondel, &c. Vales. in
Salmasius (after his confident manner) saith, Yét is certain a py
that he was not one af the twelve: 1 may at least say, it is not Epist-Clem.
certain that he was, and consequently the objection is grounded ao
on an uncertainty.
2. Granting that St. James was one of the apostles, (as some
of the ancients seem to think?, calling him an apostle; and as
divers modern divines conceive, grounding chiefly upon these
words of St. Paul, But other of the apostles saw I none, save Gal. i. 19.
James the Lord’s brother, and taking apostles there in the
strictest sense,) I answer,
That the case was peculiar, and there doth appear a special
reason, why one of the apostles should be designed to make a
constant residence at Jerusalem, and consequently to preside
there like a bishop. For Jerusalem was the metropolis, the
fountain, the centre of the Christian religion, where it had
birth, where was greatest matter and occasion of propagating
the gospel, most people disposed to embrace it resorting
thither; where the church was very numerous, consisting, as
St. Luke (or St. James in him) doth intimate, of divers myriads Acts xxi.20,
of believing Jews; whence it might seem expedient, that a person
of greatest authority should be fixed there for the confirming
and improving that church, together with the propagation of
religion among the people which resorted thither; the which
might induce the apostles to settle St. James there, both for
discharging the office of an apostle, and the supplying the
room of a bishop there.
Accordingly to him, saith Eusebius, * the episcopal throne was
committed by the apostles; or, “Our Lord, saith Epiphanius,
did intrust him with his own throne.
But there was no need of fixing an apostle at other places ;
nor doth it appear that any was so fixed ; especially St. Peter
was uncapable of such an employment, requiring settlement

Y Certum est nom fuisse unum ex
duodecim. Sa/. Mess. p. 20.

Z Hierosolymitanam, quam primus
apostolus Jacobus episcopatu suo rexit.
Aug. cont. Cresc. ii. 37. The church
of Jerusalem, which James the apostle

first governed by his episcopal power.

a “Qi mpds tay aroordéAwy 6 Tijs ém-
oxomns eyxexelpiocro Opdvos. Euseb. ii.
23.
b Qi wenlorevxe Kipios thy Opdvom
avrov. Epiph. Her. 78.

136 A Treatise of the

and constant attendance, who, beside his general apostleship,
had a peculiar apostleship of the dispersed Jews committed to
him; who therefore was much engaged in travel for propa-
gation of the faith, and edifying his converts every where.

3. The greater consent of the most ancient writers making
St. James not to have been one of the twelve apostles, it is
thence accountable, why (as we before noted) St. James was
called by some ancient writers, the bishop of bishops, the prince
of bishops, &e. because he was the first bishop of the /irst see,
the mother church; the apostles being excluded from the
comparison.

Upon these considerations we have great reason to refuse
the assertion or scandal cast on St. Peter, that he took on him
to be bishop of Rome, in a strict sense, as it is understood in
this controversy.

SUPPOSITION V.

A further assertion is this, superstructed by consequence on
the former, That the bishops of Rome (according to God’s
institution, and by original right derived thence) should have
an universal supremacy and jurisdiction (containing the pri-
vileges and prerogatives formerly described) over the Christ-
tan church.

THIS assertion to be very uncertain, yea, to be most false,
I shall by divers considerations evince.

1. If any of the former suppositions be uncertain or false,
this assertion, standing on those legs, must partake of those
defects, and answerably be dubious or false. If either Peter
was not monarch of the apostles, or if his privileges were not
successive, or if he were not properly bishop of Rome at his
decease, then farewell the Romish claim: if any of those things
be dubious, it doth totter; if any of them prove false, then
down it falleth.

But that each of them is false, hath, I conceive, been suffi-

ciently declared ; that all of them are uncertain, hath at least

been made evident.

The structure therefore cannot be firm which relieth on
such props.

2. Even admitting all those suppositions, the inference
from them is not assuredly valid. For St. Peter might have

Pope’s Supremacy. 137

an universal jurisdiction, he might derive it by succession, he
might be bishop of Rome; yet no such authority might hence
accrue to the Roman bishop his successor in that see.

For that universal jurisdiction might be derived into an-
other channel, and the bishop of Rome might in other respects
be successor to him, without being so in this.

As for instance in the Roman empire, before any rule of
succession was established therein, the emperor was sovereign
governor, and he might die consul of Rome, having assumed
that place to himself; yet when he died, the supreme authority
did not lapse into the hands of the consul who succeeded him,
but into the hands of the senate and people; his consular
authority only going to his successor in that office. So might
St. Peter’s universal power be transferred unto the ecclesiasti-
cal college of bishops and of the church ; his episcopal inferior
authority over the singular zaporx/a, or province of Rome, being
transmitted to his followers in that chair.

3. That in truth it was thus, and that all the authority of
St. Peter, and of all the other apostles, was devolved to the
church, and to the representative body thereof, the fathers
did suppose; affirming the church to have received from our
Lord a sovereign power.

¢This, saith St. Cyprian, is that one church, which holdeth
and possesseth all the power of its Spouse and Lord; in this
we preside; for the honour and unity of this we fight—saith
he in his Epistle to Jubianus, wherein he doth impugn the Aug. de
proceedings of pope Stephanus ; the which sentence St. Austin ee
appropriateth to himself, speaking it absolutely, without citing
St. Cyprian. To this authority of the church St. Basil would
have all that confess the faith of Christ to submit; 4 Zo which
end we exceedingly need your assistance, that they who confess
the apostolic faith would renounce the schisms which they have
devised, and submit themselves henceforth to the authority of the
church.

They (after the holy scripture, which saith, that each bishop 1 Tim. iii.

5) 15.
¢ Hec est una que tenet et possidet xp Couey Bonbelas, Sate trois Tiv arro-
omnem Sponsi sui et Domini potesta- oroAmhy duodoyoivtas rlaTw, dxep ére-
tem, in hac presidemus, pro honore véncay, oxlcuara diaddoavtas, brota-
ejus et unitate pugnamus——. Cypr. yijvai Tov Aovwod TH aiOewTlg Tis exKAN-
Ep. 73. alas. Bas. Epist. 69.
d Eq’ dep wal udAiora Tijs wap’ duav

138 A Treatise of the

— 28. hath a care of God’s church, and is obliged to feed the church
sans x of God and is appointed to edify the body of Christ) do
Collegium suppose the administration of ecclesiastical affairs concerning

coon the public state of the church, the defence of the common
—_ 52. faith, the maintenance of order, peace, and unity, jointly to
wep waons

émoxorjs belong unto the whole body of pastors; according to that of

tis bm ry St. Cyprian to pope Stephanus himself, ¢ Therefore, most dear

ovpaydv. A- : : : : —e

post.Const. Srother, the body of priests is copious, being joined together

vill.10. §y the glue of mutual concord, and the bond of unity, that
if any of our college should attempt to make heresy, and to
tear or waste the flock of Christ, the rest may come to suc-
cour; and like useful and merciful shepherds may recollect
the sheep into the flock. And again, ‘Which thing it concerns
us to look after and redress, most dear brother, who bearing
in mind the divine clemency, and holding the scales of the church-
government, &e.

So even the Roman clergy did acknowledge, 8 For we ought
all of us to watch for the body of the whole church, whose members
are digested through several provinces.

h Like the Trinity, whose power is one and undivided, there is
one priesthood among divers bishops.

So in the Apostolical Constitutions, the apostles tell the
bishops, that ‘an universal episcopacy is intrusted to them.

So the council of Carthage with St. Cyprian kOlear and
manifest is the mind and meaning of our Lord Jesus Christ,
sending his apostles, and affording to them alone the power given
him of the Father; in whose room we sucooadeds governing the
church of God with the same power.

€ Idcirco enim, frater charissime, co-
piosum corpus est sacerdotum, concor-
diz mutuz glutino atque unitatis vin-
culo copulatum, ut siquis ex collegio
nostro heresin facere, et gregem Christi
lacerare et vastare tentaverit, subve-
niant ceteri, et quasi pastores utiles et
misericordes oves Domini in gregem
colligant. Cypr. Ep. 67.

f Cui rei nostrum est consulere, et
subvenire, frater charissime, qui divi-
nam clementiam cogitantes, et guber-
nande ecclesie libram tenentes, &c.
Ibid.

& Omnes enim nos decet pro corpore
totius ecclesiz, cujus per varias quasque

provincias membra digesta sunt, excu-
bare. Cler. Rom. apud Cypr. Ep. 30.

h Ad Trinitatis instar, cujus una est
atque individua potestas, unum esse per
diversos antistites sacerdotium. P. Sym-
machus ad /Eonium Arelat.

i Els émornprypov tuav, Tov Thy Ka-
6dAou emiokor)y Temiorevméevwv. Const.
Apost. vi. 14.

k Manifesta est sententia Domini -

nostri Jesu Christi apostolos suos mit-
tentis, et ipsis solis potestatem a Petro
sibi datam permittentis, quibus nos
successimus, eadem potestate ecclesiam
Domini gubernantes. Conc. Carth. apud
Cypr. p- 405.

139

Christ our Lord and our God going to the Father, commended
his spouse to us.

A very ancient instance of which administration is the pro-
ceeding against Paulus Samosatenus; when ™¢he pastors of
the churches, some from one place, some from another, did as-
semble together against him as a pest of Christ's flock, all of them
hastening to Antioch; where they deposed, exterminated, and
deprived him of communion, warning the whole church to
reject and disavow him.

n Seeing the pastoral charge is common to us all, who bear the
episcopal office, although thou sittest in a higher and more
eminent place.

Therefore for this cause the holy church is committed to you
and to us, that we may labour for all, and not be slack in yield-
ing help and assistance to all.

Hence St. Chrysostom said of Eustathius his bishop ; P For
he was well instructed and taught by the grace of the Holy Spirit,
that a president or bishop of a church ought not to take care

of that church alone, wherewith he <s intrusted by the Holy
Ghost, but also of the whole church dispersed throughout the
world.

They consequently did repute schism, or ecclesiastical re-
bellion, to consist in 9a departure from the consent of the body
of the priesthood, as St. Cyprian in divers places doth express
it in his epistles to pope Stephen and others.

They deem all bishops to partake of the apostolical author-
ity, according to that of St. Basil to St. Ambrose ; 'The Lord
himself hath translated thee from the judges of the earth wnto the
prelacy of the apostles.

Pope's Supremacy.

1 Christus Dominus et Deus noster non negligamus . P.Joh. I. Ep.t.

ad Patrem proficiscens, sponsam suam
nobis commendavit . Ibid. p. 404.

™m Of Aowol trav éxxAnoiay Toméves
GAAot GAAovev ws emi Avmedva Tijs TOD
Xpicrod moluvns cuviecay, of mdvres em)
Thy Avtidxevay omevoaytes. Euseb. vii.
27.

n Cum communis sit omnibus nobis,
qui fungimur episcopatus officio, quam-
vis ipse in eo preemineas celsiore fastigio,
specula pastoralis . Aug.ad Bonif.
contra duas Epist. Pelag. i.1.

(ad Zachar.) apud Bin. tom. iii. p.812.

P Kal yap jv memaidevpévos Karas
mapa Tis Tov mvevuartos. xdpitos, Sr Tis
exxAnolas mpoeot@ra ovw exelvns mdvns
KhdecOa Set Tis mapa ToD mvEevmaTos ey-
xeipicbelaons abTG, GAAG Kal wdons Kara
Thy oikovnévny Kemevns. Chrys. tom. v.
Or. 93. ,

4 A corpore nostri, et sacerdotii con-
sensione discesserit . Cypr. Ep. 67.
Qui se ab ecclesiz vinculo, atque a sa-
cerdotum collegio separat. Cypr. Ep. 52.

r Airés ce 6 Kips amd Tay KpiTay
ris yas em thy mpocdplay tay dmoord-
Awv petéOnxey. Basil. Ep. 56.

Cypr. Ep.
27.

140 A Treatise of the

They took themselves all to be vicars of Christ, and judges
in his stead; according to that of St. Cyprian; ‘For heresies
are sprung up, and schisms grown from no other ground nor root
but this, because God’s priest was not obeyed, nor was there one
priest or bishop for a time in the church, nor a judge thought on
for a time to supply the room of Christ. Where that by church
is meant any particular church, and by priest a bishop of such
church, any one not bewitched with prejudice by the tenor of
St. Cyprian’s discourse will easily discernt.

They conceive that our Saviour did promise to St. Peter
the keys in behalf of the church, and as representing it.

They suppose the combination of bishops in peaceable con-
sent and mutual aid, to be the rock on which the church is
built.

They allege the authority granted to St. Peter as a ground
of claim to the same in all bishops jointly, and in each bishop
singly, according to his rata pars, or allotted proportion.

uWhich may easily be understood by the words of our Lord,
when he says to blessed Peter, whose place the bishops supply,
Whatsoever &e.

xI have the sword of Constantine in my hands, you of Peter,
said our great king Edgar.

They do therefore in this regard take themselves all to be
successors of St. Peter, that his power is derived to them all,
and that the whole episcopal order is the chair by the Lord’s
voice founded on St. Peter: thus St. Cyprian in divers places
(before touched) discourseth; and thus Firmilian from the keys
granted to St. Peter inferreth, disputing against the Roman
bishop ; Y Therefore, saith he, the power of remitting sins is
given to the apostles, and to the churches, which they being sent
from Christ did constitute, and to the bishops, which do succeed
them by vicarious ordination.

8 Neque enim aliunde hzereses oborte
sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quam
inde quod sacerdoti Dei non obtempe-
retur, nec unus in ecclesia ad tempus sa-
cerdos, et ad tempus judex vice Christi
cogitatur. Cypr. Ep. 55.

t Episcopus personam habet Christi,
et vicarius Domini est. Ambr. in 1 Cor.
11. The bishop sustains the person of
Christ, and is the vicar of our Lord.

u Quod ex verbis Domini facile in-

telligi potest, quibus B. Petro, cujus vi-
cem episcopi gerunt, ait, Quodcunque,
&c. Capit. Caroli M. lib. v. cap. 163.

x Ego Constantini, vos Petri gla-
dium habetis in manibus.

y Potestas ergo remittendorum pec-
catorum apostolis data est, et ecclesiis
quas illi a Christo missi constituerunt,
et episcopis qui eis ordinatione vicaria
succedunt. Firmil. apud Cypr. Ep. 75.

Pope’s Supremacy. 141

4, The bishops of any other churches founded by the apo-
stles, in the fathers’ style are successors of the apostles, in
the same sense, and to the same intent, as the bishop of Rome
is by them accounted successor of St. Peter; the apostolical
power, which in extent was universal, being in some sense, in
reference to them, not quite extinct, but transmitted by suc-
cession: yet the bishops of apostolical churches did never
claim, nor allowedly exercise, apostolical jurisdiction beyond
their own precincts; according to those words of St. Jerome,
zTell me, what doth Palestine belong to the bishop of Alex-
andria ?

This sheweth the inconsequence of their discourse ; for in
like manner the pope might be successor to St. Peter, and
St. Peter’s universal power might be successive, yet the pope
have no singular claim thereto, beyond the bounds of his par-
ticular church.

5. So again, for instance, St. James (whom the Roman
church, in her liturgies, doth avow for an apostle) was bishop
of Jerusalem more unquestionably than St. Peter was bishop
of Rome; Jerusalem also was the root, and @¢he mother of all
churches, (as the fathers of the second general synod, in their
letter to pope Damasus himself, and the occidental bishops
did call it, forgetting the singular pretence of Rome to that
title.)

Yet the bishops of Jerusalem, successors of St. James, did
not thence claim I know not what kind of extensive jurisdic-
tion ; yea, notwithstanding their succession, they did not so
much as obtain a metropolitical authority in Palestine, which
did belong to Czesarea, (having been assigned thereto in con-
formity to the civil government,) and was by special provision
reserved thereto in the synod of Nice»; whence St. Jerome did
not stick to affirm, °that the bishop of Jerusalem was subject
to the bishop of Cesarea; for speaking to John bishop of
Jerusalem, who for compurgation of himself from errors

% Responde mihi, ad Alexandrinum The mother of the Christian name.

episcopum Palestina quid pertinet ? b Ty untpordrAc cw Couévou Tov oikeiou
Hier. ad Pammach. Ep. \xi.15. afidmaros. Conc, Nic. can. 7.
& Tis 5 untpds amacav Tay éKxKAn- ¢ |bi decernitur, ut Palestine metro-

aia, Tis év lepotoAtpos, Theodor.v.g. polis Caesarea sit. Lier. Ep. lxi.15. It
Mater (hristiani nominis. Jmper. Just. is there decreed, that Czsarea should
ad P. Hormisd. apud Bin. t. iii. p. 794. be the metropolis of Palestine.

142 A Treatise of the

imputed to him had appealed to Theophilus bishop of Alex-
andria, he saith, ¢ Thou hadst rather cause molestation to ears
possessed, than render honour to thy metropolitan, that is, to the

bishop of Czesarea.

By which instance we may discern what little considera-
tion sometimes was had of personal or topical succession to
the apostles in determining the extent of jurisdiction: and
why should the Roman bishop upon that score pretend more

validity than others ?

Hier. ad 6. St. Peter probably ere that he came at Rome did found

oe a divers other churches, whereof he was paramount bishop, or
Ep.1. did retain a special superintendency over them ; particularly

e Antioch was anciently called his sce, and he is acknowledged
to have sat there seven years before he was bishop of Rome.
Why therefore may not the bishop of Antioch pretend to
succeed St. Peter in his universal pastorship, as well as his
younger brother of Rome? why should Euodius, ordained
by St. Peter at Antioch, yield to Clemens, afterward by him

ordained at Rome?

Actsxi.26. Antioch was the firstborn of Gentile churches, where the
name of Christians was first heard ; Antioch was (as the Con-
stantinopolitan fathers called it) tthe most ancient and truly

apostolical church.

Antioch, by virtue of St. Peter’s sitting theres, or peculiar
relation to it, was (according to their own conceits) the prin-

cipal see.

Why therefore should St. Peter be so unkind to it, as not
only to relinquish it, but to debase it; not only transferring
his see from it, but divesting it of the privilege which it had

got?

Why should he prefer before it the city of Rome, the

Rey. xvii.s.mystical Babylon, the mother of abominations of the earth, the
throne of Satan’s empire, the place which did then most per-

Rev. xvii.6. secute the Christian faith, and was drunk with the blood of the

saints” ?

4d Maluisti occupatis auribus moles-
tias facere, quam debitum metropolitano
tuo honorem reddere. Her. ad Pum-
mach. Ep. 1xi. 15.

e Opdvov ris ’AyTioxéwy peya-
AowdAcws, Toy Tov aylov Tlérpov. Syn.

Chalced. Act. vii. p. 264.

f TIpecButarn kal bvTws amrooroAKh
éxxAnola. Theod. v. 9.

& Ubi imperator, ibi Roma. Where
the emperor is, there is Rome.

h Sic et Babylon apud Joannem nos-

ei ee ict

Pope’s Supremacy. 143

7. The ground of this preference was, say they, St. Peter's Bell. ii. 12.
will: and they have reason to say so; for otherwise if St. Peter
had died intestate, the elder son of Antioch would have had the
best right to all his goods and dignities'.

But how doth that will appear? in what tables was it written?
in what registers is it extant? in whose presence did he nuncu-
pate it? It is nowhere to be seen or heard of.

Neither do they otherwise know of it, than by reasoning it
out ; and in effect they say only that it was fit he should will
it: but they may be mistaken in their divinations ; and per-
haps notwithstanding them St. Peter might will as well to his
former see of Antioch, as to his latter of Rome.

8. Indeed Bellarmine sometimes positively and briskly enough

Rome figi
unprobable, that our Lord gave an express command, that Peter apostolicam

should so fix his see at Rome, that the bishop of Rome should rsa a y
absolutely succeed him.

He saith it is not improbable ; if it be no more than so, it
is uncertain; it may be a mere conjecture or a dream.

It is much more not unprobable, that if God had commanded
it, there would have been some assurance of a command so very
important.

9. Antioch hath at least a fair plea for a share in St. Peter's
prerogatives ; for it did ever hold the repute of an apostolical
church, and upon that score some deference was paid to it:
why so, if St. Peter did carry his see with all its prerogatives
to another place? But if he carried with him only part of his
prerogative, leaving some part behind at Antioch, how much
then, I pray, did he leave there? why did he divide unequally,
or leave less than half? If perchance he did leave half, the
bishop of Antioch is equal to him of Rome.

trum Romane urbis figura est, proinde fecit primis quinque annis . Dhid.

et magni et regno superbe, et sancto-
rum debellatricis. Tertull. adv. Jud.
cap. 9. So also Babylon in our St. John
is a type of the city of Rome, and there-
fore of a great, royal, and proud city,
and a subduer of the saints.

i Potuisset Petrus nullam sedem
particularem sibi unquam eligere, sicut

Peter might have chosen to himself no
particular city, as he did the first five

years.
k Non est improbabile Dominum
etiam aperte jussisse, ut sedem suam

Petrus ita figeret Rome, ut Romanus
episcopus absolute ei succederet. Bell.
ii. 12. §. Et quoniam.

144 A Treatise of the

10. Other persons also may be found, who according to equal
judgment might have a better title to the succession of Peter
in his universal authority than the pope ; having a nearer re-
lation to him than he, (although his successor in one charge,)
or upon other equitable grounds.

For instance, St. John, or any other apostle, who did sur-
vive St. Peter: for if St. Peter was the father of Christians,
(which title yet our Saviour forbiddeth any one to assume,)
St. John might well claim to be his eldest son; and it had
been a very hard case for him to have been postponed in the
succession ; it had been a derogation to our Lord’s own choice,
a neglect of his special affection, a disparagement of the apo-
stolical office, for him to be subjected to any other; neither
could any other pretend to the like gifts for management of
that great charge.

11. The bishop of Jerusalem might with much reason have
put in his claim thereto, as being successor of our Lord him-
self, who unquestionably was the High Priest of our profession,
and Archbishop of all our souls; whose see was the mother
of all churches ; wherein St. Peter himself did at first reside,
exercising his vicarship: if our Lord, upon special accounts
out of course, had put the sovereignty into St. Peter’s hands,
yet after his decease it might be fit that it should return into
its proper channel.

This may seem to have been the judgment of the times, when
the author of the Apostolical Constitutions did write, who re-
porteth the apostles to have ordered prayers to be made first
for James, then for Clement, then for Kuodius.

12. Equity would rather have required, that one should by
common consent and election of the whole church be placed
in St.Peter’s room, than that the bishop of Rome, by election
of a few persons there, should succeed into it.

As the whole body of pastors was highly concerned in that
succession, so it was reasonable that all of them should coneur

in designation of a person thereto; it is not reasonable to _

suppose that either God would institute, or St. Peter by will
should devise a course of proceeding in such a case so unequal
and unsatisfactory.

If therefore the church, considering this equity of the case,
together with the expediency of affairs in relation to its good,

145

should undertake to choose for itself another monarch, (the
bishop of another see, who should seem fitter for the place,)
to succeed into the prerogatives of St. Peter, that person
would have a fairer title to that office than the pope; for
such a person would have a real title, grounded on some
reason of the case; whenas the pope’s pretence doth only
stand upon a positive institution, whereof he cannot exhibit
any certificate. This was the mind of a great man among
themselves; who saith, that ! 7f possibly the bishop of Triers
should be chosen for head of the church. For the church has free
power to provide itself a head.

Bellarmine himself confesseth, that ™ if St. Peter (as he
might have done if he had pleased) should have chosen no
particular see, as he did not for the first five years, then after
Peter’s death, neither the bishop of Rome nor of Antioch had
succeeded, but he whom the church should have chosen for itself.
Now if the church upon that supposition would have had such
a right, it is not probable that St. Peter by his fact would have
deprived it thereof, or willingly done any thing in prejudice
to it; there being apparently so much equity, that the church
should have a stroke in designation of its pastor.

In ancient times there was not any small church which had
not a suffrage in the choice of its pastor; and was it fitting
that all the church should have one imposed on it without its
consent " ?

If we consider the manner in ancient time of electing and
constituting the Roman bishop, we may thence discern not
only the improbability, but iniquity of this pretence : how was
he then chosen? was it by a general synod of bishops, or by
delegates from all parts of Christendom, whereby the common

Pope’s Supremacy.

1 Quod si per possibile Trevirensis
eligeretur pro capite ecclesize. Habet
enim ecclesia potestatem liberam sibi
de capite providendi . Card. Cus.
de Cone. Cath. ii. 13.

m Nam potuisset Petrus nullam sedem
particularem sibi unquam eligere, sicut
fecit primis quinque annis, et tunc mo-
riente Petro, non episcopus Romanus,
neque Antiochenus successisset, sed is
quem ecclesia sibi elegisset. Bell. ii. 12.

n Nulla ratio sinit, ut inter episcopos
habeantur, qui nec a clericis sunt electi,
nec a plebibus expetiti, nec a compro-

vincialibus episcopis cum metropolitani
judicio consecrati. P. Leo I. Ep. 92.
No reason will admit that they should
be esteemed bishops, who are neither
chosen by the clergy, nor desired by the
people, nor consecrated by the bishops
of the same province, with the consent
of the metropolitan. Nullus invitis detur
episcopus : cleri, plebis, et ordinis con-
sensus requiratur. P. Celest. J. Ep. 2.
Grat. Dist. 61. cap. 13. Let there be
no bishop imposed on any against their
wills: let the consent of the clergy and
people, and his own order be required.

146 A Treatise of the

interest in him might appear, and whereby the world might
be satisfied that one was elected fit for that high office? No;
he was chosen, as usually then other particular bishops were,
by the clergy and people of Rome; none of the world being
conscious of the proceeding, or bearing any share therein.

Now was it equal that such 4 power of imposing a sovereign
on all the grave bishops, and on all the good people of the
Christian world, should be granted to one city?

Was it fitting that such a charge, importing advancement
above all pastors, and being intrusted with the welfare of all
souls in Christendom, should be the result of an election liable
to so many defects and corruptions ; which assuredly often, if
not almost constantly, would be procured by ambition, bribery,
or partiality ; would be managed by popular faction and tu-
mults ?

It was observed generally of such elections by Nazianzen,
that Pprelacies were not got rather by virtue than by naughtiness;
and that episcopal thrones did not rather belong to the more worthy,
than to the more powerful.

And declaring his mind or wish, that elections of bishops
should ‘rest only or chiefly in the best men; not in the wealthiest
and mightiest ; or in the impetuousness and unreasonableness of
the people, and among them in those who are most easily bought
and bribed ; whereby he intimateth the common practice, and
subjoineth, But now I can hardly avoid thinking that the popular
(or civil) governances are better ordered than ours, which are re-
puted to have divine grace attending them.

And that the Roman elections in that time were come
into that course, we may see by the relation and reflections
of an honest pagan historian concerning the election of pope
Damasus, (contemporary of Gregory Nazianzen ;) ' Damasus,
saith he, and Ursinus, above human measure burning with de-
sire to snatch the episcopal see, did, with divided parties, most

P Ob yap e& aperijs uaAAov, 7) Kakoup-
ylas 4 mpocdpla, obdt Tav atwréepwr
MadAov, 2 Svvatwrépwr of Opdva. Naz.
Or. xx. p. 335.

q Eq’ ofs Ger Tas To.abTras mpoBodds
KeicOa wdvots, 2 Ste pdAvoTa—GArAAe p)
Tots evmopwrdros Te Kal SuvaTwrdras,
dopa Shyov nal Gaoyla, Ka Toltwy
abray uddAiora Tois ebwvoTdtos* viv Be

Kwduvelw Tas Snuoclas apxas evTaKTw-
tépas bmoAauBdvew tav jpetépwy, als.
n Oela xdpis emipnulCera. Greg. Naz.
Or. xix. p- 310.

r Damasus et Ursinus supra huma-
num modum ad rapiendam episcopalem
sedem ardentes scissis studiis acerrime
conflictabantur—. Am. Marcell. lib.
27.

Pope's Supremacy. 147
fiercely conflict ; in which conflict upon one day, in the very
church, an hundred and thirty persons were slain; so did that Sozom. vi.
great pope get into the chair: thus, as the historian reflecteth, **
thes wealth and pomp of the place naturally did provoke ambition
by all means to seek it, and did cause fierce contentions to arise

in the choice; whence commonly, wise and modest persons being
excluded from any capacity thereof, any ambitious and cunning
man, who had the art or the luck to please the multitude, would
by violence obtain it: which was a goodly way of constituting

a sovereign to the church.

Thus it went within three ages after our Lord: and after-
wards, in the declensions of Christian simplicity and integrity,
matters were not like to be mended, but did indeed rather
grow worse; as beside the reports and complaints of historians,
how that commonly by ambitious prensations, by simoniacal
corruptions, by political bandyings, by popular factions, by all
kinds of sinister ways, men crept into the place, doth appear
by those many dismal schisms, which gave the church many
pretended heads, but not one certain one; as also by the re-
sult of them, being the choice of persons very unworthy and

horribly flagitious'.

Ss Neque ego ab uno ostentationem
rerum considerans urbanarum, hujus rei
cupidos, &c. Id. ibid.

t Damasus I]. pontificatum per vim
occupat, nullo cleri populique consensu ;
adeo enim inoleverat bic mos, ut jam
cuique ambitioso liceret Petri sedem in-
vadere. Plat. (p. 314.) Damasus II.
invades the popedom by force, without
any consent of the clergy and people ;
for so was it now grown into custom,
that any ambitious man might invade
Peter’s see. Eo enim tum pontificatus
devenerat, ut qui plus largitione et am-
bitione, non dico sanctitate vite et doc-
trina valeret, is tantummodo dignitatis
gradum bonis oppressis et rejectis obti-
neret: quem morem utinam aliquando
non retinuissent nostra tempora. Plat.
in Silv. 3. For the business of the pa-

was come to that pass, that who-
ever by bribery and ambition, I say not
by holiness of life and learning, got the
start of others, he alone obtained that
degree of dignity, good men in the mean
being depressed and rejected: which
custom I would to God our times had
not retained. Cum jam eo devenissent
ecclesiastici, ut non coacti ut antea, sed

sponte et largitionibus pontificlum mu-
nus obirent. Plat. in Steph. 6. Baron.
ann. 112. §. 8. Whenas now eccle-
siastical persons are come to that pass,
that they execute the papal office, not
being compelled unto it, as heretofore,
but of their own accord, and by bribing
for it. Videbat enim imperator eo li-
centiz factiosum quemque et potentem,
quamvis ignobilem devenisse, ut cor-
ruptis suffragiis tantam dignitatem con-
sequeretur, &c. Plat. in Clem. ii.(p. 313-)
For the emperor saw that every factious
and powerful person, though base and
ignoble, was grown to that height of
licentiousness, that he obtained so great
dignity by corruption and buying of
suffrages. Omne papale negotium ma-
nus agunt: quem dabis mihi de tota
maxima urbe, qui te in papam receperit,
pretio seu spe pretii non interveniente?
Bern. de Consid. iv. 2. The whole bu-
siness of making a pope is managed by
gifts: whom can you shew me, in all
this great city, who took you into the
papacy without being bribed and cor-
rupted with reward, or at least with hope
of it?

L 2

Euseb.

148

A Treatise of the

If it be said that the election of a pope in old times was
wont to be approved by the consent of all bishops in the world,
according to the testimony of St.Cyprian, who saith of Corne-
hus, that “he was known by the testimony of his fellow-bishops,
whose whole number through all the world did with peaceful una-

nimity consent :

I answer, that this consent was not in the election, or ante-
cedently to it; that it was only by letters or messages declaring
the election, according to that of St. Cyprian* ; that it was
not anywise peculiar to the Roman bishop, but such as was
yielded to all catholic bishops, each of whom Ywas to be ap-
proved, as St. Cyprian saith, by the testimony and judgment of
his colleagues ; that it was in order only to the maintaining
fraternal communion and correspondence, signifying that such
a bishop was duly elected by his clergy and people, was rightly
ordained by his neighbour bishops, did profess the catholic
faith, and was therefore qualified for communion with his bre-
thren; such a consent to the election of any bishop of old was
given, (especially upon occasion, and when any question con-
cerning the right of a bishop did intervene,) whereof now in
the election of a pope no footstep doth remain.

We may also note, that the election of Cornelius being con-
tested, he did more solemnly acquaint all the bishops of the
world with his case, and so did obtain their approbation in a

way more than ordinary.

13. If God had designed this derivation of universal sove-
reignty, it is probable that he would have prescribed some
certain, standing, immutable way of election, and imparted the
right to ¢ertain persons, and not left it at such uneertainty to
the chances of time, so that the manner of election hath often
changed, and the power of it tossed into divers hands.

z And though in several times there have been observed

u co-episcoporum testimonio,
quorum numerus universus per totum
mundum concordi unanimitate consen-
tit—. Cypr. Ep. 52. Cum Fabiani lo-
cus, id est cum locus Petri, et gradus
cathedre sacerdotalis vacaret, quo occu-
pato de Dei voluntate atque omnium
nostrum consentione ——. Ibid, When
Fabianus’s place, i. e. when the place of
Peter, and the degree of the sacerdotal
chair was vacant, which being obtained

by the will of God, and all owr con-
sents ——.

x Satis erat ut tu te episcopum factum —

literis nunciares, &c. Cypr. Ep. 42. It
was enough that you declared by letters
that you were made bishop.

y Episcopo semel facto, et collegarum
ac plebis testimonio et judicio compro-
bato—. Cypr. Ep. 41.

z Et licet diversis temporibus diversi
modi super electione Romanorum ponti-

Pope's Supremacy. 149

several ways as to the election of the Roman pontiffs, according
as the necessity and expediency of the church required.

Of old it was (as other elections) managed by nomination
of the clergy, and suffrage of the people.

Afterward the emperors did assume to themselves the
nomination or approbation of them.

a For then nothing was done by the clergy in the choice of the
pope, unless the emperor had approved his election.

b But he, seeing the prince’s consent was required, sent mes-
sengers with letters, to entreat Mauritius that he would not
suffer the election made by the clergy and people of Rome in
that case to be valid.

©Leo VIII, being tired out with the inconstaney of the
Romans, transferred the whole power and authority of choos-
ing the pope from the clergy and people of Rome to the em-
peror.

At some times the clergy had no hand in the election; but
popes were intruded by powerful men or women at their
pleasure 4,

Afterwards the cardinals (that is, some of the chief Roman Grat. Dist.
clergy) did appropriate the election to themselves, by the p.) 3?"
decree of pope Nicholas II. in his Lateran synod. Nic. II.

Sometimes, out of course, general synods did assume the
choice to themselves; as at Constance, Pisa, and Basil.

14. From the premises, to conclude the pope’s title to St.
Peter’s authority, it is requisite to shew the power demised by
him to be according to God’s institution and intent, immutable
and indefectible ; for power built upon the like, but far more
certain principles, hath in course of times, and by worldly
changes, been quite lost, or conveyed into other channels than
those wherein it was first put; and that irrecoverably, so

ficum observati sunt, prout necessitas,
et utilitas ecclesiz exposcebat——. Cone.
Bas. sess. xxxvii. p. 98. Vide Grat.
Dist. 63. per tot.

a Nil enim tum a clero in eligendo
pontifice actum erat, nisi ejus electionem
imperator approbasset. Piat. in Pelag.
TI.

b Is autem, cum principis consensus
requireretur, nuncios cura literis mise-
rat, qui Mauritium obsecrarent, ne pa-
teretur electionem cleri et populi Ro-
mani ea in re valere. Plat. in Greg. M.

Vide Grat. dist. 63——.

¢ Conc. tom. vii. p. 182. Leo VIII.
Romanorum inconstantiam pertesus,
auctoritatem omnem eligendi pontificis
a clero, populoque Romano ad impera-
torem transtulit. Plat. in Leo VIII,
(p. 291).

d Nusquam cleri eligentis, vel postea
consentientis aliqua mentio. Baron.
ann. 112. §. 8. ann. 131. §. 1. There
was nowhere any mention of the clergy
electing, or afterward consenting.

Propria
perdit qui
indebita
concupiscit.
P. Leo I.
Ep. 54.

150 A Treatise of the

that it eannot anywise be retrieved, or reduced into the first
order.

For instance, Adam was by God constituted universal sove-
reign of mankind; and into that power his eldest son of right
did succeed; and so it of right should have been continually
propagated.

Yet soon did that power fail, or was diverted into other
courses; the world being cantonized into several dominions ;
so that the heir at law among all the descendants of Adam
cannot so easily be found, as @ needle in a bottle of hay; he
probably is a subject, and perhaps is a peasant.

So might St. Peter be monarch of the church, and the pope
might succeed him; yet by revolutions of things, by several
defaults and inecapacities in himself, by divers obstructions
incident, by forfeiture upon encroaching on other men’s rights,
according to that maxim of a great pope, He loseth his own,
who coveteth more than his due, his power might be clipped,
might be transplanted, might utterly decay and fail: to such
fatalities other powers are subject; nor can that of the pope
be exempt from them, as otherwhere we shall more largely
declare.

15. Indeed that God did intend his church should per-
petually subsist united in any one political frame of govern-
ment, is a principle which they do assume and build upon, but
can nowise prove. Nor indeed is it true. For

If the unity of the church designed and instituted by God
were only an unity of faith, of charity, of peace, of fraternal
communion and correspondence between particular societies
and pastors, then in vain it is to seek for the subject and seat
of universal jurisdiction. Now that God did not intend any
other unity than such as those specified, we have good rea-
son to judge, and shall, we hope, otherwhere sufficiently
prove.

16. We may consider, that really the sovereign power (such

as it is pretended) hath often failed, there having been for

long spaces of time no Roman bishops at all, upon several
accounts; which is a sign that the church may subsist with-
out it.

As, 1. When Rome was desolated by the Goths, Vandals,
and Lombards.

Pope’s Supremacy. 151

2. In times when the Romans would not suffer popes to Vide Bern.
live with them. rig

3. In case of discontinuance from Rome, when the popes Bell. iv. 4.
(so calling themselves) did for above seventy years abide in
France; when they indeed, not being chosen by the Roman
people, nor exercising pastoral care over them, were only titu-
lar, not real bishops of Rome; (they were popes of Avignon,
not of Rome; and successors of God knows who, not of
St. Peter ;) no more than one continually living in England
ean be bishop of Jerusalem.

4. In times of many long schisms, (twenty-two schisms,) —Inopem
when either there was no true pope, or, which in effect was ;...,°?*
the same, no certain one.

5. When popes were intruded by violence, whom Baronius Baron. ad
himself positively affirmeth to have been no popes: how then spars
could a succession of true popes be continued from them by
the clergy, which they in virtue of their papal authority did
pretend to create?

6. When elections had a flaw in them, were uncanonical,
and so null.

7. When popes were simoniacally chosen; who by their own
rules and laws are no true popes; being heretics, heresiarchse.

The which was done for long courses of time very com-
monly, and in a manner constantly!.

8. When popes have been deposed ; (as some by the empe-
rors, others by general councils ;) in which case, according to
papal principles, the successors were illegal; for the pope being
sovereign, he could not be judged or deposed; and his suc-
cessor is an usurper.

9. When popes were heretical, that is (say they) no popes.

10. When atheists, sorcerers,

e P. Greg. VII. Ep. iii. 7. P. Jul. in
Conc. Lat. sess. v. p. 57. Non solum
hujusmodi electio vel assumptio eo ipso
nulla existat &c. Vide sup. §. 12.
Such an election or assumption, let it
not only be upon that account void and
null

f Vide queso quantum isti degene-
raverint a majoribus suis; illi enim ut-
pote viri sanctissimi dignitatem ultro
oblatam contemnebant, orationi et doc-
trine Christiane vacantes ; hi vero lar-

gitione et ambitione pontificatum que-
rentes, et adepti, posthabito divino cul-
tu, &c. Plat. in Serg. 3. (p- 279.) Vid.
in Bened. IV. p. 277. See, I be-
seech you, how much they have dege-
nerated from their ancestors; for they,
as being very holy men, did contemn
that dignity when freely offered, giving
themselves wholly to prayer and the
doctrine of Christ; but these by bribery
and ambition seek and obtain the pa-
pacy.

152 A Treatise of the

Elections in some of these cases being null, and therefore
the acts consequent to them invalid, there is probably a defail-
ance of right continued to posterity’.

And probably therefore there is now no true pope.

For (upon violent intrusion, or simoniacal choice, or any
usurpation) the cardinals, bishops, &e. which the pope createth,
are not truly such; and consequently their votes not good in
the choice of another pope; and so successively.

These considerations may suffice to declare the inconse-
quence of their discourses, even admitting their assertions,
which yet are so false, or so apparently uncertain.

I shall in the next place level some arguments directly
against their main conclusion itself.

I. My first argument against this pretence shall be, that it
is destitute of any good warrant, either from divine or human
testimony; and so is groundless. As will appear by the fol-
lowing considerations.

1. If God had designed the bishop of Rome to be for the
perpetual course of times sovereign monarch of his church, it
may reasonably be supposed that he would expressly have
declared his mind in the case; it being a point of greatest
importance of all that concern the administration of his king-
dom in the world. Princes do not use to send their viceroys
unfurnished with patents, clearly signifying their commission,
that no man, out of ignorance or doubt concerning that point,
excusably may refuse compliance; and in all equity promul-
gation is requisite to the establishment of any law, or exacting
obedience. But in all the pandects of divine revelation the
bishop of Rome is not so much as once mentioned, either by
name, or by character, or by probable intimation ; they cannot
hook him in otherwise, than by straining hard, and framing a
long chain of consequences ; each of which is too subtle for to
constrain any man’s persuasion: they have indeed found the

& Plat. in Joh.x. (p. 275.) Pontifices
ipsi a Petri vestigiis discesserant. The
popes had swerved from the examples of
Peter. Possessor male fidei ullo tem-
pore non prescribit. Reg. Jur. 2. in
Seato. He that has no right to the
thing he possesses, cannot prescribe or
plead any length of time to make his
possession lawful.

h Nec vero simile sit, ut rem tam
necessariam ad ecclesize unitatem conti-
nendam Christus Dominus apostolis suis
non revelarit. Melch. Can. vi.8. Nei-
ther is it likely that our Lord Christ
would not have revealed to his apostles
a thing so necessary for preserving the
unity of the church.

Pope’s Supremacy. 153

pope in the first chapter of Genesis ; for (if we believe pope
Innocent IIJ.) he is one of thet wo great luminaries there’;
and he is as plainly there, as any where else in the Bible.

Wherefore if upon this account we should reject this pre-
tence, we might do it justly ; and for so doing we have the
allowance of the ancient fathers; for they did not hold any
man obliged to admit any point of doctrine, or rule of man-
ners, which is not in express words, or in terms equivalent,
contained in holy scripture; or which at least might not thence
be deduced by clear and certain inference: this their manner
of disputing with heretics and heterodox people doth shew ;
this appeareth by their way of defining and settling doctrines
of faith; this they often do avow in plain words applicable to
our case: for, * If, saith St. Austin, about Christ, or about his
church, or about any other thing, which concerneth our faith
and life, I will not say we, who are nowise comparable to him,
who said, Although we; but even as he going on did add, If
an angel from heaven should tell you, beside what you have
received in the legal and evangelical scriptures, let him be
anathema: in which words we have St. Austin’s warrant,
not only to refuse, but to detest this doctrine, which being no-
where extant in law or gospel, is yet obtruded on us, as nearly
relating both to Christ and his church, as greatly concerning
both our faith and practice.

2. To enforce this argument, we may consider that the
evangelists do speak about the propagation, settlement, and
continuance of our Lord’s kingdom ; that the apostles do often
treat about the state of the church and its edification, order,
peace, unity ; about the distinction of its officers and members,
about the qualifications, duties, graces, privileges of spiritual

i Ad firmamentum igitur cceli, hoc
est universalis ecclesiz, fecit Deus duo
magna luminaria, id est, duas instituit
dignitates, que sunt pontificalis aucto-
ritas, et regalis potestas; sed illa que
preest diebus, id est, spiritualibus, ma-
jor est; que vero carnalibus, minor,
&c. Innoc. III. in Decret. Greg. I.
xxxiii. 6. For the firmament therefore
of heaven, i. e. of the universal church,
God made two great lights; i. e. he or-
dained two dignities or powers, which
are the pontifical authority, and the
regal power: but that which rules the

days, i. e. spiritual matters, is the
greater; but that which governs carnal
things is the lesser, &c.

k Proinde sive de Christo, sive de
ejus ecclesia, sive de quacunque alia re,
que pertinet ad fidem vitamque nos-
tram, non dicam nos, nequaquam com-
parandi ei qui dixit, Licet st nos, sed
omnino quod sequutus adjecit, Si ange-
lus de ceelo vobis annunciavertt, preter-
quam quod in scripturis legalitus ac
evangelicis accepistis, anathema sit.
Aug. contr. Petil. iii. 6.

Exod.

XXViil. I, 4.
Levit. xxi.

P. Nic. I.

154 A Treatise of the

governors and guides; about prevention and remedy of here-
sies, schisms, disorders: upon any of which occasions how is
it possible that the mention of such a spiritual monarch (who
was to have a main influence on each of those particulars)
should wholly escape them, if they had known such an one
instituted by God ?

In the Levitical law all things concerning the high priest,
not only his designation, succession, consecration, duty,
power, maintenance, privileges, but even his garments, mar-
riage, mourning, &c., are punctually determined and de-
scribed: and is it not wonderful, that in the many descrip-
tions of the new law no mention should be made concerning
any duty or privilege of its high priest, whereby he might be
directed in the administration of his office, and know what
observance to require ?

3. Whereas also the scripture doth inculcate duties of all
sorts, and doth not forget frequently to press duties of respect
and obedience toward particular governors of the church; is
it not strange, that it never should bestow one precept,
whereby we might be instructed and admonished to pay our
duty to the universal pastor ; especially considering, that God,
who directed the pens of the apostles, and who intended that
their writings should continue for the perpetual instruction of
Christians, did foresee how requisite such a precept would be
to secure that duty? for if but one such precept did appear,
it would do the business, and void all contestation about it.

4. They who so carefully do exhort to honour and obey
the temporal sovereignty, how come they so wholly to wave
urging the no less needful obligations to obey the spiritual
monarch ? while they are so mindful of the emperor, why are
they so neglectful of the pope; insomuch, that divers popes

~ Leo 1x, afterward, to ground and urge obedience to them, are fain to

rd Greg.

borrow those precepts ec command obedience to princes,

VIL. Ep. 1, accommodating them by analogy and inference to them-

22.

1 Pet. ii.
13—17.

selves ?

5. Particularly St. Peter, one would think, who doth so_

earnestly enjoin to obey the king as supreme, and to honour
him, should not have been unmindful of his successors; or
quite have forborne to warn Christians of the respect due to
them: surely the popes afterward do not follow him in this

Pope’s Supremacy. 155

reservedness ; for in their Decretal Epistles they urge nothing
so much as obedience to the apostolical see.

6. One might have expected something of that nature from
St. Paul himself, who did write so largely to the Romans,
and so often from Rome; that at least some word, or some
intimation, should have dropped from him concerning these
huge rights and privileges of this see, and of the regard due
to it. Particularly then, when he professedly doth enumerate
the offices, instituted by God, for standing use and perpetual
duration ; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the Eph. iv.11,
ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ; till we all come ri? ag
in the unity of faith, &e.* 28.

He commendeth them for their faith, which was spoken of Rom. i. 8.
through the whole world; yet ‘giving them no advantage above
others ; as St. Chrysostom observeth on those words, for obedi- Rom. i. s.
ence to the faith among all nations, among whom also are ye.

m This, saith St. Chrysostom, he saith to depress their conceit, to
void their haughtiness of mind, and to teach them (to deem others
equal in dignity with them).

When he writeth to that church, (which was some time (Vid.
after St. Peter had settled the popedom,) he doth only style ig
them kAnro) dy.ou, (called saints,) and dyamnrot cod, (beloved of Hier.) Ba-
God,) which are common adjuncts of all Christians; he saith, ¢ 46, & é
their faith was spoken of generally, but of the fame of their 8™-1-7,
authority being so spread he taketh no notice; that their Rom. xvi.
obedience had come abroad to all men, but their commands had '*
not (it seemeth) come anywhere.

He wrote divers Epistles from Rome, wherein he resolveth
many cases debated, yet never doth urge the authority of the
Roman church for any point, which now is so ponderous an
argument.

7. But however, seeing the scripture is so strangely reserved,
how cometh it to pass that tradition is also so defective,
and staunch in so grand a case? We have in divers of the

fathers (particularly in Tertullian, in St. Basil, in St.Jerome) Tertull. de
Cor. Mil. 3.

k Quarum laudum et glorie degene- may é@var. ot bere
rem fuisse, maximum crimen est. C/. m Tabra 5¢ woes Kabaipav ed 7d
Rom. ad Cypr. Ep. 31. To degenerate ¢pdvnua, cal Kevav Td Quonwa THS Oia-
from which praise and glory is an ex- volas, xal d:d3donwy abrovs Thy mpds BA-
ceeding great crime. Aous lovtiulay.

1 Odd8ey wAdov abrois BiSwo1 TaY Aoi-

Basil. de
Sp. S. 27.
Hier. ad-

156 | A Treatise of the

catalogues of traditional doctrines and observances, which
they recite to assert tradition in some cases supplemental

vers. Lucif. to scripture ; in which their purpose did require that they

Const. A-

post. vii. 41.

(a full
Creed, at
baptism.)

Conc. Lat.
iv. cap. 5.
an. 1215.

should set down those of principal moment; and they are
so punctual, as to insert many of small consideration: how
then came they to neglect this, concerning the papal au-
thority over the whole church, which had been most pertinent
to their design, and in consequence did vastly surpass all the
rest which they do name?

8. The designation of the Romish bishop by succession to
obtain so high a degree in the church, being above all others
a most remarkable and noble piece of history, which it had
been a horrible fault in an ecclesiastical history to slip over,
without careful reporting and reflecting upon it ; yet Eusebius,
that most diligent compiler of all passages relating to the ori-
ginal constitution of the church, and to all transactions therein,
hath not one word about it! who yet studiously doth report
the successions of the Roman bishops, and all the notable occur-
rences he knew concerning them, with favourable advantage.

9. Whereas this doctrine is pretended to be a point of
faith, of vast consequence to the subsistence of the church and
to the salvation of men, it is somewhat strange that it should
not be inserted into any one ancient summary of things to
be believed, (of which summaries divers remain, some com-
posed by public consent, others by persons of eminency in the
church,) nor by fair and forcible consequence should be dedu-
cible from any article in them; especially considering that
such summaries were framed upon occasion of heresies spring-
ing up which disregarded the pope’s authority, and which by
asserting it were plainly confuted. We are therefore be-
holden to pope Innocent III. and his Lateran synod, for first
synodically defining this point, together with other points no
less new and unheard of before. The Creed of pope Pius IV,
formed the other day, is the first, as I take it, which did con-
tain this article of faith.

10. It is much that this point of faith should not be de-—

livered in any of those ancient expositions of the Creed (made
by St. Austin, Ruffin, &c.) which enlarge it to necessary points
of doctrine, connected with the articles therein, especially with
that of the catholic church, to which the pope’s authority hath

— | a

Pope’s Supremacy. 157

so close a connexion; that it should not be touched in the ea-
techetical discourses of Cyril, Ambrose, &c.; that in the sys-
tems of divinity composed by St. Austin, Lactantius, &c. ; it
should not be treated on: the world is now changed ; for the
Catechism of Trent doth not overlook so material a point; and
it would pass for a lame body of theology which should omit
to treat on this subject.

11. It is more wonderful that this point should never be
defined, in downright and full terms, by any ancient synod ; it
being so notoriously in those old times opposed by divers who
dissented in opinion and discorded in practice from the pope;
it being also a point of that consequence, that such a solemn
declaration of it would have much conduced to the ruin of all
particular errors and schisms, which were maintained then in
opposition to the church.

12. Indeed had this point been allowed by the main body
of orthodox bishops, the pope could not have been so drowsy
or stupid as not to have solicited for such a definition thereof ;
nor would the bishops have been backward in compliance
thereto; it being, in our adversaries’ conceit, so compendious
and effectual a way of suppressing all heresies, schisms, and
disorders; (although indeed later experience hath shewed it
no less available to stifle truth, justice, and piety:) the popes
after Luther were better advised, and so were the bishops
adhering to his opinions.

13. Whereas also it is most apparent, that many persons
disclaimed this authority, not regarding either the doctrines or
decrees of the popes; it is wonderful that such men should not
be reckoned in the large catalogues of heretics, wherein errors
of less obvious consideration, and of far less importance, did
place men; if Epiphanius, Theodoret, Leontius, &c. were so
negligent or unconcerned, yet St. Austin, Philastrius—western
men—should not have overlooked this sort of desperate he-
retics: Aérius, for questioning the dignity of bishops, is set
among the heretics; but who got that name for disavowing the
pope’s supremacy, among the many who did it! (it is but
lately that such as we have been thrust in among heretics.)

14. Whereas no point avowed by Christians could be so apt
to raise offence and jealousy in pagans against our religion as
this, which setteth up a power of so vast extent and huge

158 A Treatise of the

influence ; whereas no novelty could be more surprising or
startling, than the erection of an universal empire over the
consciences and religious practices of men; whereas also this
doctrine could not but be very conspicuous and glaring in
ordinary practice ; it is prodigious, that all pagans should not
loudly exclaim against it.

It is strange that pagan historians (such as Marcellinus,
who often speaketh of popes, and blameth them for their
luxurious way of living and pompous garb"; as Zozimus,
who bore a great spite at Christianity; as all the writers of
the imperial history before Constantine) should not report it,
as a very strange pretence newly started up.

It is wonderful, that the eager adversaries of our religion
(such as Celsus, Porphyry, Hierocles, Julian himself) should
not particularly level their discourse against it, as a most
scandalous position and dangerous pretence, threatening the
government of the empire.

It is admirable, that the emperors themselves, inflamed
with emulation and suspicion of such an authority, (the which
hath been so terrible even to Christian princes,) should not in
their edicts expressly decry and impugn it; that indeed every
one of them should not with extremest violence implacably
strive to extirpate it.

In consequence of these things it may also seem strange,
that none of the advocates of our faith (Justin, Origen, Ter-
tullian, Arnobius, Cyril, Austin) should be put to defend it,
or so much as forced to mention it, in their elaborate apolo-
gies for the doctrines and practices which were reprehended
by any sort of adversaries thereto.

We may add, that divers of them in their °apologies and
representations concerning Christianity would have appeared
not to deal fairly, or to have been very inconsiderate, when
they profess for their common belief assertions repugnant to

procedantque vehiculis insi-
dentes, circumspecte vestiti, epulas cu-
rantes profusas, adeo ut eorum convi-
via regales superent mensas. Marcell.
lib. xxvii. p. 338. They travel sitting
in chariots, curiously apparelled, pro-
curing profuse dainties, insomuch as
their meals exceed the feasts of kings.
© Sentiunt enim Deum esse solum, in
cujus solius potestate sunt, a quo sunt

secundi, post quem primi, ante omnes
et super omnes deos. Quidni? cum

super omnes homines, qui utique vi- —

vunt, et mortuis antistant. Tertull.
Apolog. cap. 30. For they think it is
God alone in whose power they are,
next to whom they are the chief, before
all, and above all gods. And why not?
when they are above all men alive, and
surpass the dead.

ep ge nh org

Pope’s Supremacy. 159

that doctrine; as when Tertullian saith, P We reverence the
emperor as a man second to God, and less only than God;
when Optatus affirmeth, that above the emperor there is
none beside God, who made the emperor; and, that *Donatus
by extolling himself (as some now do) above the emperor, did
in so doing, as it were, exceed the bounds of men, that he did
esteem himself as God, not as a man. When St. Chrysostom
asserteth ‘the emperor to be the crown and head of all men
upon earth ; and saith, that teven apostles, evangelists, prophets,
any men whoever, are to be subject to the temporal powers;
when St. Cyril calleth the emperor "the supreme top of glory
among men, elevated above all others by incomparable differ-
ences, &c. When even popes talk at this rate; as pope Gre-
gory I, calling the emperor his */ord, and lord of ali ; telling
the emperor, that his competitor, by assuming the title of
universal bishop, did set himself above the honour of his im-
perial majesty ; which he supposeth a piece of great absurdity
and arrogance: and even pope Gregory II. doth eall that
emperor (against whom he afterward rebelled) Ythe head of
Christians. Whereas, indeed, if the pope be monarch of
the church, endowed with the regalities which they now
ascribe to him, it is plain enough that he is not inferior to any
man living in real power and dignity: wherefore the modern
doctors of Rome are far more sincere or considerate in their
heraldry than were those old fathers of Christendom; who

P Colimus imperatorem ut hominem
a Deo secundum, et solo Deo minorem.
Tertull. ad Scap. 2.

4 Cum super imperatorem non sit
nisi solus Deus qui fecit imperatorem.
Opt. lib. 3.

r dum se Donatus super impe-
ratorem extollit, jam quasi hominum
excesserat modum, ut se ut Deum, non
hominem estimaret. Jd. ibid.

S$ Bacive’s yap Kopuph Kal Kepadr
Ttav ém Tis yns éorw andyvtwy. Chrys.
*Avdp. ii. p. 463.

t Kav amdatodos 7s, kav evayyeAorThs,
Kay mpophrns, kav dorisobv, &c. Chrys,
in Rom. xiii. 1. Od ydp éorw 5 bBpic8els
budrimdy twa exw én) ris vis, BaciAreds
yap . Chrys. supra. For he that is
thus wronged has not his equal upon
earth, for he is king, &c.

u Tis pev ev dvOpdras ebwrclas 7d
avwtaroy Kal dovyKpitos diapopais Tay

BrAwy andytwy aveotnxds Kal drepxel-
pevov, ducts, & MiAdxpiorot Bacireis, rad
KAjpos tuiv ekalperds te Kal mpémwv
mapa Qcod THs evotons ai’tg kata wdy-
twv dwepox7ns- Cyril. ad Theod. in Cone.
Eph. part. i. cap.3. p. 20.

x P. Greg. M. Ep. ii. 62. Quia se-
reniss. domine ex illo jam tempore domi-
nus meus fuisti, quando adhuc dominus
omnium non eras Ego quidem jussi-
oni subjectus . Ibid. Ad hoc enim
potestas dominorum meorum pietati
ceelitus data est super omnes homines,
&ec. Ibid. Ego indignus famulus vester.
Ibid. Qui honori quoque imperii vestri
se per privatum vocabulum superponit.
P. Greg. rE Ep. iv. 32.

y ‘Ns BaoidAed’s Kal Kepard Tav Xpiw-
riavav. P. Greg. II. in Epist. 1. ad
Leon. Isaur. apud Bin. tom. v. p. 502.
As king and head of Christians.

160 A Treatise of the

now stick not downrightly to prefer the pope before all princes
of the world ; not only in doctrine and notion, but in the sa-
ered offices of the church: for in the very canon of their
mass, the pope (together with the bishop of the diocese, one of
his ministers) is set before all Christian princes ; every Christ-
ian subject being thereby taught to deem the pope superior
to his prince. #Now we must believe (for one pope hath
written it, another hath put it in his decretals, and it is current
law) that the papal authority doth no less surpass the royal,
than the sun doth outshine the moon.

Now it is abundantly declared by papal definition, as a
pot necessary to salvation, that every human creature (nel-
ther king nor Czesar excepted) is subject to the Roman high
priest.

Now the mystery is discovered, why popes, when summoned
by emperors, declined to go in person to general synods; be-
cause °it was not tolerable that the emperor (who sometime
would be present in synods) should sit above the pope; as in
the pride of his heart he might perhaps offer to do. (1 can-
not forbear to note what an ill conceit Bellarmine had of
Leol. and other popes, that they did forbear coming at synods
out of their villainous pride and haughtiness.)

15. One would admire, that Constantine, if he had smelt
this doctrine, or any thing like it in Christianity, should be so
ready to embrace it ; or that so many emperors should in those
times do so; some princes then probably being jealous of their
honour, and unwilling to admit any superior to them.

It is at least much, that emperors should with so much in-
dulgence foster and cherish popes, being their so dangerous
rivals for dignity: and that it should be true, which pope

z una cum famulo tuo papa nos-
tro N. et antistite nostro N. et rege nostro

cerdotal power exceeds the kingly in an-
tiquity, dignity, and utility, &c.

N. et omnibus orthodoxis, &c. ‘Together
with thy servant our pope N. and our
bishop N. and our king N. and all or-
thodox, &c.

a Fiat autem oratio pro dignitate re-
gia post orationem factam pro papa, quia
potestas suprema sacerdotalis excedit re-
giam antiquitate, dignitate, et utilitate,
&ec. Gab. Biel. in Can, mis. Let prayer
be made for the king after prayer made
for the pope; because the supreme sa-

b Subesse Romano pontifici omni hu-
mane creature declaramus, dicimus, de-
finimus et pronunciamus omnino esse de
necessitate salutis.
Extrav. com. lib. i. tit. 38.

¢ At quamvis utcunque tolerabile sit,
ut principes seculares in concilio sedeant
ante alios episcopos, tamen nullo modo
convenit, ut ante ipsum summum ponti-
ficem, &c. Bell. de Cone. i. 19.

P. Bonif. VIII. in

161

Nicholas doth affirm, that ‘the emperors had extolled the Roman

see with divers privileges, had enriched it with gifts, had enlarged

it with benefits ; had done | know not how many things more

for it: surely they were bewitched thus to advance their con-
current competitor for honour and power; one who pretended

to be a better man than themselves. Bellarmine (in his Apo- Apol. Bell.
logy against King James) saith, that the pope was (vellet, nollet) ® °°”
constrained to be subject to the emperors, because his power was

not known to them; it was well it was not: but how could

it be concealed from them, if it were a doctrine commonly
avowed by Christians? it is hard keeping so practical a doc-
trine from breaking forth into light. But to leave this con-
sideration.

Furthermore, we have divers ancient writings, the special
nature, matter, scope whereof did require, or greatly invite
giving attestation to this power, if such an one had been
known and allowed in those times; which yet do afford no
countenance, but rather much prejudice thereto.

16. The Apostolical Canons, and the Constitutions of Cle- Const. A-
ment, which describe the state of the church, with its laws, aa
customs, and practices current in the times of those who com-
piled them, (which times are not certain, but ancient, and the
less ancient the more it is to our purpose,) wherein especially
the ranks, duties, and privileges of all ecclesiastical persons
are declared or prescribed, do not yet touch the prerogatives

of this universal head, or the special respects due to him, nor
mention any laws or constitutions framed by him: which is
no less strange, than that there should be a body of laws,
or description of the state of any kingdom, wherein nothing
should be said concerning the king, or the royal authority :
it 1s not so in our modern canon law, wherein the pope doth
make utramque paginam ; we read little beside his authority,
and decrees made by it.

The Apostolical Canons particularly do prescribe that ¢ the
bishops of each nation should know him that is first among them,

Pope’s Supremacy.

d Quapropter attendat clementia ves-
tra; quantus fuerit erga sedis apostolice
reverentiam antecessorum vestrorum, pi-
orum duntaxat imperatorum——amor,
et studium ; qualiter eam diversis privi-
legiis extulerint, donis ditaverint, bene-

ficiis ampliaverint ; qualiter eam literia
suis honoraverint, ejus votis annuerint,
&e. P. Nich. I. Epist.8.ad Mich. Imp.

162 A Treatise of the

and should esteem him the head, and should do nothing consider-
able (or extraordinary) without his advice ; as also that each
one (of those head bishops) should only meddle with those af-
airs which concerned his own precinct, and the places under
wt: also, that no such primate should do any thing without the
opinion of all ; that so there may be concord. Now what place
could be more opportune to mention the pope’s sovereign
power! How could the canonist without strange neglect pass
it over? Doth he not indeed exclude it, assigning the supreme
disposal (without further resort) of all things to the arbitration
of the whole body of pastors, and placing the maintenance of
concord in that course ?

17. So also the old writer, under the name of Dionysius the
Areopagite, ‘treating in several places about the degrees of the
ecclesiastical hierarchy, was monstrously overseen in omitting
the sovereign thereof: in the fifth chapter of his ecclesiastical
hierarchy he professeth carefully to speak of those orders, but
hath not a word of this supereminent rank, but averreth sepi-
scopacy to be the first and highest of divine orders, in which the
hierarchy is consummated: and in his Epistle to Demophilus
there is a remarkable place, wherein he could hardly have
avoided touching the pope, had there been then one in such
vogue as now: for advising that monk to gentleness and
observance toward his superiors, he thus speaketh: © Let
passion and reason be governed by you; but you by the holy
deacons, and these by the priests, and the priests by the bishops;
and the bishops by the apostles, or by their successors ; (that is,
saith Maximus, those which we now call patriarchs ;) and
if perhaps any one of them shall fail of his duty, let him be
corrected by those holy persons who are coordinate to him.

7. mpdtrrew mepirtov tvev Tis éxelvov
yvdpns enxeiva 5 pdva mpdrrew Exa-
otov, baa TH abTod mapoile emiPddrrct,
Kal rais in’ abthy xopais' GAAG pdt
éxcivos tvev TIS MdvTwY Ywaeuns "Wol-
elrw Tt obtw yap dudvoa ora. Apost.
Can. 34.

f ‘H Ocia raév lepapxav tdatis mporn
pev dort Tav Ocomtixa@v Tdkewy, axpordrn
Bt nal eoxdrn h ath’ Kal yap eis abriy
dmoreneitan kal dromAnpodTa Taca Tijs
Kal ipas lepapxlas diaxdopunois. Dionys.
de Hier. Eccl. cap. 5.

& ’Eweid) tas feparinas tdgtes Kal

amotAnpéces, Suvdwers Te adTav kal
évepyelas eiphkapev ws juiv epinrdv.
De Eccl. Hier. cap. 5.

h Adrds wey oty emibuula Kal Ouug
Kal Adyw Ta Kat’ akiay apdpicer col Be

of Oetor Aettoupyol Kal robros of iepeis:

iepdpxat 5 Tots tepedou Kal Tots lepdp-:

xas of dréotoAan Kal of Tov GroordAwy
diddoxor' Kal efrov tis Kal ev exelvois
Tov TpoonkovTos Grocpadcin, Tapa TV
buotaryav aylwy éravopdwihoera, &c.
Dionys. Ar. Ep. 8. "AmooréAwy 8 dia-
Sdéxous Tovs viv TaTpidpxouvs Ayodmou
elvat. Max. Schol. ibid,

i a ee

Pope’s Supremacy. 163

Why not in this case let him be corrected by the pope, his
superior? But he knew none of an order superior to the
apostles’ successors.

18. Likewise, Ignatius in many Epistles frequently describeth
the several ranks of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, extolleth their
dignity and authority to the highest pitch, mightily urgeth the
respect due to them, yet never doth he so much as mention or
touch this sovereign degree, wherein the majesty of the clergy
did chiefly shine.

In his very Epistle to the Romans he doth not yield any
deference to their bishop, nor indeed doth so much as take
notice of him. Is it not strange he should so little mind the
sovereign of the church? or was it, for a sly reason, because
being bishop of Antioch he had a pique to his brother Jacob,
who had supplanted him, and got away his birthright ?

The counterfeiter therefore of Ignatius did well personate
him, when he saith, that ‘ in the church there is nothing greater
than a bishop; and that * a bishop is beyond all rule and au-
thority ; for in the time of Ignatius there was no domineering
pope over all bishops.

19. We have some letters of popes, (though not many ;
for popes were then not very scribatious, or not so pragma-
tical ; whence, to supply that defect, lest popes should seem
not able to write, or to have slept almost four hundred years,
they have forged divers for them, and those so wise ones, that
we who love the memory of those good popes disdain to ac-
knowledge them authors of such idle stuff; we have yet some
letters of,) and to popes, to and from divers eminent persons
in the church, wherein the former do not assume, nor the lat-
ter ascribe, any such power; the popes do not express them-
selves like sovereigns, nor the bishops address themselves like
subjects ; but they treat one another in a familiar way, like
brethren and equals: this is so true, that it is a good mark
of a spurious epistle, (whereof we have good store, devised by
colloguing knaves, and fathered on the first popes,) when any
of them talketh in an imperious strain, or arrogateth such a
power to himself.

i Obre cod tis Kpelrrwy, } mwapa- k Tl ydp éorw enlaxowos, GAN’ F
wAhows éy waar rots obow, obdt BE ev wdons apxiis Kal etoveias éxdnewa, &e.
éxxAnola émoxéwov ti weiCov. Pseud. Id. ad Trall.

Ignat. ad Smyrn.
M2

Tpdcwra
Wpoo rer7)
kal av0ain.

p. 2.

Cypr. Ep.
41, 42, 43,
45> 47> 49>
54, 55. 575

58,

67, 72.

164 A Treatise of the

20. Clemens, bishop of Rome, in the apostolical times unto
the church of Corinth, then engaged in discords and factions,
wherein the clergy was much affronted, (divers presbyters,
who had well and worthily behaved themselves, were ejected
from their office in a seditious manner,) did write a very large
Epistle ; | wherein like a good bishop, and charitable Christian
brother, he doth earnestly by manifold inducements persuade
them to charity and peace; but nowhere doth he speak im-
periously, like their prince: in such a case one would think,
if ever, for quashing such disorders and quelling so perverse
folks, who spurned the clergy, it had been decent, it had been
expedient, to employ his authority, and to speak like himself,
challenging obedience, upon duty to him, and at their peril.
How would a modern pope have ranted in such a case! how
thundering a bull would he have dispatched against such
outrageous contemners of the ecclesiastical order! how often
would he have spoken of the apostolic see and its authority !
We should infallibly have heard him swagger in his wonted
style, ™ Whoever shall presume to cross our will, let him know
that he shall incur the indignation of Almighty God, and his
blessed apostles Peter and Paul. But our popes, it seemeth,
have more wit or better mettle than pope Clement; that
good pope did not know his own strength, or had not the
heart to use it.

21. Among the Epistles of St. Cyprian there are divers
Epistles of him to several popes, (to Cornelius, to Lucius, to
Stephanus,) in the which, although written with great kind-
ness and respect, yet no impartial eye can discern any special
regard to them, as to his superiors in power, or pastors in
doctrine, or judges of practice; "he reporteth matters to them,
he conferreth about points with all freedom ; he speaketh his
sense and giveth his advice without any restraint or awe; he

1 ‘Opamev yap Sri evlovs tyuets mern-
yayeTe KaAGsS ToAtTEvomévous eK Tis &-
péurtws airois TeTIAnuevns AcLToupyias.
Clem. ad Corinth. Ep. i. p. 58. Jun.
For we see that you have removed
some, who behaved themselves well in
their office, out of their ministry blame-
lessly discharged by them. Z3racid(ew
mpos Tovs mperBurépous.

m Si quis voluntati nostre contraire
presumpserit, indignationem omuipo-

tentis Dei, ac beatorum Petri et Pauli
apostoli se noverit incursurum. In such
terms usually the pope’s bulls do end.

n Et quamquam sciam, frater charis- -
sime, pro mutua dilectione, quam debe-
mus et exhibemus invicem nobis, floren-
tissimo illic clero tecum preesidenti, &c.
Ep. 55. And although I know, most.
dear brother, out of the mutual love
and respect which we owe and yield
one to another, &c,

Pope’s Supremacy. 165

spareth not upon occasion to reprove their practices, and to re-
ject their opinions; he in his addresses to them and discourses
of them styleth them brethren and colleagues ; and he conti-
nually treateth them as such, upon even terms: ° When, saith
he to the clergy of Rome, dearest brethren, there was among
us an uncertain rumour concerning the decease of the good
man my colleague, Fabianus: upon which words Rigaltius
had cause to remark; P How like an equal and fellow-citizen
doth the bishop of Carthage mention the bishop of Rome,
even to the Roman clergy! But would not any man now be
deemed rude and saucy, who should talk in that style of the
pope?

Pope Cornelius also to St. Cyprian hath some Epistles, Cypr. Ep.
wherein no glimpse doth appear of any superiority assumed +” 4°:
by him. But of St. Cyprian’s judgment and demeanour
toward popes we shall have occasion to speak more largely,
in a way more positively opposite to the Roman pretences.

Eusebius citeth divers long passages out of an Epistle of Euseb. vi.
Cornelius to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, against Novatus ; 43°
wherein no mark of this supremacy doth appear; although
the magnitude and flourishing state of the Roman church
is described, for aggravation of Novatus’s schism and ambi-
tion.

Pope Julius hath a notable long Epistle, extant in one of
Athanasius’s Apologies, unto the bishops assembled at An-
tioch ; wherein he had the fairest occasion that could be to
assert and insist upon this sovereign authority, they flatly
denying and impugning it; questioning his proceedings as
singular, supposing him subject to the laws of the church
no less than any other bishop; and downrightly affirming
each of themselves to be his equal: about which point he
thought good not to contend with them; but waving pretences
to superiority, he justifieth his actions by reasons grounded
on the merit of the cause, such as any other bishop might
allege: but this Epistle I shall have more particular occasion
to discuss.

Pope Liberius hath an Epistle to St. Athanasius, wherein

© Cum de excessu boni viri college P Quam ex equo, et civilis mentio
mei, rumor apud nos incertus esset, col- episcopi Romani ab episcopo Carthaginis
lege charissimi . Cypr. Ep. 4. apud clerum? Rigalt. ibid.

166 A Treatise of the

he not only (for his direction and satisfaction) doth inquire

his opinion about the point ;

perchance, that he shall obediently follow it;

but professeth, in compliment
IWrite, saith

he, whether you do think as we do, and just so, about the true

Faith ;

good to command me.

that I may be undoubtedly assured about what you think
Was not that spoken indeed like a

courteous sovereign, and an accomplished judge in matters of

Socr. iv. 12. faith? The same pope in the head of the western doth write

to a knot of eastern bishops, whom they call their beloved bre-

thren and fellow-ministers ;
an emperor.

and in a brotherly strain, not like

In the time of Damasus, successor to Liberius, St. Basil

* represented and bewailed the

per, 69» hath divers Epistles to the western bishops’, wherein, having

wretched state of the eastern

churches, then overborne with heresies, and unsettled by fac-
tions, he craveth their charity, their prayers, their sympathy,
their comfort, their brotherly aid ; by affording to the ortho-
dox and sound party the countenance of their communion, by
joining with them in contention for truth and peace; for that
the communion of so great churches would be of mighty
weight to support and strengthen their cause; giving credit
thereto among the people, and inducing the emperor to deal
fairly with them, in respect to such a multitude of adherents ;
especially of those which were at such a distance, and not so

immediately subject to the eastern emperor ;

for, SZf, saith

he, very many of you do concur unanimously in the same opin-
ion, it is manifest that the multitude of consenters will make the

doctrine to be received without contradiction ;

and, tl know,

saith he again, writing to Athanasius about these matters, but

q Tpdyov, ei ofTw dpoveis Kad Kal
jets, kal Ta toa ev GAnOw7 mlorer’ iva
Kayo merous & &diacplrws mepl av
ead KeAevey wo. Liber. ad Ath. tom.

L. p. 243.

r“vuas Tapakahovpev oupTrabeion nuav
Tais Suupéceot. Ep. 61. Ett: obv wapa-
pbO.ov aydrns, elris kowwvla mveduaros,
eltia omddyxva Kal oixtippol, KivhOnre
mpos Thy ayriAnw juav. Ibid. We be-
seech you to have a fellow-feeling of our
distractions. If there be any comfort of
love, any fellowship of the Spirit, any
bowels and mercies, be ye moved with
pity and commiseration to help us.
Adre xeipa Tots eis ydvu KABetot, ovyKi-

ynojrw ep nuiv Ta GdeApucd duav
onaAdyxva, mpoxveitw Bdkpva cuura-
Ocias. Ep.69. “Em Bonoducba Thy tuere-
pay aydarny cis Thy avTiAnuw judy Kai
ouundderay. Ep. 70. "EA@eiy Twas rap’
iuav eis éerloxepw kal mapapvilay Tay
6A1Bouévwv. Ibid. Vide Ep. 74. (el wey

was prethi elvat KowwviKovs, &e.

8 "Edy 5é nal cuupdvws mwAcloves duod —

Ta avTa Soypatlonre, SjAov brit Td TAH-
00s Tav doyuaTiocdyTwY évawTlppyrov maar
Thy napadoxhy Katackevace TOD Sdypya-
tos. Ep. 74. (Ep. 293-)

t— ~ play emvyvous dddy Bondclas Tals
Kal has exxdAnolas, Thy mapa Tov duTi-
Kav émokérwy cbumrvoiay——. Ep. 48.

Pope’s Supremacy. 167

one way of redress to our churches, the conspiring with us of the
western bishops; the which being obtained, "sould probably
yield some advantage to the public, the secular power revering
the credibility of the multitude, and the people all about following
them without repugnance: and, * You, saith he to the western
bishops, the further you dwell from them, the more credible you
will be to the people.

This indeed was according to the ancient rule and practice
in such cases, that any church being oppressed with error, or
distracted with contentions, should from the bishops of other
churches receive aid to the removal of those inconveniences.
That it was the rule doth appear from what we have before
spoken, and of the practice there be many instances: for so
did St. Cyprian send two of his clergy to Rome, to compose the
schism there, moved by Novatian against Cornelius; Yso was
St. Chrysostom called to Ephesus, (although out of his juris-
diction,) to settle things there; so (to omit divers instances
occurring in history) St. Basil himself was called by the church
of Iconium, to visit tt, and to give it a bishop ; although it did
not belong to his ordinary inspection; and he doth tell the
bishops of the *coasts, that they should have done well i” « pepana-
sending some to visit and assist his churches in their distresses. 7

But now how, I pray, cometh it to pass, that in such a case
he should not have a special recourse to the pope, but in so
many addresses should only wrap him up in a community?
Why should he not humbly petition him to exert his sovereign
authority for the relief of the eastern churches, laying his

U Taya ty Tt yévorTo Tois KoWois bpeE-
Aos, Tav te KpatotvTwy Td atidmioTtov
Tov mAtGovs dSvewroupévwy, Kal Tov
éxagTaxXot Aady a&koAovbotytwy abrois
avaytipphtws. Ibid.

X “Yyueis 5¢ Scov waxpay a’Tay arw-
Kiopevot TUYXAVETE, TOTOUTOY TAEOY Tapa
Tois Aaois akidmiorov Exere. Ep. 74.

Y Quod servis Dei, et maxime sacer-
dotibus justis et pacificis congruebat,
frater charissime, miseramus nuper col-
legas nostros Caldonium et Fortunatum,
ut non tantum persuasione literarum
nostrarum, sed presentia sua, et con-
silio omnium vestrum eniterentur, quan-
tum possent, et elaborarent, ut ad catho-
lice ecclesiz unitatem scissi corporis
membra componeret . Cypr. Ep. 42.

ad Cornel. Pallad. As it becomed the
servants of God, especially righteous
and peaceable priests, most dear bro-
ther, we lately sent our colleagues Cal-
donius and Fortunatus, that they might,
not only by the persuasion of our let-
ters, but also by their presence, and the
advice of you all, endeavour to their
utmost and strive to reduce the mem-
bers of that divided body to the unity
of the catholic church. Airy Kade wal
quads eis enloxelw, Gore airy Sovvas
érlcxorov. Bas. Ep.8. "“AxdéAov@oy Fv
rapa Tis iuerépas aydrns Kal ray yyn-
olwy twas awooréAAcoOa cuvexas, els
enloxeliy huav Tay KaTarovoundvwr.

Ep. 77:

Vid. Epist.
272, 2735
321, 325,
349.

168 A Treatise of the

charge, and inflicting censures on the dissenters ? Why should
he lay all the stress of his hopes on the consent of the western
bishops? Why doth he not say a word of the dominion resi-
dent in them over all the church? These things are uncon-
ceivable, if he did take the pope to be the man our adversaries
say he is.

But St. Basil had other notions: for indeed, being so wise
and good a man, if he had taken the pope for his sovereign,
he would not have taxed him as he doth, and so complain of
him; when speaking of the western bishops, (whereof the pope
was the ringleader, and most concerned,) he hath these words,
(oceasioned, as I conceive, by the bishop of Rome’s rejecting
that excellent person, Meletius, bishop of Antioch ;) 2 What
we should write, or how to join with those that write, Tam in
doubt—for I am apt to say that of Diomedes, You ought not
to request, for he is a haughty man; for in truth observance
doth render men of proud manners more contemptuous than
otherwise they are. *For if the Lord be propitious to us,
what other addition do we need? but if the anger of God con-
tinue, what help can we have from the western supercilious-
ness? who in truth neither know, nor endure to learn; but
being prepossessed with false suspicions, do now do those things
which they did before in the cause of Marcellus; affecting
to contend with those who report the truth to them; and
establishing heresy by themselves. Would that excellent per-
son (the greatest man of his time in reputation for wisdom and
piety) have thus, unbowelling his mind in an epistle to a very
eminent bishop, smartly reflected on the qualities and proceed-
ings of the western clergy, charging them with pride and
haughtiness, with a suspicious and contentious humour, with
incorrigible ignorance, and indisposition to learn, if he had
taken him, who was the leader in all these matters, to have
been his superior and sovereign? Would he have added the
following words, immediately touching him ; >I would in the

2 TO bri yap Oeparevdueva Ta brcph- Tepov emt MapKkeAAg: mpds ev Tovs Thy

gpava 70n éavray brepomrixdrepaylveoOat
mépuce. Bas. Ep. 10. ad Euseb, Samos.
Ep.
@——Tlola BohOea jyiy ris SuTiKjs
opptos ; of Téye GAnbes obre toaow ote
pabeiv dvéxovrat, Wevdéor Bt srovolas
mpoeiAnupevor, exeiva mova viv, & mpd-

GANVeay abtots amayyéAAovTas piAover-
Khoovtes* Thy 5& alperw B50 éavray Be-
Batéoayres. Ibid.

b Eyam pty yap abros &vev Tov Kowwov
oxhwaros eBovAduny avtay emoreiAam
T@ Kopupalw, mepl wey Tay exKAnoia-
oTiay ovdey, et ph Scov mapawitacbau,

Pope’s Supremacy. 169

common name have written to their ringleader, nothing indeed
about ecclesiastical affairs, except only to intimate, that they
neither do know the truth of things with us, nor do admit the
way by which they may understand it; but in general about
their being bound not to set upon those who were humbled with
afflictions ; nor should judge themselves dignified by pride, a sin
which alone sufficeth to make one Gods enemy. Surely this
great man knew better what belonged to government and
manners, than in such rude terms to accost his sovereign :
nor would he have given him that character which he doth
otherwhere ; where speaking of his brother, St. Gregory
Nyssen, he saith he was an unfit agent to Rome, because
Calthough his address with a sober man would find much reve-
rence and esteem; yet to a haughty and reserved man, sitting I
know not where above, and thence not able to hear those below
speaking the truth to him, what profit can there be to the public
Srom the converse of such a man, whose disposition is averse from
illiberal flattery? But these speeches suit with that conceit
which St. Basil (as Baronius, I know not whence, reporteth) Anast. ad
expressed by saying, J hate the pride of that church; which se a
humour in them that good man would not be guilty of foster-
ing by too much obsequiousness.

St. Chrysostom, having by the practices of envious men Tom. vii.
combined against him, in a packed assembly of bishops, upon eile:
vain surmises, being sentenced and driven from his see, did
thereupon write an epistle to pope Innocent I. bishop of Vid. Laun.
Rome, together with his brethren the bishops of Italy ; there- nae
in representing his case, complaining of the wrong, vindicat-
ing his innocency, displaying the iniquity of the proceedings
against him, together with the mischievous consequences of
them toward the whole church, then requiring his succour for
redress: yet (although the sense of his case, and care of his
interest, were likely to suggest the greatest deference that
could be) neither the style, which is very respectful, nor the

avrod Kal moAAod aklay Thy ovvruxlay

Sr: obre Toaow Tay Tap juiv Thy GAt-
Geray, obre Thy bddv Br hs Gy udOo.ev Ka-
Tadéxovta’ Kabddov St rep) Tod fu) Seiv
tos bro Tay Teipacuay TaTewwleiow
émitlOecOar, unde atlwua Kplvew brepn-
gaviay, audprnua, cal udvov apxodvy &-
xOpay roeicOa eis Ocdv. Ibid.

iWnrA@ SE Kal peredpy, Eyw mov Kaby-
pévy Kal 31a TovTo axovew Tay xaudber
alte Thy Gdnbeay Pbeyyoudvwr uh duva-
pévy, Tl bv yévorro dpedos Tois Kowois,
rapa Tis Tov ToovTOV avdpds duiAlas, ds
GAAdrpiov Exe: Owwelas avedevOépou 7d
jOos; Bas. Ep. 250.

170 A Treatise of the

matter, which is very copious, do imply any acknowledgment
of the pope’s supremacy: he doth not address to him as to a
governor of all, who could by his authority command justice
to be done, but as to a brother, and a friend of innocence,
from whose endeavour he might procure relief; he had re-
course, not to his sovereign power, but to iis brotherly Jove ;
he informed his charity, not appealed to his bar; he in short
did no more than implore his assistance in an ecclesiastical
way; that he would express his resentment of so irregular
dealings; that he would avow communion with him, as with
an orthodox bishop innocent and abused ; that he would pro-
cure his cause to be brought to a fair trial in a synod of
bishops, lawfully called and indifferently affected’. Had the
good man had any conceit of the pope’s supremacy, he would,
one would think, have framed his address in other terms, and
sued for another course of proceeding in his behalf: but it is
plain enough, that he had no such notion of things, nor had
any ground for such a one. For indeed pope Innocent, in his
answer to him, could do no more than exhort him to patience ;
in another, to his clergy and people, could only comfort them,
declare his dislike of the adversaries’ proceedings and grounds ;
signify his intentions to procure a general synod, with hopes
of a redress thence; his sovereign power, it seems, not avail-
ing to any such purposes; ¢ But what, saith he, can we do in
such cases? A synodical cognizance is necessary, which we here-
tofore did say ought to be called; the which alone can allay the
motions of such tempests.

It is true, that the later popes, (Siricius, Anastasius, Inno-
cent, Zosimus, Bonifacius, Celestinus, &c.) after the Sardican
council, in their epistles to the western bishops, over whom
they had encroached, and who were overpowered by them,
&e. do speak in somewhat more lofty strain; but are more
modest toward those of the east, who could not bear, &e.

d ‘Huds 8¢ rovs ovx GAdvras, and all other things as before.

ov eAeyxouevous, ovK GmoderxbévTas © "AAA th Kata Tov ToLwolTwY voY .

bmevOtvous, Tay ypauydtwv Tav iperé- Cv TH TapdyT: Toihtwpev ; dvaryKatd
pwv dre amodavew ovvexas, Kal THs ear Bidtyywors ouvodiKh hy Kal mda
aydrns, Kal mévtwrv Tay BAdAwy, vmep epnuev cvvabpoctéav’ pdvyn ydp eoTw,
kal %umpooev. But as for us, we who fris Sivara Tas Kwhoes TOv ToLovTwY
are not condemned, nor convicted, nor karacreiAa Kkatoryliwv . Soz. viii.
proved guilty, let us continually enjoy 26.

the benefit of your letters, and love,

Pope’s Supremacy. 171

22. Further; It is most prodigious, that in the disputes
managed by the fathers against heretics, (the Gnostics, Va-
lentinians, Marcionites, Montanists, Manichees, Paulianists,
Arians, &c.) they should not, even in the first place, allege
and urge the sentence of the universal pastor and judge, as a
most evidently conclusive argument, as the most efficacious
and compendious method of convincing and silencing them.
Had this point been well proved and pressed, then without
any more concertations from scripture, tradition, reason, all
heretics had been quite defeated; and nothing then could
more easily have been proved, if it had been true, when the
light of tradition did shine so brightly; nothing indeed had
been to sense more conspicuous than the continual exercise
of such an authority.

We see now among those who admit such an authority,
how surely, when it may be had, it is alleged, and what sway
it hath, to the determination of any controversy: and so it
would have been then, if it had been then as commonly
known and avowed.

23. Whereas divers of the fathers purposely do treat on
methods of confuting heretics, it is strange they should be so
blind or dull, as not to hit on this most proper and obvious
way of referring debates to the decision of him, to whose
office of universal pastor and judge it did belong: particu-
larly one would wonder at Vincentius Lirinensis; that he on
set purpose, with great care, discoursing about the means of
settling points of faith, and of overthrowing heresies, should
not light upon this notable way, by having recourse to the
pope’s magisterial sentence ; yea, that indeed he should ex-
clude it; for he (‘after most intent study, and diligent inquiry,
consulting the best and wisest men) could find but two ways of
doing it: &/, saith he, did always, and from almost every one,
receive this answer; That if either I or any other would find
out the frauds and avoid the snares of upstart heretics, and con-
tinue sound and upright in the true faith, he should guard and

f Sepe igitur magno studio, et summa
attentione perquirens a quamplurimis
sanctitate et doctrina prestantibus viris,
&c. p. 316. (in edit. Balus.)

& Hujusmodi semper responsum ab
omnibus fere retuli, quod sive ego, sive
quis alius vellet exurgentium heretico-

rum fraudes deprehendere, laqueosque
vitare, et in fide sana sanus atque in-
teger permanere, duplici modo munire
fidem suam Domino adjuvante deberet ;
primo scilicet divine legis auctoritate,
tum deinde ecclesia catholice tradi-
tione. p. 317.

The like
discourse
against he-
retics doth
Clemens
Alexandri-
nus use.
Strom. vii.

P- 549-

172 A Treatise of the

strengthen his faith, God helping him, by these two means ; viz.
first, by the authority of the divine law, and then by the tradition
of the catholic church. And again, » We before have said, that
this hath always been, and is at present, the custom of catholics,
that they prove their faith by these two ways; first, by author-
ity of the divine canon ; then by the tradition of the universal
church.

Is it not strange, that he (especially being a western man,
living in those parts where the pope had got much sway, and
who doth express great reverence to the apostolic see) should
omit that way of determining points, which of all (according
to the modern conceits about the pope) is most ready and
most sure ’

24. In like manner Tertullian professeth the catholics in
his time to use such compendious methods of confuting here-
ties ; 'We, saith he, when we would dispatch against heretics for
the faith of the gospel, do commonly use these short ways, which
do maintain both the order of times prescribing against the late-
ness of impostors, and the authority of the churches patronizing
apostolical tradition. * But why did he skip over a more com-
pendicus way than any of those; namely, standing to the
judgment of the Roman bishop ?

25. It is true, that both he, and St. Irenzeus before him,
disputing against the heretics of their times, who had intro-
duced pernicious novelties of their own devising, when they
allege the general consent of churches (planted by the apo-
stles, and propagated by continual successions of bishops from
those whom the apostles did ordain) in doctrines and practices
opposite to those devices, as a good argument (and so indeed
it then was, next to a demonstration (against them, do pro-
duce the Roman church, as a principal one among them, upon
several obvious accounts; and this indeed argueth the Roman
church to have been then one competent witness, or credible re-
tainer of tradition ; as also were the other apostolical churches,

h Diximus in superioribus hanc fuisse
semper et esse hodie catholicorum con-
suetudinem ut fidem veram duobus his
modis adprobent; primum divini cano-
nis auctoritate, deinde ecclesiz catho-
lice traditione. p. 364.

i His fere compendiis utimur, quum de
evangelii fide adversus hereticos expedi-

mur, defendentibus et temporum ordi-
nem posteritati falsariorum preescriben-
tem, et auctoritatem ecclesiarum tradi-
tioni apostolorum patrocinantem. Ter-
tull. in Mare. iv. 5.

k Solemus hereticis compendii gratia
de posteritate preescribere. Tertull. con-
tra Hermog. cap.t.

Pope’s Supremacy. 173

to whose testimony they likewise appeal: but what is this to
the Roman bishop’s judicial power in such cases? why do they
not urge that in plain terms? They would certainly have done
so, if they had known it, and thought it of any validity.

Do but mark their words, involving the force of their argu-
mentation : | When, saith Irenzeus, we do again (after allegation
of scripture) eppea! to that tradition, which is from the apostles,
which by successions of presbyters is preserved in the churches :
and, ™ That, saith Tertullian, wil] appear to have been delivered
by the apostles, which hath been kept as holy in the apostolical
churches: let us see what milk the Corinthians did draw from
Paul; what the Philippians, the Thessalonians, the Ephesians do
read; what also the Romans, our nearer neighbours, do say, to
whom both Peter and Paul did leave the gospel sealed with ther
blood: we have also the churches nursed by John, &c. Again,
ut is therefore manifest, saith he, in his Prescriptions against
Heretics, that every doctrine, which doth conspire with those
apostolical churches, in which the faith originally was planted,
is to be accounted true; as undoubtedly holding that which
the churches did receive from the apostles, the apostles from
Christ, and Christ from God; but all other doctrine ts to be
prejudged false, which doth think against the truth of the
churches, and of the apostles, and of Christ, and of God. Their
argumentation then, in short, is plainly this; that the con-
spiring of the churches in doctrines contrary to those which
the heretics vented, did irrefragably signify those doctrines to
be apostolical: which discourse doth nowise favour the Ro-
man pretences, but indeed, if we do weigh it, is very preju-
dicial thereto; it thereby appearing, that Christian doctors
then in the canvassing of points and assuring tradition had no
peculiar regard to the Roman church’s testimony, no defer-

| Cum autem ad eam iterum traditio-
nem, qui est ab apostolis, que per suc-
cessores presbyterorum in ecclesiis cus-
toditur, provocamus . Tren. iii. 2.

m Constabit id esse ab apostolis tradi-
tum quod apud ecclesias apostolicas fu-
erit sacrosanctum ; videamus quod lac a
Paulo Corinthii hauserint ; quid legant
Philippenses, Thessalonicenses, Ephesii;
quid etiam Romani de proximo sonent;
quibus evangelium et Petrus et Paulus
sanguine quoque suo signatum relique-

runt; halemus et Johannis alumnas ec-
clesias, &c. Adv. Mare. iv. §.

n Constat proinde omnem doctrinam,
quz cum illis ecclesiis apostolicis matri-
cibus et originalibus fidei conspiret, veri-
tati deputandam, id sine dubio tenen-
tem quod ecclesiz ab apostolis, apostoli
a Christo, Christus a Deo suscepit ; re-
liquam vero doctrinam de mendacio
priejudicandam, qui sapiat contra veri-
tatem ecclesiarum, et apostolorum, et
Christi, et Dei. Tert. de Preser.2.

174 A Treatise of the

ence at all to the Roman bishop’s authority; (not otherwise
at least than to the authority of one single bishop yielding
attestation to tradition.)

26. It is odd, that even old popes themselves in elaborate
tracts disputing against heretics, (as pope Celestine against
Nestorius and Pelagius, pope Leo against Eutyches—,) do
content themselves to urge testimonies of scripture, and argu-
ments grounded thereon; not alleging their own definitive au-
thority, or using this parlous argumentation ; J, the supreme
doctor of the church, and judge of controversies, do assert thus ;
and therefore you are obliged to submit your assent.

27. It is matter of amazement, if the pope were such as they
would have him to be, that in so many bulky volumes of an-
cient fathers, living through many ages after Christ, in those
vast treasuries of learning and knowledge, wherein all sorts of
truth are displayed, all sorts of duty are pressed; this mo-
mentous point of doctrine and practice should nowhere be ex-
pressed in clear and peremptory terms; (I speak so, for that
by wresting words, by impertinent application, by straining
consequences, the most ridiculous positions imaginable may be
deduced from their writings.)

It is strange, that somewhere or other, at least incidentally,
in their commentaries upon the scripture, wherein many places
concerning the church and its hierarchy do invite to speak of
the pope; in their treatises about the priesthood, about the
unity and peace of the church, about heresy and schism ; in
their epistles concerning ecclesiastical affairs; in their historical
narrations about occurrences in the church ; in their concerta-
tions with heterodox adversaries, they should not frequently
touch it, they should not sometimes largely dwell upon it.

Is it not marvellous, that Origen, St. Hilary, St. Cyril,
St. Chrysostom, St. Jerome, St. Austin, in their commentaries
and tractates upon those places of scripture [Tw es Petrus.
Pasce oves| whereon they now build the papal authority,
should be so dull and drowsy as not to say a word concerning
the pope /

That St. Austin, in his so many elaborate tractates against
the Donatists, (wherein he discourseth so prolixly about the
church, its unity, communion, discipline,) should never insist
upon the duty of obedience to the pope, or charge those schis-

a aaa els Me le i ta i tl ns =~

ei Sy
—— <<

Pope’s Supremacy. 175

matics with their rebellion against him, or allege his authority
against them ?

If we consider that the pope-was bishop of the imperial city,
the metropolis of the world; that he thence was most eminent
in rank, did abound in wealth, did live in great splendour and
reputation ; had many dependencies, and great opportunities
to gratify and relieve many of the clergy; that of the fathers,
whose volumes we have, all well affected towards him, divers
were personally obliged to him for his support in their distress,
(as Athanasius, Chrysostom, Theodoret;) or as to their pa-
trons and benefactors, (as St. Jerome ;) divers could not but
highly respect him, as patron of the cause wherein they were
engaged, (as Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Hilary, Gregory Nys-
sen, Ambrose, Austin ;) some were his partisans in a common
quarrel, (as Cyril;) divers of them lived in places and times
wherein he had got much sway, (as all the western bishops ;)
that he had then improved his authority much beyond the old
limits ; othat all the bishops of the western or Latin churches
had a peculiar dependence on him, (especially after that by
advantage of his station, by favour of the court, by colour of
the Sardican canons, by voluntary deferences and submissions,
by several tricks, he had wound himself to meddle in most of
their chief affairs;) that hence divers bishops were tempted
to admire, to court, to flatter him; that divers aspiring popes
were apt to encourage the commenders of their authority,
which they themselves were apt to magnify and inculcate;
considering, I say, such things, it is a wonder that in so
many voluminous discourses so little should be said favour-
ing this pretence, so nothing that proveth it, [so much that
erosseth it, so much indeed, as I hope to shew, that quite
overthroweth it. }

If it be asked how we can prove this, I answer, that (beside
who carefully peruseth those old books will easily see it) we
are beholden to our adversaries for proving it to us, when they
least intended us such a favour: for that no clear and cogent
passages for proof of this pretence can be thence fetched, is

© Tis ‘Papualwy émaxoris duolws rH to that of Alexandria, having now long
*AActavdpéwy wépa rijs lepwotyns emi Bv- ago arrived to that height of power
vaorelay Hin wdAai mpoeAOotons. Socr. above and beyond the priesthood.
vii. 11. The bishopric of Rome is like

176 A Treatise of the

sufficiently evident from the very allegations, which after their
most diligent raking in old books they produce; the which are
so few, and fall so very short of their purpose, that without
much stretching they signify nothing.

28. It is monstrous, that in the code of the catholic church
(consisting of the decrees of so many synods concerning ecele-
siastical order and discipline) there should not be one canon
directly declaring his authority; nor any mention made of
him, except thrice accidentally ; once upon occasion of declar-
ing the authority of the Alexandrine bishop, the other upon
occasion of assigning to the bishop of Constantinople the second
place of honour, and equal privileges with him.

If it be objected, that these discourses are negative, and
therefore of small foree; I answer, that therefore they are
most proper to assert such a negative proposition: for how
can we otherwise better shew a thing not to be, than by shew-
ing it to have no footstep there, where it is supposed to stand ?
How can we more clearly argue a matter of right to want
proof, than by declaring it not to be extant in the laws ground-
ing such right; not taught by the masters who profess to
instruct in such things; not testified in records concerning the
exercise of it? Such arguments indeed in such cases are not
merely negative, but rather privative; proving things not to
be, because not affirmed there, where in reason they ought
to be affirmed ; standing therefore upon positive suppositions,
that holy scripture, that general tradition, are not imperfect
and lame toward their design; that ancient writers were com-
petently intelligent, faithful, diligent; that all of them could
not conspire in perpetual silence about things, of which they
had often fair occasion and great reason to speak : in fine, such
considerations, however they may be deluded by sophistical
wits, will yet bear great sway, and often will amount near to
the force of demonstration, with men of honest prudence.
However, we shall proceed to other discourses more direct and
positive against the popish doctrine.

II. Secondly, we shall shew that this pretence, upon several
accounts, is contrary to the doctrine of holy scripture.

1. This pretence doth thwart the holy scripture, by assign-
ing to another the prerogatives and peculiar titles appropriated
therein to our Lord.

A ae

Pope’s Supremacy. 177

The scripture asserteth him to be our only Sovereign Lord
and King: To us, saith it, there is one Lord; and, One King ' Cor. viii.
shall be king over them; who shall reign over the house Hy ee
of David for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no B-xxxvi.
end; who is the only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord Luke i 43.
of lords; the one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to oe be
destroy. James iv.
The scripture speaketh of one Arch-pastor, and great Shep-\ "pe. y. P
herd of the sheep, exclusively to any other; for, J will, said ii. 25. _
God in the prophet, set up one shepherd over them, and he — ee:
shall feed the sheep; and, There, saith our Lord himself, shad] ©2ek-
be one fold, and one shepherd: who that shall be he expresseth, jane a
adding, J am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his''»**
life for the sheep: (by pope Boniface’s good leave, who maketh Extrav. _
St. Peter or himself this shepherd.) pe ang
The scripture telleth us, that we have one High Priest of Heb. iii.1.
our profession, answerable to that one in the Jewish church,” sib
his type.
_ The scripture informeth us, that there is but one supreme
Doctor, Guide, Father of Christians, prohibiting us to ac-
knowledge any other for such; Ye are all brethren: and call Matt. xxiii.
ye not any one father upon earth; for one is your Father, fab
even he that is in heaven: neither be ye called masters; for
one is your Master, even Christ. Good pope Gregory (not
the seventh of that name) did take this for a good argument ;
for, P What therefore, dearest brother, said he to John of Con-
stantinople, wilt thou say in that terrible trial of the Judge
who is coming ; who dost affect to be called not only Father, but
general Father in the world ?
The scripture representeth the church as a building whereof Bph. ii. 20.
Christ himself is the chief corner-stone; as a family, whereof}. "3."
he being the Pater-familias, all others are fellow-servants ; as Matt. x. 25.

one body, having one head; whom God hath given to be head, 4.
over all things to the church, which is his body. ym xi s-

He is the one spouse of the church; which title one 13. .
would think he might leave peculiar to our Lord; there me got
being no vice-husbands; yet hath he been bold even to claim Cob i. 18,

os. 1. If.

One head.
P Quid ergo, frater charissime, in illo generalis Pater in mundo vocari appe- John iii. 29.
terribili examine venientis Judicis dictu- tis? Greg. M. Epist. iv. 38. Eph. v. 23.
rus es, qui non solum Pater, sed etiam 2 Cor. xi. 2.

Ny iv dvBpl.

178 A Treatise of the

* Sext. De- that, *as may be seen in the Constitutions of pope Gregory X.

cret. lib. i.
tit.vi.cap.3.
Baron. an.
34. §. 208.
Vid. Greg.
I. Epist.

lib. iv. Ep.

32, 34, 36,
38, 39-
lib. vi. Ep.
24, 28, 39,
at. lib. vii.
Ep. 70.

in one of their general synods.

It seemeth therefore a sacrilegious arrogance (derogating
from our Lord’s honour) for any man to assume or admit
those titles of Sovereign of the Church, Head of the Church,
our Lord, Arch-pastor, Highest Priest, chief Doctor, Master,
Father, Judge of Christians; upon what pretence, or under
what distinction soever: these pompatic, foolish, proud, per-
verse, wicked, profane words; these names of singularity,
elation, vanity, blasphemy, (to borrow the epithets with which
pope Gregory I. doth brand the titles of Universal Bishop,
and Qeumenical Patriarch, no less modest in sound, and far
more innocent in meaning, than those now ascribed to the
pope,) are therefore to be rejected; not only because they
are injurious to all other pastors, and to the people of God’s
heritage, but because they do encroach upon our only Lord,
to whom they do only belong; much more to usurp the things
which they do naturally signify, is a horrible invasion upon
our Lord’s prerogative.

Thus hath that great pope taught us to argue, in words
expressly condemning some, and consequently all of them,
together with the things which they signify; 4 What (saith he,
writing to the bishop of Constantinople, who had admitted the
title of Universal Bishop or Patriarch) wilt thow say to Christ,
the head of the wniversal church, in the trial of the last judg-
ment, who by the appellation of Universal dost endeavour to
subject all his members to thee? Whom, I pray, dost thou mean
to imitate in so perverse a word, but him who, despising the
legions of angels constituted in fellowship with him, did endea-
cour to break forth unto the top of singularity, that he might
both be subject to none, and alone be over all? who also said,
I will ascend into heaven, and will exalt my throne above the
stars for what are thy brethren, all the bishops of the uni-

4 Tu quid Christo universalis eccle- bus preesse videretur? qui etiam dixit,

sie capiti in extremi judicii dicturus
examine, qui cuncta ejus membra tibi-
met coneris Universalis appellatione
supponere? Quis rogo in hoc tam per-
verso vocabulo nisi ille ad imitandum
proponitur, qui despectis angelorum le-
gionibus secum socialiter constitutis ad
culmen conatus est singularitatis erum-
pere, ut et nulli subesse, et solus omni-

In coelum conscendam, super astra coeli
exaltabo solium meum quid enim
fratres tui omnes universalis ecclesiz
episcopi, nisi astra coeli sunt? quibus
dum cupis temetipsum vocabulo ela-
tionis preponere, eorumque nomen tui
comparatione calcare . Greg. Ep. iv.
38.

i i le ee ie

Pope’s Supremacy. 179

versal church, but the stars of heaven ; to whom while by this
haughty word thou desirest to prefer thyself, and to trample on
their name in comparison to thee, what dost thou say but, I will
climb into heaven ?——

And again, in another epistle to the bishops of Alexandria
and Antioch, he taxeth the same patriarch for ' assuming to
boast so that he attempteth to ascribe all things to himself, and
studieth by the elation of pompous speech to subject to himself all
the members of Christ, which do cohere to one sole head, namely,
to Christ.

Again, *I confidently say, that whoever doth call himself
Universal Bishop, or desireth to be so called, doth in his elation
forerun Antichrist, because he pridingly doth set himself before
all others.

If these argumentations be sound, or signify any thing,
what is the pretence of universal sovereignty and pastorship
but a piece of Luciferian arrogance ? Who can imagine that
even this pope could approve, could assume, could exercise
it? If he did, was he not monstrously senseless, and above
measure impudent, to use such discourses, which so plainly,
without altering a word, might be retorted upon him ; which
are built upon suppositions, that it is unlawful and wicked
to assume superiority over the church, over all bishops, over
all Christians ; the which indeed (seeing never pope was of
greater repute, or did write in any case more solemnly and
seriously) have given to the pretences of his successors so
deadly a wound, that no balm of sophistical interpretation
ean be able to heal it.

We see that according to St. Gregory M. our Lord Christ Vid. P. Pe-
is the one only head of the church ; to whom for company let lag: Ep. 3:
us adjoin St. Basil M. (that we may have both Greek and
Latin for it,) who saith, that (according to St. Paul) we are

r Jactantiam sumpsit ita ut universa
sibi tentet adscribere, et omnia que soli
uni capiti coherent, videlicet Christo,
per elationem pompatici sermonis ejus-
dem Christi sibi studeat membra sub-
jugare. Gr. M. Ep. iv. 36. The same
-words we have in the epistle of pope
Pelagius (predecessor of St. Gregory)
to the bishops of Constantinople. (P.
: Pelagii Ep. 8.)

s Ego autem fidenter dico, quia quis-

quis se Universalem Sacerdotem vocat,
vel vocari desiderat, in elatione sua An-
tichristum precurrit quia superbiendo
se ceteris preponit. (Greg. J. lib. vi.
Ep. 30.) Nee dispari superbia ad er-
rorem ducitur ; quia sicut perversus ille
Deus videri vult super omnes homines;
ita quisquis est, qui solus sacerdos ap-
pellari appetit, super ceeteros sacerdotes
se extollit. (dd Mauric. Aug.)

John xviii.
36.

Phil. lii, 20.
Heb xii. 22.
Acts xx. 28.

Matt. xvi.
i8.

1 Cor. xii.
2%. xv. Q.

Gal. i. 13.

Matt.
XXviil. 20

180 A Treatise of the

the body of Christ, and members one of another, because it is
manifest that the one and sole truly head, which is Christ, doth
hold and connect each one to another wnto concord *.

To decline these allegations of scripture, they have forged
distinctions, of several kinds of churches, and several sorts of
heads ; the which evasions I shall not particularly discourse,
seeing it may suffice to observe in general, that no such dis-
tinctions have any place or any ground in scripture, nor can
well consist with it; which simply doth represent the church
as one kingdom, a kingdom of heaven, a kingdom not of this
world ; all the subjects whereof have their roXirevpa in heaven,
or are considered as members of a city there ; so that it is vain
to seek for a sovereign thereof in this world: the which also
doth to the catholic church sojourning on earth usually impart
the name and attributes properly appertaining to the church
most universal, (comprehensive of all Christians in heaven and
upon earth,) because that is a visible representative of this,
and we by joining in offices of piety with that do communicate
with this; whence that which is said of one (concerning the
unity of its king, its head, its pastor, its priest) is to be under-
stood of the other ; especially considering that our Lord, ac-
cording to his promise, is ever present with the church here,
governing it by the efficacy of his Spirit and grace, so that no
other corporeal or visible head of this spiritual body is needful".

It was to be sure a visible headship which St. Gregory did
so eagerly impugn and exclaim against; for he could not
apprehend the bishop of Constantinople so wild, as to affect
a.jurisdiction over the church mystical, or invisible.

t Kparotons Sndovdt: Kal cvvarrobons
éxaatov TG bAAw mpds dudvoiay Tis pias
Kal udyns GAnOGs Keparjs, ris early 6
Xpiords. Bas. M. de Jud. Div. tom. ii.
p. 261. Totus Christus caput et corpus
est; caput unigenitus Dei Filius, et
corpus ejus ecclesiz, sponsus et sponsa,
duo in carne una. Quicunque de ipso
capite ab scripturis sanctis dissentiunt,
etiamsi in omnibus locis inveniantur in
quibus ecclesia designata est, non sunt
in ecclesia, &c. Aug. de Unit. Ecel.
cap. 4. Vid. contra Pelil. iii. 42. Whole
Christ is the head and the body; the
head the only begotten Son of God, and
his body the church, the bridegroom
and the spouse, two in one flesh. Who-

ever disagree about the head itself from

the holy scriptures, though they are
found in all places in which the church
is designed, they are not in the church,
&c. It was unhappily expressed by
Bellarmine —— Ecclesia secluso etiam
Christo unum caput habere debet. De
Pont. R. i. 9. §. Ac ne forte. The
church, even Christ himself being set
aside, ought to have one head.

u Christus arbitrio et nutu ac pre-
sentia sua et preepositos ipsos, et eccle-
siam cum prepositis gubernat. Cypr.
Ep. 69. Christ, by his own arbitre-
ment, and power, and presence, governs
both the bishops themselves, and the
church with the bishops.

|
.

Popes Supremacy. 181

2. Indeed upon this very account the Romish pretence doth John xviii.
not well accord with holy scripture, because it transformeth 36.
the church into another kind of body than it was constituted
by God, according to the representation of it in scripture : for
there it is represented as a spiritual and heavenly society,
compacted by the bands of one faith, one hope, one spirit of Eph iv, 4.5.
charity: but this pretence turneth it into a worldly frame ; * ae
united by the same bands of interest and design ; managed
in the same manner, by terror and allurement ; supported by
the same props of force, of policy, of wealth, of reputation and
splendour, as all other secular corporations are*.

You may call it what you please; but it is evident, that in
truth the papal monarchy is a temporal dominion, driving on
worldly ends by worldly means ; such as our Lord did never
mean to institute: so that the subjects thereof may with far
more reason than the people of Constantinople had, when their
bishop Nestorius did stop some of their priests from contra-
dicting him, say, Y We have a king; a bishop we have not: so
that upon every pope we may charge that whereof Anthimus
was accused in the synod of Constantinople under Menas ;

z That he did account the greatness and dignity of the priesthood
to be, not a spiritual charge of souls, but as a kind of politic rule.

This was that which, seeming to be affected by the bishop
of Antioch, in encroachment upon the church of Cyprus, the
fathers of the Ephesine synod did endeavour to nip ; enacting
a canon against all such invasions, Jest under pretext of holy
discipline the pride of worldly authority should creep in. »And
what pride of that kind could they mean beyond that which
now the popes do claim and exercise? Now, do I say, after
that the papal empire hath swollen to such a bulk: whereas
so long ago, when it was but in its bud and stripling age, it

Xx Caput nostrum, quod Christus est,
ad hoc sua esse membra nos voluit, ut
per compagem charitatis et fidei unum
nos in se corpus efficeret. Greg. M.
Ep. vii. 111. Our head, which is Christ,
would therefore have us to be his mem-
bers, that by the conjunction of charity
and faith he might make us to be one
body.

Y BaoiAda txouev, ericxomoy ovK exo-
pev. Conc. Eph. Part. cap. 30.

2Td Tis apxiepwotyns péyeOos Kal
Gtiwua ob mvevwarichy Wuxav emorta-

olay elva: Aoyioduevos, GAA’ oldy Twa
TodiTikiy apxiv, &e. Conc. sub Men.
Act. i. pag. 9.

&@ Mnde ev iepovpylas mpooxtuari
éfovalas Koouiis Tipos mapedinra.
Can. Eph. i. can. 8.

b This was that which, about the
same time, the fathers of the African
synod do request P. Celestine *to for-
bear ; nec permittere, ut fumosum
mundi fastum Christi ecclesize inducere
videamur. Cone. Afr. ad P. Celest. 1.

182 A Treatise of the

was observed of it by a very honest historian, ‘that the Roman
episcopacy had long since advanced into a high degree of power
beyond the priesthood.
3. This pretence doth thwart the scripture by destroying
that brotherly coordination and equality, which our Lord did
appoint among the bishops and chief pastors of his church :
he did (as we before shewed) prohibit all his apostles to as-
sume any domination, or authoritative superiority over one
another; the which command, together with others concern-
ing the pastoral function, we may well suppose to reach their
successors: so did St. Jerome suppose, collecting thence that
all bishops by original institution are equals, or that no one
by our Lord’s order may challenge superiority over another ;
a Wherever, saith he, a bishop is, whether at Rome or at Eugu-
bium, at Constantinople or at Rhegium, at Alexandria or at
Thanis, he is of the same worth, and of the same priesthood ;
the power of wealth or lowness of poverty do not make a bishop
higher or lower ; but all are successors of the apostles. Where
doth not he plainly deny the bishop of Eugubium to be infe-
rior to him of Rome, as being no less a successor of the apo-
Si auctori- stles than he? Doth he not say these words in way of proof,
adel that the authority of the Roman bishop or church was of no
_— validity against the practice of other bishops and churches ¢
cungue, xc, (upon occasion of deacons there taking upon them more than
in other places, as cardinal deacons do now;) which excludeth
such distinctions as scholastical fancies have devised to shift
off his testimony ; the which he uttered simply, never dream-
ing of such distinctions.
This consequence St. Gregory did suppose, when he there-
fore did condemn the title of Universal Bishop, because it did
© imply an affectation of superiority and dignity in one bishop
above others; of abasing the name of other bishops in com-

© Tis ‘Pwpalwy emoxoris duolws TH ceterum omnes apostolorum succes-
*AAckavdpéwv mépa Tis lepwoivns emi sores sunt. Hier. Ep. 85. (ad Evagr.)
duvacreiay mdrAat mpocADovans. Socr. € Illud appetunt unde omnibus
vii. IT. digniores videantur. Gr. Ep. iv. 34.

d Ubicunque fuerit episcopus sive Quia superbiendo se ceteris preponit.
Rome, sive Eugubii, sive Constan- Ep. vi. 38. Super ceteros sacerdotes
tinopoli, sive Rhegii, sive Alexandrie, se extollit. Ibid. Cupis episcoporum
sive Thanis, ejusdem meriti, ejusdem nomen tui comparatione calcare. Ep.
et sacerdotii; potentia divitiarum et iv. 38. Cuncta ejus membra tibimet
paupertatis humilitas vel sublimiorem conaris supponere. Jbid.
vel inferiorem episcopum non facit ;

Pope’s Supremacy. 183

parison of his own, of extolling himself above the rest of priests,
&e.

This the ancient popes did remember, when usually in their
compellation of any bishop they did style them brethren, col- (Invigile-
leagues, fellow-ministers, fellow-bishops, not intending thereby pace a
compliment or mockery, but to declare their sense of the ori- coepiscopis

nostris et
ginal equality among bishops; notwithstanding some differ- fatribus
ences in order and privileges which their see had obtained. Apmis:
orn
And that this was the general sense of the fathers we shall apud Cypr.
afterward shew. Re.)

Hence, when it was objected to them, that they did affect
superiority, they did sometimes disclaim it: so did pope Gela-
sius I,' (a zealous man for the honour of his see.)

4. This pretence doth thwart the holy scripture, not only
by trampling down the dignity of bishops, (which according to
St. Gregory doth imply great pride and presumption,) but as
really infringing the rights granted by our Lord to his church,
and the governors of ité.

For to each church our Lord hath imposed a duty and im- ong ii. et
parted a power of maintaining divine truth, and so approving"; ;.
itself a pillar and support of truth: of deciding controversies 15.
possible and proper to be decided with due temper, ultimately ,, reg
without further resort ; for that he, who will not obey or ac- ely be wa-
quiesce in its decision, is to be as a heathen or publican: of &e ne
censuring and rejecting offenders, (in doctrine or demeanour;) Oi! robs
Those within, saith St.Paul to the church of Corinth, do not ye xpivere ;
judge ? But them that are without God judgeth : wherefore put *S pe ees
away from among yourselves that wicked person: of preserving Vid. v. 4, 5
order and decency, according to that rule prescribed to the sgrakn pr
church of Corinth, Let al/ things be done decently and in order: =
of promoting edification: of deciding causes.

All which rights and privileges the Roman bishop doth be- Rom. xiv.
reave the churches of, snatching them to himself; pretending : Coca

that he is the sovereign doctor, judge, regulator of all churches;

“hess. v.

f Hic non tam optamus preponi aliis, ne

(sicut predicas,) quam cum fidelibus
cunctis sanctum et Deo placitum ha-
bere consortium. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 9g. (ad
Euphem. Ep. CP.) Were we do not
so much desire to be advanced above
others, as together with all the faithful
to make up a consort holy and well-
pleasing to God.

Vobis subtrahitur, quod alteri
plus quam ratio exigit prebetur. Greg.
vii. 30. (p. 451.) What is yielded to
another more than reason requires, is
taken from you. M[payua——rijs wdy-
twv erevdeplas amrduevov. Syn. Eph. lL.
can. 8. A thing that entrencheth upon
the freedom of all others.

Acts xx. 28.
Heb. xiii.
ry.

1 Pet. v. 2.
1 Tim. iii.
15.

Te. i 9.

1 Cor. xii.
28.

Eph. iv. 11.
Rev. ii. &c.
Eph. iv. 12.
Heb. xiii.
17.

Gal. v. 1.

Gal. v. I.
Col. ii. 16,
18.

184 A Treatise of the

overruling and voiding all that is done by them, according to
his pleasure.

The scripture hath enjoined and empowered all bishops to
feed, guide, and rule their respective churches, as the min-
isters, stewards, ambassadors, angels of God; for the perfect-
ing of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifica-
tion of the body of Christ: to whom God hath committed the
care of their people, so that they are responsible for their
souls.

All which rights and privileges of the episcopal office the
pope hath invaded, doth obstruct, cramp, frustrate, destroy ;
pretending (without any warrant) that their authority is de-
rived from him; forcing them to exercise it no otherwise than
as his subjects, and according to his pleasure». But of this
point more afterward.

5. This pretence doth thwart the scripture, by robbing all

Christian people of the liberties and rights with which by that

divine charter they are endowed', and which they are obliged
to preserve inviolate.

St. Paul enjoineth the Galatians to stand fast in the liberty
wherewith Christ hath made us free, and not to be entangled
again with the yoke of bondage.
which we must maintain, and a power to which we must not
submit: and against whom can we have more ground to do
this, than against him who pretendeth to dogmatize, to define
points of faith, to impose doctrines (new and strange enough)
on our consciences, under a peremptory obligation of yielding
assent to them; to prescribe laws, as divine and necessary to
be observed, without warrant, as those dogmatists did, against
whom St. Paul biddeth us to maintain our liberty ; (so that if
he should declare virtue to be vice, and white to be black, we must
believe him, some of his adherents have said, consistently enough
with his pretences:) for

Against such tyrannical invaders we are bound to maintain

There is therefore a liberty

h Dei et apostolic sedis gratia. Vid.
post. Superbum nimis est et immodera-
tum ultra fines proprios tendere, et an-
tiquitate calcata alienum jus velle pre-
ripere, atque ut unius crescat dignitas,
tot metropolitanorum impugnare pri-
matus, &c. P. LeoI. Ep. §5. It is too
proud and unreasonable a thing for one
to stretch himself beyond his bounds, and

maugre all antiquity to snatch away
other men’s right; and that the dignity
of one may be enhanced, to oppose the
primacies of so many metropolitans.

i Sancte ecclesie universali injuriam
facit. Greg. l. Ep.i. 24. It does wrong
to the holy catholic church. Plebis ma-
jestas. Cypr. Ep. 55. (ad Corn. P.)

p- 117.

ee, fe

Pope’s Supremacy. 185

our liberty, according to that precept of St. Paul; the which

if a pope might well allege against the proceedings of a general P.Leo I.
synod, with much more reason may we thereby justify our >
non-submission to one man’s exorbitant domination.

This is a power which the apostles themselves did not chal-
lenge to themselves; for, We, saith St. Paul, have not dominion 2 Cor. i. 24.
over your faith, but are helpers of your joy.

They did not pretend that any Christian should absolutely
believe them in cases wherein they had not revelation ( general 1 Cor. x.15.
or special) from God; in such cases referring their opinion tov® 12, 25,
the judgment and discretion of Christians.

They say, Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any Gal.i.8.
other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you,
let him be accursed: If any man, &c. which precept, with many
others of the like purport, (enjoining us to examine the truth,
to adhere unto the received doctrine, to decline heterodoxies
and novelties,) doth signify nothing, if every Christian hath
not allowed to him a judgment of discretion, but is tied blindly
to follow the dictates of another.

St. Austin (I am sure) did think this liberty such, that
without betraying it no man could be obliged to believe
any thing not grounded upon canonical authority: for to a
Donatist, his adversary, citing the authority of St. Cyprian
against him, he thus replieth; ‘But now seeing it is not
canonical which thou recitest, with that liberty to which the Lord
hath called us, I do not receive the opinion, differing from scrip-
ture, of that man whose praise I cannot reach, to whose great
learning I do not compare my writings, whose wit I love, in
whose speech I delight, whose charity I admire, whose martyrdom
I reverence.

This liberty, not only the ancients, but even divers popes
have acknowledged to belong to every Christian; as we shall
hereafter shew, when we shall prove, that we may lawfully re-
ject the pope, as a patron of error and iniquity.

6. It particularly doth thwart scripture by wronging princes,
in exempting a numerous sort of people from subjection to

k Nune vero quoniam canonicum cujus ingenium diligo, cujus ore delec-
non est quod recitas, ea libertate ad tor, cujus charitatem miror, cujus mar-
quam nos vocavit Dominus, ejus viri, tyrium veneror, hoc quod aliter sapuit
cujus laudem consequi non valeo, cujus non accipio. Aug. contr. Cresc. ii. 32.
multis literis scripta mea non comparo,

Rom, xiii.
“e

186 A Treatise of the

their laws and judicature; whereas by God’s ordination and
express command every soul is subject to them; not excepting
the popes themselves, (in the opinion of St. Chrysostom, ex-
cept they be greater than any apostle. )

By pretending to govern the subjects of princes without
their leave; to make laws without his permission or confirma-
tion ; to cite his subjects out of their territories, &c. which
are encroachments upon the rights of God’s unquestionable
ministers.

III. Further, because our adversaries do little regard any
allegation of scripture against them, (pretending themselves to
be the only masters of its sense, or of common sense, judges
and interpreters of them,) we do allege against them, that this
pretence doth also cross tradition, and the common doctrine
of the fathers. For,

1. Common usage and practice is a good interpreter of
right; and that sheweth no such right was known in the
primitive church.

2. Indeed the state of the primitive church did not admit it.

3. The fathers did suppose no order in the church, by
original right, or divine institution, superior to that of a
bishop ; whence they commonly did style a bishop the highest

priest, and episcopacy the top of ecclesiastical orders!.
m The chief priest, saith Tertullian, that is, the bishop, hath the

right of giving baptism.

» Although, saith St. Ambrose, the presbyters also do i, yet
the beginning of the ministry is from the highest priest.
Optatus calleth bishops °¢the tops and princes of all.

PThe divine order of bishops,

1’Amd rod Kuplov 5:5ax0évtes Gxodov-
Olay mparyudtwr tots wiv emioKdrms Ta
THS apxiepwatyns éveluauev, &c. Const.
Apost. viii 46.

m Dandi quidem jus habet summus
sacerdos, qui est episcopus. Tert. de
Bapt. cap. 17.

n Licet enim et presbyteri faciant, ta-
men exordium ministerii est a summo
sacerdote. Ambr, de Sacr. iii. 1. Susce-
pisti gubernacula summi sacerdotii. Id.
Ep. 5.

© Apices et principes omnium sacer-
dotes. Opt. 1. Ecclesiz salus in summi
sacerdotis dignitate pendet. Hier. contr.
Lucif.4. The safety of the church de-
pends upon the dignity of the high

saith Dionysius, is the first of

priest. Ego dignus summo sacerdotio
decernebar. Id. Ep. 99. (ad Asell.) In
episcopo omnes ordines sunt, quia pri-
mus sacerdos est, hoc est princeps sacer-
dotum, et propheta et evangelista, et
cetera adimplenda officia ecclesize in mi-
nisterio fidelium, Ambr. in Eph. iv. 11.
In the bishop there are all orders, be-
cause he is the first priest; i.e. the
prince of priests, and prophet, and evan-
gelist, and all other offices of the church,
to be fulfilled in the ministry of the
faithful.

P ‘H Oela ray iepapyay rdkis, &c. supr.
Pontifex princeps sacerdotum est, quasi
via sequentium ; ipse et summus sacer-
dos, ipse et pontifex maximus nuncupa-

-
ee — A.

187

divine orders; the same being also the extreme and last of them ;
Jor into it all the frame of our hierarchy is resolved and accom-
plished.

This language is common even among popes themselves,
complying with the speech then current; for, 9 Presbyters,
saith pope Innocent I, although they are priests, yet have they
not the top of high-priesthood.

"No man, saith pope Zosimus 1, against the precepts of the
Jathers, should presume to aspire to the highest priesthood of the
church.

S[t is decreed, saith pope Leo I, that the chorepiscopi, or pres-
byters, who figure the sons of Aaron, shall not presume to snatch
that which the princes of the priests (whom Moses and Aaron did
typify) are commanded to do. (Note, by the way, that seeing
according to this pope’s mind (after St. Jerome) Moses and
Aaron did in the Jewish policy represent bishops, there was
none there to prefigure the pope.)

In those days the bishop of Nazianzum (a petty town in
Cappadocia) was an high priest, (so Gregory calleth his father ‘.)
And the bishop of a poor city in Afric is styled "Sovereign
Pontiff of Christ, most blessed Father, most blessed Pope; and
the very Roman clergy doth eal! St.Cyprian ‘most blessed and
most glorious Pope: which titles the pope doth now so charily
reserve and appropriate to himself.

But innumerable instances of this kind might be produced :
I shall only therefore add two other passages, which seem very
observable, to the enforcement of this Discourse.

St. Jerome, reprehending the discipline of the Montanists,

Pope’s Supremacy.

tur. Isid. Hisp. apud Grat. Dist. xxi.
cap. 1.
q Nam presbyteri, licet sint sacer-

Leo. Ep. 88. Poutificatus apicem non
habent. bid. Vid. Ep. lxxxiv. cap. §.
S. Hier. ad Evagr. Ut sciamus tradi-

dotes, pontificatus tamen apicem non
habent. P. Innoc. I. Ep. 1. (ad De-
cent. ) ——dum facile imponuntur ma-
nus, dum negligenter summus sacerdos
eligitur. Jd. Ep. 12. (ad Aurel.)

¥ Ne quis contra Patrum preecepta
ad summum ecclesie sacerdotium aspi-
rare presumeret. P. Zos. I. Ep. 1. (ad
Hesych.)

8 Ideoque id quod tantum facere prin-
cipibus sacerdotum jussum est, quorum
typum Moses et Aaron tenuerunt, om-
nino decretum est, ut chorepiscopi vel
presbyteri qui filiorum Aaron gestant
figuram, arriper enon presumant. P.

tiones apostolicas sumptas de Veteri Tes-
tamento, Quod Aaron et filii ejus atque
Levitz in templo fuerunt, hoc sibi epi-
scopi, presbyteri et diaconi vindicant in
ecelesia. Or. xix. p. 309.

t A bishop called apxiepevs.
Const. viii. TO, (2.

u Summus Christi pontifex Augus-
tinus. (Paulin. apud Aug. Ep. 36.)
Aug. Ep. 35. Beatissimo pape Augus-
tino. Hieron. (Aug. Ep. 11, 13, 14.
&c.)

v Optamus te beatiss. et gloriosissime
papa in Domino semper valere. Ep.31.

A post.

188 A Treatise of the

hath these words; ’ With us the bishops do hold the places of the
apostles ; with them a bishop is in the third place: for they have
Sor the first rank the patriarchs of Pepusa in Phrygia; for the
second, those whom they call cenones; so are bishops thrust
down into the third, that is, almost the last place ; as if thence
religion became more stately, if that which is first with us be the
last with them. Now doth not St. Jerome here affirm, that
every bishop hath the place of an apostle, and the first rank
in the church? Doth not he tax the advancement of any
order above this? May not the popish hierarchy most patly
be compared to that of the Montanists, and is it not equally
liable to the censure of St. Jerome? Doth it not place the
Roman pope in the first place, and the cardinals in the second,
detruding the bishops into a third place? Could the Pepusian
patriarch, or his cenones, either more overtop in dignity, or
sway by power over bishops, than doth the Roman patriarch
and his cardinals ?

Again, St.Cyprian telleth pope Cornelius, that in episcopacy
doth reside xthe sublime and divine power of governing the
church ; it being the sublime top of the priesthood. Y He, saith
the blessed man concerning pope Cornelius, did not suddenly
arrive to episcopacy ; but being through all ecclesiastical offices
promoted, and having in divine administrations often merited of
God, did by all the steps of religion mount to the sublimest pitch
of priesthood. Where it is visible, that St. Cyprian doth not
reckon the papacy, but the episcopacy of Cornelius, to be that
top of priesthood, (above which there was nothing eminent in
the church,) unto which he passing through the inferior degrees
of the clergy had attained.

In fine, it cannot well be conceived that the ancients con-
stantly would have spoken in this manner, if they had allowed
the papal office to be such as now it doth bear itself; the
which indeed is an order no less distant from episcopacy than

actum est de episcopatus vi-

w Apud nos apostolorum locum epi- x

scopi tenent, apud eos episcopus tertius
est; habent enim primos de Pepusa
Phrygie patriarchas, secundos quos ap-
pellant cenones; atque ita in tertium,
id est pene ultimum locum episcopi de-
volvuntur ; quasi exinde ambitiosior re-
ligio fiat, si quod apud nos primum est,
apud illes novissimum sit. Hier. (ad
Marcellam) Ep. 54.

gore, et de ecclesia gubernande sublimi
ac divina potestate. Cypr. Ep. 55. (ad
P. Cornel.)

Y Non iste ad episcopatum subito per-
venit, sed per omnia ecclesiastica officia
promotus, et in divinis administrationi-
bus Dominum szpe promeritus, ad sa-
cerdotii sublime fastigium cunctis reli-
gionis gradibus ascendit. Cypr. Ep. 52.

rie twig -\--

Pope’s Supremacy. 189

the rank of a king differeth from that of the meanest baron in
his kingdom.

Neither is it prejudicial to this discourse, (or to any pre-
ceding,) that in the primitive church there were some dis-
tinctions and subordinations of bishops, 7(as of patriarchs,
primates, metropolitans, common bishops,) for,

These were according to prudence constituted by the church
itself for the more orderly and peaceable administration of
things.

‘These did not import such a difference among the bishops,
that one should domineer over others, to the infringing of pri-
mitive fraternity, or common liberty : but a precedence in the
same rank, with some moderate advantages for the common
good.

These did stand under authority of the church; and might
be changed or corrected, as was found expedient, by common
agreement.

By virtue of these the superiors of this kind could do nothing
over their subordinates in an arbitrary manner, but according
to the regulation of canons, established by consent in synods ;
by which their influence was amplified or curbed.

When any of these did begin to domineer, or exceed his
limits, he was liable to account and correction; he was ex-
claimed against as tyrannical».

When primates did begin to swell and encroach, good men
declared their displeasure at it, and wished it removed ; as is
known particularly by the famous wish of © Gregory Nazianzen.

But we are discoursing against a superiority of a different
nature, which foundeth itself in the institution of Christ, im-
poseth itself on the church, is not alterable or governable by
it, can endure no check or control, pretendeth to be endowed
with an absolute power to act without or against the consent
of the church, is limited by no certain bounds but its own
pleasure’, &e.

Z The Africans had a particular care his time. So Isidor. Pelusiot. £p. xx.

that this primacy should not degenerate
into tyranny.

a Conc. Ant. can. 9. Vid. Apost. can.
34- Cone. Carth. apud Cypr. Cod. Afr.
can. 39. Nestorius, Dioscorus.

> Old re rupavvidas Tas pidapxlas ex-
Oijuws Siexdicodvtres. Euseb. viii. 1. So
Eusebius complaineth of the bishops in

125. iv. 219.

C ‘Os bpeddy ye unde hv mpocdpla,
pnde tis tTérov mpotiunois, Kal Tupay-
vikh mpovoula. Greg. Naz. Orat. 28.
O that there were not at all any presi-
dency, or any preference in place, and
tyrannical prerogative !

4 So Socrates of the bishop (not only

Psal. ii. 8.
Col. i. 23.
Luke xxiv.

47-
Matt.
XXViil. 19.

190 A Treatise of the

IV. Further, this pretence may be impugned by many argu-
ments springing from the nature and reason of things ab-
stractedly considered ; according to which the exercise of such
an authority may appear unpracticable, without much iniquity,
and great inconvenience, in prejudice to the rights of Christian

states and people, to the interests of religion and piety, to the |

peace and welfare of mankind: whence it is to be rejected, as
a pest of Christendom.

I. Whereas all the world in design and obligation is Christ-
ian, (the wtmost parts of the earth being granted in posses-
sion to our Lord, and his gospel extending to every creature
under heaven,) and may in effect become such, when God
pleaseth, by acceptance of the gospel; whereas it may easily
happen, that the most distant places on the earth may em-
brace Christianity; whereas really Christian churches have
been and are dispersed all about the world; it is thence
hugely incommodious, that all the church should depend upon
an authority resident in one place, and to be managed by one
person: the church, being such, is too immense, boundless,
uncircumscribed, unwieldy a bulk, to be guided by the inspec-
tion, or managed by the influence, of one such authority or
person.

If the whole world were reduced under the government of
one civil monarch, it would necessarily be ill governed, as to
policy, to justice, to peace: the skirts, or remoter parts from
the metropolis or centre of the government, would extremely
suffer thereby ; for they would feel little light or warmth from
majesty shining at such a distance: they would live under
small awe of that power, which was so far out of sight : they
must have very difficult recourse to it, for redress of griev-
ances, and relief of oppressions ; for final decision of causes,
and composure of differences ; for correction of offences, and
dispensation of justice, upon good information, with tolerable
expedition : it would be hard to preserve peace, or quell sedi-
tions, and suppress insurrections, that might arise in distant
quarters.

What man could obtain the knowledge or experience need-
ful skilfully and justly to give laws or administer judgment to

of Rome, but) Alexandria. Lib. vii. iii. 1. in Ep. Orat. 11. So Greg. Naz.
cap. tf. So St. Chrysostom in 1 Tim. complained of tupayvuxh mpovoula. Ibid.

Pope’s Supremacy. 191

so many nations different in humour, in language, in customs ?

What mind of man, what industry, what leisure, could serve

to sustain the burden of that care, which is needful to the
wielding such an office? How and when should one man be Cum tot
able to receive all the addresses, to weigh all the cases, to nN
make all the resolutions and dispatches requisite for such a tia solus,
charge? If the burden of one small kingdom be so great that Ep. jee
wise and good princes do groan under its weight, what must

that be of all mankind? To such an extent of government

there must be allowed a majesty and power correspondent,

the which cannot be committed to one hand without its de-
generation into extreme tyranny. The words of Zosimus to

this purpose are observable ; who saith, that the Romans, by
admitting Augustus Czesar to the government, did do very
perilously ; for, Jf he should choose to manage the government Etre yap
rightly and justly, he would not be capable of applying him- Fag
self to all things as were fit, not being able to succour thosei. (p. 4.
who do lie at greatest distance; nor could he find so many sess
magistrates as would not be ashamed to defeat the opinion
conceived of them; nor could he suit them to the differences of

so many manners: or if, transgressing the bounds of royalty,

he should warp to tyranny, disturbing the magistracies, over-
looking misdemeanours, bartering right for money, holding

the subjects for slaves, (such as most emperors, or rather near

all have been, few excepted ;) then it is quite necessary that

the brutish authority of the prince should be a public calamity :

for then flatterers being by him dignified with gifis and honours

do invade the greatest commands ; and those who are modest

and quiet, not affecting the same life with them, are consequently
displeased, not enjoying the same advantages ; so that from hence

cities are filled with seditions and troubles. And the civil and
military employments being delivered up to avaricious persons,

do both render a peaceable life sad and grievous to men of

better disposition, and do enfeeble the resolution of soldiers in

war.

Hence St. Austin was of opinion, that ‘7 were happy for

4 Felicioribus sic rebus humanis,om- dpydvwy* kal yap TovTwy exarrov obte
nia regna parva essent, concordi vicini- Alay puxpdy, obre Kata ucyebos bwepBdr-
tate letantia. Ang. de Civ. D. iv. 15. Aov Eker Thy adrod divauw. Arist. Pol.
“Eor: Tt Kal rédcot weyebous uérpov, So- vii. 4. There is a certain measure of
mep kal Tv bAAwy wdytwv, Cdwy, puTav, greatness fit for cities and common-

192 A Treatise of the

mankind if all kingdoms were small, enjoying a peaceful neigh-
bourhood.

It is commonly observed by historians, that ¢ Rome growing
in bigness, did labour therewith, and was not able to support
itself; many distempers and disorders springing up in so vast
a body, which did throw it into continual pangs, and at length
did bring it to ruin; for Then, saith St. Austin concerning
the times of Pompey, ‘Rome had subdued Afric, it had sub-
dued Greece ; and widely also ruling over other parts, as not
able to bear itself, did in a manner by its own greatness break
utself.

Hence that wise prince, Augustus Ceesar, did himself forbear
to enlarge the Roman dominion, and did in his testament advise
the senate to do the like’.

To the like inconveniences (and much greater in its kind ;
temporal things being more easily ordered than spiritual, and
having secular authority, great advantages of power and wealth,
to aid itself) must the church be obnoxious, if it were sub-
jected to the government of one sovereign, unto whom the
maintenance of faith, the protection of discipline, the determi-
nation of controversies, the revision of judgments, the discus-
sion and final decision of causes upon appeal, the suppression
of disorders and factions, the inspection over all governors,
the correction of misdemeanours, the constitution, relaxation

wealths, as well as for all other things,
living creatures, plants, instruments ;
for every one of these hath its proper
virtue and faculty, when it is neither
very little, nor yet exceeds in bigness.
Tis yap otparnyds ota Tov Alay bTep-
Bdddovtos tA Vous, H Tis Khpvé wh oTEv-
tépewos; Ibid. For who would be a
captain of an excessive huge multi-
tude? &e.

€ Suis et ipsa Roma viribus ruit.
Hor. Ep. 16. ——que ab exiguis ini-
tiis creverit, ut jam magnitudine labo-
ret sua. Liv. i. Ac nescio an satius fu-
erit populo Romano Sicilia et Africa
contentos fuisse, aut his etiam ipsis ca-
rere dominanti in Italia sua, quam eo
magnitudinis crescere, ut viribus suis
conficeretur. Flor. iii. 12.

f Tune jam Roma_ subjugaverat
Africam, subjugaverat Greciam, late-
que etiam aliis partibus imperans tan-
quam seipsam ferre non valens, se
sua quodammodo magnitudine fregerat.

Aug. de Civ. D. xviii. 45. Tac. Hist. ii.
p. 476.

& Tyvdunv re avtois €wke Tois Te Ta-
povow apkecOjvat, Kal undauas emt 7d
mAciov Thy apxhv emavkjoa edeAjoat’
dvoplaAaktdy Te yap avThy exeaOa Epn’
TovTo yap Kal avTds bvTws del mote ov
Ady udvov, GAAG Kal Epyw erhpnoe’ Ta-
pov youv av’T@ ToAAG ex Tov PapBapiKod
mpookThoacbat, ovx HO€Anoe. Dion. lib.
lvi. Tac. Ann. 1. He advised them to
be content with what they had, and by
no means to endeavour the enlargement
of their empire; for, said he, it will be
hardly kept: and this he himself ob-
served, not in word only, but in deed:
for when he might have gotten more
from the barbarous nations, yet he
would not.

Ipsa nocet moles, utinam remeare li-

ceret

Ad veteres fines, et moenia pauperis

anci, &c.
Claud. de bello Gildon.

Pope’s Supremacy. 193

and abolition of laws, the resolution of all matters concerning
religion and the public state, in all countries must be referred.

Tis mpos tatta ixavds; What shoulders can bear such a
charge without perpetual miracle‘ (and yet we do not find
that the pope hath any promise of miraculous assistance, nor
in his demeanour doth appear any mark thereof.) What mind
would not the care of so many affairs utterly distract and
overwhelm? who could find time to cast a glance on each of
so numberless particulars? What sagacity of wit, what variety
of learning, what penetrancy of judgment, what strength of
memory, what indefatigable vigour of industry, what abund-
ance of experience, would suffice, for enabling one man to
weigh exactly all the controversies of faith and cases of disci-
pline perpetually starting up in so many regions" ?

What reach of skill and ability would serve for aecommoda-
tion of laws to the different humours and fashions of so many
nations? Shall a decrepit old man, in the decay of his age,
parts, vigour, (such as popes usually are,) undertake this?
May we not say to him, as Jethro did to Moses, Ultra vires fxoa. xiii.
‘tuas est negotium; The thing thou doest is not good: thou wilt ‘7 '8.
surely wear away, both thou and this people that is with thee:
for this thing is too heavy for thee ; thou art not able to perform
it thyself alone ?

If the care of a small diocese hath made the most able and
industrious bishops (who had a conscience and sense of their
duty) to groan under its weight, how insupportable must such
a charge be !

The care of his own particular church, if he would act the
part of a bishop indeed, would sufficiently take up the pope ;

especially in some times; whenas pope Alexander saith,—— p, Ajex. 11.
Ut intestina nostre specialis ecclesie negotia vix possemus venti- age:

. - er. 1em.
lare, nedum longinqua ad plenum extricare. Bin.

If it be said that St. Paul testifieth of himself, that he had ? 28+)
a care of all the churches incumbent on him; I answer, that, Cor. xi. >
he (and other apostles had the like) questionless had a pious *®:
solicitude for the welfare of all Christians, especially of the
churches which he had founded, being vigilant for occasions

h The synod of Basil doth well de- measure. (Conc. Bas. sess. xxiii. p. 64,
scribe the duty of a pope; but it is &c.
infinitely hard to practise it in any

194 A Treatise of the

to edify them. But what is this, to bearing the charge of a
standing government over all the churches diffused through
the world? That care of a few churches then was burdensome
to him: what is the charge of so many now, to one seldom
endowed with such apostolical graces and gifts as St. Paul
was !

How weak must the influence of such an authority be upon
the circumferential parts of its cecumenical sphere !

How must the outward branches of the churches faint and
fade for want of sap from the root of discipline, which must be
conveyed through so many obstructions to such a distance!

How discomposed must things be in each country for want
of seasonable resolution, hanging in suspense till information
do travel to Rome, and determination come back thence!

How difficult, how impossible will it be for him there to re-
ceive faithful information or competent testimony, whereupon
to ground just decisions of causes !

Héw will it be in the power thence of any ene and
cunning person to raise trouble against innocent persons! for
any like person to decline the due correction laid on him, by
transferring the cause from home to such a distance !

How much cost, how much trouble, how much hazard, must
parties concerned be at to fetch light and justice thence !

Put case a heresy, a schism, a doubt or debate of great
moment should arise in China; how should the gentleman in
Italy proceed to confute that heresy, to quash that schism, to
satisfy that doubt, to determine that cause? how long must it
be ere he can have notice thereof! to how many cross acci-
dents of weather and way must the transmitting of informa-
tion be subject! how difficult will it prove to get a clear and
sure knowledge concerning the state of things !

How hard will it be to get the opposite parties to appear,
so as to confront testimonies and probations requisite to a fair
and just decision! how shall witnesses of infirm sex or age
ramble so far? how easily will some of them prepossess and

i Tanta me occupationum onera de-
primunt, ut ad superna animus nulla-
tenus erigatur, &c. Greg. I. lib.i. Ep. 7,
25,5. Such a weight of employment
presses me down, that my mind can by
no means be raised to things above. Si

administratio illius temporis mare fuit,
quid de presenti papatu dicendum erit ?
Calv. Inst. iv. cap. 7,22. If the or-
dering of affairs in those times was a
boundless sea, what shall we say of the
present papacy.

Pope’s Supremacy. 195

abuse him with false suggestions and misrepresentations of the
ease! how slippery therefore will the result be, and how prone
he to award a wrongful sentence *!
How tedious, how expensive, how troublesome, how vexa- De lungas

tious, how hazardous, must this course be to all parties pagers.

Certainly causes must needs proceed slowly, and depend Hisp. Prov.
] 6 di h d th luti f Syn. Basil.
ong; and in the end the resolution of them must be very cess. xxxi.
uncertain. p. 86.

What temptation will it be for any one (how justly soever
corrected by his immediate superiors) to complain; hoping
thereby to escape, to disguise the truth, &c. who being con-
demned will not appeal to one at a distance, hoping by false
suggestions to delude him?

This necessarily will destroy all discipline, and induce im- Vid. Bern.
punity or frustration of justice. rth eg ye:

Certainly much more convenient and equal it should be,
that there should be near at hand a sovereign power, fully
capable, expeditely and seasonably to compose differences, to
decide causes, to resolve doubts, to settle things, without more
stir and trouble.

Very equal it is, that laws should rather be framed, inter-
preted, and executed in every country, with accommodation to
the tempers of the people, to the circumstances of things, to
the civil state there, by persons acquainted with those parti-
culars, than by strangers ignorant of them, and apt to mistake
about them.

How often will the pope be imposed upon! as he was in the
ease of Basilides, of whom St. Cyprian saith, !Going to Rome
he deceived our colleague Stephen, being placed at distance,
and ignorant of the fact, and concealed truth, aspiring to be
unjustly restored to the bishopric, from which he was justly
removed.

As he was in the case of Marcellus, who gulled pope Julius
by fair professions, as St. Basil doth often complain ™.

k Nunquid mirandum est de tam lon-
ginquis terris episcopos tuos tibi nar-
rare impune quod volunt? Aug. contra
Crescon. iii. 34. What marvel if the
bishops from so remote countries tell
you what they please without check or
control ?

1 Romam pergens Stephanum colle-
gam nostrum longe positum, et geste
rei, ac tacite veritatis ignarum fefellit ;

ut exambiret reponi se injuste in episco-
patum, de quo fuerat juste depositus.
Cypr. Ep. 67.

Mm ’Exeiva mowovor vov, & mpdrepow éxi

196 A Treatise of the

ney Ep.73, As he was in aiding that versatile and troublesome bishop,

74:

P. Zos. I.
Ep. 3, 4-

Cypr. Ep.
v. (p. 116.)

Eustathius of Sebastia, to the recovery of his bishopric.

As he was in rejecting "the man of God, and most admir-
able bishop, Meletius ; and admitting scandalous reports about
him, which the same saint doth often resent; blaming some-
times the fallacious misinformation, sometimes the wilful pre-
sumption, negligence, pride of the Roman church in the
case °.

As he was in the case of Pelagius and Celestius, who did
cajole pope Zosimus to acquit them, to condemn Eros and
Lazarus their accusers, to reprove the African bishops for
prosecuting them.

How many proceedings should we have like to that of pope
Zosimus I. concerning that scandalous priest, Apiarius; whom,
being for grievous crimes excommunicated by his bishop, that
pope did admit to communion, and undertake to patronise ;
but was baffled in his enterprise P.

This hath been the sense of the fathers in the case.

St. Cyprian therefore saith, that seeing it was a general
statute among the bishops, and that it was both equal and just
that every one’s cause should be heard there, where the crime
was committed ; and that each pastor had a portion of the flock
allotted to him, which he should rule and govern, being to render
unto the Lord an account of his downg.

St. Chrysostom thought it improper that one out of Egypt

MapkéAAg, mpds mtv Thy GANOeay avTors
amaryyéAAovtas pidovennoavres, &c. Ba-
sil. Ep. 10.

D Tod GvOpdrov Tod Ocod MeAetlov—
Tov Oavpacidtatov enlaoxoroy Tis GAn-
Owis TOD Ocovd exxAnolas Medériov .
Bas. Ep. 349.

© Of wey yap a&yvootat mayTeAas Ta
évraida’ of 5& Kal Soxotvtes €idévar gi-
Aovendrepov padrdov } GAnbéorepor ab-
Tois e&nryouvra. Ibid. Some are alto-
gether ignorant of what is here done;
others, that think they know them, de-
clare them unto us more contentiously
than truly. "EAdqe: quads A€ywv ois
"Apciouaviras ovyKkarapiOucicOa Tous
Ocopircoratous GdeApods juwv MeA€riov
«al EioéBuov. Epist. 321. ad Pet. Alex.
He grieved us when he said, that our
godly brethren, Meletius and Eusebius,
were reckoned among the Arians. To/a

BonOea tuiv ris Suticis odptos, of Toye
GAndes ode Yoacw, ore mabey avéxor-
rat; Bas. Ep. 10. What help can we
have from the pride of the Africans,
who neither know the truth, nor en-
dure to learn it ?

P Deinde quod inter tantam hominum
multitudinem adeo pauci sunt episcopi,
et ample singulorum parochie, ut in
subjectis plebibus curam episcopalis of-
ficii nullatenus exequi, aut rite admini-
strare valeant. P. Greg.VII. Ep. ii. 73.
And then because in so great a multi-
tude of people there are so few bishops,
and every one’s diocese very large, that
they are in no wise able to execute or
rightly perform the charge of the episco-
pal office among the people over whom
they are set.

q OSE yap axdrovbov hv Tov e Aiyb-

mov Tois év Opdrn SikdCew. Chrys. Ep. -

197
(And why not,

Pope’s Supremacy.

should administer justice to persons in Thrace.
as well as one out of Italy ?)

The African synod thought "the Nicene fathers had provided
most prudently and most justly that all affairs should be finally
determined there where they did arise.

They thought sa transmarine judgment could not be firm,
because the necessary persons for testimony, for the infirmity of
sex or age, or for many other infirmities, could not be brought
thither.

Pope Leo himself saw how dilatory this course would be ;
and that ‘longinguity of region doth cause the examination of
truth to become over dilatory.

Pope Liberius for such reasons did request Constantius, that
Athanasius’s cause should be tried at Alexandria; where—“he,
saith he, that is accused and the accusers are, and the defender
of them ; and so we may, upon examination had, agree in our

sentence about them.

Therefore divers ancient canons of synods did prohibit that
-any causes should be removed out of the bounds of provinces
or dioceses ; as otherwhere we shew*.

2. Such an authority as this pretence claimeth must neces-
sarily (if not withheld by continual miracle) throw the church

into sad bondage.

102. (ad P. Innoc. I.) Ei yap rovro xpa-
Thoee Td 00s, Kal e&dby yévorto Tots Bov-
Aouevots, eis GAAOTpias amévan mapoixlas
é€x TocovTay Siactnudtwy, Kal éxBadAcw
obs by 0A Tis, lore Bri wWdvTa olx7-
cerat, &c. For if this custom prevail,
and if they that will may go to other
men’s dioceses at so great a distance,
and eject whom any man pleases, know
that all will go to wrack, &c.

r Decreta Nicena sive inferioris gra-
dus clericos, sive ipsos episcopos suis
metropolitanisapertissime commiserunt ;
prudentissime enim justissimeque vide-
runt (providerunt) quecunque negotia
in suis locis, ubi orsa sunt, finienda.
Ep. Cone. Afric. ad P. Celest. I. (in fine
Cod. Afric.) vel apud Dion. Exig.

8 Aut quomodo ipsum transmarinum
judicium ratum erit, ad quod testium
necessariz persone vel propter sexus,
vel propter senectutis infirmitatem, vel
multis aliis impedimentis adduci non
poterunt. Jbid.

All the world must become slaves to one

t Ne ergo (quod inter longinquas re-
giones accidere solet) in nimias dila-
tiones tenderent veritatis examina ;
P. Leo I. Ep. 34.

U Tére emi Thy Arckavdpéwy of wdytes
amavtThoavtes év0a 6 eykadovmevos Kal oi
eykadotrtés eiot, Kat 6 avTiroiotmevos
abtayv, eketdcavres Ta wep) a’Tay cup-
mepievexevauev. Theod. ii. 16.

x Inoleverunt autem hactenus into-
lerabilium vexationum abusus permulti,
dum nimium frequenter a remotissimis
etiam partibus ad Romanam curiam, et
interdum pro parvis et minutis rebus ac
negotiis quamplurimi citari ac evocari
consueverunt, &c. Vid. Conc. Bas. sess.
xxxi. (p. 86.) But hitherto very many
intolerable vexatious abuses have pre-
vailed, while too often men have been
used to be cited and called out even
from the remotest parts to the court of
Rome, and sometimes for slight and
trivial businesses and occasions.

Vid. Conc.
Bas. sess.
xxxi. p. 87.

Hist. Conc.
Trid. p. 60.
so they pre-
tend. Conc.
Later. 4.
(sub Innoc.
IIT.)

198 A Treatise of the

city, its wealth must be derived thither, its quiet must depend
on it. For it (not being restrained within any bounds of place
or time, having no check upon it of equal or coordinate power,
standing upon divine institution, and therefore immutably
settled) must of its own nature become absolute and unli-
mited ¥.

Let it be however of right limited by divine laws or human
canons, yet will it be continually encroaching, and stretching
its power, until it grows enormous and boundless. It will not
endure to be pinched by any restraint. It will draw to itself
the collation of all preferments, &e.

It will assume all things to itself, trampling down all oppo-
site claims of right and liberty; so that neither pastor nor
people shall enjoy or do any thing otherwise than in depend-
ence on it, and at its pleasure.

It will be always forging new prerogatives, and interpreting
all things in favour of them, and enacting sanctions to establish
them ; which none must presume to contest2.

It will draw to itself the disposal of all places; the exaction
of goods. All princes must become his ministers, and exe-
cutors of his decrees.

It will mount above all law and rule; not only challenging
to be uncontrollable and unaccountable, but not enduring any
reproof of its proceedings, or contradiction of its dictates: a
blind faith must be yielded to all its assertions, as infallibly
true; and a blind obedience to all its decrees, as unquestion-
ably holy: whosoever shall anywise cross it in word or deed,
shall certainly be discountenanced, condemned, ejected from
the church?; so that the most absolute tyranny that can be

y Vid. Hist. Conc. Trid. p. 61. Pri-
vilegia istius sedis perpetua sunt, divini-
tus radicata, atque plantata, impingi
possunt, transferri non possunt; trahi
possunt, evelli non possunt. P. Nich. I.
ad Mich.Imp. The privileges of this
see are perpetual, rooted, and founded
upon divine authority; they may be
dashed against, they cannot be remov-
ed; they may be drawn aside, they
cannot be plucked up.

z Licet apostolica prerogativa possi-
mus de qualibet ecclesia clericum ordi-
nare. P. Steph. apud Grat. Caus. 9.
qu. iii. cap. 20. Though by our aposto-

lical prerogative we may ordain a cler-
gyman of any church.

@ Sitque alienus a divinis et pontifica-
libus officiis, qui noluit preeceptis aposto-
licis obtemperare. Greg. IV. (Dist. xix.
cap. 5.) And let him have nothing at
all to do with divine and pontifical
offices, who would not obey apostolical
precepts. Oportet autem gladium esse
sub gladio, et temporalem authoritatem
spirituali subjici potestati. Bonif. VIII.
Extrav. Com.i.8.1. But there must
be a sword under a sword, and tem-
poral authority subject to spiritual.

199

imagined will ensue: all the world hath groaned and heavily
complained of their exactions, particularly our poor nation; it
would raise indignation in any man to read the complaints.

This is consequent on such a pretence, according to the
very nature of things; and so in experience it hath hap-
pened». For

It is evident, that the papacy hath devoured all the privi-
leges and rights of all orders in the church, either granted by
God, or established in the ancient canons °¢.

The royalties of Peter are become immense; and, con-
sistently to his practice, the pope doth allow men to tell him
to his face, that all power in heaven and in earth is given unto

Pope’s Supremacy.

Vide Mat.
Paris.

him.

It belongeth to him 4 to judge of the whole church.

He hath ¢a@ plenitude (as he calleth it) of power, by which
he can infringe any law, or do any thing that he pleaseth.

It is the tenor of his bulls, that whoever rashly dareth to
thwart his will shall incur the indignation of Almighty God,
- and (as if that were not enough) of St. Peter and St. Paul

also.

f No man must presume to tax his faults, or to gudge of his

judgment.

SIt is idolatry to disobey his commands, against their own

sovereign lord.

There are who dare in plain terms call him omnipotent,

and who ascribe ifinite power to him.

infallible is the most common

b chesia piu officio di pontefici
aggiurgere con |’ armi, et col sorgue de
Christiani, &c. Guice. xi. p. 858.

© Quid hodie erant episcopi, nisi
umbra quedam? quid plus eis restabat
quam baculus et mitra? &c. Ain. Sylv.
de Gestis Syn. Bas. lib. i. What were
bishops now but a kind of shadows?
what had they left more than a staff
and a mitre ? &c.

ad Conc. Lat. v. sess. 11. p. 129. De
omni ecclesia jus habet judicandi. (P.
Gelas. Grat. Caus. ix. q. 3. cap. 18.)

e Secundum plenitudinem potestatis
de jure possumus supra jus dispensare.
Greg. Deeret. lib. iii. tit. 8. cap. 4.

f Hujus culpas isthic redarguere pre-
sumit mortalium nullus. Grat. Dist.

And that he is
and plausible opinion: so that

xl. cap. 6. (Si papa —) Neque cuiquam
licere de ejus judicare judicio. Caus. ix.
qu. 3. cap. 10.

& Cum enim obedire apostolice sedi
superbe contemnunt, scelus idololatrie,
teste Samuele, incurrunt. Greg. VII.
Ep. iv. 2. Nulli fas est vel velle, vet
posse transgredi apostolic sedis pre-
cepta. Greg. IV. apud Grat. Dist. xix.
cap. 5. No man may nor can trans-
gress the commands of the apostolic
see. —— ab omnibus quicquid statuit,
quicquid ordinat, perpetuo et irrefraga-
biliter observandum est. bid. cap. 4.
(P. Steph.) Whatever he decrees,
whatever he ordains, must always and
inviolably be observed by all.

Erronea,
et heresi
proxima.
Bell. de

FP. WW. 2

Gal. v. 1,

13.
1 Pet. ii. 16.

200 A Treatise of the

at Rome the contrary ¢s erroneous, and within an inch of being
heretical.

We are now told, that ® ¢f the pope should err by enjoining
vices or forbidding virtues, the church should be bound to believe
vices to be good, and virtues evil, unless it would sin against con-
science.

The greatest princes must stoop to his will; otherwise he
hath power to cashier and depose them.

Now what greater inconvenience, what more horrible ini-
quity can there be, than that all God’s people (that free people,
who are called tv freedom) should be subject to so intolerable
a yoke and miserable a slavery ?

That tyranny soon had crept into the Roman church So-
erates telleth us'.

They have rendered true that definition of Scioppius : * The
church is a stall, or herd, or multitude of beasts, or asses.

' They bridle us, they harness us, they spur us, they lay yokes
and laws upon us.

The greatest tyranny that ever was invented in the world
is the pretence of infallibility: for Dionysius and Phalaris did
leave the mind free, (pretending only to dispose of body and
goods according to their will:) but the pope, not content to
make us do and say what he pleaseth, will have us also to
think so; denouncing his imprecations and spiritual menaces
if we do not.

3. Such an authority will inevitably produce a depravation
of Christian doctrine, by distorting it in accommodation of it
to the promoting its designs and interests. It will blend
Christianity with worldly notions and policies.

It certainly will introduce new doctrines, and interpret the
old ones so as may serve to the advancement of the power, re-
putation, pomp, wealth, and pleasure, of those who manage it,
and of their dependents.

h Si autem papa erraret precipiendo
vitia, vel prohibendo virtutes, teneretur
ecclesia credere vitia esse bona, et vir-
tutes malas, nisi vellet contra conscien-
tiam peccare. Bell. de Pont. iv. §.

i Papa occupavit omnia jura inferi-
orum ecclesiarum, ita quod inferiores
prelati sunt pro nihilo. Card. Zab. de

h. Innoc. VII. p. 560. The pope

hath invaded all the rights of inferior
churches, so that all inferior prelates
are nothing set by.

k Ecclesia est mandra sive grex aut
multitudo jumentorum sive asinorum,
Eccl. cap. 47.

1 lh nos frenant, nos lore alligant,
nos stimulant, nobis jugum et onus
imponunt. Jbid.

Pope’s Supremacy. 201

That which is called xatnAceveww tov Adyov Tod Ocod, to make 2 Cor. ii.17.
a trade of religion, will be the great work of the teachers of
the church. It will turn all divines into mercenary, slavish,
designing flatterers ™.

This we see come to pass, Chvictaisity by the papal influence
being from its original simplicity transformed into quite another
thing than it was; from a divine philosophy designed to improve
the reason, to moderate the passions, to correct the manners
of men, to prepare men for conversation with God and angels,
modelled to a system of politic devices, (of notions, of precepts,
of rites,) serving to exalt and enrich the pope, with his court
and adherents, clients and vassals".

What doctrine of Christian theology, as it is interpreted by
their schools, hath not a direct aspect, or doth not squint that
way? especially according to the opinions passant and in vogue
among them.

To pass over those concerning the pope, (his universal pas-
torship, judgeship in controversies, power to call councils, pre-
sidency in them, superiority over them ; right to confirm or
annul them ; his infallibility; his double sword, and dominion
(direct or indirect) over princes ; his dispensing in laws, in
oaths, in vows, in matrimonial cases, with all other the mon-
strous prerogatives which the sound doctors of Rome, with
encouragement of that chair, do teach.)

What doth the doctrine concerning the exempting of the
clergy from secular jurisdiction, and immunity of their goods
from taxes, signify, but their entire dependence on the pope,
and their being closely tied to his interests ?

What is the exemption of monastical places from the juris-
diction of bishops, but listing so many soldiers and advocates
to defend and advance the papal empire ?

What meaneth the doctrine concerning that middle region
of souls, or cloister of purgatory, whereof the pope holdeth the
keys ; opening and shutting it at his pleasure, by dispensation
of pardons and indulgences; but that he must be master of
the people’s condition, and of their purse ?

m1 Tim. vi. §. Noui(évtwy ropiopdv n Pasce, id est, regio more impera.
elvat Thy eboéBeiay. Supposing that gain Ecce duos gladios. Oravi ne defice-
is godliness. "Ev mpopdoe: wAcovetias. ret. Feed, i. e. rule as a king. Behold
1 Thess. ii. 5. A cloke of covetousness; two swords.

xuBela. Eph. iv. 14.

202 A Treatise of the

What meaneth the treasure of merits and supererogatory
works, whereof he is the steward, but a way of driving a trade,
and drawing money from simple people to his treasury ?

Whither doth the entangling of folks in perpetual vows tend,
but to assure them in a slavish dependence on their interests,
eternally, without evasion or remedy; except by favourable
dispensation from the pope?

Why is the opus operatum in sacraments taught to confer
grace, but to breed a high opinion of the priest, and all he
doth ?

Whence did the monstrous doctrine of transubstantiation
(urged with so furious zeal) issue, but from design to magnify
the credit of those, who by saying of a few words can make
our God and Saviour? and withal to exercise a notable in-
stance of their power over men, in nye them to renounce
their reason and senses?

Whither doth tend the doctrine concerning the mass being
a propitiatory sacrifice for the dead, but to engage men to
leave in their wills good sums to offer in their behalf ?

Why is the cup withholden from the laity, but to lay it
low by so notable a distinction, in the principal mystery of our
religion, from the priesthood ?

Why is saying private mass (or celebrating the communion
in solitude) allowed, but because priests are paid for it, and
live by it ?

At what doth the doctrine concerning the necessity of auri-
cular confession aim, but that thereby the priests may have a
mighty awe on the consciences of all people, may dive into their
secrets, may manage their lives as they please?

And what doth a like necessary particular absolution in-
tend, but to set the priest in a lofty state of authority above
the people, as a judge of his condition and dispenser of his
salvation ?

Why do they equal ecclesiastical traditions with seripture,
but that on the pretence of them they may obtrude whatever
doctrines advantageous to their designs ?

What drift hath the doctrine concerning the infallibility of
churches or councils, but that, when opportunity doth invite,
he may call a company of bishops together to establish what
he liketh, which ever after must pass for certain truth, to be

Pope’s Supremacy. 203

contradicted by none; so enslaving the minds of all men to his
dictates, which always suit to his interest.

What doth the prohibition of holy scripture drive at, but a
monopoly of knowledge to themselves, or a detaining of people
in ignorance of truth and duty; so that they must be forced
to rely on them for direction, must believe all they say, and
blindly submit to their dictates ; being disabled to detect their
errors, or contest their opinions ?

Why must the sacraments be celebrated, and public devo-
tions exercised, in an unknown tongue, but that the priests
may seem to have a peculiar interest in them, and ability for
them ?

Why must the priesthood be so indispensably forbidden
marriage, but that it may be wholly untacked from the state,
and rest addicted to him, and governable by him; that the
persons and wealth of priests may be purely at his devotion ?

To what end is the clogging religion by multiplication of
ceremonies and formalities, but to amuse the people, and
- Maintain in them a blind reverence toward the interpreters Vid. Sleid.
of the dark mysteries couched in them; and by seeming to?:°7%
encourage an exterior show of piety (or form of godliness) to
gain reputation and advantage, whereby they might oppress
the interior virtue and reality of it, as the Scribes and Pha-
risees did, although with less designs?

Why is the veneration of images and relics, the credence
of miracles and legends, the undertaking of pilgrimages and
voyages to Rome, and other places, more holy than ordinary;
sprinklings of holy water, consecrations of baubles, (with in-
numerable foppish knacks and trinkets,) so cherished; but to
keep the people in a slavish credulity and dotage, apt to be led
by them whither they please, by any sleeveless pretence, and
in the meanwhile to pick various gains from them by such
trade?

What do all such things mean, but obscuring the native
simplicity of Christianity, whereas it being represented intel-
ligible to all men, would derogate from that high admiration
which these men pretend to from their peculiar and profound
wisdom? And what would men spend for these toys, if they
understood they might be good Christians and get to heaven
without them ?

204 A Treatise of the

What doth all that pomp of religion serve for, but for
ostentation of the dignity of those who administer it? It
may be pretended for the honour of religion, but it really
conduceth to the glory of the priesthood, who shine in those
pageantries.

Why is monkery (although so very different from that
which was in the ancient times) so cried up as a superlative
state of perfection, but that it filleth all places with swarms of
lusty people, who are vowed servants to him, and have little

else to do but to advance that authority by which they subsist

in that dronish way of life?

In fine, perusing the controversies of Bellarmine, or any
other champion of Romanism, do but consider the nature and
scope of each doctrine maintained by them; and you may
easily discern, that scarce any of them but doth tend to ad-
vance the interest of the pope, or of his sworn vassals.

Whereas indeed our Lord had never any such design, to
set up a sort of men in such distance above their brethren; to
perk over them, and suck them of their goods by tricks ; it
only did charge people to allow their pastors a competent
maintenance for a sober life, with a moderate respect, as was
needful for the common benefit of God’s people ; whom they
were, with humility and meekness, to instruct and guide in the
plain and simple way of piety.

This is a grievous inconvenience; there being nothing where-
in the church is more concerned, than in the preservation of its
doctrine pure and incorrupt from the leaven of hurtful errors,
influential on practice.

4. The errors in doctrine, and miscarriages in practice,
which this authority in favour to itself would introduce, would
be established immovably, to the irrecoverable oppression of
truth and piety ; any reformation becoming impossible while
it standeth, or so far as it shall be able to oppose and ob-
struct it.

While particular churches do retain their liberty, and pas-
tors their original coordination in any measure, if any church
or bishop shall offer to broach any novel doctrine or practice
of bad import, the others may endeavour to stop the settlement
or progress of them; each church at least may keep itself
sound from contagion.

—— |e

Pope’s Supremacy. 205

But when all churches and bishops are reduced into subjec-
tion to one head, supported by the guards of his authority,
who will dare to contest, or be able to withstand, what he
shall say or do? It will then be deemed high presumption,
contumacy, rebellion, to dissent from his determinations, how
false soever, or tax the practices countenanced by him, how-
ever irregular and culpable. .

He will assume to himself the privilege not to be crossed
in any thing; and soon will claim infallibility, the mother of
incorrigibility.

No error can be so palpable, which that authority will not
protect and shroud from confutation ; no practice so enor-
mous, which it will not palliate, and guard from reproof.

There will be legions of mercenary tongues to speak, and
stipendiary pens to write, in defence of its doctrines and
practices; so that whoever will undertake to oppose it shall
be yoted down and overwhelmed with noise, and shall ineur
all the discouragement and persecution imaginable. So poor
_ truth will become utterly defenceless, wretched virtue desti-
tute of succour or patronage.

This is so in speculation, and we see it confirmed by ex-
perience : for when from the influence of this power (as pope
Adrian VI. did ingenuously confess) an apparent degeneracy Sleid. lib.
in doctrine, in discipline, in practice, had seized on Christen- i a a
dom, all the world feeling it, and erying out loudly for re-p- 322-
formation, yet how stiff a repugnance did the adherents to tal 7 #
this interest make thereto! with what industry and craft did pata
popes endeavour to decline all means of remedy ! p- pr

What will not this party do rather than acknowledge Centum
themselves mistaken or liable to error? what palliations, what °°"
shifts, do not they use? what evidence of light do they not
outface ¢

5. The same will induce a general corruption of manners.

For the chief clergy partaking of its growth, and protected
by its interest, (reciprocally supporting it, and being sheltered
by it from any curb or control,) will swell into great pride-and
haughtiness ; will be tempted to scrape and hoard up wealth
by rapine, extortion, simony; will come to enjoy ease and
sloth ; will be immersed in sensuality and luxury, and will
consequently neglect their charge.

206 A Treatise of the

The inferiors will become enamoured and ambitious of dig-
nity, and will use all means and arts to attain it®.

Thence emulation, discord, syeophantry will spring.

Thence all ecclesiastical offices will become venal; to be
purchased by bribes, flattery, favour.

The higher ranks will become fastuous, supercilious, and
domineering. The lower will basely crouch, cog.

What then must the people be, the guides being such ?

Aly. Pelag- Were such guides like to edify the people by their doctrine?

ie, N a Were they not like to damnify them by their example?
8. That thus it hath happened experience doth shew, and his-
Vid. Bern.

Convers. tory doth abundantly testify. This was soon observed by a

Sadeagey pagan historian, Am. Marcellin. By St. Basil, é¢pus duriKy.

p- 87. What mischief this, what scandal to religion, what detri-
ment to the church, what ruins of souls it produceth, is visible.

The descriptions of Rome and of that church, by Mantuan,
do in a lively manner represent the great degeneracy and
corruptions of it.

6. This authority, as it would induce corruption of man-
ners, so it would perpetuate it, and render the state of things
incorrigible.

For this head of the church, and the supporters of his au-
thority, will often need reformation, but never will endure it.

That will happen of any pope, which the fathers of Basil
complained of in pope EugeniusP.

- Vid. Conc. If the pope would, (as pope Adrian VJ,) yet he will not be
Trid. p. 22. . ar ; go id
able to reform; the interests of his dependents crossing it.

If there hath happened a good pope, who desired to re-
form; yet he hath been ridiculous when he endeavoured it ;
and found it impossible to reform even a few particulars in
his own house, the incorrigible Roman court.

The nature and pretended foundation of this spiritual au-
thority doth encourage it with insuperable obstinacy to with-
stand all reformation: for whereas, if any temporal power

© Vid. ipsum Greg. VII. Ep. i. 42. rum abusuum correctionem in ecclesia
ii. 45. See the description of them sancta Dei efficere satageret. Conc. Bus.
in S. Bernard. in Cant. Serm. 33. Guic- sess. xxiii. (p. 76.) sess. xxxi. p. 89. He
ciard. in Suppl. could never be brought in this long

p —Nulla unquam monitione, nulla time by any advice or exhortation, seri-
exhortatione induci jam largo tempore ously to set upon any amendment of
potuit, ut aliquam errorum emendatio- errors or correction of the most gross
nem Christo placentem, aut notissimo- abuses in the holy church of God.

Pope’s Supremacy. 207

doth grow intolerable, God’s providence by wars and revolu-
tions of state may dispense a redress, they have prevented
this by supposing that in this case God hath tied his own
hands; this authority being immovably fixed in the same
hands, from which no revolution can take it: whence from
its exorbitances there can be no rescue or relief.

7. This authority will spoil him in whom it is seated; cor-
rupting his mind and manners; rendering him a scandal to
religion, and a pernicious instrument of wickedness, by the
influence of his exampleP.

To this an uncontrollable power (bridled with no restraint)
and impunity doth naturally tend, and accordingly hath it
been.

How many notorious reprobates, monsters of wickedness,
have been in that see4!

If we survey the lives of popes, written by historians most
indifferent, or (as most have been) partial in favour to them,
we shall find, at first good ones, martyrs, confessors, saints :
but after this exorbitant power had grown, how few good
ones! how many extremely bad! The first popes before
Constantine were holy men: the next were tolerable, while
the papacy kept within bounds of modesty: but when they
having shaken off their master, and renounced allegiance to
the emperor, (i. e. after Gregory II,) few tolerable; generally
they were either rake-hells, or intolerably arrogant, insolent,
turbulent, and ravenous.

Bellarmine and Baronius do bob off this, by telling us,
that hence the providence of God is most apparent’.

But do they call this preserving the church ; the permis-
sion of it to continue so long in such a condition, under the
prevalence of such mischiefs? when hath God deserted any

Orth. p. 141. Baron. Pope Marcel-
lus II. doubted whether a pope could
be saved. Thuan. lib. xv. (p. 566.)
From John VIII. to Leo IX. what a

P It will certainly render him a ty-
rant, according to the definition of Ari-
stotle, Pol. iv.10. Cui plus licet quam
par est, plus vult quam licet. Unde sicut

languescente capite, reliquum postea
corpus morbus invadat. Conc. Bas. sess.
Xxili. (p.64.) Whence it comes to pass,
that if the head be sick, the rest of the
body afterward grows diseased. Vid.
Cone. Bas. p.87. Cone. Const. p. 1110.

q Vid. Dist. xl. cap. 6. (hujus culpas,
etsi.) Vid. Alv. Pelag. apd Riv. Cath.

rabble of rake-hells and sots did sit in
that chair! Machiavel, Hist. lib. xvi.
p.1271t. Baron, ann. 912. §- 8.

r Baron. ann. 897. §.5. It was said
of Vespasian, Solus imperantiam me-
lior so apt is power to corrupt men,
Solus omnium ante se principum in me-
lius mutatus est. Tac. Hist. i. (p. 451.)

Wisd. i. 5.

Vid. Guic-
ciard. Ma-

208 A Treatise of the *

people, if not then, when such impiety more than pagan doth
reign in it’?

But what in the mean time became of those souls which
by this means were ruined? what amends for the vast damage
which religion sustained? for the introducing so pernicious
customs hardly to be extirpated?

To what a pass of shameless wickedness must things have
come, when such men as Alexander VI, having visibly such an
impure brood, should be placed in this chair !

Even after the reformation began to curb their impudence,
and render them more wary, yet had they the face to set
Paul the Third there.

How unfit must such men be to be the guides of all
Christendom ; to breathe oracles of truth, to enact laws of
sanctity !

How improper were those vessels of Satan to be organs of
that holy spirit of discipline, which will flee deceit, and remove
from thoughts that are without understanding, and will not abide
where unrighteousness cometh in !

It will engage the pope to make the ecclesiastical authority
an engine of advancing the temporal concerns of his own
relations, (his sons, his nephews.)

What indeed is the popedom now, but a ladder for a

“hing, Hist, {2Mily to mount unto great estate ¢

Fl. p. 19.
Conc. Bas.

(p- 65-)

What is it, but introducing an old man into a place, by
advantage whereof a family must make hay while the sun
shines" ?

8. This pretence, upon divers obvious accounts, is apt to
create great mischief in the world, to the disturbance of civil
societies, and destruction or debilitation of temporal authority,
which is certainly God’s ordinance, and necessary to the well-

8 How vain is that which pope
Greg. VII. citeth out of pope Sym-
machus, B. Petrus perennem merito-
rum dotem cum hereditate innocentiz
misit ad posteros. Grey. VII. Ep. viii.
21.

t Quod Romanus pontifex, si cano-
nice fuerit ordinatus, meritis B. Petri
indubitanter efficitur sanctus; was one
of pope Gregory VII.’s dictates. That
the Roman pontiff, if canonically elected,
is undoubtedly made holy by the merits

of blessed Peter.

u Cum non ob religionem, et
Dei cultum appetere pontificatum nos-
tri sacerdotes videantur, sed ut fratrum
vel nepotum, vel familiarium ingluviem
et avaritiam expleant. Plat. in Joh.
XVI. (p. 298.) Whereas our priests
seem to desire the popedom, not for
religion and the worship of God, but
that they may fill the ravening appe-
tite and covetousness of their brethren,
or nephews, or familiars.

Popes Supremacy. 209

being of mankind; so that supposing it, we may in vain pray : Tim. ii.
Jor kings, and all that are in authority; that we may lead a quia "*
and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

For suppose the two powers (spiritual and temporal) to be
coordinate, and independent each of other; then must all
Christians be put into that perplexed state of repugnant and
incompatible obligations, concerning which our Lord saith, Vo Matt. vi.
man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one,’*
and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise
the other.

They will often draw several ways, and clash in their designs,
in their laws, in their decisions ; one willing and commanding
that which the other disliketh and prohibiteth.

It will be impossible by any certain bounds to distinguish Bell. v. 6.
their jurisdiction, so as to prevent contest between them; all‘? ‘45-)
temporal matters being in some respect spiritual, (as being re-
ferrible to spiritual ends, and in some manner allied to reli-
gion,) and all spiritual things becoming temporal, as they con-
duce to the secular peace and prosperity of states: there is
nothing which each of these powers will not hook within the
verge of its cognizance and jurisdiction ; each will claim a right
to meddle in all things; one pretending thereby to further the
good of the church, the other to secure the interest of the state;
and what end or remedy can there be of the differences hence
arising, there being no third power to arbitrate or moderate
between them ? |

Each will prosecute its cause by its advantages; the one
by instruments of temporal power, the other by spiritual arms
of censures and curses.

And in what a case must the poor people then be ! how dis-
tracted in their consciences, how divided in their affections,
how discordant in their practices! according as each pretence
hath influence upon them, by its different arguments or pecu-
liar advantages.

How can any man satisfy himself in performing or refusing
obedience to either? How many (by the intricacy of the point,
and contrary pulling) will be withdrawn from yielding due
compliance on the one hand or the other!

What shall a man do, while one in case of disobedience to

Matt. xii.
25.

P. Pasch. II.
Ep. 7.

210 A Treatise of the

his commands doth brandish a sword, the other thundereth out
a curse against him; one threateneth death, the other excision
from the church; both denounce damnation ?

What animosities and contentions, what discomposures and
confusions must this constitution of things breed in every place!
and how can @ kingdom so divided in itself stand, or not come
into desolation ?

Such an advantage infallibly will make popes affect to invade
the temporal power.

It was the reason which pope Paschal alleged against
Henry IV, because he did ecclesie@ reqnum auferre.

It is indeed impossible that a coordination of these powers
should subsist ; for each will be continually encroaching on the
other; each for its own defence and support will continually
be struggling and clambering to get above the other: there
will never be any quiet, till one come to subside and truckle
under the other; whereby the sovereignty of the one or the
other will be destroyed. Each of them soon will come to claim
a supremacy in all causes, and the power of both swords; and
one side will carry it.

It is indeed necessary, that men for a time continuing pos-
sessed with a reverence to the ecclesiastical authority, as inde-
pendent and uncontrollable, it should at last overthrow the
temporal, by reason of its great advantages above it ; for

The spiritual power doth pretend an establishment purely
divine; which cannot by any accidents undergo any change,
diminutions, or translation, to which temporal dominions are
subject: its power therefore being perpetual, irreversible, de-
pending immediately of God, can hardly be checked, can never
be conquered*.

It fighteth with tongues and pens, which are the most peril-
ous weapons.

It can never be disarmed, fighting with weapons that cannot
be taken away, or deprived of their edge and vigour.

It worketh by most powerful considerations upon the con-
sciences and affections of men, upon pain of damnation, pro-

x Vid. Mach. Hist. Flor. p. 18. vinci autem quorumlibet potestate non
Impeti possunt humanis presumptioni- possunt. P. Gel. Ep. 8. Feliv P. Ep.i.
bus que divino sunt judicio constituta, (p. 597.)

Pope’s Supremacy. 211

mising heaven, and threatening hell ; which upon some men
have an infinite sway, upon all men a considerable influence ;
and thereby will be too hard for those who only can grant
temporal rewards or inflict temporal punishments. It is surely
a notable advantage that the pope hath above all princes, that
he commandeth not only as a prince, but as a guide ; so that
whereas we are not otherwise bound to obey the commands of
princes, than as they appear concordant with God’s law, we
must observe his commands absolutely, as being therefore law-
ful, because he commandeth them, that involving his assertion
of their lawfulness, to which (without further inquiry or seru-
ple) we must submit our understanding, his words sufficiently
authorizing his commands for just. We are not only obliged
to obey his commands, but to embrace his doctrines.

It hath continual opportunities of conversing with men ;
and thereby can insinuate and suggest the obligation to
obey it, with greatest advantage, in secrecy, in the tenderest
seasons.

It claimeth a power to have its instruction admitted with
assent: and will it not instruct them for its own advantage ?
All its assertions must be believed —is not this an infinite
advantage !

By such advantages the spiritual power (if admitted for such
as it pretendeth) will swallow and devour the temporal; which
will be an extreme mischief to the world.

The very pretence doth immediately crop and curtail the
natural right of princes, by exempting great numbers of per-
sons (the participants and dependents of this hierarchy) from
subjection to them; by withdrawing causes from their juris-
diction; by commanding in their territories, and drawing
people out of them to their judicatories ; by having influence
on their opinion ; by draining them of wealth, &c.y

To this discourse experience abundantly doth yield its at-
testation ; for, how often have the popes thwarted princes in Arietes fu-

i i : : - + riosos, Bell.
the exercise of their power, challenging their laws and adminis- he

y Non enim volumus aut propter prin- that either the ecclesiastical dignity
cipum potentiam ecclesiasticam minui should be diminished, by reason of the
dignitatem, aut pro ecclesiastica digni- prince’s power, or that the prince's
tate principum potentiam mutilari. P. power should be curtailed for the ec-
Pasch. 11. Ep. 28, 29. For we will not clesiastical dignity.

Vid. Tort.
T. p. 216.
Greg. VII.
Ep. i. 7.
cxii. 13, 63.

Vid. Conc.
Lugd. p.
851.

Thuan.
lib. 1.

212 A Treatise of the

trations as prejudicial to religion, as contrary to ecclesiastical
liberty? !

Bodin (I. 9.) observeth, that if any prince were a heretic,
(that is, if the pope could pick occasion to call him so,) or a
tyrant, (that is, in his opinion,) or anywise scandalous, the
pope would excommunicate him ; and would not receive him
to favour, but upon his acknowledging himself a feudatory
to the pope: so he drew in most kingdoms to depend on
him.

How often have they excommunicated them, and interdicted
their people from entertaining communion with them !

How many commotions, conspiracies, rebellions, and insur-
rections against princes have they raised in several countries?!

How have they inveigled people from their allegiance! How
many massacres and assassinations have they caused! Howhave
they depressed and vilified the temporal power !

Have they not assumed to themselves superiority over all
princes? (the emperor himself, the chief of Christian princes,
they did call their vassal,) exacting an oath from them, whereof
you have a form in the canon law, and a declaration of pope
Clement V, that it is an oath of fealty.

Have they not challenged propriety in both swords ; Ecce
duo gladii ?

How many princes have they pretended to depose, and dis-
possess of their authority? !

Consider the pragmatical sanctions, provisors, compositions,
concordats, &¢. which princes have been forced to make against
them, or with them, to secure their interest.

Many good princes have been forced to oppose them, as
Henry the Second of England, king Lewis the Twelfth of

z In vain did St. Bernard (de Con-
sid. 1.) cry, Quid fines alienos inva-
ditis? quid falcem vestram in alienam
messam extenditis? Why do you invade
other men’s territories? why thrust
you your sickle into other men’s har-
vest ?

a Vid. Plat. de Bonif. VIII. p. 467.
Jul. 2. Non sine suspicione, quod il-
lorum temporum pontifices, qui bella
extinguere, discordias tollere debuissent,
suscitarent ea potius atque nutrirent.
Epise. Modrus. in Cone. Lat. V. sess.
6. (p. 72-) Not without suspicion, that

the popes of those times, who ought to
have extinguished wars, and put an end
to dissensions, did rather raise them up
and cherish them. See Greg. VII. Ep.
iv. 2. viii. 25.

b Auctoritate apostolica de fratrum
nostrorum consilio declaramus illa jura-
menta preedicta fidelitatis existere et
censeri debere. Clement lib. ii. tit. 9.
cap. unicum. We declare out of our
apostolical authority, by the advice of
our brethren, that the foresaid oaths of
fealty ought to be, and be so esteemed.

Pope’s Supremacy. 213

France, (that just prince, pater patrig,) Perdam Babylonis
nomen.

How often have they used this as a pretence of raising and
fomenting wars! confiding in their spiritual arms; interdicting
princes, that would not comply with their designs for ad-
vancing the interests, not only of their see, but of their private
families !

Bodin observeth, that pope Nicholas I. was the first who Observ.
excommunicated princes. Platina doth mention some before
him : but it is remarkable, that although pope Leo I. (a high-
spirited pope, (fortissimus Leo,) as Liberatus calleth him,)
was highly provoked against Theodosius junior; pope Gela-
sius, and divers of his predecessors and followers; pope Gre-
gory II. against Leo; Vigilius against Justinian, &c.; yet none
of them did presume to excommunicate the emperors.

All these dealings are the natural result of this pretence ;
and, supposing it well grounded, are capable of a plausible
justification: for is it not fit, (seeimg one must yield,) that
_temporal should yield to spiritual ?

Indeed, granting the papal supremacy in spirituals, I con-
ceive the high-flying zealots of the Roman church, who subject
all temporal powers to them, have great reason on their side;
for coordinate power cannot subsist, and it would be only an
eternal seminary of perpetual discords.

The quarrel cannot otherwise be well composed, than by
wholly disclaiming the fictitious and usurped power of the
pope: for

Two such powers (so inconsistent and cross to each other,
so apt to interfere, and consequently to breed everlasting mis-
chiefs to mankind between them) could not be instituted by
God. :

He would not appoint two different vicegerents in his king-
dom at the same time.

But it is plain that he hath instituted the civil power; and Tort. T.
endowed it with a sword. That princes are his lieutenants*. ">

* P. Anast.

That in the ancient times the popes did not claim such au- calleth the
: . . empero

thority, but avowed themselves subjects to princes. Amat WE.
¢ Abutente Christianorum pastore pastor of Christians abusing the power

Christianorum principum viribus, ut of Christian princes, that he might gra-

private ambitioni, et suorum libidini tify his private ambition, and the will

inserviret. Thuan. lib. i. p. 42. The and lust of his friends,

carium,
Epist.

(p. 670.)
Eccl. Leod.
». £23.

214 A Treatise of the

9. Consequently this pretence it apt to engage Christian
princes against Christianity; for they will not endure to be
crossed, to be depressed, to be trampled on.

This popes often have complained of; not considering it
was their own insolence that caused it.

10. Whereas now Christendom is split into many parcels,
subject to divers civil sovereignties, it is expedient that corre-
spondently there should be distinct ecclesiastical governments,
independent of each other, which may comply with the respec-
tive civil authorities in promoting the good and peace both of
church and state 4.

It is fit that every prince should in all things govern all his
subjects; and none should be exempted from subordination to
his authority : as philosophers, and physicians of the body ;
so priests, and physicians of the soul; not in exercising their
function, but in taking care that they do exercise it duly for
the honour of God, and in consistence with public good ;
otherwise many grievous inconveniences must ensue.

It is of perilous consequence that foreigners should have
authoritative influence upon the subjects of any prince, or have
power to intermeddle in affairs.

Princes have a natural right to determine with whom their
subjects shall have intercourse: which is inconsistent with a
right of foreigners to govern or judge them in any case with-
out their leave.

Every prince is obliged to employ the power intrusted to
him, to the furtherance of God’s service, and encouragement
to all good works; as a supreme power, without being liable
to obstruction from any other power.

It would irritate his power, if another should be beyond his
coercion.

It is observable, that the pope by intermeddling in the
affairs of kingdoms did so wind himself into them, as to get a
pretence to be master of each; princes being his vassals and
feudatories®.

4 Secundum mutationes temporum
transferuntur etiam regna terrarum ;
unde etiam ecclesiasticarum parochiarum
fines in plerisque provinciis mutari ex-
pedit et transferri. P. Pasch. IT. Ep. 19.

€ Vid. Bod. de Rep. i. 9. (p. 195-)
Car les princes Chrétiens avoient pres-

que tous opinion, que le pape étoit ab-
solument seigneur souverain de tous les
royaumes de la Chrétienté. Bod. ibid.
p- 196. Tort. Tort. p. 216, &e.——
Greg. VII. Ep. 1, 7, 2, 13. Alex. II.
Ep.8. ‘H rocatrn diapwria nal waxn
Tay ev TH exxdanola ylverot, ExarTou Tis

> mt —

Pope’s Supremacy. 215

11. Such an authority is needless and useless; it not
serving the ends which it pretendeth ; and they being better
compassed without it.

It pretendeth to maintain truth; but indeed it is more
apt to oppress it.

Truth is rather (as St. Cyprian wisely observeth) preserved
by the multitude of bishops, whereof some will be ready to
relieve it when assaulted by others.

Truth cannot be supported merely by human authority ;
especially that authority is to be suspected which pretendeth
dominion over our minds. What controversy, being doubtful
in itself, will not after his decision continue doubtful? His
sentence may be eluded by interpretation, as well as other
testimonies or authorities.

The opinion of a man’s great wisdom or skill may be the
ground of assent, in defect of other more cogent arguments ;
but authority of name or dignity is not proper to convince a
man’s understanding. Men obey, but not believe princes more
than others, if not more learned than others.

It pretendeth to maintain order: but how? by introducing
slavery ; by destroying all rights; by multiplying disorders ;
by hindering order to be quietly administered in each country.

It pretendeth to be the only means of unity and concord in
opinion, by determining controversies: which its advocates
affirm necessary‘.

But how can that be necessary which never was de facto,
not even in the Roman church ?

Hath the pope effected this? Do all his followers agree in
all points? Do they agree about his authority ? Do not they
differ and dispute about infinity of questions? Are all the
points frivolous, about which their divines and schoolmen
dispute? Why did not the council of Trent itself, without

more ado, and keeping such
oracular decision ?

uty tod Kuplov judy 1. X, didacKaAlas
adioctapévov, Aoyicmovs 5€ twas Ka) -
pous iBlous éxdicodvtos é& abfevtias, al
paAAov Gpxew an’ évaytias Tov Kuplov,
h &pxerOa imd trod Kuplov Bovdouévov.
Bas. de Jud. Dei, t. ii. p. 259. So
great a dissonancy and jarring there is
among men in the church, while every
one swerves from the doctrine of our

a disputing, refer all to his

Lord Jesus Christ, and asserts certain
conceits and rules of his own by his
own authority, and had rather rule
contrary to the Lord, than be ruled

by the Lord.
f Necesse est, ut omnes fideles idem
sentiant. Bell. i. g. It is necessary

that all the faithful should be of the
same opinion.

‘Ixavwtépa
y Gela
ypaon. Ath.

Nemini
preescri-
bentes.

216 A Treatise of the

Necessary points may and will, by all honest people, be
known and determined without him, by the clear testimony
of scripture, by consent of fathers, by general tradition —And
other points need not to be determined.

That he may be capable of that office, he must be believed
appointed by God thereto; which is a question itself to be
decided without him, to satisfaction. His power is apt no
otherwise to knock down controversies, than by depressing
truth; not suffering any truth to be asserted, which doth
not favour its interests.

Concord was maintained, and controversies decided, without
them in the ancient church; in synods, wherein he was not the
sole judge, nor had observable influence.

The fathers did not think such authority needful, otherwise
they would have made more use of it.

A more ready way to define controversies is for every one
not to prescribe to others, or to persecute; for then men would
more calmly see the truth, and consent.

It pretendeth to maintain peace and unity. But nothing
hath raised more fierce dissensions, or so many bloody wars
in Christendom, as it.

It is apt by tyrannical administration to become intolerable,
and so to break the ecclesiastical state ; to raise schisms and
troubles.

It is like to extinguish genuine charity, which is free and
uncompelled.

All the peace and charity which it endureth is by force and
compulsion, not out of choice and good affection.

V. The ancients did assert to each bishop a free, absolute,
independent authority, subject to none, directed by none, ac-
countable to none on earth, in the administration of affairs
properly concerning his particular church.

This is most evident in St.Cyprian’s writings ; out of which
it will not be amiss to set down some passages, manifesting the
sense and practice of the church in his time, to the satisfaction
of any ingenuous mind.

&The bond of concord abiding, and the sacrament (or doc-

g Manente concordie vinculo, et et dirigit unusquisque episcopus, ratio-
perseverante catholice ecclesiz indivi- nem propositi sui Domino redditurus.
duo sacramento, actum suum disponit Cypr. Ep. 52. (ad Antonianum.)

Pope’s Supremacy. 217

trine) of the catholic church persisting undivided, every bishop
disposeth and directeth his own acts, being to render an accownt
of his purpose to the Lord. This he writeth, when he was
pleading the cause of pope Cornelius against Novatian ; but
then, it seemeth, not dreaming of his supremacy over others.

h But we know that some will not lay down what once they have
imbibed, nor will easily change their mind; but, the bond of peace
and concord with their colleagues being preserved, will retain some
peculiar things, which have once been used by them; in which
matter neither do we force any, or give law ; whenas every prelate
hath in the administration of his church the free power of his will,
being to render unto the Lord an account of his acting. This
saith he, writing to pope Stephanus, and in a friendly manner,
i out of common respect and single love, (not out of servile
obeisance,) acquainting him what he and his brethren in a
synod, * dy common consent and authority, had established
concerning the degradation of clergymen who had been or-
dained by heretics, or had lapsed into schism.

! For seeing it is ordained by us all, and it is likewise equal
and just, that each man’s cause should be there heard where the
crime is committed ; and to each pastor a portion of the flock is
assigned, which each should rule and govern, being to render an
account to his Lord ; those indeed over whom we preside ought
not to ramble about. This saith he, in his Epistle to pope
Cornelius, upon occasion of some factious clergymen address-
ing themselves to him with factious suggestions, to gain his
countenance.

m These things I have briefly written back, according to our
meanness, dear brother; prescribing to none, nor prejudging,

h Ceterum scimus quosdam quod
semel imbiberint nolle deponere, nec
propositum suum facile mutare, sed
salvo inter collegas, pacis et concordiz
vinculo quedam propria, que apud se
semel sint usurpata, retinere; qua in
re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus, aut
legem damus ; cum habeat in ecclesize
administratione voluntatis suze liberum
arbitrium unusquisque prepositus, ra-
tionem actus sui Domino redditurus.
Cypr. Ep. 72. (ad Stephanum.)

i Hee ad conscientiam tuam, frater
charissime, et pro honore communi et

pro simplici dilectione pertulimus, &c.

k Consensu et auctoritate communi.

1 Nam cum statutum sit omnibus
nobis, et equum sit pariter ac justum,
ut uniuscujusque causa illic audiatur,
ubi est crimen admissum, et singulis
pastoribus portio gregis sit adscripta,
quam regat unusquisque et gubernet,
rationem actus sui Domino redditurus,
oportet utique eos quibus presumus,
non circumeursare, &c. Cypr. Ep. §5§.
(ad Cornelium.)

m Hee tibi breviter pro nostra me-
diocritate rescripsimus, frater charissi-

218 A Treatise of the

that every bishop should not do what he thinks good, having a
Sree power of his will.

"In which matter our bashfulness and modesty doth not prejudge
any one ; so that every one may not judge as he thinketh, and act
as he judgeth: prescribing to none, ° so that every bishop may
not resolve what he thinks good, being to render an account to
the Lord, &e.

PIt remaineth that each of us do utter his opinion about this
matter, judging no man, nor removing any man, if he dissenteth,
Jrom the right of communion ; for neither doth any of us consti-
tute himself bishop of bishops, or by tyrannical terror driveth his
colleagues to a necessity of obeying; whenas every bishop hath
upon account of his liberty and authority his own free choice,
and is no less exempted from being judged by another, than he is
uncapable to judge another ; but let us all expect the judgment of
our Lord Jesus Christ, who, and who alone, hath power both to
prefer us to the government of his church, and to judge of our
acting. These words did St. Cyprian speak as prolocutor of
the great synod of bishops at Carthage: and what words
could be more express, or more full, in assertion of the epi-
scopal liberties and rights, against almost every branch of
Romish pretences ?

He disavoweth the practice of one bishop excluding an-
other from communion for dissent in opinion about disputable
points; he rejecteth the pretence that any man can have, to
be a bishop of bishops, or superior to all his brethren; he con-
demneth the imposing opinions upon bishops, and constraining

me; nemini prescribentes, aut preju-
dicantes, quo minus unusquisque epi-
scoporum quod putat faciat, habens
arbitrii sui liberam potestatem. Cypr.
Ep. 73. (ad Jubaianum.)

mn Qua in parte nemini verecundia
et modestia nostra prejudicat, quo mi-
nus unusquisque quod putat sentiat,
et quod senserit faciat. Cypr. Ep. 76.
(ad Magnum.)

© Nemini prescribentes, quo minus
statuat quod putat unusquisque pre-
positus, actus sui rationem Domino
redditurus ; secundum quod apostolus,
&e. Thid.

P Superest ut de hac re singuli quid
sentiamus proferamus, neminem judi-

cantes, aut a jure communionis aliquem
si diversum senserit amoventes ; neque
enim quisquam nostrum episcopum se
esse episcoporum constituit, aut tyran-
nico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem
collegas suos adigit; quando habeat
omnis episcopus pro licentia libertatis
et potestatis sue arbitrium proprium,
tamque judicari ab alio non possit,
quam nec ipse potest alterum judicare ;
sed expectemus universi judicium Do-
mini nostri Jesu Christi, qui unus et
solus habet potestatem et preeponendi
nos in ecclesiz sus gubernatione, et
de actu nostro judicandi. Cypr. in
pref. Conc. Carthag.

——\ a ———

Pope’s Supremacy. 219

them to obedience; he disclaimeth any power in one bishop

to judge another; he asserteth to each bishop a full liberty

and power to manage his own concerns according to his dis-
cretion; he affirmeth every bishop to receive his power only

from Christ, and to be liable only to his judgment.

' We may observe, that St. Austin, in his reflections upon Aug. de
the passages in that synod, doth approve, yea admire that pre- ps
face, passing high commendations on the smartest passages of l!- 3, &c.
it which assert common liberty, professing his own conformity

in practice to them: Jn this consultation, saith he, is shewed a
pacific soul, overflowing with plenty of charity ; and, 41 We have
therefore a free choice of inquiry granted to us, by the most mild

and most veracious speech of Cyprian himself; and, *Now if the
proud and tumid minds of heretics dare to extol themselves against

the holy humility of this speech—than which what can be more
gentle, more humble ?

Would St. Austin have swallowed those sayings, could he
have so much applauded them, if he had known a just power
then extant and radiant in the world, which they do impeach
and subvert? No, I trow; he did not know, nor so much as
dream of any such; although the pope was under his nose
while he was discussing that point, and he could hardly talk so
much of St.Cyprian without thinking of pope Stephen.

However let any man of sense honestly read and weigh those
passages, considering who did write them, to whom he writ
them, upon what occasions he writ them, when he writ them ;
that he was a great primate of the church, a most holy, most
prudent, most humble and meek person; that he addressed
divers of them to bishops of Rome ; that many of them were
touching the concerns of popes; that he writ them in times of
persecution and distress, which produce the most sober and
serious thoughts; then let him, if he can, conceive that all
Christian bishops were then held subject to the pope, or owned
such a power due to him as he now claimeth.

We may add a contemporary testimony of the Roman

4 Habemus ergo querendi liberum cervices hzreticorum adversus sanctam
arbitrium ipsius Cypriani nobis mitis- humilitatem hujus sententie extollant.
simo et veracissimo sermone concessum. Lib. ii. cap. 3. Quid mansuetius, quid
Lib. iii. cap. 3. humilius? Lib. iii. cap. 3.

r Nunc si se audent superbe et tumidee

220 A Treatise of the

clergy, addressing to St. Cyprian these words; ‘Although a
mind well conscious to itself, and supported by the vigour of
evangelical discipline, and having in heavenly doctrines be-
come a true witness to itself, is wont to be content with God
for its only judge ; and not to desire the praises, nor to dread
the accusations, of another; yet they are worthy of double
praise, who when they know they owe their consciences to God
only as judge, yet desire also their actions to be approved by
their brethren themselves ; the which it is no wonder that you,
brother Cyprian, should do, who, according to your modesty
and natural industry, would have us not so much judges as
partakers of your counsels Then it seems the college of
cardinals, not so high in the instep as they are now, did take
St. Cyprian to be free, and not accountable for his actions to
any other judge but God.

That this notion of liberty did continue a good time after
in the church, we may see by that canon of the Antiochene
synod, ‘ordaining that every bishop have power of his own
bishopric, govern it according to the best of his care and dis-
cretion, and provide for all the country belonging to his city,
so as to ordain priests and deacons, and dispose things aright.

The monks of Constantinople, in the synod of Chalcedon,
said thus; "We are sons of the church, and have one father,
after God, our archbishop: they forgot their sovereign father
the pope.

The like notion may seem to have been then in England,
when the church of Canterbury was ealled *the common

8 Quanquam bene sibi conscius ani-
mus, et evangelice discipline vigore
subnixus, et verus sibi in decretis coe-
lestibus testis effectus, soleat solo Deo
judice esse contentus, nec alterius aut
laudes petere, aut accusationes perti-
mescere; tamen geminata sunt laude
condigni, qui cum conscientiam sciant
Deo soli debere se judici, actus tamen
suos desiderant etiam ab ipsis suis fra-
tribus comprobari: quod te, frater Cy-
priane, facere non mirum est, qui pro
tua verecundia, et ingenita industria
consiliorum tuorum nos non tam ju-
dices voluisti, quam participes inve-
niri . Cler. Rom, ad Cypr. Ep. 31-

t "Exaorov yap émlaxorov ekovciav
éxew Tis EavTod mapoikias, Siouety KaTa
Thy Exdaotw émBddrdAovoay evAdBetav, Kar
mpdvoav moeioOa mdons THS Xwpas THS
bmd thy é€avtod wéAW; os kal xeipoTo-
velv mpeoBuTépous kal Siaxdvous, Kal mere
kptoews Exacta SiarauBdver—. Syn.
Ant. Can. 9.

u ‘Huts 5& kal téxva Tis exkdAnolas
Zouev, kal Eva marépa peta Tov Oedv, Toy
dpxienloxotoyv €xouev. Syn. Chale. Act. i.
p. 114.

x Omnium nostrum mater communis
sub sponsi sui Jesu Christi dispositione.
Gervus. Dorob. (p. 1663.) apud Twisd.

p. 72.

Pope’s Supremacy. 221

mother of all under the disposition of its spouse Jesus
Christ.

VI. The ancients did hold all bishops, as to their office, Vid. Ep. P.
originally according to divine institution, or abstracting from Cone, Eph.
human sanctions framed to preserve order and peace, to be Att. ii.
equal: for that all are successors of the apostles; all derive ?* 374
their commission and power in the same tenor from God; all
of them are ambassadors, stewards, vicars of Christ, intrusted
with the same divine ministries of instructing, dispensing the
sacraments, ruling and exercising discipline: to which func-
tions and privileges the least bishop hath right, and to greater
the biggest cannot pretend.

One bishop might exceed another in splendour, in wealth,
in reputation, in extent of jurisdiction, as one king may sur-
pass another in amplitude of territory; but as all kings, so
all bishops are equal in office and essentials of power, derived
from God.

Hence they applied to them that in the Psalm, Instead of Baron. an.
thy fathers shall be thy children, whom thou mayest make princes $0 $:3°.
in all the earth.

This was St. Jerome’s doctrine in those famous words;
yYWherever a bishop be, whether at Rome or at Eugubium, at
Constantinople or at Rhegium, at Alexandria or at Thanis, he
is of the same worth and of the same priesthood ; the force of
wealth and lowness of poverty doth not render a bishop more high
or more low; for that all of them are successors of the apostles:
to evade which plain assertion, they have forged distinctions,
whereof St. Jerome surely did never think, he speaking simply
concerning bishops, as they stood by divine institution, not
according to human models, which gave some advantages
over other.

That this notion did continue long in the church, we may
see by the elogies of bishops in later synods ; for instance,
that in the synod of Compeigne; 7Jt is convenient all Christ-
ians should know what kind of office the bishop's is,—who tt ts

yY Ubicunque fuerit episcopus, sive nisterium episcoporum—quos constat
Rome sive Eugubii, &c. Heron. ad esse vicarios Christi, et clavigeros regni
Evagr. Ep. 85. ceelorum, &c. Syn. Compend. ann. Dom.

z Omnibus in Christiana religione 833. (apud Bin. tom. vi. p. 361-)
constitutis scire convenit quale sit mi-

QQQ A Treatise of the

plain are the vicars of Christ, and keep the keys of the kingdom
of heaven.

And that of the synod of Melun; And though all of us
unworthy, yet are the vicars of Christ, and successors of his
apostles*.

In contemplation of which verity, St. Gregory Nazianzen,
observing the declension from it introduced ‘in his times by
the ambition of some prelates, did vent that famous exclama-
tion; %O that there were not at all any presidency, or any pre-
ference in place, and tyrannical enjoyment of prerogatives !—
which earnest wish he surely did not mean to level against
the ordinance of God, but against that which lately began to
be intruded by men. And what would the good man have
wished, if he had been aware of those pretences about which
we discourse; which then did only begin to bud and peep up
in the world ?

1. Common practice is a good interpreter of common sen-
timents in any case; and it therefore sheweth, that in the
primitive church the pope was not deemed to have a right of
universal sovereignty: for if such a thing had been instituted
by God, or established by the apostles, the pope certainly
with evident clearness would have appeared to have possessed
it; and would have sometimes (I might say frequently, yea
continually) have exercised it in the first ages: which that
he did not at all, we shall make, I hope, very manifest, by re-
flecting on the chief passages occurring then ; whereof indeed
there is scarce any one, which, duly weighed, doth not serve
to overthrow the Roman pretence: but that matter I reserve
to another place; and shall propound other considerations,
declaring the sense of the fathers; only I shall add, that
indeed,

2. The state of the most primitive church did not well
admit such an universal sovereignty. For that did consist
of small bodies incoherently situated, and scattered about in
very distant places, and consequently unfit to be modelled
into one political society, or to be governed by one head.

a Nos omnes licet indigni, Christi ta- b ‘Os bpeddy ye unde hv mpocdpia,
men vicarii, et apostolorum ipsius suc- pndé ris témrov mpotlunois, Kal Tupay-

cessores. Syn. Meldens. ann. Dom. 845. vich mpovoula Greg. Naz. Orat.
(apud Bin. tom. vi. p. 402-) 28.

Pope’s Supremacy. 223

Especially considering their condition under persecution and
poverty. What convenient resort for direction or justice
could a few distressed Christians in Egypt, Ethiopia, Parthia,
India, Mesopotamia, Syria, Armenia, Cappadocia, and other
parts, have to Rome? What trouble, what burden had it
been, to seek instruction, succour, decision of cases thence !
Had they been obliged or required to do so, what offences,
what clamours would it have raised! seeing that afterward,
when Christendom was connected and compacted together,
when the state of Christians was flourishing and prosperous,
when passages were open, and the best of opportunities of
correspondence were afforded, yet the setting out of these
pretences did cause great oppositions and stirs; seeing the
exercise of this authority, when it had obtained most vigour,
did produce so many grievances, so many complaints, so many
courses to check and curb it, in countries feeling the incon-
veniences and mischiefs springing from it.

The want of the like in the first ages is a good argument
that the cause of them had not yet sprung up; Christendom
eould not have been so still, if there had been then so meddle-
some a body in it as the pope now is.

The Roman clergy, in their Epistle to St. Cyprian, told
him, that °decause of the difficulty of things and times, they could
not constitute a bishop who might moderate things immediately
belonging to them in their own precincts: how much more in
that state of things would a bishop there be fit [unfit] to
moderate things) over all the world ; when, as Rigaltius truly
noteth, ‘the church being then oppressed with various vexations,
the communication of provinces between themselves was difficult
and unfrequent.

Wherefore Bellarmine himself doth confess, that in those
times, before the Nicene synod, ‘the authority of the pope was
not a little hindered, so that because of continual persecutions he
could not freely exercise it.

¢ Nobis, post excessum nobilissime igalt. in Cypr. Ep. 67.
memorie viri Fabiani, nondum est epi- e Verum enim est impeditam fuisse
scopus propter rerum et temporum diffi- eo tempore non parum pontificis aucto-
cultatem constitutus, qui omnia ista ritatem propter persecutiones con-
moderetur—. Cl. Rom. ad Cypr. Ep.31. tinuas non potuisse Romanos pontifices

4 Variis tune ecclesia vexationibus libere exercere eam, quam a Christo ac-
oppressa, difficilis et infrequens erat pro- ceperant auctoritatem, &c. Bell. de R.
Vinciarum inter sese communicatio. P. ii.17.

224 A Treatise of the

The church therefore could so long subsist without the use
of such authority, by the vigilance of governors over their
flocks, and the friendly correspondence of neighbour churches :
and if he would let it alone, it might do so still.

That could be no divine institution, which had no vigour
in the first and best times; but an innovation raised by am-
bition.

VIl. The ancients, when occasion did require, did maintain
their equality of office and authority, particularly in respect to
the Roman bishops; not only interpretatively by practice, but
directly and formally in express terms asserting it.

Thus when Felicissimus and his complices, being rejected
by St.Cyprian, did apply themselves to pope Cornelius for his
communion and countenance, St. Cyprian affirmed that to be
an irregular and unjust course; subjoining, ‘Except to a few
desperate and wicked persons, the authority of the bishops con-
stituted in Afric, who have already judged of them, do seem
less; that is, inferior to any other authority, particularly to
that of Rome, unto which they had recourse: what other
meaning could he have? Doth not his argument require this
meaning ! ;

Another instance is that of the fathers of the Antiochene
synod, (being ninety-seven bishops,) the which St. Hilary
calleth a synod of saints congregated, (the decrees whereof
the catholic church did admit into its code, and the canons
whereof popes have called venerablei:) these in their Epistle
to pope Julius, complaining of his demeanour in the case of
Athanasius, did flatly assert to themselves an equality with
him; «They did not, as Sozomen reciteth out of their Epistle,
therefore think it equal, that they should be thought inferiors, be-
cause they had not so big and numerous a church.

That pope himself testifieth the same in his Epistle to
them, extant in the second Apology of Athanasius; Jf, saith

f Nisi si paucis desperatis et perditis
minor esse videtur auctoritas episco-
porum in Africa constitutorum, qui jam
de illis judicaverunt——.

& Fides quam exposuerunt qui affue-
runt episcopi 97. —-—Hilar. de Synodis.
(p- 367+)

h Congregatam sanctorum synodum.
Hilar. ibid.

i Venerabiles Antiocheni canones.

P. Nicol. I. Ep. ix. (p. 519.)

k Ob wapa TovTo Ta Bevrepeia pépewv
hklovy, drt wh meyeer, wAAGE exkAn-
gias TAcoventovow. Soz. iii. 8.

1 Ei obv GAnOds tony Ka Thy abrhy
iyyeioGe Tiphy Tay emokdrwy, Kal ph ek
Tov peyeOous Tay WéAEwy, ws ypdpere,
kplvere Tovs émickdmovs. P. Jul. I. apud

Athan. in Apol. ii. (p. 744.)

—_— —

Pope’s Supremacy. 225

he, ye do truly conceive the honour of bishops to be equal, and

the same ; and ye do not, as ye write, judge of bishops according

to the magnitude of cities: which assertion of theirs so flatly
thwarting papal supremacy he doth not at all confute, yea not

so much as contradict; and therefore reasonably may be in-
terpreted to yield consent thereto; the rule, He that holdeth his Qui tacet
peace seemeth to consent, never holding better than in this case, arenes i
when his copyhold was so nearly touched : indeed he had been

very blamable to wave such an occasion of defending so im-
portant a truth, or in letting so pestilent an error to pass with-

out correction or reproof.

After the pope had climbed higher than at that time, (upon
the ladders of dissension and disorders in the church,) yet he
was reproved by Euphemius, bishop of Constantinople, for
preferring himself before his brethren; as we may collect from
those words of a zealous pope, ™ We desire not to be placed above
others, (as you say,) so much as to have fellowship holy and well-
pleasing to God with all the faithful.

That pope Gregory I. did not hold himself superior to other
bishops, many sayings of his do infer: for in this he placeth
the fault of the bishop of Constantinople, which he so often
and so severely reprehendeth, that he did "prefer himself before,
and extol himself above, other bishops.

And would he directly assume that to himself which he
chargeth on another, although only following his position by
consequence /

And when Eulogius the bishop of Alexandria had com-
plimentally said, Sicut jussistis, As ye commanded ; he doth
thus express his resentment; °Zat word of command J desire
you let me not hear; because I know who I am, and who ye
are: by place ye are my brethren ; in goodness, fathers: I did
not therefore command ; but what seemed profitable I hinted to
you.

m Hic non tam optamus preponi aliis
(sicut predicas) quam cum fidelibus
cunctis sanctum et Deo placitum habere
consortium. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 1. (ad
Euphemium.)

D In elatione sua Antichristum
preecurrit, quia superbiendo se ceteris
preponit. P. Greg. I. Ep. vi. 30. Super
cxteros sacerdotes se extollit. bid.
Christi sibi student membra judicare.

Id. Ep. iv. 36. Solus omnibus presse.
Id. Ep. iv. 38. quibus (episcopis)
cupis temetipsum vocabulo elationis
preponere. Jd. ibid.

© Quod verbum jussionis peto a meo
auditu removeri; quia scio quis sum,
qui estis; loco enim mihi fratres estis,
moribus patres, non ergo jussi, sed que
utilia visa sunt, indicare curavi, &c.
Greg. I. Ep. vii. 30. (ad Eulog. Alex.)

226 A Treatise of the

That many such instances may not be alleged out of anti-
quity, the reason is, because the ancient popes did not under-
stand this power to belong to them, and therefore gave no
occasion for bishops to maintain their honour; or were more
just, prudent, and modest, than to take so much upon them,
as their successors did, upon frivolous pretences.

VIII. The style used by the primitive bishops in their ap-
plications to the Roman bishop doth signify, that they did not
apprehend him their sovereign, but their equal.

Cypr.Ep.4, Brother, colleague, fellow-bishop, are the terms which St. Cy-

és, = vik prian doth use in speaking about the Roman bishops, his con-

&e. temporaries, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus ; and in
his Epistles to the three last of them; nor doth he ever use
any other, importing higher respect due to them; as indeed
his practice demonstrateth he did not apprehend any other

“19 vov, due, or that he did take them for his superiors in office. Know

ange now, brother, was the compellation of Dionysius (bishop of

5. Alexandria) to pope Stephanus. The syned of Antioch, which
rejected Paulus Samosatenus, inscribeth its epistle to PDuony-
sius (then bishop of Rome) and Mawimus, and all our fellow-
ministers through the world.

The old synod of Arles directeth their epistle to Seignior
Sylvester, their brother. Athanasius saith, 4 These things may
suffice, which have been written by our beloved and fellow-minis-
ter Damasus, bishop of great Rome. Marcellus inscribed to
pope Julius, to his "Most blessed fellow-minister. So Cyril
spake of pope Celestine I, sOur brother and fellow-mimister,
the bishop of Rome. So St. Basil, and his fellow-bishops of
the east, did inscribe their Epistle, ‘Zo the beloved of God,
and our most holy brethren and fellow-ministers, the unanimous
bishops through Italy and France. In this style do the fathers

Theod. v- 9- of Sardica salute pope Julius; those of Constantinople, pope
Damasus ; those of Ephesus, pope Celestine I, * Our brother

P Atovuaty Kal Maklup cad rots xara Cyril. ad Nest. in Syn. Eph. p. 207.

Thy olkouvpevyy Waa TVAAELT OUPYors NUGY. t Tots OeopiAcardros Kal dowrdros
Euseb, vii. 30. &deApots gvdAeToupyois Kata Thy "ITa-

q ‘Ikava pev 72 ypapévra mapa Te TOU Alay Kal Taddlay dpowbxos emokdras.
wyarntod Kal ovAdAcTovpyod Aapdcoov. Bas. Ep. 69. Athanas. Apol. ii. (p. 761,
Athan. Ep. ad Afr. (p. 931-) 750.)

I T6 pakapwrdty suddAcitoupy®@ ‘lov- U Tod &deApod kal cvAAEvToupyou Huav
Aly. Marcell, ad P. Jul. Epiph. Her. 72. KeAeorivov. Syn. Eph. p. 217. Domino

S’AdeAdod Kal cvAAcLToupyov Huey Tov dilectissimo et honoratissimo fratri —.
ris ‘Pwpalwy éxxAnotas émioxdrov Cone. Afr.

Pope's Supremacy. 227

and fellow-minister, Celestine ; those of Carthage, pope Celes-
tine I. in the very same terms wherein St. Austin doth salute
Maximinus, a Donatist bishop, ¥ Seignior, my beloved and most
honoured brother. The oriental bishops Eustathius, Theo-
philus, and Silvanus, did inseribe. their remonstrance to pope
Liberius, *7o seignior, our brother and fellow-minister, Libe-
rius. So John of Antioch to Nestorius writeth, ¥7'o my mas-
ter. The synod of Illyricum call Elpidius, 2 Our seignior, and
fellow-minister.

In which instances, and some others of later date, we may
observe that the word kvpios, or dominus, was then (as it is
now) barely a term of civility, being then usually given to
any person of quality, or to whom they would express common
respect; so that St. Chrysostom in his epistles commonly
doth give it, not only to meaner bishops, but even to priests ;
and St. Austin doth thus salute even Donatist bishops, reflect-
ing thereon thus; *Since therefore by charity I serve you in
this office of writing letters to you, I do not improperly call you
master, for the sake of our one true Master, who has commanded
us so to do. » my most honoured master. © now
therefore having with me my most honoured seignior and
most reverend presbyter, &ce. ° my most honoured master
Asyneritus the elder.

Pope Celestine himself did salute the Ephesine fathers,
exvpior ddeAdol, masters, brethren. Even in the sixth coun-
cil, Thomas, bishop of Constantinople, did inscribe according Conc. 6.
to the old style, to pope Vitalianus, hes brother and fellow- gets
minister. racer

The French bishops had good reason to expostulate with
pope Nicholas I. * You may know that we are not, as you boast

u Domino dilectissimo et honorabili © Nov yoty éemAaBduevor Tod xupiov

fratri Maximino. Jug. Ep. 203.

X Kuple adedp@, Kal osvdAdEcToupy@
AiBeplw Evordbis, Oedpiros, SiABavds
év Kupl@ xalpev . Socr. iv. 12.

Y T@ deomd7y pod. Conc. Eph. 202.

z Tov Kipiov judy Kail ovAAciToOupydv.
Theod. iv. 9.

& Cum ergo vel hoc ipso officio litera-
rum per charitatem tibi serviam, non
absurde te dominum voco, propter unum
et verum Dominum nostrum qui nobis
ista precepit. Aug. Ep. 103.

b Adoword wourimwrtare. Chrys Ep. 26.

Mov Timiwtdrov Kal evAaBeoTdrou mpeo-
Burépov. Id. ibid.

d Acomdrny nod Timmtarov “AciyKpt-
tov Tov mpegBitrepov. Ep. 68, (71,75,
77, 84, 91, &e.)

f Scias nos non tuos esse, ut te jactas
et extollis, clericos, quos ut fratres et
coepiscopos recognoscere, si elatio per-
mitteret, debueras. An. Franc. Pith.
(an. 858.)

Qa2

228 A Treatise of the

and brag, your clerks ; whom, if pride would suffer, you ought
to acknowledge for your brethren and fellow-bishops.

Such are the terms and titles which primitive integrity,
when they meant to speak most kindly and respectfully, did
allow to the pope, being the same which all bishops did give
to one another; (as may be seen in all solemn addresses and
reports concerning them:) which is an argument sufficiently
plain, that bishops in those times did not take themselves to
be the pope’s subjects, or his inferiors in office ; but his fellows
and mates, coordinate in rank.

Were not these improper terms for an ordinary gentleman
or nobleman to accost his prince in? yet hardly is there such
a distance between any prince and his peers, as there is
between a modern pope and other bishops.

It would now be taken for a great arrogance and sauciness
for an underling bishop to address to the pope in such lan-
guage, or to speak of him in that manner; which is a sign
that the world is altered in its notion of him, and that he
beareth a higher conceit of himself than his primitive ancestors
did. Now nothing but Beatissimus Pater, Most blessed Father ;
and Dominus noster Papa, Our Lord the Pope, in the highest
sense, will satisfy him.

Now a pope in a general synod, in a solemn oration, could
be told to his face, that ¢the most holy senate of cardinals had
chosen a brother into a father, a colleague into a lord. Verily
so it is now, but not so anciently.

In the same ancient times the style of the Roman bishops
writing to other bishops was the same; he calling them bre-
thren and fellow-ministers.

So did Cornelius write to Fabius of Antioch, " Beloved bro-
ther; so did he call all other bishops,—' Be it known to all
our fellow-bishops and brethren. So Julius to the oriental
bishops, * Zo our beloved brethren. So Liberius to the Mace-
donian bishops, !7o our beloved brethren and fellow-minis-

& Vere divina providentia factum cen- h ’AdeApe Gyarnré. Euseb. vi. 43.
sendum est, quod te sacerrimus iste se- i Omnibus coepiscopis nostris et fra-
natus fratrem, et ita dixerim filium tribus innotescat. P. Corn. apud Cypr.
in patrem, collegam in dominum—ele- Fist. 48.
gerint, assumpserint, adoraverint. Balt. k "Ayannrtots adeApots. Athan. p.739.
Delrio. in Cone. Later. ud Leonem X. !-Ayamnrois adeApots nal vAA€rroup-

seas. viii. (p. 85.) yois. Socr. iv. 12.

Pope’s Supremacy. 229

ters: and to the oriental bishops, ™ To our brethren and fel-
low-bishops. So Damasus to the bishops of Illyricum. So Soz. vi. 23.
Leo himself frequently in his epistles. So pope Celestine

ealleth John of Antioch, ® Most honoured brother; to Cyril

and to Nestorius himself, ° Beloved brother ; to the fathers of
Ephesus, P Seigniors, brethren. Pope Gelasius to the bishops

of Dardania, 4 Your brotherhood. St.Gregory to Cyriacus,

Our brother and fellow-priest, Cyriacus.

If it be said, the popes did write so then out of condescension,
or humility and modesty; it may be replied, that if really there
was such a difference as is now pretended, it may seem rather
affectation, and indecency or mockery: for it would have more
become the pope to maintain the majesty and authority of his
place, by appellations apt to cherish their reverence, than to
eollogue with them in terms void of reality, or signifying that
equality which he did not mean.

But Bellarmine hath found out one instance (which he Bell. ii. 14.
maketh much of) of pope Damasus, who writing (not, as he | gga ie
allegeth, to the fathers of Constantinople, *but) to certain *Vales. in
eastern bishops, ealleth them most honoured sons. That whole |." ae
epistle I do fear to be foisted into Theodoret ; for it cometh te7.
in abruptly ; and doth not much become such a man: and if
it be supposed genuine, I should suspect some corruption in
the place: for why, if he writ to bishops, should he use a
style so unsuitable to those times, and so different from that
of his predecessors and successors? Why should there be
such a disparity between his own style now and at other
times? for writing to the bishops of Illyricum, he calleth ’ayarnrois
them beloved brethren: why then is he so inconstant and gg? on
partial as to yield these oriental bishops less respect? where-
fore perhaps viol was thrust in for ddeAdoi or perhaps the
word ézicxdézors was intruded, and he did write to laymen, Tots riv
those who governed the east, who well might be called most can set
honoured sons ; otherwise the epithet doth not seem well to
suit; but however, a single example of arrogance or stateli-

™ Fratribus et coepiscopis. Hil. Frag. P Kipior adeAol. Act. ii. p. 324.

P- 459. q Fraternitas vestra. P. Gelas, Ep.
mM Tiyuwdtare adeaApé. Conc. Eph. 12. Greg.—Ep. vi. 24. Fratris et con-
p- 196. sacerdotis nostri Cyriaci

9 T@ ayarnrG adeAg@. P. 179, 183.

Ecclesia
principalis.
Cypr. Ep.
55.

230 A Treatise of the

ness (or of what shall I call it?) is not to be set against so
many modest and mannerly ones.

In fine, that this salutation doth not always imply superiority,
we may be assured by that inscription of Alexander, bishop of
Thessalonica, to Athanasius of Alexandria, 'Zo my beloved son
and unanimous colleague, Athanasius.

IX. The ground of that eminence which the Roman bishop
did obtain in the church, so as in order to precede other bishops,
doth shake this pretence.

The church of Rome was indeed allowed to be the principal
church, as St.Cyprian calleth it : but why? Was it preferred
by divine institution? No surely ; Christianity did not make
laws of that nature, or constitute differences of places. Was
it in regard to the succession of St. Peter? No; that was a
slim, upstart device; that did not hold in Antioch, nor in
other apostolical churches.

But it was for a more substantial reason ; the very same
on which the dignity and preeminency of other churches was
founded ; that is, the dignity, magnitude, opulency, oppor-
tunity of that city in which the bishop of Rome did preside ;
together with the consequent numerousness, quality, and
wealth of his flock; which gave him many great advantages
above other his fellow-bishops: it was, saith Rigaltius, called
by St. Cyprian the principal church, ‘ because constituted in
the principal city.

That church in the very times of severest persecutions, ‘ by
the providence of God, (as pope Cornelius said in his Epistle to
Fabius,) had a rich and plentiful number, with a most great and
innumerable people ; so that he reckoneth forty-four presbyters,
seven deacons, (in imitation of the number in the Acts,) seven
sub-deacons, forty-two acoluthi, fifty-two others of the inferior
clergy, and above fifteen hundred alms-people.

To that church there must needs have been a great resort

¥’Ayarnt@ vig Kal duopixyp cvArei-
Toupy@ Adavaciy. Apud Athan. Apol. il.
P 783. . * * . * *

5 Ecclesia principalis, id est in urbe
principali constituta. Rigalt. in Cypr.
Ep. 55- r ¥ ,

t Aid THs TOD Ocod mpovolas mAovaids
Te Kol mAnObwy apOuds pera peylaTou

Kal dvapiOunrov Aaod. Euseb. vi. 43.
Et quanquam sciam, frater, pro mutua
dilectione quam debemus et exhibemus
invicem nobis florentissimo illic clero
tecum presidenti, et sanctissimee atque
amplissime plebi, legere te semper
literas nostras Cypr. Ep. 55-
(ad Corn.)

Popes Supremacy. 231

of Christians, going to the seat of the empire in pursuit of
business ; as in proportion there was to each other metro-
polis; according to that canon of the Antiochene synod,
which ordered, that " the bishop of each metropolis should take
care of the whole province, because all that had business did
resort to the metropolis.

That church was most able to yield help and succour to
them who needed it; and accordingly did use to do it; ac-
cording to that of Dionysius, (bishop of Corinth,) in his epistle
to bishop Soter of Rome; *This, saith he, is your custom from
the beginning, in divers ways to do good to the brethren, and to
send supplies to many churches in every city, so refreshing the
poverty of those who want.

Whence it is no wonder that the head of that church did
get most reputation, and the privilege of precedence without
competition.

Y To this church, said Irenzeus, it is necessary that every church
(that is, the faithful who are all about) should resort, because of
_ ats more powerful principality : what is meant by that resort
will be easy to him who considereth how men here are wont
to go up to London, drawn thither by interests of trade, law,
&e. What he did understand by more powerful principality, (Awarwré-
the words themselves do signify, which exactly do agree to the past
power and grandeur of the imperial city, but do not well suit he said-)
to the authority of a church ; especially then when no church
did appear to have either principality or puissance. And that
sense may clearly be evinced by the context, wherein it doth
appear, that St. Irenzeus doth not allege the judicial authority
of the Roman church, but its credible testimony, which thereby
became more considerable, because Christians commonly had
occasions of recourse to it.

Such a reason of precedence St. Cyprian giveth in another
case, * Because, saith he, Rome for its magnitude ought to pre-
cede Carthage.

&c.

"Kal rh ppovtlda dvadéxerOar raons
Tis émapxlas. Aida Td ev TH untpowdrc
ouvtpéxew mdvras Tols Ta mpdyuara
Exovras. Syn. Ant. can. 9.

X "EE dpxiis yap duly @os eat) rovro,
mdytas pev aderpors mwoixlrAws evepye-
Teiv, éxxAnolais Te mwoAAais Talis KaTa
nacay wédw epddia méumeiv, Gde wey
Th Tav deoudvay weviay dvapixovras,

Dionys. Corinth. apud Euseb.
iv. 23.

y Ad hanc ecclesiam, propter poten-
tiorem principalitatem, necesse est om-
nem convenire ecclesiam, hoc est, eos
qui suntubi que fideles. Jren. iii. 3.

2 Quoniam pro magnitudine sua
debeat Carthaginem Roma precedere.
Cypr. Ep. 49-

232 A Treatise of the

For this reason a pagan historian did observe the Roman
bishop “had a greater authority (that is, a greater interest and
reputation) than other bishops.

This reason Theodoret doth assign in his Epistle to pope
Leo, wherein he doth highly compliment and cajole him ;
>For this city, saith he, ts the greatest, and the most splendid,
and presiding over the world; and flowing with multitude of
people; and which moreover hath produced the empire now
governing.

This is the sole ground upon which the greatest of all ancient
synods, that of Chalcedon, did affirm the papal eminency to be
founded ; for, ° Zo the throne, say they, of ancient Rome, because
that was the royal city, the fathers reasonably conferred the privi-
leges : the fountain of papal eminence was in their judgment
not any divine institution, not the authority of St. Peter deriy-
ing itself to his successors ; but the concession of the fathers,
who were moved to grant it upon account that Rome was the
imperial city.

To the same purpose the empress Placidia, in her Epistle
to Theodosius in behalf of pope Leo, saith, 4J¢ becometh us to
preserve to this city (the which is mistress of all lands) a rever-
ence in all things.

This reason had indeed in it much of equity, of decency, of
conveniency; it was equal, that he should have the preference,
and more than common respect, who was thence enabled and
engaged to do most service to religion. It was decent, that
out of conformity to the state, and in respect to the imperial
court and senate, the pastor of that place should be graced
with repute ; it was convenient, that he who resided in the
centre of all business, and had the greatest influence upon
affairs, who was the emperor’s chief counsellor for direction,
and instrument for execution of ecclesiastical affairs, should
not be put behind others.

a Auctoritate qua potiores eterne
urbis episcopi. Amm. Murcell. lib. xv.
(P- 47-)

b ‘H yap aith macdv peylotn, Kal
Aaumpotarn, Kal Tis olkovyévns mpo-
Kabnuevn, Kal TS WAVE Tv oikntdpwr
kupalvovgay mpos 5& TovTois Kal viv
Kpatovoay ayeuovlay éBAdoTnGE
Theod. Ep. 113.

© T@ Opdv@ tis mperButépas ‘Péuns
bia TH BactAevew mwodw exelyny of TMa-
tépes cixdtws drobcdéKact Ta mpeaBeia.
Syn. Chale. Act. xvi. can. 28.

d Tipére: nuads tatty TH peylarn 1é-
Act, ys béomowa Tracey bmdpxe Tov
yeav, ev mao Td) ofBas mapadvdAdta..
Placid. in Syn. Chale. p. 27.

e Toy pévto. KwvoraytwoumdAews

Pope’s Supremacy. 233

vanee the bishop of Constantinople to the next privileges of
honour after the bishop of Rome, because it was new Rome, and
a seat of the empire.

And the fathers of Chalcedon assigned fequal privileges to the
most holy see of new Rome, with good reason, (say they,) judging
that the city which was honoured with the royalty and senate, and
which (otherwise) did enjoy equal privileges with the ancient royal
Rome, should likewise in ecclesiastical affairs be magnified as it,
being second after it.

Indeed upon this score the church of Constantinople is said
to have aspired to the supreme principality, when it had the
advantage over old Rome, the empire being extinguished there;
and sometime was styled, the head of all churchess.

It is also natural, and can hardly be otherwise, but that the
bishop of a chief city (finding himself to exceed in wealth, in
power, in advantages of friendships, dependencies, &c.) should
not affect to raise himself above the level: it is an ambition
that easily will seize on the most moderate, and otherwise re-
_ligious minds. Pope Leo objected it to Anatolius, and pope

Gregory to John, (from his austere life called the Faster.)
Upon the like account it was that the bishops of other

éricxomoy éxew Ta TpecBeia Tis Tits We-
7a Toy Tis ‘Péuns éemioxomoy Sia Td elvac
abthy veay ‘Péuny Syn. Const.
can. 3.

f Ta toa mpeoBeia erévemay Th Tis
véas ‘Pduns aywrdtrw Opdvy, evrAdyws
kplvaytes Thy BaciAela Kal cuvyKANTy Ti-
undeioay modu, kal tTav Yowv amrodatov-
gay mpecBelwy 7H mpecButépa BaciAldi
‘Péun, Kal év trois exxkAnoiagtixois ws
éxelvny ueyadtverOa mpd-yuact, Sevtépay
per exelyny iwdpxovoay. Syn. Chal.
can. 28.

& Sacrosanctam quoque hujus reli-
giosissime civitatis ecclesiam, et matrem
nostre pietatis, et Christianorum ortho-
doxe religionis omnium, et ejusdem re-
giz urbis sanctissimam sedem, &c. Imp.
Leo. Cod. lib. i. tit. 2. §. 16. The holy
church of this most religious city, the
mother of our devotion, and of all or-
thodox Christians, and the most holy
see of that imperial city. Bonifacius
Ill. a Phoca imperatore obtinuit,
magna tamen contentione, ut sedes B.
Petri apostoli, que caput est omnium
ecclesiarum, ita et diceretur, et habere-
tur ab omnibus; quem quidem locum

ecclesia Constantinopolitana sibi vendi-
care conabatur; faventibus interdum
principibus, affirmantibusque eo loci pri-
mam sedem esse debere, ubi imperii ca-
put esset. Plat. in Bonif. III. (p. 161.)
Boniface III. (though with a great deal
of stir) obtained of the emperor Phocas,
that the see of St. Peter the apostle,
which is the head of all churches, should
be so called and accounted by all;
which dignity the church of Constanti-
nople did indeed endeavour to assert to
itself, princes sometime favouring them,
and affirming that there the chief see
ought to be, where the head of the em-
pire was. Phocas rogante papa Boni-
facio statuit sedem Romane ecclesiz ca-
put esse omnium ecclesiarum, quia ec-
clesia Constantinopolitana primam se
omnium ecclesiarum scribebat. Anasias,
in Bonif. III, Idem Sabellicus, Blon-
dus, Letus, &c. tradunt. Phocas, at
the entreaty of pope Boniface, appointed
that the Roman see should be the head
of all churches, because the church of
Constantinople wrote herself the chief
of all churches.

234 A Treatise of the

cities did mount to a preeminency, metropolitan, primatical,
patriarchal.

Thence it was that the bishop of Alexandria, before Con-
stantine’s time, did acquire the honour of second place to
Rome; because that city, being head of a most rich and
populous nation, did in magnitude and opulency (as Gregory
Nazianzen saith) approach neat to Rome, so as hardly to yield
the next place to it.

Upon that account also did Antioch get the next place; as
being the most large, flourishing, commanding city of the east ;
ithe which, as Josephus saith, for bigness and for other advan-
tages, had without controversy the third place in all the world
subject to the Romans; and the which St. Chrysostom calleth
kthe head of all cities seated in the east.

St. Basil seemeth to call the church thereof the principal in
the world ; for, | What, saith he, can be more opportune to the
churches over the world than the church of Antioch? the which,
if it should happen to be reduced to concord, nothing would
hinder, but that as a sound head it would supply health to the
whole body.

Upon the same account the bishop of Carthage did obtain
the privilege to be standing primate of his province, (although
other primacies there were not fixed to places, but followed
seniority,) and a kind of patriarch over all the African pro-
vinces.

Hence did Ceesarea, as exceeding in temporal advantages,
and being the political metropolis of Palestine, overtop Jerusa-
lem, that most ancient, noble, and venerable city, the source of
our religion.

It was indeed the general rule and practice to conform the
privileges of ecclesiastical dignity in a proportion convenient
to those of the secular government, as the synod of Antioch
in express terms did ordain: the ninth canon whereof runneth

h “Ypets 4 weydan moris, of pev Thy k TldéAis oftw peyddn, kal Tav brd
mpaotny evOéws, ) unde ToUTO wapaxw- Thy Ew Kemevwy 7) Kepadh. Chrys.
powvres. Greg. Naz. Orat.27. ‘H’A- ’Avdp. B’.

Ackavdpéwy peyardmodis. Evagr. ii. 4. et 1 Ti 8 by yévorro Tats Kata Thy oiKov-
assim. peévny exkAnotas THs Avrioxelas Kaipid-

i‘H pnrpdémoarls éort THs Suplas, we- Tepov; hy cicvveBn mpds dudvoiay eray-
yéOous evexa Kal Tis BAAnS ebdapovias eAOeiv, vddiv exddvey, Samep Kepadiyvy
tplrov Gdnplrws em) ris iwd‘Pwpators oi- eppwuévny, mavtl TP Tduari emixopnyeiv
koupévns txovoa térov. Joseph. de Bello thy byleav. Bas. Ep. 48. (ad Atha-
Jud. iii. 3. nas. )

Pope’s Supremacy. 235

thus: ™ The bishops in every province ought to know, that the
bishop presiding in the metropolis doth undertake the care of all
the province; because all that have business do meet together
in the metropolis ; whence it hath been ordained, that he should
precede in honour, and that the bishops should do nothing extra-
ordinary without him; according to a more ancient canon hold-
ing from our fathers ; (that is, according to the thirty-fourth
eanon of the apostles.)

It is true, that the fathers do sometimes mention the church
of Rome being founded by the two great apostles, or the
succession of the Roman bishop to them in pastoral charge,
as a special ornament of that church, and a congruous ground
of respect to that bishop, whereby they "did honour the
memory of St. Peter: but even some of those, who did acknow-
ledge this, did not avow it as a sufficient ground of preemi-
nence; none did admit it for an argument of authoritative
superiority.

St. Cyprian did call the Roman see the chair of St. Peter, Cypr. Ep.
and the principal church; yet he disclaimed any authority of lv. §2-
the Roman bishops above his brethren.

Firmilian did take notice, that pope Stephanus °did glory
in the place of his bishopric, and contend that he held the succes-
sion of Peter ; yet did not he think himself thereby obliged to
submit to his authority, or follow his judgment; but sharply
did reprehend him, as a favourer of heretics, an author of
schisms, and one who had cut himself off from the communion
of his brethren.

The fathers of the Antiochene synod Pdid confess, that in

™ Tods ev éxdotn erapxla emickdrous © Atque ego in hac parte juste indig-

eidéva: xph Toy ev TH unTpowdrAc Tpoe-
oTata éxloKxoror, (kal) thy ppovTlda ava-
déxecOai mdons Tis emapxias’ Sia Td ev
TH pntpomdAc ouvtpéxew mdytas Tovs
Ta mpdyuara txovras bev 5ote Kal TH
Tih TponyeicOau abtoy, undév Te mpdr-
Tew mwepittov Tovs Aoiro’s emicKdrous
avev abtod, kata Toy apxaidrepoy Kparh-
cavTa ek Tay Tarépwy huav Kavdva.
Syn. Ant. can. g. Syn. Chale. 17.

n Sedis apostolice primatum 8. Petri
meritum, (qui princeps est episcopalis
corone) Romane dignitas civitatis,
sacre etiam synodi firmavit authori-
tas. Valentin. Nov. 24. in fin. Cod.
Theod.

nor ad hanc tam apertam et manifestam
Stephani stultitiam, quod qui sic de
episcopatus sui loco gloriatur, et se suc-
cessionem Petri tenere contendit
Stephanus qui per successionem cathe-
dram Petri habere se predicat——.
Firmil. apud Cypr. Ep. 75.

P dépew pty yap mac pirotiulay Thy
‘Pwualwy éxxdAnolay év Trois ypduuaow
Gmordyouv, ws dmogtéAwy ppoyTiaThpioy,
Kal evaeBelas unrpdrodAw ef apxijs yeye-
ynuevny’ ei wal ef €w evediunoay abrh oi
Tow ddéyuaros einyntal’ ob rapa TovTo be
ra devrepeia pepe Hélouy, dri uh weyebe
A wane: exxAnclas wAcovextovaw. Soz.
iii. 8.

236 A Treatise of the

writings all did willingly honour the Roman church, as hav-
ing been from the beginning the school of the apostles, and
the metropolis of religion; although yet from the east the in-
structors of the Christian doctrine did go and reside there ;
but from hence they desired not to be deemed inferiors ; because
they did not exceed in the greatness and numerousness of their
church. They allowed some regard (though faintly and with
reservation) to the Roman church upon account of their apo-
stolical foundation; they implied a stronger ground of pretence
from the grandeur of that city; yet did not they therefore
grant themselves to be inferiors; at least as to any substantial
privilege, importing authority.

If by divine right, upon account of his succession to St.
Peter, he had such preeminence, why are the other causes
reckoned, as if they could add any thing to God’s institution,
or as if that did need human confirmation? The pretence to
that surely was weak, which did need corroboration, and to be
propped by worldly considerations.

Indeed, whereas the apostles did found many churches, ex-
ercising apostolical authority over them, (eminently containing
the episcopal,) why in conscience should one claim privileges
on that score rather than or above the rest ?

Why should the see of Antioch, that most ancient and
truly apostolical church, where the Christian name began,
where St. Peter at first (as they say) did sit bishop for seven
years, be postponed to Alexandria?

Epiph. Sy- Especially why should the church of Jerusalem, the seat of
nod. Con-_ our Lord himself, the mother of all churches, the fountain of
Tis 8€y¢ Christian doctrine, the first consistory of the apostles, enno-
, chap bled by so many glorious performances, (by the life, preaching,
el a miracles, death, burial, resurrection, ascension of our Saviour ;
poss. by the first preaching of the apostles, the effusion of the
Holy Spirit, the conversion of so many people, and consti-
Optat. 1. vi. tution of the first church, and celebration of the first synods,)
Fg 2 upon these considerations, not obtain preeminence to other
<i pamgl churches, but in honour be cast behind divers others; and as
‘to power be subjected to Ceesarea, the metropolis of Palestine?

4 Tis mpecBurdrns Kab bytws amo- Alexandrinam fuerat instituta, tamen

orodiKis exKAnalas - Ep. Mang quoniam prefectura Alexandrina Au-

Const. Theodoret. Hist. 1. v. cap. 9. gustalis dicta longe preestabat Syrize
211. Que quantumlibet a Petro ats prefecture, &c. Buron. ann. 39. §. 10.

Pope’s Supremacy. 237

The true reason of this even Baronius himself did see and
acknowledge ; for, That, saith he, the ancients observed no other
rule in instituting the ecclesiastical sees, than the division of
provinces, and the prerogative before established by the Romans,
there are very many examples".

Of which examples, that of Rome is the most obvious and
notable ; and what he so generally asserteth may be so applied
thereto, as to void all other grounds of its preeminence.

X. The truth is, all ecclesiastical presidencies and subordi-
nations, or dependencies of some bishops on others in admini-
stration of spiritual affairs, were introduced merely by human
ordinance, and established by law or custom, upon prudential
accounts, according to the exigency of things: hence the pre-
rogatives of other sees did proceed; and hereto whatever dig-
nity, privilege, or authority the pope with equity might at any
time claim, is to be imputed.

To clear which point we will search the matter nearer the
quick ; propounding some observations concerning the ancient
forms of discipline, and considering what interest the pope
had therein.

At first each church was settled apart under its own bishop
and presbyters; so as independently and separately to manage
its own concernments; each was aitoxédpados, and attdvoyos,
governed by its own head, and had its own laws. Every bishop,
as a prince in his own church, did act freely, according to
his will and discretion, with the advice of his ecclesiastical
senate, and ‘with the consent of his people, (the which he
did use to consult,) without being controllable by any other,
or accountable to any, further than his obligation to uphold
the verity of Christian profession, and to maintain fraternal

r Majores enim in instituendis sedi-
bus ecclesiarum non aliam iniisse ratio-
nem, quam secundum divisionem pro-
vinciarum, et prerogativas a Romanis
antea stabilitas, quam plurima sunt ex-
empla. Jd. ibid.

8 Cypr. Ep. 52, 55, 72, 73, 76. Om-
nis hic actus populo erat insinuandus.
P. Corn. apud Cypr. Ep. 46. All this
business was to have been imparted to
the people. Secundum arbitrium quo-
que vestrum, et omnium nostrum com-
mune consilium— ea que agenda sunt
disponere. Cypr. Ep. 40. (Plebi Univ.)

To order what was to be done accord-
ing to your judgment, and the common
advice of us all. Et limanda plenius
ratio non solum cum collegis meis, sed
et cum plebe ipsa universa. Jd. Ep. 28.
And the reason is more throughly to
be examined, not only with my col-
leagues, but with the whole people.
Prejudicare ego et soli mihi rem com-
munem vindicare non audeo. Ep. 18.
I dare not therefore prejudge, nor as-
sume to myself alone a matter which is
common to all.

* Particu-
larly in the
dispensa-
tion of
church
goods.
Cone. Ant.
can. 25.

+t Nov.
CXXXvVii.

Apost. 38.
(al. 30.) de
Synodis.

238 A Treatise of the

communion in charity and peace with neighbouring churches
did require; in which regard, if he were notably peccant, he
was liable to be disclaimed by them as no good Christian, and
rejected from communion, together with his church, if it did
adhere to him in his misdemeanours. This may be collected
from the remainders of state in the times of St. Cyprian.

But because little, disjointed, and incoherent bodies were
like dust, apt to be dissipated by every wind of external as-
sault or intestine faction; and peaceable union could hardly
be retained without some ligature of discipline; and churches
could not mutually support and defend each other without
some method of intercourse and rule of confederacy engaging
them: ‘therefore for many good purposes (for upholding and
advancing the common interests of Christianity, for protection
and support of each church from inbred disorders and dissen-
sions, for preserving the integrity of the faith, for securing the
concord of divers churches, for providing fit pastors to each
church, and correcting such as were scandalously bad * or un-
faithful) it was soon found needful that divers churches should
be combined and linked together in some regular form of dis-
cipline; + that if any church did want a bishop, the neigh-
bour bishops might step in to approve and ordain a fit one;
{that if any bishop did notoriously swerve from the Christian
rule, the others might interpose to correct or void him; that if

- any error or schism did peep up in any church, the joint con-

currence of divers bishops might avail to stop its progress, and
to quench it, by convenient means of instruction, reprehension,
and censure; that if any church were oppressed by persecu-
tion, by indigeney, by faction, the others might be engaged
to afford effectual succour and relief: for such ends it was

t Hoc enim et verecundize et disci- clesiz unius aut unius provinciz, sed

pline et vitz ipsi omnium nostrim con-
venit, ut episcopi plures in unum con-
venientes, presente et stantium plebe,
(quibus et ipsis pro fide et timore suo
honor habendus est) disponere omnia
consilii communis religione possimus.
Cypr. Ep. 14. For it becomes the mo-
desty, the discipline, and the manner of
our living, that many bishops meeting
together, the people being also present,
(to whom respect ought to be had for
their faith and fear,) we may order
all things with the common advice.
——quoniam non paucorum, nec ec-

totius orbis hee causa est-———. Cypr.
Ep. 14. because this is the con-
cern, not of a few men, or of one
church, or one province, but of the
whole world. Idcirco copiosum corpus
est sacerdotum——ut si quis ex collegio
nostro heresin facere, et gregem Christi
lacerare et vastare tentaverit, subve-
niant ceteri——. Jd. Ep. 76. There-
fore the clergy is a large body that
if any one of our own society should
vent an heresy, and attempt to rent
and waste the flock of Christ, the rest
might come in to their help.

Pope’s Supremacy. 239

needful that bishops in certain precincts should convene, with

intent to deliberate and resolve about the best expedients to
compass them; and that the manner of such proceeding (t0 (g%oyou/a
avoid uncertain distraction, confusion, arbitrariness, dissatis- ¢««Angia-
faction, and mutinous opposition) should be settled in an ordi- rma 9 piace,
nary course, according to rules known and allowed by all.)

In defining such precincts it was most natural, most easy,
most commodious, to follow the divisions of territory or juris-
diction already established in the civil state; that the spiritual
administrations, being in such circumstances aptly conformed
to the secular, might go on more smoothly and expeditely,
the wheels of one not clashing with the other ; according to the
judgment of the two great synods, that of Chaleedon and the
Trullane; which did ordain, that '7f by royal authority any
city be, or should hereafter be reestablished, the order of the churches
shall be according to the civil and public form.

Whereas therefore in each nation or province subject to one
political jurisdiction there was a metropolis, or head city, to p, Anacl,
_which the greatest resort was for dispensation of justice, and png 5
dispatch of principal affairs emergent in that province; it was Grey VIL.
also most convenient that also the determination of ecclesias- ®P- ¥- 35-
tical matters should be affixed thereto; especially considering
that usually those places were opportunely seated; that many
persons upon other occasions did meet there; that the churches
in those cities did exceed the rest in number, in opuleney, in
ability and opportunity to promote the common interest in all
kinds of advantages.

x Moreover because in all societies and confederacies of men
for ordering public affairs, (for the setting things in motion,
for effectual dispatch, for preventing endless dissensions and
confusions both in resolving upon and executing things,) it is
needful that one person should be authorized to preside among

u El dé cal tis ee BactAikijs efovaelas
exawicbn modus, 2 adOis Katelin, Tors
mwoAitiKois Kal Snuogios Tumos Kal Tay
éxxAnoiacTiKay mapoikiay Takis axo-
AovOelrw. Conc. Chalced. can. 17. et
Conc. Trull. can. 38.

* Ad hoc divine dispensationis pro-
visio gradus et diversos constituit ordi-
nes in se distinctos, ut dum reverentiam
minores potioribus exhiberent, et po-
tiores minoribus diligentiam impende-

rent, una concordie fieret a diversitate
contentio et recte officiorum gereretur
administratio singulorum. Joh. VIII.
Ep.g5. To this end Divine Providence
hath appointed degrees and diverse
orders distinct from one another, that
while the less reverence the greater, and
the greater take care of the less, from
this diversity there might arise one
frame of concord, and all offices be duly
administered.

* Primas

provincie.

Cod. Afr.
can. IQ.
Cod. Afr.
can 39.

Dist. xcix.

cap. 3.

240 A Treatise of the

the rest, unto whom the power and care should.be intrusted
to convoke assemblies in fit season, to propose matters for con-
sultation, to moderate the debates and proceedings, to declare
the result, and to see that what is agreed upon may be duly
executed ; such a charge then naturally would devolve itself
upon the prelate of the metropolis, as being supposed con-
stantly present on the place; as being at home in his own seat
of presidence, and receiving the rest under his wing; as in-
contestably surpassing others in all advantages answerable to
the secular advantages of his city; for that it was unseemly
and hard, if he at home should be postponed in dignity to
otliers repairing thither; for that also commonly he was in a
manner the spiritual father of the rest, (religion being first
planted in great cities, and thence propagated to others,) so
that the reverence and dependence on colonies to the mother
city was due from other churches to his see.

Wherefore by consent of all churches, grounded on such
obvious reason of things, the presidency in each province was
assigned to the bishop of the metropolis, who was called the
first bishop, the metropolitan (in some places the *primate,
the archbishop, the patriarch, the pope) of the province. The
Apostolical Canons call him the first bishop, (which sheweth
the antiquity of this institution ;) the African synods did ap-
point that name to him as most modest, and call him primate
in that sense ; other ancient synods style him the metropolite ;
and to the metropolites of the principal cities they gave the
title of archbishop. The bishops of Rome and Alexandria
peculiarly were called popes; although that name was some-
times deferred to any other bishop.

During this state of things the whole church did consist of
so many provinces, being atroxépado., independent on each
other in ecclesiastical administration ; each reserving to itself
the constitution of bishops, the convocation of synods, the
enacting of canons, the decision of causes, the definition of
questions ; yet so that each province did hold peaceful and
amicable correspondence with others; upon the like terms as
before each zapovx(a, or episcopal precinct, did hold intercourse
with its neighbours.

Y Tovs émonxdmovs Exdorov @vous ei- Apost.27. The bishops of each nation
Séva xph tov ev abrois mp@rov. Can. ought to know who is chief among them.

Pope’s Supremacy. 241

And whoever in any province did not comply with or sub-
mit to the orders and determinations resolved upon in those
assemblies, was deemed a schismatical, contentious, and con- Mapdragss.
tumacious person ; with good reason, because he did thwart a3" N'*
discipline plainly conducible to public good ; because declining
such judgments he plainly shewed that he would admit none,
(there not being any fairer way of determining things than
by common advice and agreement of pastors ;) because he did
in effect refuse all good terms of communion and peace.

Thus, I conceive, the metropolitical governance was intro-
duced, by human prudence following considerations of public
necessity or utility. There are indeed some who think it was
instituted by the apostles: but their arguments do not seem
convincing; and such a constitution doth not (as I take it)
well suit to the state of their times, and the course they took
in founding churches.

Into such a channel, through all parts of Christendom,
(though with some petty differences in the methods and mea-
sures of acting,) had ecclesiastical administrations fallen of
themselves ; plain community of reason and imitation insen-
sibly propagating that course; and therein it ran for a good
time, before it was by general consent and solemn sanction
established.

The whole church then was a body consisting of several
confederations of bishops, acting in behalf of their churches
under their respective metropolitans, who did manage the Can. Apost.
common affairs in each province; convoking synods at stated a tall. de
times and upon emergent occasions ; #in them deciding causes Jej- cap. 13.
and controversies incident, relating to faith or practice vag by
framing rules serviceable to common edification and decent
uniformity in God’s service ; quashing heresies and schisms,
declaring truths impugned or questioned ; maintaining the
harmony of communion and concord with other provinces ad-
jacent or remote.

Such was the state of the church, unto which the A postoli-
cal Canons and Constitutions do refer, answerable to the times
in which they were framed ; and which we may discern in the
practice of ancient synods.

z Aid Tas exxAnoiaartixas xpelas Kal Tas TaY dugicBnTovudrwy 3iadvoeis—.

Syn. Ant. can. 20.
R

24.2 A Treatise of the

Such it did continue, when the great synod of Nice was
celebrated*, which by its authority, (presumed to represent:
the authority of all bishops in the world, who were summoned
thereto,) backed by the imperial authority and power, did
confirm those orders, as they found them standing by more
general custom and received rules in most provinces®; re-
ducing them into more uniform practice ; so that what before
stood upon reason, customary usage, particular consent, by
so august sanction did become universal law: and did obtain
so great veneration, as by some to be conceived everlastingly
and immutably obligatory; according to those maxims of
pope Leo.

It is here further observable, that whereas divers provinces
did hold communion and intercourse; so that upon occasion
they did (by their formed letters) render to one another an
account of their proceedings, being of great moment, espe-
cially of those which concerned the general state of Christ-
ianity and common faith; calling, when need was, for assist-
ance one of another, to resolve points of faith, or to settle order
and peace; there was in so doing a special respect given to
the metropolites of great cities: and to prevent dissensions,
which naturally ambition doth prompt men to, grounded upon
degrees of respect, an order was fixed among them, according to
which in subscriptions of letters, in accidental congresses, and
the like occasions, some should precede others; (that distine-
tion being chiefly and commonly grounded on the greatness,
splendour, opulency of cities; or following the secular dignity
of them ;) whence Rome had the jirst place, Alexandria the
second, Antioch the third, Jerusalem the fourth, &e.

Zos. lib.ii. Afterward, Constantine having introduced a new partition
ee Ru.Of the empire, whereby divers provinces were combined to-
fus, Brev. gether into one territory, under the regiment of a vicar, or a
lieutenant of a prefectus-pretorio, which territory was called
a diocese; the ecclesiastical state was adapted in conform-
ity thereto; new ecclesiastical systems, and a new sort of
spiritual heads thence springing up; so that in each diocese,
consisting of divers provinces, an ecclesiastical °exarch (other-

4 TlaAads Te &s tore Oeouds Kexpd- dSuolws puvddrrecba. Can. 20.

THKE, Kal Tay aylwy ev Nixalg Tlarépwv c ’Emkodovdnca Tw etdpxw mov. Syn.

épos . Syn. Constant. Theod.v.9. Chale. Act. x. p. 388.

b 'Yxtp rot mdvta ev méon mapoiKia

Pope’s Supremacy. 243

wise sometimes called a primate, sometimes a 4 diocesan, some-
times a patriarch) was constituted, answerable to the civil
exarch of a diocese; fwho by such constitution did obtain a
like authority over the metropolitans of provinces, as they
had in their province over the bishops of cities; so that it
appertained to them to call together the synods of the whole
diocese, to preside in them, and in them to dispatch the prin-
cipal affairs concerning that precinct, to ordain metropoli-
tans, to confirm the ordinations of bishops, to decide causes
and controversies between bishops upon appeal from provin-
cial synods.

Some conceive the synod of Nice did establish it; but that
ean hardly well be; for that synod was held about the time of
that division, (after that Constantine was settled in a peaceful
enjoyment of the empire,) and scarce could take notice of so
fresh a change in the state; that doth not pretend to imno-
vate, but professeth in its sanctions specially to regard ancient
custom, saving to the churches their privileges of which they
were possessed’; that only mentioneth provinces, and repre-
senteth the metropolitans in them as the chief governors eccle-
siastical then being; that constituteth a peremptory decision
of weighty causes in provincial synods, which is inconsistent
with the diocesan authority ; that taketh no notice of Con-
stantinople, the principal diocese in the east, as seat of the
empire; (and the synod of Antioch, insisting in the footsteps
of the Nicene, doth touch only metropolitans, (can. 19.) and
the synod of Laodicea doth only suppose that order.) In
fine, that synod is not recorded by any old historian to have
framed such an alteration ; which indeed was so considerable,

4 Avoxnths. Epist. Orient. ad Ru-
fum. in Syn. Eph. p. 396. Dist. xcix.
cap. I, 2.

f Twes piv edpxous Tay dioiKhoewv
Tovs marpidpxous pact. Zon. ad 28. Can.
Chale. Novell. cxxxvii. cap. 5. et exxiii.
cap. 10. P. Greg. I. Ep. 11,56. Ordo
episcoporum quadripartitus est, id est,
in patriarchis, archiepiscopis, metropoli-
tanis, atque episcupis. IJsid. Dist. xxi.
cap.1. Dionysius Ex. translates tap-

xov, primatem, in Syn. Chale. can. 9,
17.
&“Omep obre 5 kava, obtre 7) cvv7Gera
mapedwKev . Can 18. Ta adpxaia 6
kpareitw. Can.6. "Ereid) cuvhGeia ke-
xparnxe kal rapddocis apxala—. Can.7.
‘Opolws St kal card Thy Avridxeray, Kal
év tais BAAas érapxlais Ta mwpecBeia
od erGat tais exxAnolas. Ibid.

h Tods éxirxdmovs xploe TOV unTpo-
mwokitav, Kal Tav wept erioxdwav Kabl-
oracdai.—— . Syn. Laod. can.12. The
bishops should be constituted by the
judgment of the metropolitans and the
neighbouring bishops.

r 2

244 A Treatise of the

that Eusebius, who was present there, could not well have
passed it over in silence.

Of this opinion was the synod of Carthage, in their Epistle
to pope Celestine I, who understood no jurisdiction but that
of metropolitans to be constituted in the Nicene synod.

Some think the fathers of the second general synod did in-
troduce it, seeing it expedient that ecclesiastical administra-
tions should correspond to the political ; for they did innovate
somewhat in the form of government; they do expressly use
the new word diocese, according to the civil sense, as distinct
from a province; they do distinctly name the particular
dioceses of the oriental empire, as they stood in the civil
establishment; they do prescribe to the bishops in each dio-
cese to act unitedly there, not skipping over the bounds of it ;
they order a kind of appeal to the synod of the diocese, pro-
hibiting other appeals: the historians expressly do report of
them, that they did distinguish and distribute dioceses, that
they did constitute patriarchs, that they did prohibit that any
of one diocese should intrude upon another’.

But if we shall attently search and scan passages, we may
perhaps find reason to judge that this form did soon after
the synod of Nice creep in, without any solemn appointment,
by spontaneous assumption and submission, accommodating
things to the political course; the great bishops (who by the
amplification of their city, in power, wealth, and concourse of
people, were advanced in reputation and interest) assuming
such authority to themselves; and the lesser bishops easily com-
plying; and of this we have some arguments. Cyril, bishop of

i Ei 5 ovpBain ddvvarijoa tos érap-
Xi@tas mpds 5idpOwow emipepopéevwv ey-
KAnpdtwv TG emickdéry, T6TE a’TOUS mpoT-
révan pelCoun ouvdd@ Tay Tis dioiKhoews
émickdnwv exelyns brtp Tis aitlas Tavrns
cuyKarounéevwy—. Syn. Const. can. 6.
But if it so happen that the bishops of
any province cannot rectify those things
which are laid to the charge of a bishop,
they shall then go to a greater synod of
the bishops of that diocese, met together
for that purpose. The fathers of Con-
stantinople, in their synodic Epistle,
distinguish the province and diocese of
Antioch, of re tis eérapxlas, Kal rhs
avaroAKis S.oiKhoews cvvdpapdvres—.
Theod.v.g. Kal ratpidpxas xaréornoay

diavemuduevor tas enapxlas. Socr. v. 8.
Ev éxelvn yap 7H BactAevoton more ovv-
eAOdyTes of paxdpio marépes cuupdvws
Tots €v TH Nixala cvvabpoicbeior Tas Si01-
Khoews di€xpiway, kal exdorn Sioikhoe TA
éauTijs amréveimay, dytixpus amaryopevovTes
ef Erépas Tivas Sioikhoews Erépa uh emié-
vat. Theodor. Ep. 86. (ad Flavianum.)
For, says Theodoret, the blessed fathers

meeting together in the imperial city, —

distinguished dioceses agreeably to what
the Nicene fathers had done, and al-
lotted to every diocese what belonged to
it: on the contrary charging that no
one of one diocese should encroach upon
another.

:
. >
ee

Pope’s Supremacy. 245

Jerusalem, being deposedand extruded by Acacius, metropolitan
of Palestine, did appeal to a greater judicatory'; being the
first (as Socrates noteth) who ever did use that course; be-
cause, it seemeth, there was no greater in being till about that
time; which was some years before the synod of Constanti-
nople; in which there is mention of @ greater synod of the
diocese :

There was a convention of bishops of the Pontie diocese at Soz. vi.12.
Tyana, (distinguished from the Asian bishops,) whereof Euse-
bius of Czesarea is reckoned, in the first place, as president, in
the time of Valens.

Nectarius, bishop of Constantinople, is said by the synod
of Chalcedon to have presided in the synod of Constanti-
nople*.

A good argument is drawn from the very canon of the synod
of Constantinople itself! ; which doth speak concerning bishops
over dioceses, as already constituted, or extant ; not instituting
that order of bishops, but supposing it, and together with an
implicit confirmation regulating practice according to it, by
prohibiting bishops to leap over the bounds of their diocese
so as to meddle in the affairs of other dioceses ; and by order-
ing appeals to the synod of a duocese.

Of authority gained by such assumption and concession,
without law, there might be produced divers instances.

As particularly that the see of Constantinople did assume to
itself ordination, and other acts of jurisdiction, in three dioceses,
before any such power was granted to it by any synodical de-
eree; the which to have done divers instances shew; some
whereof are alleged in the synod of Chalcedon; as St. Chry- Syn. Chale.
sostom, of whom it is there said, ™ That going into Asia he de- ee
posed fifteen bishops, and consecrated others in their room.

He also deposed Gerontius, bishop of Nicomedia, belonging Sez. viii. 6.
to the diocese of Pontus.

Whence the fathers of Chaleedon did aver, " That they had

i BiBAlov rots KabeAodor diareupd-
pevos peiCov emixardécaro Sixacrhpiov
ToUTo wey obv udyvos kal Tpa@Tos Tapa
T > civnbes exxaAnoiactixg@ Kavdvi Kipir-
Aos errolnoev ——. Soer. ii. 40.

k Tay 5¢ Nexrdpwos obv Tpryoplw iyye-
poviay iipato. (In prosphonetico ad Im-

per.
1 Tobs brép diolknow émoxdrous

Can. 2. Tpoova: pelCom cuvdiw tay
Tis Sioikhoews emiokdmrwy . Can. 6.

Mm *Iwdvyns dexanévre éemioxdmous Ka-
Ocirev, dwedAOdy év’Aala, Kal exeipord-
ynoev GAAous avt’ a’r@y. Syn. Chale.
Act. 11. (p. 411.)

D Td yap éx woAAod Kpariicay Cos Sep
ticxev 7) KwvortaytivovroA\itéy ayla Ocod
éxxaAnola eis Td Xeiporoveiy untpowoAlras

Syn. Chale.

Act. xvi.
(p- 462.)

246 A Treatise of the

in a synod confirmed the ancient custom which the holy church
of God in Constantinople had, to ordain metropolitans in the
Asian, Pontic, and Thracian dioceses.

The which custom (consistent with reason, and becoming
the dignity of the empire, and grateful to the court) that great
synod did establish, although the Roman church, out of jea-
lousy, did contest and protest against it.

But the most pertinent instances are those of the Roman,
Alexandrine, and Antiochene churches, having by degrees as-
sumed to themselves such power over divers provinces; 1n
imitation of which churches the other diocesan bishops may
well be thought to have enlarged their jurisdiction.

This form of government is intimated in the synod of Ephe-
sus, by those words in which dioceses and provinces are dis-
tinguished ; °and the same shall be observed in all dioceses and
all provinces every where.

However, that this form of discipline was perfectly settled
in the times of the fourth general synod is evident by two
notable canons thereof, wherein it is decreed, that pif any
bishop have a controversy with his metropolitan of his province,
he shall resort to, and be judged by, the exarch of the diocese, or by
the see of Constantinople.

This was a great privilege conferred on the bishop of Con-
stantinople; the which perhaps did ground (to be sure it did
make way for) the plea of that bishop to the title of Gcume-
nical Patriarch, or Universal Bishop, which pope Gregory
did so exagitate ; and indeed it soundeth so fairly toward it,
that the pope hath nothing comparable to it to allege in favour
of his pretences ; this being the decree of the greatest synod
that ever was held among the ancients, where all the patriarchs
did concur in making these decrees; which pope Gregory did
reverence as one of the Gospels. If any ancient synod did ever
constitute any thing like to wniversal monarchy, it was this ;
wherein a final determination of greatest causes was granted to

the see of Constantinople, without any exception or reservation: -

Tov diwiKhoewv TIS TE "Aoiavijs, kal Tlov- is mention of dioceses in Strabo. ]

TiKhs, Kal Opakinys Kal viv Kara ouvo- P Ei 5¢ mpds toy Tis abris émapxlas
5ixhy éxvpdcayev WHpov. Syn. Chale. in nT powoAlrny émlaxoros % KAnpixds Gp-
Epist. ad P. Leonem. pirBnroin, Kararap Bay ere h rov &apxov

cewy kal Tay GravTaxod emapxia@v Tapa- Kwyoraytivoumdadcws Opdvov, kal é’ abtg

puaaxOnceras. Syn. Eph. can.8. [There d:xa{éc0w. Syn. Chale, can, 19, 17.

Pope’s Supremacy. 247

I mean as to”semblance, and the sound of words; for as to
the true sense, I do indeed conceive that the canon did only
relate to causes emergent in the eastern parts ; and probably
it did only respect the three dioceses (of Asia, Pontus, and
Thrace) which were immediately subjected to his patriarchal
jurisdiction.

Pope Nicholas I. doth very jocularly expound this canon ;
affirming that by the primate of the diocese is understood the
pope, (diocese being put by a notable figure for dioceses,) and
that an appeal is to be’made to the bishop of Constantinople
only by permission, in case the party will be content there-
with4.

We may note, that some provincial churches were by
ancient custom exempted from dependence on any primacy
or patriarchate.

Such an one the Cyprian church was adjudged to be in the
Ephesine synod; wherein the privileges of such churches were
confirmed against the invasion of greater churches, and to that
_ purpose this general law enacted; ' Let the same be observed in
all dioceses and provinces every where—that none of the hi-
shops most beloved of God invade another province, which did
not formerly belong to him or his predecessors ; and if any
one have invaded one, and violently seized it, that he re-
store tt.

Such a church was that of Britain anciently, before Austin
did introduce the papal authority here, against that canon ; as
by divers learned pens hath been shewed.

Such was the church of Afric, as by their canons against
transmarine appeals, and about all other matters, doth ap-
pear.

It is supposed by some, that discipline was screwed yet one Isid. Dist.
peg higher, by setting up the order of patriarchs higher than" “P:"

4 Quem autem primatem diceceseos
8. synodus dixerit, preter apostoli primi
vicarium, nullus penitusintelligitur .
None can understand whom the holy
synod should call primate of a diocese,
except the vicar of the prime apostle.
Tantundem valet dixisse primatem dice-
ceseos, quantum si perhibuisset dicece-
seon. P. Nich. I. Ep. 8.(p.507-) To
say the primate of a diocese is as much

as to say of dioceses.

r Td 8 abrd wal emi rav bAA@v Sioi-
Khoewy Kal Tay arayraxov enapxi@y ma-
papvaaxOhoetai—aore undéva Tav Beo-
gircotdtaev emaxérwy érapxlay érépay
otk obdcay Evwiev wal etapyijs bard Thy
airrod Hyouv Tay mpd abrov x¢ipa KaTa-
AauBdvew, add’ ei kal Tis KaréAaBer, wal
ip’ autG werolnra, Biagduevos TovTov
arodiddva:, &c. Conc. Eph. can. 8.

Ipeo Beta
Tiwjs. Can.

Ta mpwreia

kal éfalpe-

TOS Tih.
Syn. Ch.
Act. 16.

“loa mpeo-

Beia.

248 A Treatise of the

primates, or diocesan exarchs: but I find no ground of this
supposal, except in one case; that is, of the bishop of Con-
stantinople being set above the bishops of Ephesus, Caesarea,
and Heraclea, which were the primates of the three dio-
ceses.

It is a notable fib which pope Nicholas II. telleth, as Gra-
tian citeth him; * That the church of Rome instituted all patri-
archal supremacies, all metropolitan primacies, episcopal sees, all
ecclesiastical orders and dignities whatsoever.

Now things standing thus in Christendom, we may, con-
cerning the interest of the Roman bishop in reference to them,
observe,

1. In all these transactions about modelling the spiritual
discipline, there was no canon established any peculiar juris-
diction to the bishop of Rome, only the

2. Synod of Nice did suppose that he by custom did enjoy
some authority within certain precincts of the west, like to
that which it did confirm to the bishop of Alexandria in Egypt,
and the countries adjacent thereto.

3. The synods of Constantinople did allow him honorary
privileges, or precedence before all other bishops, assigning the
next place after him to the bishop of Constantinople.

4. In other privileges the synod of Chalcedon did equal the
see of Constantinople to the Roman.

5. The canons of the two first and fourth general synods,
ordering all affairs to be dispatched, and causes to be deter-
mined in metropolitan or diocesan synods, do exclude the
Roman bishop from meddling in those concerns.

6. The popes (out of a humour natural to them, to like
nothing but what they did themselves, and which served their
interests) did not relish those canons, although enacted by
synods which themselves admitted for cecumenical. That
subscription of some bishops made above sixty years since, as
you boast, does no whit favour your persuasion; a subscrip-

s Omnes sive patriarche cujuslibet

apices, sive metropolewn primatus, aut
episcopatuum cathedras, vel ecclesiarum
cujuslibet ordinis dignitates instituit Ro-
mana ecclesia. P. Nic. II. Dist. xxii.
cap. I.

t Persuasioni enim tue in nullo pe-
nitus suffragatur quorundam episcopo~

rum ante sexaginta, ut jactas, annos
facta subscriptio, nunquamque a preede-
cessoribus tuis ad apostolice sedis trans-
missa notitiam, cui ab initio sui caducee,
dudumque collapse sera nunc et inu-
tilia subjicere fomenta voluisti
P. Leo. Ep. 53. (ad Anatol.) Vid. Ep.
54, 55, 61.

249

tion never transmitted to the knowledge of the apostolic see by
your predecessors, which from its very beginning being weak,
and long since ruinous, you endeavour now too late and un-
profitably to revive.

So doth pope Leo I. treat the second great synod, writing
to Anatolius ; and Gregory speaking of the same says, "Z/at
the Roman church has not the acts of that synod, nor received its
canons.

7. Wherefore in the west they did obtain no effect, so as
to establish diocesan primacies there.

The bishops of cities, which were heads of dioceses, either
did not know of these canons, (which is probable, because
Rome did smother the notice of them,) or were hindered from
using them ; the pope having so winded himself in, and got
such hold among them, as he would not let go*.

8. It indeed turned to a great advantage of the pope, in
carrying on his encroachments, and enlarging his worldly in-
terests, that the western churches did not, as the eastern,
conform themselves to the political frame in embracing dio-
cesan primacies ; which would have engaged and enabled them
better to protect the liberties of their churches from papal
invasions Y.

9. For hence, for want of a better, the pope did claim to
himself a patriarchal authority over the western churches ;
pretending a right of calling synods, of meddling in ordina-
tions, of determining causes by appeal to him; of dictating
laws and rules to them, against the old rights of metropolitans,
and the later constitutions for primacies.

Of this we have an instance in St. Gregory; where he
alleging an imperial constitution importing that in case a
clergyman should appeal from his metropolitan, the cause
should be referred to the archbishop and patriarch of that dio-

Pope’s Supremacy.

u Romana autem ecclesia eosdem
canones vel gesta synodi illius hactenus
non habet, nec accepit. Greg. M. Ep.
vi. 31. (ad Eulog. Alex.)

x N. B. A Roman synod, anno 378,
consisting of Italian bishops, did give
the pope such a privilege as the synod
of Constantinople did to the bishop of
that see. (Marc. de Primat. p. 103.
ex App. Cod. Theodos. Vide Baron.)
But there is difference between a

general synod and an Italian synod:
and what had an Italian synod to
prescribe to all the provinces of the
Roman empire, or rather of the west ?
P. Greg. I. Ep. 7, 8.

y Balusius thinketh that Hilarius
of Arles did pretend and offer at this
primatical power, apud Mare. vy. 32.
but pope Leo did mainly check and
quash his attempt.

Ruffin.
Hist. i. 6.

250 A Treatise of the

cese, who judging according to the canons and laws should give
an end thereto ; doth consequentially assume an appeal from
a bishop to himself, adjoining, 7Z/ against these things tt be said
that the bishop had neither metropolitan nor patriarch, it is to be
said that this cause was to be heard and decided by the apostolical
see, which is the head of all churches.

10. Having got such advantage, and, as to extent, stretched
his authority beyond the bounds of his suburbicarian precincts,
he did also intend it in quality far beyond the privileges by any
ecclesiastical law granted to patriarchs, or claimed or exercised
by any other patriarch ; till at length, by degrees, he had ad-
vanced it to an exorbitant omnipotency, and thereby utterly
enslaved the western churches.

The ancient order did allow a patriarch or primate to call
a synod of the bishops in his diocese, and with them to deter-
mine ecclesiastical affairs by majority of suffrages: but he doth
not do so; but setting himself down in his chair,with a few of
his courtiers about him, doth make decrees and dictates, to
which he pretendeth all must submit.

The ancient order did allow a patriarch to ordain metropo-
litans duly elected in their dioceses ; leaving bishops to be or-
dained by the metropolitans in their provincial synods: but he
will meddle in the ordination of every bishop, suffering none
to be constituted without his confirmation, for which he must
soundly pay.

The ancient order did allow a patriarch, with the advice
and consent of his synod, to make canons for the well-order-
ing his diocese: but he sendeth about his decretal letters,
composed by an infallible secretary, which he pretendeth
must have the force of laws, equal to the highest decrees of
the whole church.

The ancient order did suppose bishops by their ordination
sufficiently obliged to render unto their patriarch due observ-
ance, according to the canons, he being liable to be judged in
a synod for the transgression of his duty; but he forceth all
bishops to take the most slavish oaths of obedience to him
that can be imagined.

z Contra hec si dictum fuerit, quianec omnium ecclesiarum caput est, causa heec
metropolitam habuit nec patriarcham ; audienda ac dirimenda fuerat. Greg. I.
dicendum est quia a sede apostolica, que Ep. xi. 56.

Pope’s Supremacy. 251

The ancient order did appoint, that bishops accused for
offences should be judged in their provinces ; or, upon appeal
from them, in patriarchal synods: but he receiveth appeals
at the first hand, and determineth them in his court, without
calling such a synod in an age for any such purpose.

The ancient patriarchs did order all things, as became good
subjects, with leave and under submission to the emperor, who
as he pleased did interpose his confirmation of their sanctions:
but this man pretendeth to decree what he pleaseth without
the leave and against the will of princes.

Wherefore he is not a patriarch of the western churches,

(for that he acteth according to no patriarchal rule,) but a
certain kind of sovereign lord, or a tyrannical oppressor of

them.

~ 11. In all the transactions for modelling the church, there Isid. in
never was allowed to the pope any dominion over his fellow- ney a
patriarchs, or of those great primates who had assumed that

name to themselves ; among whom indeed, for the dignity of

his city, he had obtained a priority of honour or place ; but

never had any power over them settled by a title of law, or

by clear and uncontested practice.

Insomuch, that if any of them had erred in faith, or offended
in practice, it was requisite to call a general synod to judge
them; as in the cases of Athanasius, of Gregory Nazianzen
and Maximus, of ‘Theophilus and St.Chrysostom, of Nestorius
and of Dioscorus, is evident.

12. Indeed all the oriental churches did keep themselves
pretty free from his encroachments, although, when he had
swollen so big in the west, he sometimes did take occasion
to attempt on their liberty ; which they sometimes did warily
decline, sometimes stoutly did oppose.

But as to the main, those flourishing churches constantly did Vid. de
maintain a distinct administration from the western churches, oo bet
under their own patriarchs and synods, not suffering him to
interlope in prejudice to their liberty.

They, without his leave or notice, did call and celebrate
synods, (whereof all the first great synods are instances ;)
their ordinations were not confirmed or touched by him;
appeals were not (with public regard or allowance) thence
made to him in causes great or little, but they decided them

252 A Treatise of the

among themselves : they quashed heresies springing up among
them, as the second general synod the Macedonians, Theophilus
the Origenists, &c. Little in any case had his worship to do
with them, or they with him, beyond what was needful to main-
tain general communion and correspondence with him; which
they commonly, as piety obliged, were willing to do.

And sometimes, when a pert pope, upon some incidental ad-
vantage of differences risen among them, would be more busy
than they deemed convenient in tampering with their affairs,
they did rap his fingers: so Victor, so Stephanus, so Julius and:
Liberius, of old did feel to their smart: so afterwards Damasus
and other popes in the case of Flavianus ; Innocent in the case
of St.Chrysostom; Felix and his successors in the case of Aca-
cius, did find little regard had to their interposals.

So things proceeded, till at length a final rupture was made
between them, and they would not suffer him at all to meddle
with their affairs.

Before I proceed any further, I shall briefly draw some
corollaries from this historical account which I have given
of the original and growth of metropolitical, primatical, and
patriarchal jurisdiction.

1. Patriarchs are an human institution.

2. As they were erected by the power and prudence of men,
so they may be dissolved by the same.

3. They were erected by the leave and confirmation of
princes; and by the same they may be dejected, if great
reason do appear.

4. The patriarchate of the pope beyond his own province or
diocese doth not subsist upon any canon of a general synod.

5. He can therefore claim no such power otherwise than
upon his invasion or assumption.

6. The primates and metropolitans of the western church
cannot be supposed otherwise than by force, or out of fear, to
have submitted to such an authority as he doth usurp.

7. It is not really a patriarchal power, (like to that which
was granted by the canons and princes,) but another sort of
power, which the pope doth exercise.

8. The most rightful patriarch, holding false doctrine, or
imposing unjust laws, or tyrannically abusing his power, may
and ought to be rejected from communion.

Pope's Supremacy. 253

9. Such a patriarch is to be judged by a free synod, if it
may be had.

10. If such a synod cannot be had by consent of princes,
each church may free itself from the mischiefs induced by his
perverse doctrine or practice.

11. No ecclesiastical power can interpose in the manage-
ment of any affairs within the territory of any prince without
his concession.

12. By the laws of God, and according to ancient practice,
princes may model the bounds of ecclesiastical jurisdiction,
erect bishoprics, enlarge, diminish, or transfer them as they
please.

13. Wherefore each prince (having supreme power in his
own dominions, and equal to what the emperor had in his)
may exclude any foreign prelate from jurisdiction in his terri-
tories.

14. It is expedient for peace and public good that he should
do thus.

15. Such prelate, according to the rules of Christianity,
ought to be content with his doing so.

16. Any prelate, exercising power in the dominion of any
prince, is catenus his subject; as the popes and all bishops were
to the Roman emperors.

17. Those joints of ecclesiastical discipline, established in
the Roman empire by the confirmation of emperors, were (as
to necessary continuance) dissolved by the dissolution of the
Roman empire. )

18. The power of the pope in the territories of any prince
did subsist by his authority and favour.

19. By the same reason as princes have curbed the exorbi-
tancy of papal power in some cases, (of entertaining legates,
making appeals, disposing of benefices, &c.) by the same they
might exclude it.

20. The practice of Christianity doth not depend upon the
subsistence of such a form instituted by man.

Having shewed at large that this universal sovereignty and
jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome over the Christian church
hath no real foundation either in scripture or elsewhere, it will
be requisite to shew by what ways and means so groundless a
claim and pretence should gain belief and submission to it from

254 A Treatise of the

so considerable a part of Christendom; and that from so very
De pusillo slender roots (from slight beginnings, and the slimmest pre-
P. feo, tences one can well imagine) this bulk of exorbitant power did
Ep.55. grow, the vastest that ever man on earth did attain, or did ever
aim at, will be the less wonderful, if we do consider the many
causes which did coneur and contribute thereto; some whereof
are proposed in the following observations:

1. Eminency of any kind (in wealth, in honour, in reputa-

tion, in might, in place, or mere order of dignity) doth easily °

pass into advantages of real power and command over those
who are inferior in those respects, and have any dealings or
common transactions with such superiors.

For to persons endowed with such eminency by voluntary
deference the conduct of affairs is wont to be allowed; none
presuming to stand in competition with them, every one rather
yielding place to them than to their equals.

The same conduct of things, upon the same accounts, and
by reason of their possession, doth continue fast in their hands,
so long as they do retain such advantages.

Then from a custom of managing things doth spring up an
opinion or a pretence of right thereto; they are apt to assume
a title, and others ready to allow it.

Men naturally do admire such things, and so are apt to defer
extraordinary respect to the possessors of them.

Advantages of wealth and might are not only instruments
to attain, but incentives spurring men to affect the getting
authority over their poorer and weaker neighbours: for men
will not be content with bare eminency, but will desire real
power and sway, so as to obtain their wills over others, and

pan 2 not to be crossed by any. Pope Leo had no reason to wonder

tante usbis that Anatolius, bishop of Constantinople, was not content

magnificen- with dry honour. Men are apt to think their honour is pre-

tudonon carious, and standeth on an uncertain foundation, if it be not

Leo. Ep.55. supported with real power; and therefore they will not be sa-
tisfied to let their advantages lie dead, which are so easily
improvable to power, by inveigling some, and scaring or con-
straining others to bear their yoke: and they are able to
benefit and gratify some, and thereby render them willing to
submit; those afterwards become serviceable to bring others
under, who are disaffected or refractory.

~ ss ‘le iad

Pope’s Supremacy. 255

So the bishops of Constantinople and of Jerusalem, at first,
had only privileges of honour; but afterward they soon hooked
in power.

Now the Roman bishops from the beginning were eminent
above all other bishops in all kinds of advantages.

He was seated in the imperial city, the place of general re- Euseb. vi.
sort; thence obvious to all eyes, and his name sounding in all te rae
mouths. He had a most numerous, opulent, splendid flock ——
and clergy. He had the greatest income (from liberal obla- rum ditati.
tions) to dispose of. He lived in greatest state and lustre. Rae
He had opportunities to assist others in their business, and to stiti. Amm.
relieve them in their wants. He necessarily thence did obtain — ,
great respect and veneration. Hence in all common affairs (p. 337-)
the conduct and presidence were naturally devolved on him, nator
without contest.

No wonder then that after some time the pope did arrive to
some pitch of authority over poor Christians, especially those
who lay nearest to him ; improving his eminency into power,
and his pastoral charge into a kind of empire ; according to
that observation of Socrates, that */ong before his time the Ro-
man episcopacy had advanced itself beyond the priesthood into a
potentacy.

And the like he observeth to have happened in the church Socr. vii. 7.
of Alexandria, upon the like grounds, or by imitation of such
a pattern.

2. Any small power is apt to grow and spread itself; a

spark of it soon will expand itself into a flame: it is very like
to the grain of mustard seed, which indeed is the least of all seeds ; Matt. xiii.
but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh 3" 3*
a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches
thereof. » Encroaching, as Plutarch saith, is an innate disease
of potentacies. Whoever hath any pittance of it will be im-
proving his stock; having tasted the sweetness of having his
will, (which extremely gratifieth the nature of man,) he will
not be satisfied without having more ; he will take himself to
be straitened by any bounds; and will strive to free himself of
all restraints.

& Tis ‘Pwualwy emicxor)js mépa Tijs b Td ciupuroy véonua Tais Suvac-

lepwotvns em) duvacrelay H5n wdAai mpo- elas, #) wAcovet(a. Plut. in Pyrrh.
eASotens. Socr. vii. 11.

256 A Treatise of the

Any pretence will serve to ground attempts of enlarging
power, and none will be balked. For power is bold, enter-
prising, restless: it always watcheth, or often findeth, °never
passeth opportunities of dilating itself. Every accession doth
beget further advantages to amplify it; as its stock groweth,
so it with ease proportionably doth increase ; being ever out
at use. As it groweth, so its strength to maintain and enlarge
itself doth grow: it gaining more wealth, more friends, more
associates and dependents.

None can resist or obstruct its growth without danger and
manifold disadvantages: for as its adherents are deemed loyal
and faithful, so its opposers are branded with the imputations
of rebellion, contumacy, disloyalty; and not succeeding in their
resistance, they will be undone.

None ever doth enterprise more than to stop its career; so
that it seldom loseth by opposition; and it ever gaineth by
composition. If it be checked at one time, or in one place, it
will, like the sea, at another season, in another point, break in.
If it is sometimes overthrown in a battle, it is seldom con-
quered in the war.

It is always on its march forward, and gaineth ground; for
one encroachment doth countenance the next, and is alleged
for a precedent to authorize or justify it. It seldom moveth
backward ; for every successor thinketh he may justly enjoy
what his predecessor did gain, or which is transmitted into his
possession; so that there hardly can ever be any restitution of
ill-gotten power.

Thus have many absolute kingdoms grown ; the first chief
was a leader of volunteers; from thence he grew to be a prince
with stated privileges ; after, he became a monarch invested
with high prerogatives; in fine, he creepeth forward to be a
grand seignior, usurping absolute dominion: so did Augustus
Ceesar first only assume the style of prince of the senate, de-
meaning himself modestly as such ; but he soon drew to him-
self the administration of all things; and upon that foundation
his suecessors very suddenly did erect a boundless power. If

© Subrependi occasiones non preter- Ep. 101. Prime dominandi spes in ar-
mittit ambitio—. P. Leo. I. Ep.62. Fa- duo; ubi sis ingressus, adsunt studia et
cilius crescit dignitas quam incipit. Sen. ministri. Tacit. Ann. iv. (p. 143.

Pope’s Supremacy. 257

you trace the footsteps of most empires to the beginning, you
may perceive the like.

So the pope, when he had got a little power, continually did
swell it. The puny pretence of the succeeding St. Peter, and
the name of the apostolical see ; the precedence, by reason of
the imperial city; the honorary privileges allowed him by
councils ; the authority deferred to him by one synod of re-
vising the causes of bishops ; the countenance given to him in
repressing some heresies, he did improve to constitute himself
sovereign lord of the church.

3. Spiritual power especially is of a growing nature, and
more especially that which deriveth from divine institution:
for it hath a great awe upon the hearts and consciences of
men ; which engageth them to a firm and constant adherence.
It useth the most subtle arms, which it hath always ready,
which needeth no time or cost to furnish, which cannot be ex-
torted from its hand; so that it can never be disarmed. And
its weapons make strong impression, because it proposeth the
most effectual encouragements to its abettors, and discourage-
‘ments to its adversaries; alluring the one with promises of
God’s favour and eternal happiness, terrifying the other with
menaces of vengeance from heaven, and endless misery: the
which do ever quell religious, superstitious, weak people; and
often daunt men of knowledge and courage.

It is presumed unchangeable and unextinguishable by any
human power, and thence is not (as all other power) subject to
revolutions. Hence, like Achilles, it is hardly vincible, because
almost immortal. If it be sometimes rebuffed or impaired, it
soon will recover greater strength and vigour.

The popes derive their authority from divine institution ; Dist. xxi.
and their weapons always are sentences of scripture: they pre-“P:* 3:
tend to dispense remission of sins, and promise heaven to their
abettors. They excommunicate, curse, and damn the opposers
of their designs.

They pretend they never can lose any power that ever did
belong to their see: they are always stiff, and they never re-
cede or give back. The privileges of the Roman church can
sustain no detriment,

d Privilegia Romane ecclesie nullum possunt sustinere detrimentum
P. Nic. I. Ep. xxxvi. (32 -)

258 A Treatise of the

4. Power is easily attained and augmented upon occasion of
dissensions. Each faction usually doth make itself a head,
the chief in strength and reputation which it can find inelin-
able to favour it ; and that head it will strive to magnify, that
he may be the abler to promote its cause; and if the cause
doth prosper, he is rewarded with accession of privileges
and authority: especially those who were oppressed, and
find relief by his means, do become zealously active for his
aggrandizement.

Thus usually in civil broils the captain of the prevalent
party groweth a prince, or is crowned with great privileges,
(as Ceesar, Octavian, Cromwell, &c.)

So upon occasion of the Arian faction, and the oppression
of Athanasius, Marcellus, Paulus, and other bishops, the pope
(who by their application to him had occasion to head the ca-
tholic party) did grow in power; for thereupon the Sardican
synod did decree to him that privilege, which he infinitely en-
hanced, and which became the main engine of rearing himself
so high.

And by his interposal in the dissensions raised by the Nes-
torians, the Pelagians, the Eutychians, the Acacians, the Mo-
nothelites, the Image-worshippers, and Image-breakers, &e.
his authority was advanced ; for he, adhering in those causes
to the prevailing party, was by them extolled, obtaining both
reputation and sway.

5. All power is attended by dependencies of persons shel-
tered under it, and by it enjoying subordinate advantages ; the
which proportionably do grow by its increase.

Such persons therefore will ever be inciting their chief and
patron to amplify his power; and in aiding him to compass it,
they will be very industriously, resolutely, and steadily active,
their own interest moving them thereto.

Wherefore their mouths will ever be open in crying him up,
their heads will be busy in contriving ways to further his in-
terests, their care and pains will be employed in accomplishing
his designs ,; they with their utmost strength will contend in
his defence against all oppositions.

Thus the Roman clergy first, then the bishops of Italy, then
all the clergy of the west, became engaged to support, to for-
tify, to enlarge the papal authority; they all sharing with him

“—> iia Gin sales

ih ete ee, a

Pope’s Supremacy. 259

in domination over the laity; and enjoying wealth, credit,
support, privileges, and immunities thereby. Some of them
especially were ever putting him on higher pretences; and
furthering him by all means in his acquist and maintenance of
them.

6. Hence if a potentate himself should have no ambition,
nor much ability to improve his power; yet it would of itself
grow, he need only be passive therein ; the interest of his par-
tisans would effect it: so that often power doth no less thrive
under sluggish and weak potentates, especially if they are void
of goodness, than under the most active and able: let the min-
isters alone to drive on their interest. |

7. Even persons otherwise just and good do seldom scruple
to augment their power by undue encroachment, or at least to
uphold the usurpations of their foregoers: for even such are
apt to favour their own pretences, and afraid of incurring cen-
sure and blame, if they should part with any thing left them
by their predecessors. They apprehend themselves to owe a
dearness to their place, engaging them to tender its own weal
and prosperity, in promoting which they suppose themselves
not to act for their own private interest ; and that it is not out
of ambition or avarice, but out of a regard to the grandeur of
their office, that they stickle and bustle; and that in so doing
they imitate St.Paul, who did magnify his office. They are
encouraged here to by the applause of men, especially of those
who are allied with them in interest, and who converse with
them; who take it for a maxim, Boni principis est ampliare
imperium: the extenders of empire are admired and com-
mended, however they do it, although with cruel wars, or by
any unjust means.

Hence usually the worthiest men in the world’s eye are
greatest enlargers of power; and such men bringing appear-
ances of virtue, ability, reputation, to aid their endeavours, do
most easily compass designs of this nature, finding less ob-
struction to their attempts ; for men are not so apt to suspect
their integrity, or to charge them with ambition and avarice ;
and the few, who discern their aims and consequences of things,
are overborne by the number of those who are favourably con-
ceited and inclined toward them.

Thus Julius I, Damasus I, Innocent I, Gregory I, and the

s 2

Sixtus V.

* Kata
ina TeV
aylov.

260 A Treatise of the

like popes, whom history representeth as laudable persons, did
yet confer to the advancement of papal grandeur. But they
who did most advance that interest, as pope Leo I, Gelasius I,
pope Nicholas I, pope Gregory VII, in the esteem of true
zealots, pass for the best popes. Hence the distinction between
a good man, a good prince, a good pope.

8. Men of an inferior condition are apt to express them-
selves highly in commendation of those who are in a superior
rank, especially upon occasion of address and intercourse ;
which commendations are liable to be interpreted for acknow-
ledgments or attestations of right, and thence do sometimes
prove means of creating it.

Of the generality of men it is truly said, that it «doth fondly
serve fame, and is stunned with titles and images; readily
ascribing to superiors whatever they claim, without scanning
the grounds of their title. Simple and weak men, out of ab-
jectedness or fear, are wont to crouch, and submit to any
thing upon any terms. Wise men do not love brangling, nor
will expose their quiet and safety without great reason ; thence
being inclinable to comply with greater persons. Bad men,
out of design to procure advantages or impunity, are prone to
flatter and gloze with them. Good men, out of due reverence
to them, and in hope of fair usage from them, are ready to
compliment them, or treat them with the most respectful
terms. ‘Those who are obliged to them will not spare to
extol them; paying the easy return of good words for good
deeds.

Thus all men conspire to exalt power; the which snatcheth
all good words as true, and construeth them to the most fa-
vourable sense ; and allegeth them as verdicts and arguments
of unquestionable right. So are the compliments, or terms
of respect, used by Jerome, Austin, Theodoret, and divers
others, toward popes, drawn into an argument for papal au-
thority; whenas the actions of such fathers, and their dis-
courses upon other occasions, do manifest their serious judg-
ment to have been directly contrary to his pretences: where-
fore the emperor of Constantinople, in the Florentine synod,
had good reason to decline such sayings *for arguments, for,

e ——-. qui fame servit ineptus,

Ac stupet in titulis et imaginibus . Hor.

Pope’s Supremacy. 261

‘Tf, saith he, any of the saints doth in an epistle honour the
pope, shall he take that as importing privileges ?

9. Good men commonly (out of charitable simplicity, meek-
ness, modesty and humility, love of peace, and averseness
from contention) are apt to yield to the encroachments of
those who anywise do excel them; and when such men do
yield, others are ready to follow their example. Bad men
have little interest to resist, and no heart to stand for public
good ; but rather strike in presently, taking advantage by their
compliance to drive a good market for themselves. Hence
so many of all sorts in all times did comply with popes, or
did not obstruct them ; suffering them without great obstacle
to raise their power.

10. If in such cases a few wise men do apprehend the con-
sequences of things, yet they can do little to prevent them.
They seldom have the courage with sufficient zeal to bustle
against encroachments; fearing to be overborne by its stream,
to lose their labour, and vainly to suffer by it: if they offer
_ at resistance, it is usually faint and moderate: whereas power
doth act vigorously, and push itself forward with mighty vio-
lence ; so that it is not only difficult to check it, but dangerous
to oppose it.

8 Ambiguity of words (as it causeth many debates, so)
yieldeth much advantage to the foundation and amplification
of power: for whatever is said of it will be interpreted in
favour of it, and will afford colour to its pretences. Words
innocently or carelessly used are by interpretation extended
to signify great matters, or what you please. For instance,

The word bishop may import any kind of superintendency
or inspection: hence St. Peter came to be reckoned bishop of
Rome, because in virtue of his apostolical office he had in-
spection over that church founded by him, and might exer-
cise some episcopal acts.

The word head doth signify any kind of eminency ; the Kat iye?-
word prince, any priority; the word to preside, any kind oft" "ae
superiority or preeminence: hence some fathers attributing 4Post: 34-
those names to St. Peter, they are interpreted to have thought

f Mirws, nol, Tis Trav aylov ev ém- & Ita de vocabulorum occasionibus
TTOAH Tima Tov wamay, Kal éxAdBy rovTo plurimum questiones subornantur, sicut
avtl mpovoulwr. Syn. Flor. sess. xxv. et de verborum in communionibus.

(p- 848.) Tertill. de Resur. Carn. §4.

262 A Treatise of the

him sovereign in power over the apostles. And because some
did give like terms to the pope, they infer his superiority in
power over all bishops; notwithstanding such fathers did ex-
press a contrary judgment.

The word swccessor may import any derivation of power:
hence because St. Peter is said to have founded the church of
Rome, and to have ordained the first bishop there, the pope
is called his successor. | .

The word authority doth often import any kind of influence
upon the opinions or actions of men, (grounded upon emi-
nence of place, worth, reputation, or any such advantage :
hhence because the pope of old sometimes was desired to
interpose his authority, they will understand him to have had
right to command or judge in such cases ; although authority
is sometimes opposed to command, as where Livy saith, that
i Evander did hold those places by authority, rather than by com-
mand; and Tacitus of the German princes saith, ‘They are
heard rather according to their authority of persuading, than
power of commanding. ‘The word judge (saith Canus) ts fre-
quently used to signify no more than, I do think or conceive ;
whereby he doth excuse divers popes from having decreed a
notable error; (for Alexander III. says of them, That they
judged, that after a matrimony contracted, not consummated, an-
other may be valid, that being dissolved.) Yet if the pope is
said to have judged so or so in any case, it is alleged for a
certain argument of proper jurisdiction.

11. There is a strange enchantment in words; which being
(although with no great colour of reason) assumed, do work
on the fancies of men, especially of the weaker sort. Of these
power doth ever arrogate to itself such as are most operative,
by their force sustaining and extending itself.

So divers prevalent factions did assume to themselves the
name of catholic; and the Roman church particularly hath

h Quia duobus episcopis, quorum ea
tempestate summa authoritas erat non
illuserat . Sulp. Sev. ii.63. Because
he had not deluded the two bishops
who had the greatest authority in those
times. Non mediocris authoritatis epi-
scopus Carthag. Aug. Ep. 162. The
bishop of Carthage was of no mean au-
thority.

i Evander —— ea authoritate magis
quam imperio retinebat loca. Liv. 1.

k audiuntur authoritate sua-
dendi potius quam jubendi potestate.
Tuc. de Mor. Ger. (p. 640.)

1 Verbum judico frequenter in ea sig-
nificatione usurpatur, ut idem sit quod
sentio seu opinor. Can. loc. yi. cap. 8.
(Comp. lib. vi. 1.)

Pope’s Supremacy. 263

appropriated that word to itself, even so as to commit a bull,
implying Rome and the universe to be the same place; and
the perpetual canting of this term hath been one of its most
effectual charms to weak people: J am a catholic, that is, an
universal; therefore all I hold is true: this is their great
argument.

The words successor of Peter, apostolic see, prima sedes,
have been strongly urged for arguments of papal authority ;
the which have beyond their true force (for indeed they
signify nothing) had a strange efficacy upon men of under-
standing and wisdom.

12. The pope’s power was much amplified by the impor-
tunity of persons condemned or extruded from their places,
whether upon just accounts, or wrongfully, and by faction ;
™for they finding no other more hopeful place of refuge and
redress, did often apply to him: for what will not men do,
whither will not they go, in straits ?

Thus did Marcion go to Rome, and sue for admission to
-communion there. So Fortunatus and Felicissimus in St.Cy-
prian, being condemned in Afric, did fly to Rome for shelter ; Cypr. Ep.
of which absurdity St.Cyprian doth so complain. So likewise a
Martianus and Basilides, in St.Cyprian, being outed of their Ep. 55.
sees for having lapsed from the Christian profession, did fly
to Stephen for succour, to be restored. So Maximus (the
Cynic) went to Rome, to get a confirmation of his election
at Constantinople. So Marcellus, being rejected for hetero-
doxy, went thither to get attestation to his orthodoxy, (of
which St. Basil complaineth.) So Apiarius, being condemned
in Afric for his crimes, did appeal to Rome.

And on the other side, Athanasius being with great par- Calendion
tiality condemned by the synod of Tyre; Paulus and other fiber cop”
bishops being extruded from their sees for orthodoxy; St.Chry- 18.
sostom being condemned and expelled by Theophilus and his

complices ; Flavianus being deposed by Dioscorus and the P. Leo. Ep.
[phesine synod; Theodoret being condemned by the same— + a m
P. Nich. L.
Ep. xxxviii

m ut ad domini mei tanti ponti- lord so great a pontiff, and most pious (p, 564.)
ficis et piissimi patris, omnium ad se a father, the safe defender and pro- Rothaldus,
confugientium tutissimi defensoris ac tector of all those that flee unto him
protectoris, &c. Rothaldi Appell.(in P. for succour.

Nich. I. Ep. xxxvii. p. 563.) ——— my

Cod. lib. i.
tit. 2. cap.
16.

264 A Treatise of the

did ery out for‘help to Rome. Chelidonius, bishop of Resanon,
being deposed by Hilarius of Arles, (for erimes,) did fly to
pope Leo. Ignatius, patriarch of Constantinople, being ex-
truded from his see by Photius, did complain to the pope.

13. All princes are forward to heap honour on the bishop
of their imperial city; it seeming a disgrace to themselves
that so near a relation be an inferior to any other; who is,
as it were, their spiritual pastor, who is usually by their
special favour advanced. The city itself, and the court, will
be restless in assisting him to climb.

Thus did the bishop of Constantinople arise to that high
pitch of honour, and to be second patriarch ; who at first was
a mean suffragan to the bishop of Heraclea: this by the
synods of Constantinople and Chalcedon is assigned for the
reason of his advancement. And how ready the emperors
were to promote the dignity of that bishop, we see by many
of their edicts to that purpose; as particularly that of Leo.

So, for the honour of their city, the emperors usually did
favour the pope, assisting him in the furtherance of his designs,
and extending his privileges by their edicts at home, and let-
ters to the eastern emperors, recommending their affairs.

So in the synod of Chalcedon we have the letters of Valen-
tinian, together with those of Placidia and of Eudoxia, the
empresses, to Theodosius, in behalf of pope Leo, for retrac-
tation of the Ephesine synod; wherein they do express them-
selves engaged to maintain the honour of the Roman see ;
"Seeing that, saith Placidia, mother of Theodosius, i¢ becometh
us in all things to preserve the honour and dignity of this chief
city, which is the mistress of all others.

So pope Nicholas confesseth, that the emperors had °¢a-
tolled the Roman see with divers privileges, had enriched it with
gifts, had enlarged it with benefits, (or benefices,) &e.

14. The popes had the advantage of being ready at hand to
suggest what they pleased to the court, and thereby to procure
his edicts (directed or dictated by themselves) in their favour,

u ‘Ordre mpére: Huas tatty TH we- beneficiis ampliaverint, qualiter illam,
yiorn mérci, Hris Béomowa wacdv iwdp- &c. P. Nich. I. Ep. viii. (p. 513.)

XEt TaY yeav, ev Tact Td TEBas Tapapu- — Romanus tempore prisco
Adta. Syn. Chale. (p. 27.) Pauper erat presul, regali munere

Pope's Supremacy. 265

for extending their power, or repressing any opposition made
to their encroachments.

Baronius observeth that the bishops of Constantinople did
use this advantage for their ends; for thus he reflecteth on
the edict of the emperor Leo in fayour of that see: P These
things Leo ; but questionless conceived in the words of Acacius,
swelling with pride.

And no less unquestionably did the popes conceive words
for the emperor in countenance of their authority.

Such was that edict of Valentinian in favour of Leo against
Hilarius, bishop of Arles, (in an unjust cause, as Binius con-
fesseth,) who contested his authority to undo what was done

Apud
Mare. v.

32.
Bin. ad
Hi

. Hill.
Ep. tT.

in a Gallican synod. And we may thank Baronius himself (?- 57°-)

for this observation, 4 By this, reader, thou understandest that
when the emperors ordained laws concerning religion, they did it
by transcribing and enacting the laws of the church, upon the
admonition of the holy bishops requiring them to do their duty.
It was a notable edict which pope Hilarius allegeth ; "Jt was
also decreed by the laws of Christian princes, that whatsoever the
bishop of the apostolic see should upon examination pronounce con-
cerning churches and their governors, &ec. should with reverence
be received, and strictly observed, &c.

Such edicts by crafty suggestions being at opportune times
from easy and unwary princes procured, did hold, not being
easily reversed: and the power which the pope once had ob-
tained by them, he would never part with ; fortifying it by
higher pretences of divine immutable right.

The emperor Gratian, having gotten the world under him,
did order the churches to those who would communicate with
pope Damasus. This and the like countenances did bring
credit and authority to the Roman see.

15. It is therefore no wonder that popes, being seated in
the metropolis of the western empire, (the head of all the
Roman state,) should find interest sufficient to make them-
selves by degrees what they would be: for they not only

P Hee Leo, sed Acacii fastu tumen- sulum requirentium eorum officium ex
tis proculdubio verbis concepta, et stylo scriptis legibus statuisse. Baron. ann.
superbie exarata. Baron. ann. 473- 458. §- 4
§. 4. r Christianorum quoque principum

4 Ex his intelligis, lector, cum de lege decretum est, &c. P. Hilarius,

rebus sacris imperatores leges sanxi- Ep. xi. (p. 576.)
vere, id ipsum admonitione ss. pre-

P. Nich. I.
Ep. 36.

Theod. vy. 2.

266 A Treatise of the

surpassing the provincial bishops in wealth and repute, but
having power in court, who dared to pull a feather with them,
or to withstand their encroachments? What wise man would
not rather bear much, than contest upon such disadvantages,
and without probable grounds of success ?

16. Prinees who favoured them with such concessions, and
abetted their undertakings, did not foresee what such increase
of power in time would arise to; or suspect the prejudice
thence done to imperial authority. They little thought that
in virtue thereof popes would check and mate princes, or
would claim superiority over them: for the popes at that
time did behave and express themselves with modesty and
respect to emperors.

17. Power once rooted doth find seasons and favourable
junctures for its growth; the which it will be intent to
embrace.

The confusions of things, the eruptions of barbarians, the
straits of emperors, the contentions of princes, &c. did all
turn to account for him; and in confusion of things he did
snateh what he could to himself.

The declination and infirmity of the Roman empire gave
him opportunity to strengthen his interests, either by closing
with it, so as to gain somewhat by its concession; or by
opposing it, so as to head a faction against it. As he often
had opportunity to promote the designs of emperors and
princes, so those did return to him increase of authority ; so
they trucked and bartered together. For when princes were
in straits, or did need assistance (from his reputation at
home) to the furtherance of their designs, or support of their
interest in Italy, they were content to honour him, and grant
what he desired: as in the case of Acacius, which had caused
so long a breach, the emperor, to engage pope Hormisdas, did
consent to his will. And at the Florentine synod, the emperor
did bow to the pope’s terms, in hopes to get his assistance
against the Turks.

When the eastern emperors, by his means chiefly, were
driven out of Italy, he snatched a good part of it to himself,
and set up for a temporal prince °.

8 Apuds mecobans mas avhp EvAiCerar——. When the oak is fallen, every one

gets some wood.

Pope’s Supremacy. 267

When princes did clash, he, by yielding countenance to one
side, would be sure to make a good market for himself: for
this pretended successor to the fisherman was really skilled to
angle in troubled waters.

They have been the incendiaries of Christendom, the kin- Anast. in
dlers and fomenters of war ; and would often stir up wars ; and Le aig
inclining to the stronger part, would share with the conqueror ; Ep. 25, 30,
as when he stirred up Charles against the Lombards. They i
would, upon spiritual pretence, be interposing in all affairs*.

He did oblige princes by abetting their cause when it was
unjust or weak: his spiritual authority satisfying their con-
science: whence he was sure to receive good acknowledgment
and recompense. As when he did allow Pepin’s usurpation. An. 752.

He pretended to dispose of kingdoms, and to constitute
princes ; reserving obeisance to himself. Gregory VII. granted An. 1060.
to Robert Guislard Naples and Sicily, benefictario jure. Inno- An. 1139.
cent II. gave to Roger the title of king.

There is scarce any kingdom in Europe which he hath not
claimed the sovereignty of, by some pretence or other. Princes
sometime, for quiet sake, have desired the pope’s consent and
allowance of things appertaining of right to themselves, whence
the pope took advantage to claim an original right of disposing
such things.

The proceeding of the pope upon occasion of wars is remark-
able: when he did enter league with a prince, to side with him
in a war against another, he did covenant to prosecute the
enemy with spiritual arms, (that is, with excommunications and
interdicts,) engaging his confederates to use temporal arms.

So making ecclesiastical censures tools of interest.

When princes were in difficulties, (by the mutinous dis-
position of princes, the emulation of antagonists,) he would,
as served his interest, interpose ; hooking in some advantage
to himself.

In the tumults against our king John, he struck in, and
would have drawn the kingdom to himself.

He would watch opportunity to quarrel with princes, upon
pretence they did intrench on his spiritual power: as about

t Non sine suspicione, quod illorum suscitarent ea potius atque nutrirent.
temporum pontifices, qui bella extin- Modruviensis Epise. im Cone. Lat. sub
guere, discordias tollere debuissent, Leone X. sess. vi. (p 72.)

268 A Treatise of the

the point of the investiture of bishops, and receiving homage
from them.

Gregory VII. did excommunicate Hen. III. (an. 1074.)

0S Sree Hen. IV. (an. 1120.)
Perea bei oc.. ts woh glieas Fred. (an. 1160.)
Celestinus III................ Hen. V..(an. 1193.)
Innocent jTIT. ... 5. {tein deeb fan. 1208

Honorius III. and Gregory IX. \ Fred. II. (an. 1220.)
Innocent IV. in the Lugd. Conc. (1245.)

18. The ignorance of times did him great service: for then
all the little learning which was, being in his clients and fac-
tors, they could instil what they pleased into the credulous
people. Then his dictates would pass for infallible oracles,
and his decrees for inviolable laws: whence his veneration
was exceedingly increased.

Anselme 19. He was forward to support factious churchmen against
an. 109. : ir ° :

Becket | Princes, upon pretence of spiritual interest and liberty. And
pain usually by his importunity and arts getting the better in such
Mait. Par. contests, he thereby did much strengthen his authority.

20. He making himself the head of all the clergy, and carrying
himself as its protector and patron, did engage thereby innumer-
able most able heads, tongues, and pens, who were devoted to
maintain whatever he did, and had little else to do.

21. So great a party he cherished with exorbitant liberties,
suffering none to rule over them, or touch them, beside
himself.

22. He did found divers militias and bands of spiritual jani-
saries, to be combatants for his interests ; who, depending im-
mediately upon him, subsisting by his charters, enjoying ex-
emptions by his authority from other jurisdictions, being sworn
to a special obeisance of him, were entirely at his devotion, ready
with all their might to advance his interests, and to maintain
all the pretences of their patron and benefactor.

These had great sway among the people, upon account of
their religious guises and pretences to extraordinary heights
of sanctimony, austerity, contempt of the world. And learning
being mostly confined to them, they were the chief teachers
and guides of Christendom ; so that no wonder if he did chal-
lenge and could maintain any thing by their influence.

They did ery up his power, as superior to all others. They

Pope’s Supremacy. 269

did attribute to him titles strangely high, Vice-god, Spouse
of the Church, &e. strange attributes of omnipotency, infalli-
bility, &e.
23. Whereas wealth is a great sinew of power, he did invent Po pallio

: a ino ali-
divers ways of drawing great store thereof to himself. quid dare
By how many tricks did he proll money from all parts of pig
Christendom ? as by Ep. iv. 44.

Dispensations for marriage within degrees prohibited, or at
uncanonical times; for vows and oaths; for observance of
fasts and abstinences ; for pluralities and incompatible bene-
fices, non-residences, &e.

Indulgences, and pardons, and freeing souls from the pains
of purgatory.

Reservations, and provisions of benefices, not bestowed Vendit

ratis ——

g : pro auro.
Consecrated presents; Agnus Dei’s, swords, roses, &e. Taxa came-
Confirmation of bishops; “sending palls. ee

Appeals to his court.
_ Tributes of Péer-pence, annates, tithes,—introduced upon Peter-
oceasion of holy wars, and continued. Pian 57.
Playing fast and loose, tying knots, and undoing them for
gain.
Sending legates to drain places of money.
Commutations of penance for money.
Inviting to pilgrimage at Rome.
Hooking in legacies. What a mass of treasure did all this Quantas
come to! What a trade did he drive ! ren
24. He did indeed easily, by the help of his mercenary di- hec fabula
vines, transform most points of divinity in accommodation to ine
his interests of power, reputation, and gain.
25. Any pretence, how slender soever, will in time get some
validity ; being fortified by the consent of divers authors, and
a current of suitable practice.
Any story serving the designs of a party will get credit by
being often told, especially by writers bearing a semblance of
gravity ; whereof divers will never be wanting to abet a flou-
rishing party.

4 In the times of Henry I. the bishop of York did pay 10,000/. sterling for his
pall. Matt. Par. (p. 274.)

270 A Treatise of the

26. The histories of some ages were composed only by the
pope’s clients, friars and monks, and such people; which there-
fore are partial to him, addicted to his interests, and under
awe of him.

For a long time none dared open his mouth to question any
of his pretences, or reprehend his practices, without being called
heretic, and treated as such.

27. Whereas the pope had two sorts of opposites to subdue,
temporal princes and bishops; his business being to overtop
princes and to enslave all bishops, or to invade and usurp the
rights of both; he used the help of each to compass his de-
signs on the other; by the authority of princes oppressing
bishops, and by the assistance of bishops mating princes.

28. When any body would not do as he would have them,
he did incessantly clamour or whine that St. Peter was in-
juredy,

29. The forgery of the Decretal Epistles (wherein the an-
cient popes are made expressly to speak and act according to
some of his highest pretences, devised long after their times,
and which they never thought of, good men) did hugely
conduce to his purpose: authorizing his encroachments by
the suffrage of ancient doctrine and practice: a great part
of his canon law is extracted out of these, and grounded on
them.

The donation of Constantine, fictitious acts of councils, and
the like counterfeit stuff, did help thereto; the which were soon
embraced, as we see in pope Gregory II.

"Andry ris AS also legends, fables of miracles, and all such deceivableness .

Gdixlas. an A A

a Thess. i. of unrighteousness. |

10. 30. Popes were so cunning as to form grants, and impute
sic P’ that to privileges derived from them, which princes did enjoy
Non neces- by right or custom.

itatis, sed > inne 4

mec 9 31. Synods of bishops called by him at opportune seasons,

causa peto. consisting of his votaries or slaves. None dared therein to
Extortis as- : A on 2 5

sentationi- Whisper any thing to the prejudice of his authority. He car-
bus. /’.Le0- ried whatever he pleased to propose, without check or contra-
Epist. bales . 2

(ad Syn. diction. Who dared to question any thing done by such num-
Chale.)

VY Quando et apostolica preceptio ad observatur, et a te spernitur et violatur.
injuriam B. Petri in illis partibus non P. Nich. J. Ep. 37.

Pope's Supremacy. 271

bers of pastors, styling themselves the representative of Chris-
tendom ?

32. The having hampered all the clergy with strict oaths of
universal obedience to him, (beginning about the times of pope
Gregory VII,) did greatly assure his power

33. When intolerable oppressions and exactions did con-
strain princes to struggle with him, if he could not utterly pre-
vail, things were brought to composition; whereby he was to
be sure for that time a gainer, and gained establishment in
some points, leaving the rest to be got afterward in more fa-
vourable junctures.

Witness the Henry II. and P. Alex. ITT. an.1172.
Concordates < Edw. III. and P. Greg. XI. an. 1373.
between Henry V. and P. Mart. V. an. 1418.

34. When princes were fain to curb their exorbitances by
Pragmatical Sanctions, they were restless till they had got those
sanctions revoked. And when they found weak princes, or any —
prince in circumstances advantaging their design, they did ob-
tain their end. So pope Leo X. got Lewis XI. to repeal the
Pragmatical Sanctions of his ancestors.

35. The power he did assume to absolve men from oaths
and vows, to dispense with prohibited marriages, &e. did not
only bring much grist to his mill, but did enable him highly
to oblige divers persons (especially great ones) to himself.
For to him they owed the quiet of their conscience from scru-
ples; to him they owed the satisfaction of their desires, and
legitimation of their issue, and title to their possessions.

36. So the device of indulgences did greatly raise the
veneration of him: for who would not adore him, that could
loose his bands, and free his soul from long and grievous
pains ?

SUPPOSITION VI.

The next Supposition is this, That in fact the Roman bishops
continually from St.Peter’s time have enjoyed and exercised
this sovereign power.

THIS is a question of fact, which will best be decided by
a particular consideration of the several branches of sovereign
power; that so we may examine the more distinctly whether

Q72 A Treatise of the

in all ages the popes have enjoyed and exercised them, or
not.

And if we survey the particular branches of sovereignty,
we shall find that the pope hath no just title to them, in
reason, by valid law, or according to ancient practice ; whence
each of them doth yield a good argument against his pre-
tences.

I. If the pope were sovereign of the church, he would have
power to convocate its supreme councils and judicatories; and
would constantly have exercised it.

This power therefore the pope doth claim; and indeed did
pretend to it a long time since, before they could obtain to
exercise it: *J¢ 7s manifestly apparent, saith pope Leo X,
with approbation of his Lateran synod, that the Roman bishop
for the time being (as who hath authority over all councils) hath
alone the full right and power of indicting, translating, and dis-
solving councils: and long before him, To the apostolical author-
ity, said pope Adrian I,y by our Lord's command, and by the
merits of St. Peter, and by the decrees of the holy canons, and of
the venerable fathers, a right and special power of convocating
synods hath manywise been committed: and yet before him, 7The
authority, saith pope Pelagius II, of convocating synods hath
been delivered to the apostolical see by the singular privilege of
St. Peter.

But it is manifest that the pope cannot pretend to this power
by virtue of any old ecclesiastical canon, none such being ex-
tant or produced by him; nor can he allege any ancient cus-
tom; there having been no general synod before Constantine :
and as to the practice from that time, it is very clear, that for
some ages the popes did not assume or exercise such a power,
and that it was not taken for their due. Nothing can be more
sanctorum canonum ac venerandorum

patrum decretis multipliciter privata
tradita est potestas. P. Hadrian I. apud

x Distinct. 17. Cum etiam solum
Rom. pontificem pro tempore existen-
tem, tanquam auctoritatem super om-

nia concilia habentem, conciliorum indi-
cendorum, transferendorum ac dissol-
vendorum plenum jus et potestatem ha-
bere manifeste constet. Con. Later.
sess. xi. (p. 152.)

y Cui jussione Domini, et me-
ritis B. Petri apostoli, singularis con-
gregandarum synodorum authoritas, et

Bin. tom. v. p. 565. (ann. 785.)

z Cum generalium synodorum convo-
candi auctoritas apostolic sedi B. Petri
singulari privilegio sit tradita ea
Pelag. II. Fp.8. (Bin. tom. iv. p. 476.)
ann. 587. Qu. An hec epistola sit Pe-
Jagii lJ ? Negat Launoius.

Pope’s Supremacy. 273

evident, and it were extreme impudence to deny, that the em-
perors, at their pleasure, and by their authority, did congregate
all the first general synods ; for so the oldest historians in most
express terms do report, so those princes in their edicts did
aver, so the synods themselves did declare. The most just and
pious emperors, who did bear greatest love to the clergy, and
had much respect for the pope, did call them without scruple ;
it was deemed their right to do it, none did remonstrate against
their practice; the fathers in each synod did refer thereto,
with allowance, and commonly with applause; popes them-
selves did not contest their right, yea commonly did petition
them to exercise it.

These things are so clear and so obvious, that it is almost
vain to prove them; I shall therefore but touch them.

In general Socrates doth thus attest to the ancient practice;
aWe, saith he, do continually include the emperors in our his-
tory, because upon them, ever since they became Christians,
ecclesiastical affairs have depended, and the greatest synods
have been and are made by their appointment : and Justinian
in his prefatory type to the fifth general council beginneth
thus; >Jt hath been ever the care of pious and orthodox em-
perors, by the assembling of the most religious bishops, to cut
off heresies, as they did spring up; and by the right faith,
sincerely preached, to keep the holy church of God in peace :
and to do this was so proper to the emperors, that when Ruffin
did affirm St. Hilary to have been excommunicated in a synod,
St. Jerome, to confute him, did ask; ¢ Zell me, what emperor
did command this synod to be congregated? implying it to be
illegal or impossible that a synod should be congregated with-
out the imperial command.

Particularly Eusebius saith of the first Christian emperor,
that 4as a common bishop appointed by God he did summon

@ Suvexas kal tovs Bacirels TH ioro-
pia mepiAauBdvouer, didt1 ad’ ob Xprote-
avilew Hpkavto, Ta Tis exxAnoias mpdy-
para hptntro ef abray, kal ai wéeyiorm
civoda TH abtay youn yeydvacl Te Kal
ylvoyvra:. Socr. 5. Procem.

b Semper studium fuit orthodoxis et
piis imperatoribus, pro tempore exortas
heereses per congregationem religiosissi-
morum episcoporum amputare, et recta
fide sincere preedicata in pace sanctam

Dei ecclesiam custodire . Justin.in
Syn. 5. Collat. i. (p. 209.) Greece p. 368.
magis emphatice.

©€ Doce quis imperator hance syno-
dum jusserit congregari? Hier,

d Ofd ris kowds éwicxoros éx Oeov ka-
O.orduevos cuvddous Ta@v TOU Ocov AerTOUP-
yav auvexpére. Euseb. de Vit. Const. I.
44. TlAclorous ex diapdpwy Kal duvéhrer
rénwy emokdrous eis THY ApeAatna lay r6-
Aw covered exedcioauev. Euseb. Hist.

Q74 A Treatise of the

synods of God’s ministers ; so did he command a great number
of bishops to meet at Arles, (for decision of the Donatists’
cause ;) so did he also command the bishops from all quarters
to meet at Tyre, for examination of the affairs concerning
Athanasius; and that he did convocate the great synod of
Nice (the first and most renowned of all general synods) all
the historians do agree, he did himself affirm, the fathers
thereof in their synodical remonstrances did avow ; as we shall
hereafter, in remarking on the passages of that synod, shew.

The same course did his son Constantius follow, without
impediment ; for although he was a favourer of the Arian
party, yet did the catholic bishops readily at his call assemble
in the great synods of ¢Sardica, of fAriminum, of sSeleucia,
of )Sirmium, of iMilan, &. Which he out of a great zeal to
compose dissensions among the bishops did convoeate.

After him the emperor Valentinian, understanding of dis-
sensions about divine matters, to compose them, did indict a
synod in Illyricum‘.

A while after, for settlement of the Christian state, (which
had been greatly disturbed by the persecution of Julian and of
Valens, and by divers factions,) Theodosius I. did |! command,
saith Theodoret, the bishops of his empire to be assembled to-
gether at Constantinople ; the which meeting accordingly did
make the second general synod: in the congregation of which
the pope had so little to do, that Baronius saith it was cele-
brated against his will.

Afterwards, when Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, af-
fecting to seem wiser than others in explaining the mystery of
Christ’s incarnation, had raised a jangle to the disturbance of

x. 5. {Ep. ad Chrestum. Ad Arelaten-
sium civitatem piissimi imperatoris vo-
luntate adducti, say the fathers in their
Epistle to P. Sylvester himself. Vid.
Euseb. de Vit. Const. lib. iv. cap. 41,
42, 43, et Socr.i. 28.

© Mpocératey eis Sapdlkny cvvdpapety
émoxémovs. Theod. ii. 4. Soz. iii. 11.
Socr. ii. 16, 20. Athan. tom. i. p. 761.
Hil. in Fragm. p. Jubet ex toto orbe
apud Sardicam episcopos congregari.
Sulp. ii. 52.

f“Ex Te THs TOD @cov Kedcboews, Kal
THs os evoeBelas mpooTdyparos, &c.
Syn. Arim. Ep. ad Const. Socr. ii. 37-

g Socr. ii. 39. hv—yevéoOa 7d Baci-

Aéws éxérevoe mpdotayua. Ann. 381.

h‘O Baoireds civodov éemoxdrwy év
TS Sipulp yeverOu éxéAdevoe. Socr. ii.
29. Soz. iv. 6.

i Tpdorayua 5¢ jv Tod Baciréws év
MedioAdvm médrer TroveiaOa Thy civodor.
Socr, i. 36. Soz. iv. 9.

k ’Ev piv tq “IAAvpin@ obvodov ye-
véc0a mpocérate. Theod. iv. 7.

1] Sivodov buoddtwv ate cuvendreces
Soz. vii. 7. Socr. v.8. Mévns tis oi-
kelas Baotrelas Tovs emioxdmovs els THY
KwvorayvtwovroAw ocvvabpooOjva1 mpoo=
ératev. Theod. v. 7. Repugnante Da-
maso celebrata, &c. Baron. ann. 553.
§. 224.

Pope’s Supremacy. 275

the church ; for removing it, the emperor Theodosius IT. did
mby his edict command the bishops to meet at Ephesus ; who
there did celebrate the third general council: in the begin-
ning of each action it is affirmed, that the synod was "con-
vocated by the imperial decree; the synod itself doth often
profess it; the pope’s own legate doth acknowledge it; and so
doth Cyril the president thereof®.

The same emperor, upon occasion of Eutyches being con-
demned at Constantinople, and the stirs thence arising, did
indict the second general synod of Ephesus, (which proved
abortive by the miscarriages of Dioscorus, bishop of Alex-
andria,) as appeareth by his imperial letters to Dioscorus, and
the other bishops, summoning them to that synod: PWe have
decreed, that the most holy bishops meeting together, &e. IA fter the
same manner the other most reverend bishops were written to, to
come to the synod. And as pope Leo doth confess, calling it
“the council of bishops, which you (Theodosius) commanded to be
held at Ephesus.

The next general synod of Chaleedon was convocated by Ann. 45¢.
the authority of the emperor Marcian ; as is expressed in the
beginning of each action‘, as the emperor declareth, as the
synod itself, in the front of its Definition, doth avow; ' The
holy, great, and ecumenical synod, gathered together by the grace

M [Ipécrayua tod BaciAéws eis Thy
aivodoy avviévan exéAevoev. Socr. vii. 34.
Evagr. i. 3.

n Ex Oernicuatos Tay BaciAéwy ovy-
KpoTnbeioa.

© ‘H ayla cbvodos, h xdpiti @cod Kara
vd Oompa Tay cboeBeaTaTwr Kal diro-
xplotwv ijpav BaciAéwy ovyKpoTnbcioa.
Syn. Eph. Act. i. p. 291. The holy
synod assembled by the grace of God,
according to the decree of our most
religious emperors, &c. n xdpire
cod Kal rveduati Tov buetépou Kpdtous
guvaxbeion, p. 297. Ta mpooretaypeva
Th ayia cvvddp mapa tod iuerépov Kpd-
tous, &c. Act. v. p. 347- Tots d&@pa-
wOeiot Kata rpdotaypa Tov Baciréwr.
Pp: 404. “Hytwa obyodov of Xpicriavi-
Katato. Kal pireavOpwrdétato: BacireZs
%picay. Which synod our most Christ-
ian and gracious emperors appointed,
saith Philip, the pope’s legate. Act. iii.
P- 330. TH ayla ouvddy 1H Kata Ocod
xdpw Kal Oorioua trav Ocodircotdtwv

kal piroxplotwy Bart éwy ovvaxbelon—.

To the holy synod assembled by the

grace of God, and the command of our

emperors, &c. So do Cyril and Mem-

non inscribe their Epistle. <Aet. iv. p.
ée

P ’E@conricauey kata Taito cvveAOdy-
twv dcwTdatwv, &c.

4 TG abtg timw eypddn Kal rots &A-
Aois evAaBeotdrois emickdrois Sote wa-
paryevécOa eis THy civodov. Syn. Chale.
pars i. p. 53.

t Episcopale consilium, quod haberi
apud Ephesum precepistis. P. Leo J.
Ep. 25. (et 24.) ad Theod.

8S Katrd Oeiov Béomioua ovvabpocbei-
ca. Thy aylay iuay HOpoloauev civodor.
(Act. vi. p. 345.)

t ‘H a@yla Kal pweyddAn Kal olxovmerixh
civodos, ) Kata cod xdpiv, Kal béom-
cua Tav evAaBerrdadtwy Kal piroxplotwr
jay Baciréwy cvvaxbeioa Spire Ta
bmoretayutva. Act. vi. 346.

, 9

Ann. 533.

Act. p. 368.
Gr. p. 309.
Lat.

276 A Treatise of the

of God and the command of our most dread emperors, &c. has
determined as follows.

The fifth general synod was also congregated by the author-
ity of Justinian 1; and the emperor’s letter authorizing it
beginneth (as we saw before) with an assertion, (backed with
a particular enumeration,) that all former great synods were
called by the same power: the fathers themselves do say, that
they had “come together according to the will of God, and the
command of the most pious emperor. So little had the pope to
do in it, that, as Baronius himself telleth us, it was congregated
xagainst his will, or with his resistance.

The sixth general synod at Constantinople was also indicted
by the emperor Constantine Pogonatus ; as doth appear by his
letters, as is intimated at the entrance of each action, as the
synod doth acknowledge, as pope Leo II. (in whose time it was
concluded) doth affirm. The synod, in its Definition, as also
in its Epistle to pope Agatho, doth inscribe itself, ¥Y The holy
and ecumenical synod, congregated by the grace of God, and the
altogether religious sanction of the most pious and most faithful
great empercr Constantine: and in their Definition they say,
2 By this doctrine of peace dictated by God, our most gracious
emperor, through the divine wisdom being guided, as a defender
of the true faith, and an enemy to the false, having gathered us
together in this holy and cecumenical synod, has united the whole
frame of the church, &e. In its acclamatory oration to the
emperor it saith, Tats Oevordrais tuGv mpoordgeow elkovTes GTe
Ths tpeaBurdtns Kal GmooToAuKhs AakpoTdAEws ApXLEpaTLK@TATOS
mpdedpos Kal fuels eAdxioTo, &e. Act. xvill. p. 271. We all
acquiescing in your most sacred commands ; both the most holy
president of (Rome) the most ancient and apostolical city, and
we the least, &c.*

u Pro Dei voluntate, et jussione pi-
issimi imperatoris ad hanc urbem con-
venimus. Co/lat. 8.

x Ut que resistente Romano ponti-
fice fuerit congregata. Baron. ann. 553-
§. 219.
y ‘H ayla nal weyddrn Kal oikoupevixy
abvodos, 7 Kara Ocod xapw Kal mavev-
geBts Céomiopa Tov evocBeotaTov Kal
mutotatouv meydAou BaciAéws Kwvoray-
tivov cuvaxGeion. Act. xviii. p. 255, 285.
(in Epist. ad P. Agath.)

Z Tatty TH VeodéxTe@ Tis ciphyns d:-

dackarla Ococdpws 6 mpadtatos juev
Bacirev’s ddnyotuevos, 6 THs mev dpBo-
Sotlas iwépuaxos, THs 5€ Kaxodotlas av-
tinaxos, Thy Kal nas oylay Tabrny Kat
oikoupevixhy aOpoloas duhyupw, Td Tis
éxxAnolas dav jvwoe obyxpiua. Act.
xviii. p. 256. in Definitione Synodica.

a Kal yap éréyvopuev bri 7 Gayla Kal
peydAn Kal oikovperixh Extn abvodos,
Aris kata Ocov xapiw, TH BactAiK@ wpoc-
Taypat. evaryxos ev TH BactAld: ovv-
nOpotcdn méAcac——. P. Leo Il. in Ep.
ad Con. Imp. p. 305.

Pope’s Supremacy. Q7T7

These are all the great synods which posterity with clear
consent did admit as general: for the next two have been
disclaimed by great churches, (the seventh by most of the
western churches, the eighth by the eastern,) so that even
bdivers popes after them did not reckon them for general
councils; and all the rest have been only assemblies of
western bishops, celebrated after the breach between the
oriental and occidental churches.

Yet even that second synod of Nice, which is called the
seventh synod, doth avow itself to have © convened by the
emperor’s command ; and in the front of each action, as also
of their Synodical Definition, the same style is retained.

Hitherto it is evident, that all general synods were convo-
cated by the imperial authority; and about this matter divers
things are observable.

It is observable in how peremptory a manner the emperors
did require the bishops to convene at the time and place ap-
pointed by them. Constantine, in his letter indicting the synod
_of Tyre, hath these words; Jf any one presuming to violate Euseb. de
our command and sense, &e. highs —

Theodosius IJ. summoneth the bishops to the Ephesine (Vid. in v.
synod in these terms; 4We, taking a great deal of care about® 3°)
these things, will not suffer any one, if he be absent, to go un-
punished ; nor shall he find excuse either with God or us, who
presently without delay does not by the time set appear in the
place appointed.

In like terms did he call them to the second Ephesine
synod ; ¢Lf any one shall choose to neglect meeting in a synod
so necessary and grateful to God, and by the set time do not
with all diligence appear in the place appointed, he shall find
no excuse, &e.

b P. Joh. VIII. Ep. 247. P. Nic. I.
Ep. 7, 8, 10. P. Hadr. II. Ep. 26.

© Maca 7% ayla otvodos ) Kar’ eddo-
Klay @cod, mpoordge: te Tis pidoxplarov
tua@v Bacirelas cvvedOodoa. Act. vii.
p- 831. i 519. ii. 551. iii. 586. iv. 609.
v. 696. vi. 722. vii. 812. Defin. Synod.
Act. vii. p. 817.

4 Kal nueis 88 tobtwy roAdAAhy rowl-
evan ppovTida amrodiumdverOa oddéva
popnTas avetducba oddeulay Te Eker mpds
Ocdy, obBt mpds uas drodoylay, 5 wh

mapaxpiua Kata Toy Mpoeipnuevoy Kai-
pov, eis Tov apopiabevta Témov orovdalws
mapayevéuevos. Theod. Jun. Ep. ad
Cyril. Conc. Eph. pars i. p. 2, 6.

e El 3€ tis Thy oftws dvaykalay Kal
7G OcG Hlanv wapideiv Erorro oivodoy,
kal uh mdop duvduer Kata Toy mpoeipy-
uévov Kaipdy Toy &popiabévTa KaTardBor
rémov, ovdeulay efter mpds Td Kpeirtov, F
mpos Thy huetépay edadéBeay drodoylav.
Theod. in Ep. ad Diose, in Cone, Chale.
Act. i. p. §3-

278 A Treatise of the

Marcian thus indicteth the synod of Nice, (after by him
translated to Chalcedon ;) ¢lt properly seemeth good to our
clemency, that an holy synod meet in the city of Nice, in the
province of Bithynia.

Again we may observe, that in the imperial edicts, or
epistles, whereby councils effectually were convened, there is
nothing signified concerning the pope’s having any authority
to call them ; it is not as by license from the pope’s holiness,
but in their own name and authority they act: which were
very strange, if the popes had any plea then commonly ap-
proved for such a power.

As commonly emperors did call synods by the suggestion
of other bishops‘, so again there be divers instances of popes
applying themselves to the emperors with petitions to indict
synods; wherein sometimes they prevailed, sometimes they
were disappointed : so pope Liberius did request of Constan-
tius to indict a synod for deciding the cause of Athanasius.
¢ Ecclesiastical judgment (said he, as Theodoret reports) should
be made with great equity: wherefore, if it please your piety,
command a judicatory to be constituted: and in his Epistle to
Hosius, produced by Baronius, he saith, Many bishops out of
Italy met together, who together with me had beseeched the most
religious emperor that he would command, as he had thought fit,
the council of Aquilea to meet.

So pope Damasus, having a desire that a general synod
should be celebrated in Italy for repressing heresies and fac-
tions then in the church, did obtain the imperial letters for
that purpose directed to the eastern bishops, as they in their
epistle to the western bishops do intimate, ‘But because ex-
pressing a brotherly affection toward us, ye have called us, as
your own members, by the most pious emperors letters, to that
synod which by the will of God ye are gathering at Rome.

€ Todro idiKas TH NueTepa Hpevev nye-
pérntt, va ayla obvodes év TH Nixaséwy
wére THs Bibuva@y erapxlas cvyKpoTny.
In Epist. ad Episc. Syn. Chale. pars i.
P- 34.

f KbpidAdos cixdrws eddnoe veda
Tov véov Qcodociov Ta TKImTpAa Tis Ewas
biémovtos Thy ev’ Epéow mparny cbvodov
oAcOjva. Evagr. i. 3.

£ Awmep ef gov Boxe TH ciocfela,

Kpithpiov cvorabjva KéAevocov. Theod.
ii. 16.

h Multi ex Italia episcopi convene-
runt, qui mecum religiosissinum impe-
ratorem fuerant deprecati, ut juberet
sicut ipsi placuerat, dudum concilium
Aquileiense congregari. Baron. ann.
353- §- 19.

l’Emeddy pévtor thy GdeAgikny meph
jas aydany emdexvipevor, cbvodov emi

ee ee ee ee

Pope’s Supremacy. 279

It is a wonder that Bellarmine should have the confidence Bell. de
to allege this passage for himself. | i a _

So again pope Innocent I. being desirous to restore St.
Chrysostom, * did, as Sozomen telleth us, send five bishops
and two priests of the Roman church to Honorius, and to
Arcadius the emperor, requesting a synod, with the time and the
place thereof: in which attempt he suffered a repulse, for the
courtiers of Arcadius did repel those agents, ! as troubling an-
other government, which was beyond their bounds, or wherein
the pope had nothing to do that they knew of.

So also pope Leo I.™ (whom no pope could well exceed in
zeal to maintain the privileges and advance the eminence of
his see) did in these terms request Theodosius to indict a
synod ; "Whence if your piety shall vouchsafe consent to our
suggestion and supplication, that you would command an epi-
scopal council to be held in Italy ; soon, God aiding, may all
scandals be cut off. Upon this occasion the emperor did ap-
point a council (not in Italy, according to the pope’s desire,

but) at Ephesus; the which not succeeding well, pope Leo
again did address to Theodosius in these words; °AUI the
churches of our parts, all bishops with groans and tears, do
supplicate your grace, that you would command a general synod
to be celebrated within Italy. To which request, (although
backed with the desire of the western emperor) Theodosius
would by no means consent: for, as Leontius reporteth,
P when Valentinian, being importuned by pope Leo, did write
to Theodosius II, that he would procure another synod to be

THs Pauns Oeov BovaAhae: ovyKpotowrTes,
kal jas @s oixeia wéAn mporekadreoacbe,
bia Tay Tod Oeopireotdtrov Bacidéws
ypaupdrwy. Theod. v. 9.

kK Tléroupev emicxdrovs mévte Kah
mpeaButépous dt0 Tis ‘Pwualwy éxxAn-
alas mpos ‘Ovdpiov, kal ’Apkddioy roy
Baciréa, eivodov aithoovtas, kal Kaipdy
tavTns Kal témov. Soz. viii. 28.

1'Os ttrepopiay apxhy evoxAhcartas.
Ibid.

m Humiliter ac sapienter exposcite,
ut petitioni nostre, qua plenariam in-
dici synodum postulamus, clementissi-
mus imperator dignetur annuere, (saith
pope Leo, to the clergy and people of
Constantinople, Ep. 23.)

Unde si pietas vestra suggestioni

ac supplicationi nostre dignetur an-
nuere, ut intra Italiam haberi jubeatis
episcopale concilium, cito auxiliante
Deo poterunt omnia scandala resecari.
P. Leo I. Ep. 9.

© Omnes partium ecclesiz nostrarum,
omnes mansuetudini vestre cum gemi-
tibus et lacrymis supplicant sacerdotes,
ut generalem synodum jubeatis intra
Italiam celebrari. P. Leo J. Ep. 42.

P Odarevtiviavds dxAovmevos bmd Adov-
Tos Tov mama ypape: Ocodocly TE miKp@,
tva éemitpélm otvodov yevérOa, eis Td
ywava ei Kad@s Exper d Ardoxopos F od-
5 5t Ocoddcios avréypapev altg Abywr,
bri ob woi@ GAAnv aivodoyv. Leont. de
Sect. Act. 4.

280 A Treatise of the

held for examining whether Dioscorus had judged rightly or no,
Theodosius did write back to him, saying, I shall make no other
synod.

The same pope did again of the same emperor petition for
a synod to examine the cause of Anatolius, bishop of Constan-
tinople ; Let your clemency, saith he, be pleased to grant an
universal council to be held in Italy; as with me the synod,
which for this cause did meet at Ronie, doth request. Thus did
that pope continually harp upon one string, to get a general
synod to be celebrated at his own doors; but never could
obtain his purpose, the emperor being stiff in refusing it.

The same pope, with better success, (as ? to the thing,
though not as to the place,) did request of the emperor
Marcian a synod; for he (concurring in opinion that it was
needful) did, saith Liberatus, at the petition of the pope and
the Roman princes, command a general council to be congregated
at Nice.

Now if the pope had himself a known right to convocate
synods, what needed all this supplication, or this application
to the emperors? Would not the pope have endeavoured to
exercise his authority? would he not have clamoured or whined

Fortissimus at any interruption thereof? Would so spiritful and sturdy a

2 aes pope as Leo have begged that to be done by another which he
had authority to do of himself, when he did apprehend so great
necessity for it, and was so much provoked thereto? would he
not at least have remonstrated against the injury therein done
to him by Theodosius ?

All that this daring pope could adventure at was to wind
in a pretence, that the synod of Chalcedon was congregated
by his consent; for, "Zt hath been the pleasure (of whom, I pray ?)
that a general council should be congregated, both by the com-
mand of the Christian princes, and with the consent of the

P Sanctum clementie vestre studium,
quo ad reparationem pacis ecclesiasticee
synodum habere voluistis, adeo libenter
accepi, ut quamvis eam fieri intra Ita-
liam poposcissem, &c. Leo, Ep. 50.
Poposceram quidem a gloriosissima cle-
mentia vestra, ut synodum, quam pro
reparanda orientalis ecclesia pace a
nobis etiam petitam necessariam judi-
castis, aliquantisper differri ad tempus
opportunius juberetis + te. ea

Ep. 43, 44, 50.

4 Sed eo defuncto, cum Martianus
imperii culmen fuisset adeptus, pro illa
pape et principum Romanorum peti-
tione universale concilium in Nicena
congregari jussit. Lib. Brev. cap. 13.

r in causa fidei, propter quam
generale concilium et ex preecepto Chris-
tianorum principum, et ex consensu
apostolice sedis placuit congregari.
Ep. 61.

‘ -
OO

Pope’s Supremacy. 281

apostolic see, saith he very cunningly ; yet not so cunningly,
but that any other bishop might have said the same for his
see.

This power indeed upon many just accounts peculiarly
doth belong to princes; it suiteth to the dignity of their
state, it appertaineth to their duty, they are most able to
discharge it. They are the guardians of public tranquillity,
which constantly is endangered, which commonly is violated,
by dissensions in religious matters; (whence we must pray
for them, that by their care we may lead a quiet and peaceable 1 Tim. ii. 2.
life in all godliness and honesty ;) they alone can authorize their
subjects to take such journeys, or to meet in such assemblies ;
they alone can well cause the expenses needful for holding
synods to be exacted and defrayed; they alone can protect
them, can maintain order and peace in them, can procure
observance to their determinations; they alone have a sword
to constrain resty and refractory persons (and in no cases are
men so apt to be such as in debates about these matters) to
_ convene, to confer peaceably, to agree, to observe what is
settled; they, as nursing fathers of the church, as ministers of tsa. xlix.23.
God's kingdom, as encouragers of all good works, as the stewards — “s
of God, intrusted with the great talents of power, dignity,
wealth, enabling them to serve God, are obliged to cause
bishops in such cases to perform their duty; according to
the example of good princes in holy scripture, who are com-
mended for proceedings of this nature: for so king Josias
did convocate a general synod of the church in his time ; Then, 2 Chron.
saith the text, the king sent, and gathered together all the elders ri 29,
of Judah and Jerusalem: in this synod he presided, standing
in his place, and making a covenant before the Lord; its reso-
lutions he confirmed, causing all that were present in Jerusalem
and Benjamin to stand to that covenant; and he took care of
their execution, making all present in Israel effectually to serve
the Lord their God.

So also did king Hezekiah gather the priests and Levites 2 Chron.
together, did warn, did command them to do their duty, and meet Pig
reform things in the church; My sons, said he, be not now ver. 11.
negligent ; for the Lord hath chosen you to stand before him,
to serve him, and that ye should minister unto him, and burn
incense.

om. Xili. 3.

282 A Treatise of the

Beside them none other can have reasonable pretence to
such a power, or can well be deemed able to manage it: so
great an authority cannot be exercised upon the subjects of
any prince, without eclipsing his majesty, infringing his
natural right, and endangering his state. He that at his
pleasure can summon all Christian pastors, and make them
trot about, and hold them when he will, is in effect emperor,
or in a fair way to make himself so. It is not fit therefore
that any other person should have all the governors of the
church at his beck, so as to draw them from remote places
whither he pleaseth; to put them on long and chargeable
journeys; to detain them from their charge; to set them on
what deliberations and debates he thinketh good. It is not
reasonable that any one, without the leave of princes, should
authorize so great conventions of men, having such interest
and sway; it is not safe that any one should have such
dependencies on him, by which he may be tempted to clash
with princes, and withdraw his subjects from their due obedi-
ence. Neither can any success be well expected from the use
of such authority by any, who hath not power by which he
can force bishops to convene, to resolve, to obey ; whence we
see that Constantine, who was a prince so gentle and friendly
to the clergy, was put to threaten those bishops who would
absent themselves from the synod indicted by him at Tyre ;
and Theodosius’ (also a very mild and religious prince) did the
like in his summoning the two Ephesine synods. We like-
wise may observe, that when the pope and western bishops, in
a synodical Epistle, tdid invite those of the east to a great synod
indicted at Rome, these did refuse the gourney, alleging that it
would be to no good purpose: so also when the western bishops
did call those of the east, for resolving the difference between
Flavianus and Paulinus, both pretending to be bishops of
Antioch, what effect had their summons? And so will they
always or often be ready to say, who are called at the pleasure

8 TH mpadtytt Kal mdytas Tovs GAnOas
lepwuevous evixa. 6 Bacire’s Oco-
ddéavos mpals opddpa mapa mdvTas Tovs
avOpémous Tous byTas em THs yjs. Socr.
Vii. 42.

t Thy arodnulay mapntncayro ws ovdev
éxovoay Képdos. Theod.v.8. ~Eypawev

avrot Te, Kal Tpariavds 6 Baoireds, ovy-
Kadouvtes eis Thy Siow Tos ard Tis
avaroAns emakdérovs. Soz.vii.11. Both
they and Gratian the emperor wrote,
calling the eastern bishops into the
west.

283

of those who want force to constrain them: so that such
authority in unarmed hands (and God keep arms out of the
pope’s hands) will be only a source of discords.

Either the pope is a subject, as he was in the first times,
and then it were too great a presumption for him to claim
such a power over his fellow-subjects in prejudice to his
sovereign ; (nor indeed did he presume so far, until he had
in a manner shaken off subjection to the emperor:) or he is
not a subject; and then it is not reasonable that he should
have such power in the territories of another prince.

The whole business of general synods was an expedient for
peace, contrived by emperors, and so to be regulated by their
order. Hence even in times and places where the pope was
most reverenced, yet princes were jealous of suffering the Philip of
pope to exercise such a power over the bishops their subjects ; geal
and to obviate it, did command all bishops not to stir out of vii. p. 906.
their territories without license; particularly our own nation, eed
in the council at Clarendon, where it was decreed, "That they
_ should not go out of the kingdom without the king’s leave.

To some things above said, a passage may be objected
which occurreth in the acclamation of the sixth synod to the
emperor Constantine Pogonatus; wherein it is said, that
xConstantine and Sylvester did collect the synod of Nice ;
Theodosius I. and Damasus, (together with Gregory and
Nectarius,) the synod of Constantinople ; Theodosius IT, with
Celestine and Cyril, the Ephesine synod: and so of the rest.
To which I answer, that the fathers mean only for the honour
of those prelates to signify, that they in their places and ways
did concur and cooperate to the celebration of those synods ;
otherwise we might, as to matter of fact and history, contest
the accurateness of their relation; and it is observable, that
they join other great bishops, then flourishing, with the popes ;
so that if their suffrage prove any thing, it proveth more than

Pope’s Supremacy.

« Decretum est non licere—— tews——TIpyyédpids re kal Nextdpios roy

exire regnum absque licentia regis. Conc.
Clarend. Vid. Mati. Par. ann. 1164.

x Syn. Sext. Act. xviii. p. 272. Kav-
oraytivos 6 de:oéBaoros, Kal SlABec-
tpos 5 doldimos thy év Nixala peyddAnv
Te Kal wepiBAXewrov acuvédeyey civodoyv.
GAN’ 5 ueyiotos BaciAcds Ocodd-
wis, kal Aduacos 5 ddduas tHs mlo-

ev raitn TH Bacirldi wéder cuvhOpoiCov
avAAoyov. TidAw Neordpios, kal wddw
KeAcorivos, kal KipiAdos, 6 wey yap Toy
Xpiordv Sihper, Kal naredixaCev, of 38 7G
SeamdTn ovAAauBavduevor civ TE TOY
oxhrtpwy SeondCovT: Toy KaTaTouéa Ka-
TéBadAov

284 A Treatise of the

our adversaries would have, viz. that all great bishops and
patriarchs have a power or right to convocate synods.

As for passages alleged by our adversaries, that no synod
could be ealled, or ecclesiastical law enacted, without consent
of the pope, they are nowise pertinent to this question ; for
we do not deny that the pope had a right to sit in every
general synod; and every other patriarch at least had no
less; Yas all reason and practice do shew; and as they of the
seventh synod do suppose, arguing the synod of Constanti-
nople, which condemned the worship of images, to be no
general council, @because it had not the pope’s cooperation, nor
the consent of the eastern patriarchs. Syncellus, the patriarch
of Jerusalem’s legate in the eighth synod, says, 2For this
reason did the Holy Spirit set up patriarchs in the world, that
they might suppress scandals arising in the church of God: and
Photius is in the same synod told, >That the judgment passed
against him was most equal and impartial, as proceeding not
From one, but all the four patriarchs.

That a general synod doth not need a pope to eall it, or

Sess. xxxix. preside in it, appeareth by what the synods of Pisa and Con-

(p- 1109.)

stance define, for provision in time of schisms.

II. It inseparably doth belong to sovereigns in the general
assemblies of their states to preside, and moderate affairs ;
proposing what they judge fit to be consulted or debated ;
stopping what seemeth unfit to be moved; keeping proceed-
ings within order and rule, and steering them to a good
issue ; checking disorders and irregularities, which the dis-
temper or indiscretion of any persons may create in delibera-
tions or disputes.

This privilege therefore the pope doth claim; not allowing
any general council to be legitimate, wherein he in person,
or by his legates, doth not preside and sway. ©All catholics,

Y Avayvwobevtwr tive cvvodiKay Tov
Siaryopevévtwv wh Sei yiverba wore oby-
odov oikovpeviKhy mapextds cuupwvlas
TaV AoLT@Y GywTdtTwy maTpidpxwy. An-
teacta Syn. Nic. II. p. 518.

Z Oin eaxe ouvepydy Tov THhyiKadTa
TIS ‘Pwpalwy mémav—Kabws vduos eat)
Tais cuvddois* GAN oltre suudppovoivTas
abTh Tovs Tarpidpxas Tis ew, &c. Syn. 7.
Act. vi. p. 725.

a Ald ToUTO Tas TaTpLapXiKas KEpadas
év TG Kéoum ero Td Tvedua Td Gyr,
iva Ta év TH exkAnolg TOD Ocod avapvd-
peva oKdviadra 8 abtay dvapavi(wyra.
Syn. 8. Act. i. p. 930.

b ’AmpoowrdAnntos 7 Kplois, @s ovK
e& évds udvov Opdvov, GAAG TOY TeETTG-
pwv TarpiapxiKav yiwouevn. Act. Vv. p.
945

¢ Catholici omnes id munus proprium

Pope’s Supremacy. 285

says Bellarmine, teach this to be the chief pontiff’s proper office,
that either in person or by his legate he preside, and as chief judge
moderate all.

But for this prerogative no express grant from God, no
ancient canon of the church no certain custom can be pro-
duced.

Nor doth ancient practice favour the pope’s claim to such a
prerogative, it appearing that he did not exercise it in the first
general synods.

St.Peter himself did not preside in the apostolical synod at Act. xv.
Jerusalem, where he was present ; but rather St.James, as we
before have shewed.

In all the first synods, convocated by emperors, they
did either themselves in person, or by honourable persons
authorized by them, in effect preside, governing the pro-
ceedings.

In the synod of Nice, Constantine was the chief manager, mpocdidou
director, and moderator of the transactions; and under him ian ie
other chief bishops did preside; but that the pope’s legates édpxs. _
had any considerable influence or sway there, doth by no evi- se 7
dence appear, as we shall hereafter out of history declare.

In the synod of Sardica, (which in design was a general
council, but in effect did not prove so, being divided by a
schism into two great parts,) Hosius, bishop of Corduba, did
preside, or (by reason of his age and venerable worth) had the
first place assigned to him, and bore the office of prolocutor ;
so the synod itself doth imply; 4 Ad/ we bishops (say they in
their catholic Epistle) meeting together, and especially the most
ancient Hosius, who for his age, and for his confession, and for
that he hath undergone so much pains, is worthy all reverence :
so Athanasius expressly doth call him ; ¢7he holy synod, saith
he, the prolocutor of which was the great Hosius, presently sent to

esse docent summi pontificis, ut per se,
vel per legatos preesideat, et tanquam
supremus judex omnia moderetur. Bedi.
de Cone. i. 19.

ad Mdvrwy hudy ovvedOdvrwy emokd-
mwv, kal uddrora Tov ebrynpoTarou ‘Oct-
ov, Tov kal dia thy xpdvov, Kal Bia Thy
duoroylav, kal 8a Tov ToToDTOY KduaTov
broueuernkéva, taons aldovs &kiov tTvy-
xavovtos, &c. Athan. Apol. ii. p. 761.

€ EdOvs 4) ayla atvodos, hs mpotryopos
hv 5 péyas “Oowos, &ypavey abtois, &e.
Athan. ad Solit. p. 819. "AuéAcs “Ooros,
kal mpwroyévns, of TéT€ dwhpxov Upxovres
Tay and Tis Sicews ev Lapdinh cvveAn-
AvOdTav . Soz. xii. 13. Tay ev Zap-
Six cvveAndvOdtav xpwretoas. Theod.
ii. 15. Tay uty “Oovos efijpxe ris yro-
uns——. Syn. Chale. ad Imp. Mare.
p. 468.

Digress.

286 A Treatise of the

them, &c. The canons of the synod intimate the same, wherein
he proposeth matters, and asketh the pleasure of the synod :
the same is confirmed by the subscriptions of their general Epi-
stle, wherein he is set before pope Julius himself; ('Hosius from
Spain, Julius of Rome, by the presbyters Archidamus and Phi-
loxenus.) In this all ecclesiastical histories do agree; none
speaking of the pope’s presiding there by his legates.

In the second general synod at Constantinople the pope had
plainly no stroke ; the oriental bishops alone did there resolve
on matters, being headed by their patriarchs, (of Alexandria,
Antioch, and Jerusalem,) as Sozomen saith; being guided by
Nectarius and St. Gregory Nazianzen, as the council of Chal-
cedon in its Epistle to the emperor doth aver.

In the third general synod at Ephesus, Cyril, bishop of
Alexandria, did preside, as pope Leo himself doth testify: he
is called the head of it, in the Acts.

We may note, that the bishop of the place where the synod
is held did bear a kind of presidency in all synods; so did
St. James bishop of Jerusalem in the first ‘synod, as St. Chry-
sostom noteth; so did Protogenes at Sardica, and Nectarius at
Constantinople, and Memnon in this of Ephesus.

It is true, that according to the acts of that synod, and the
reports of divers historians, pope Celestine (according to a new
politic device of popes) did authorize Cyril to represent his
person, and act as his proctor in those affairs ; assigning to
him, as he saith, jointly, both the authority of his throne, (that
is, his right of voting,) and the order of his place, (the first
place in sitting ;) but it is not consequent thence, that Cyril
upon that sole account did preside in the synod‘. He thereby
had the disposal of one so considerable suffrage, or a legal con-
currence of the pope with him in his actings; he thereby might
pretend to the first place of sitting and subscribing, (which

f “Oows ard Sravias, "lobAios ‘Péuns
5? ’Apxibdpov, Kal birotévov mperBu-
tépwy, &c. apud Athan. p. 767.

& Baron. ann. 553. §. 224. ‘HyoovTo.
Soz. vii. 7. Tay d€ Nexrdpws oby T'pn-
yople Thy iyeuoviay Hparo. Conc. Chale.
in Epist. ad Imp. Mare. (p. 469.)

h Prioris Ephesine synodi, cui sancte
memorize Cyrillus episcopus tune pre-
sedit. P. Leo I. Ep. 47. Kepaady trav

guveieypevay ayiwtdtwv emoKkdmwv Kb-
pitAdos. Relat. Act. Eph. cap. 60.

1 Suvapbeions cor THs abdevrias Tov
hmetépov Opdvov, Kal TH iyerépa Tod
térov diadoxH. Celest. ad Cyril. Re-
lat. cap. 16. MN. Yet the fathers in
their Epistle to pope Celestine do only
take notice of Arcadius, Projectus, and
Philippus supplying his place. Act. p.

Popes Supremacy. 287

kind of advantages it appeareth that some bishops had in
synods by the virtue of the like substitution in the place of
others,) but he thence could have no authoritative presidency ;
for that the pope himself could by no delegation impart, having
himself no title thereto warranted by any law or by any prece-
dent; that depended on the emperor’s will, or on the election
of the fathers, or on a tacit regard to personal eminence in
comparison to others present: this distinction Evagrius seemeth
to intimate, when he saith, that the divine Cyril did *admin-
ister it, and the place of Celestine, (where a word seemeth to have
fallen out :) and Zonaras more plainly doth express, saying, that
\Cyril, pope of Alexandria, did preside over the orthodox fathers,
and also did hold the place of Celestine: and Photius; ™ Cyril
did supply the seat and the person of Celestine. If any latter
historians do confound these things, we are not obliged to
comply with their ignorance or mistake.

Indeed as to presidency there we may observe, that some-
time it is attributed to Cyril alone, as being the first bishop
present, and bearing a great sway ; sometimes to pope Ce-
lestine, as being in representation present, and being the first
bishop of the church in order; sometimes to both Cyril and
Celestine; sometimes to Cyril, and Memnon, bishop of Ephe-
sus, who, as being very active, and having great influence on
the proceedings, are styled the presidents and rulers of the
synod". The which sheweth, that presidency was a lax thing,
and no peculiarity in right or usage annexed to the pope; nor
did altogether depend on his grant or representation, to which
Memnon had no title.

The pope himself and his legates are divers times in the
Acts said ovvedpeder, to sit together with the bishops; which

k KuplAdov Tod Oeomeclou d:€movtos
kal Tov KeAeortivov témov. Evagyr. i. 4.

1 Mpoorapevou Tay dp0oddiwy matépwr
Tod év aylois KuplAAov mama ’AAckay-
Spelas, erexovros 5t Kal roy Témov KeAe-
otivov. Zon. in Syn. Eph. can. 1.

™m Tod ‘Pdéuns KeAcotivov éxAhpou Thy
Kabédpay Kal mpdowrov.

Hs jpyeiro 6 wakdpiws TaThp judy
Kipiddos. Conc. Chale. Act. iv. p. 302.
Svvd5ov Kabyynths. Cler. Const. in Syn.
Eph. p. 418. Cui prefuit Cyrillus. Syn.
Chale. Act. i. p. 173. "Hs tryeudves of

ayiwrato. KeAcorivos kal KipiAdos. Syn.
Chale. Defin. in Act. v. p. 338. iv. p.
300. The bishops of Isauria to the em-
peror Leo, say, that Cyril was partaker
with pope Celestine, &c. Dum B. Ce-
lestino incolumis ecclesie Romanorum
particeps . Part. 3. Syn. Chale. p.
522. Tis ovvddov mpdedpor. Eph. Act.
iv. p. 338. (p. 420, 422.) [pdedpor rijs
éxxAnoias. Act. v. p- 347- ‘“Huérepax
mpded,or. Relat. Syn. p. 406. "Egapxou
Tis guvddov. Relat. p. 411.

288 A Treatise of the

confidence doth not well comport with his special right to pre-
sidency°.

Yea, it is observable, that the oriental bishops, which with
John of Antioch did oppose the Cyrillian party in that synod,
did charge on Cyril, that phe (as if he lived in a time of
anarchy) did proceed to all irregularity ; and that Isnatching
to himself the authority, which neither was given him by the
canons, nor by the emperor’s sanctions, did rush on to all kind
of disorder and unlawfulness: whence it is evident, that, in
the judgment of those bishops, (among whom "were divers
worthy and excellent persons,) the pope had no right to any
authoritative presidency.

This word presidency indeed hath an ambiguity, apt to im-
pose on those who do not observe it; for it may be taken for
a privilege of precedence, or for authority to govern things:
the first kind of presidence the pope without dispute, when
present at a synod, would have had among the bishops, (as
being the sdishop of the first sec, as the sixth synod calleth
him; and tthe first of priests, as Justinian calleth him ;) and
in his absence his legates might take up his chair, (for in
general synods each see had its chair assigned to it, according
to its order of dignity by custom.) And according to this
sense the patriarchs and chief metropolitans are also often
(singly or conjunctly) said to preside, as sitting in one of the
first chairs.

But the other kind of presidency was (as those bishops in
their complaint against Cyril do imply, and as we shall see in
practice) disposed by the emperor, as he saw reason; although
usually it was conferred on him, who, among those present, in
dignity did precede the rest: this is that authority, ad@evria,
which the Syrian bishops complained against Cyril for assum-
ing to himself, without the emperor's warrant, and whereof we

© Sivodos, } cuvedpeter kal 6 ris pe-
ydans ‘Péuns apxtericxoros. Relat. ad
Imp. p.422. Zuvedpevedytwv amd rijs
éonépas, &e. Act. ii. p.322. Tov amo-
atoAikdy Opdvov ovycdpetovra juiv. Act.
iv. p. 340.

p ‘Os ev GBactredrois Kaspois xwpet
Tpds macay mapuvoulay °

q ‘Aprécas éavtG Thy addertiay Ti
pare napa Tay kavivev aire deBouevny,
ware ard trav tyerépwy Ccomopudroyv,

ippa mpds wav elbos Gratias cal mapavo-
pias. Relat. ad Imper. Act. Eph. p.
380.
r The bishops of Syria being then the
most learned in the world; as John of
Antioch doth imply, p. 377.
8 Tlpwrd0povos Tis exxAnolas. Syn. vi.
p. 285. Tay re ovvOpdvwv abri pet’ ai-
Thy aywrdtwv rarpiapx@v. Ibid p. 297.
t [paros iepéwv. Justin. Cod. tit. 1.

Pope's Supremacy. 289

have a notable instance in the next general synod at Ephesus.
For,

In the second Ephesine synod, (which in design was a gene-
ral synod, lawfully convened, for a public cause of determining
truth and settling peace in the church; but which by some
miscarriages proved abortive,) although the pope had his le-
gates there, yet by the emperor’s order Dioscorus, bishop of
Alexandria, did preside; " We, said Theodosius in his Epistle
to him, do also commit to thy godliness the authority and the
preeminency of all things appertaining to the synod now as-
sembled: and in the synod of Chalcedon it is said of him, that
‘he had received the authority of all affairs, and of judgment :
and pope Leo I. in his Epistle to the emperor saith, that
Dioscorus did *challenge to himself the principal place ; (insi-
nuating a complaint, that Dioscorus should be preferred before
him, although not openly contesting his right.)

The emperor had indeed some reason not to commit the
presidency to pope Leo, because he was looked upon as pre-
judiced in the cause, having declared in favour of Flavianus,
against Eutyches; whence Eutyches declined his legate’s in-
teressing in the judgment of his cause, saying, Y They were
suspected to him, because they were entertained by Flavianus
with great regard. And Dioscorus, being bishop of the next
see, was taken for more indifferent, and otherwise a person
(however afterward it proved) of much integrity and modera-
tion; «He did, saith the emperor, shine by the grace of God,
both in honesty of life, and orthodoxy of faith : and Theodoret
himself, before those differences arose, doth say of him, that
he was by common fame ®reported a man adorned with many
other kinds of virtue, and that especially he was celebrated for his
moderation of mind.

U Kal piv (ovviv) Kal lodAvos enl-

rationem custodire voluisset . Leol.

okoros Témov mAnpay A€ovTos, Tod Tis
mpecButépas ‘Pduns emioxdrov. Evag. i.
10. ’AAAG kal Tay bAAwY wayTwv Tov
aynkdvTwy TH viv cvvabporCouevyn avvddy
tiv abdevriay, kal Ta mMpwreia TH oH
OeoreBelg mapéxouev. Syn. Chale. Act.
i. p. 59.
VY Thy @kovclay wdvtwy ciAnpws mpa-
yudrwy Kal ris xploews. Ibid. p. 160.
“Hs tapxos kaberaorhxe: Aidokopos. Evag.
1, 10.

x Si is qui sibi locum princi-
palem vindicabat, sacerdotalem mode-

Ep. 25, 26, &e.

Y ‘Yrorrol wo yeydvaci, &c. Syn.
Chale. Act. i. p. 80.

2——TH of aywotvyn exAaurobon
dia THY TOU cod xdpw el re TH Tow
Biov ceuvdrnts, Kal 7H bp0ordtn wlores.
Theod. Ep. ad Diose. in Syn. Chale.
Act. i. p. 59- >

& TloAAois wey Kal BAAos eSerw ape-
Tis kocueicOa Thy chy aywotrny dxoto-
pev—oix feiota 5¢ Grayres BBovor 7d
Tov dpovfuaros uétpiov. Theod, Ep. 60.

290 A Treatise of the

It is true, that the legates of pope Leo did take in dudgeon
this preferment of Dioscorus; and (if we may give credence
to Liberatus) »would not sit down in the synod, because the
presession was not given to their holy see; and afterwards, in
the synod of Chalcedon, the pope’s legate, Paschasinus‘, (to-
gether with other bishops,) did complain that Dioscorus was
preferred before the bishop of Constantinople: but notwith-
standing those ineffectual mutinies, the emperor’s will did take
place, and according thereto Dioscorus had (although he did
not use it so wisely and justly as he should) the chief managery
of things.

It is to be observed, that to other chief bishops the presi-
dency in that synod is also ascribed, by virtue of the emperor’s
appointment ; ¢Let the most reverend bishops (say the imperial
commissaries in the synod of Chalcedon) to whom the authori-
tative management of affairs was by the royal sovereignty granted,
speak why the epistle of the most holy archbishop Leo was not
read: and, ¢ You, say they again, to whom the power of gudging
was given: and of Dioscorus, Juvenalis (bishop of Jerusalem),
Thalassius (of Czesarea), Eusebius (of Ancyra), Eustathius
(of Beristus), Basilius (of Seleucia), it is by the same com-
missioners said, that they ‘had received the authority, and did
govern the synod which was then; and Elpidius, the emperor’s
agent in the Ephesine synod itself, did expressly style them
Spresidents ; and pope Leo himself calleth them &presidents
and primates of the synod.

Whence it appeareth, that at that time, according to com-
mon opinion and practice, authoritative presidency was not
affixed to the Roman chair.

In the synod of Chalcedon, pope Leo did indeed assume to
himself a kind of presidency by his legates» ; and no wonder

> Ecclesiae Romane diaconi, vicesha- éd5éd070 . Ibid. p. 77.

bentes P. Leonis assidere non passi sunt,
eo quod non data fuerit preesessio sanc-
te sedi eorum. Liber. cap. 12.

© Tacxacives elmev—Hie jpucis @eov
OédAovTos Kipiwov Tov ’AvardéAwy mp@rov
éxouev’ ovTor meumTov erakay Thy pwaKd-
pov daviaydv. Syn. Chale. Act. i. p. 62.

d Of ebAaBéoraroa exickorm, ois 7
avdevtia tére TaY mpaTTouévwy Tapa
THs BaciriKis ebéd0T0 kopupiis, AeyéeTw-
cav——. Ibid. p. 65.

e Ypeis, ois 4 eEovcia Tot diKdCew

f Tods éekovciay eiAnddras, kal etdp-
xovtas THs TéTE auvddou . Act. ii.
p- 202. iv. 288. (Evagr. 24. &apyxor.)
Kow is ardytwy pwv7s cvvOewevns Te Kad

edonunodans Thy tuav Tov mpocdpevody- |

twv Wipov —- . Ibid. p. 70.

& Siquidem pene omnes, qui in con-
sensum presidentium aut traducti fu-
erant, aut coacti. Leo. Ep. 51. Ibi pri-
mates synodi nec resistentibus, &c. P.
Leol. Ep.

h In his fratribus—me synodo vestre

ee eee

Pope’s Supremacy. 291

that a man of a stout and ardent spirit (impregnated with high
conceits of his see, and resolved with all his might to advance
its interests, as his legates themselves did in effect declare to
the world) should do so; having so favourable a time, by the
misbehaviour of Dioscorus and his adherents; against whom
the clergy of Constantinople, and other fathers of the synod,
being incensed, were ready to comply with Leo, (who had
been the champion and patron of their cause,) in allowing
him extraordinary respect, and whatever advantages he could
pretend to.

Yet in effect the emperor by his commissioners did preside Act. i. p. 50,
there; they propounding and allowing matters to be discussed ; bveabeore
moderating debates by their interlocution, and driving them to
an issue; maintaining order and quiet in proceedings; perform-
ing those things which the pope’s legates at Trent or other-
where, in the height of his power, did undertake.

To them supplicatory addresses were made for succour and
redress by persons needing it ; as for instance, ‘Command, said
Eusebius of Doryleum, that my supplications may be read.

Of them leave is requested for time to deliberate ; ‘Com-
mand, (saith Atticus, in behalf of other bishops,) that respite be
given, so that within a few days, with a calm mind, and undis-
turbed reason, those things may be formed which shall be pleasing
to God and the holy fathers.

Accordingly they order the time for consultation ; | Let, say
they, the hearing be deferred for five days, that in the mean time
your holiness may meet at the house of the most holy archbishop
Anatolius, and deliberate in common about the faith, that the doubt-
Sul may be instructed.

They were acknowledged judges, and had thanks given
them for the issue by persons concerned ; ™/, said Eunomius,
bishop of Nicomedia, do thank your honour for your right judq-
ment. And in the cause between Stephanus and Bassianus

fraternitas existimet presidere. 7. Leo J.
Ep. 47. ‘Ov od wey ds Kepart) pedav
tyyeudveves, ev Tois Thy chy Tdkw ewéxov-
ot. Syn. Chale. Epist. ad Leon. p. 473.

i KeAetoate ras dehoeis Tas euds dva-
yrwoOjva. Act.i. p. 50.

k Kedeboare évd00qva: iuiv, Sore ev-
Tos dAlywr huepav axvudyTy Biavola Kai
arapdyy Aoyiwrug Ta TE Oc SoKxovvra
Kal Tots aylois rarpdot rumwOva. Act. i.

p. 219.

| '"YrereOhoera: i) dxpdacis ews Tyue-
pu wévre, Gore dv TH weratd cuveddeiv
Thy iperépay ayiwovrny eis Td TOU aryiw-
Tdrov apxtemioxdrov AvaroAlov, kal Koi-
vas wepi Tis ticrews Bovrdetioarba, Iva
of GudiBddAdAovres SidaxOa@or. Act. iv. p.
289.

Mm Ebyapiore 7H Simacoxpiola THS Me-
yaAdorperelas judy. Act, xiii. p. 420.
u2

- td

292 A Treatise of the

concerning their title to the bishopric of Ephesus, they
having declared their sense, "the holy synod cried, This is
right judgment ; Christ hath decided the case, God judgeth by
you: and in the result, upon their declaring their opinion,
the whole synod exclaimed, This is a right judgment, this is a
prous order.

When the bishops, transported with eagerness and passion,
did tumultuously clamour, they gravely did check them, saying,
P These vulgar exclamations neither become bishops, nor shall ad-
vantage the parties.

—xaracw- In the great contest about the privileges of the Constanti-

vaca nopolitan see, they did arbitrate and decide the matter, even

ooigiey against the sense and endeavours of the pope’s legates; the

Leon. Ep. whole synod concurring with them in these acclamations,

P- 475: 4This is a right sentence; we all say these things ; these things
please us all; things are duly ordered: let the things ordered be
held.

The pope’s legates themselves did avow this authority in
them : for, t Jf, said Paschasinus, in the case of the Egyptian
bishops, your authority doth command, and ye enjoin that some-
what of humanity be granted to them, &e.

And in another case, S//, said the bishops, supplying the place
of the apostolical see, your honours do command, we have an infor-
mation to suggest.

Neither is the presidency of these Roman legates expressed

*Act.v, in the Conciliar Acts; but they are barely said * ovveddeiv,
syle rg (to concur,) and fovvedpedeww, (to sit together,) with the other
Act. ix, xi, fathers: and accordingly, although they sometimes talked
+ Act. ii. high, yet it is not observable that they did much there; their
(P- 230.) presidency was nothing like that at Trent, and in other like

papal synods. It may be noted, that the emperor’s deputies

n ‘H ayla obvodos éBdnoev, Atty Bi- pev, Taira waow apéoke, mavTa SedvTws
kala Kplois, 6 Xpiords edixace TH bwoVE- ervTHOn, TA TUTWIEVTA KpaTeirw. Act.
cet, 6 @eds BC buav BindCer. Act. xii. p. xvi. p. 464.

409. t Ei mpoordtre: 7 duerépa etovoia,
© Tava 4 Gayla obvodos éBdnoev, Abtn Kal KeAcvere Th woTe adTois maparxerO7-
dixata Kplois, ovTos eboeBhs TUmos. Ibid. vat piravOpwrias éxduevov . Act. iv.

p- 414. p- 315. :

P Ai éxBonoes ai Snuotixal otre ém- 8 Of ebAaBéorara emicxoro: éréoxov-
oxérois mpémovat, ore TH epn wpEAn- Tes Tov TérOv TOD &mocToALKOD Opdvou
covow. Act. i. p. 55- elwov’ €i mpootarre: | Hwerepa meyare-

q Of edAaBéorara enloxora eBinoay, drs, éxouev didacKarlay bmoPazrciv. Act.
airn diucala Wipos, Tatta mdytes Adyo- Xvi. p. 451.

Pope’s Supremacy. 293

are always named in the first place, at the entrance of the
Acts, before the pope’s legates, so that they who directed the
notaries were not popish. In effect the emperor was presi-
dent, though not as a judge of spiritual matters, yet as an
orderer of the conciliar transactions; as the synod doth re-
port it to Leo; ‘The faithful emperors, said they, did preside
(or govern it) for good order sake.
In the fifth general synod, pope Vigilius indeed was moved
to be present, and (in his way) to preside ; but he out of state
or policy declined it"; wherefore the patriarch of Constanti-
nople was the ecclesiastical president, as in the beginning of
every collation doth appear: whence clearly we may infer
that the pope’s presidency is nowise necessary to the being
of a general council.
In the sixth general synod the emperor in each Act is ex- Mpoxadnué-
pressly said to preside, in person or by his deputies ; although 77470" 7"

oeBectatou

pope Agatho had his legates there. ———
In the synod of Constance sometimes the cardinal of Cam- ea he >
bray, sometimes of Hostia, did preside, (by order of the synod
itself,) and sometimes the king of the Romans did supply that
place*: so little essential was the pope’s presidency to a
council deemed even then, when papal authority had mounted
to so high a pitch.
Nor is there good reason why the pope should have this
privilege, or why this prerogative should be affixed to any one
see ; so that (if there be cause ; as if the pope be unfit, or less
fit; if princes or the church cannot confide in him; if he be
suspected of prejudice or partiality; if he be party in causes or
controversies to be decided ; if he do himself need correction)
princes may not assign, or the church with allowance of princes
may not choose any other president, more proper in their
judgment for that charge: in such cases the public welfare of
church and state is to be regarded.
Were an erroneous pope (as Vigilius or Honorius) fit to

t Baoircis 5& morol mpds edxooulay x Dominus Rom. rex indutus vesti-
éEipxov. Relat. Syn. ad Leon. 473. bus regalibus recessit de sede sua solita,
a Ideo petimus presidente nobis et transivit ad aliam sedem positam in
vestra beatitudine, sub tranquillitate, et fronte altaris, tanquam presidens pro
mansuetudine sacerdotali, sanctis propo- tunc in concilio. Syn. Const, sess. xiv.
sitis evangeliis, communi tractatu, &c. (p. 1044.)
Coll. i. p. 212. (et in Const. Vigil.)

Nic. Il.
Lugd. Lat,
cv, 7

294 A Treatise of the

govern a council, gathered to consult about defining truth in
the matter of their error ?

Were a lewd pope (as Alexander VI, John XII, Paul III,
innumerable such, scandalously vicious) worthy to preside in a
synod convocated to prescribe strict laws of reformation !

Were a furious, pugnacious pope (as Julius II——) apt
to moderate an assembly drawn together for settlement of
peace ?

Were a pope engaged in schism (as many have been) a
proper moderator of a council designed to suppress schism /

Were a Gregory VII, or an Innocent IV, or a Boniface
VIII, an allowable manager anywhere of controversies about
the papal authority ?

Were now indeed any pope fit to preside in any council
wherein the reformation of the church is concerned, it being
notorious that popes, as such, do most need reformation, that
they are the great obstructors of it, that all Christendom hath
a long time a controversy with them for their detaining it in
bondage ?

In this and many other cases we may reject their presidency,
as implying iniquity, according to the rule of an old pope;
YI would know of them, where they would have that judgment
they pretend, examined? What! by themselves? that the same
may be adversaries, witnesses, and gudges? To such judgment
as this even human affairs are not to be trusted, much less the
integrity of the divine law.

It is not reasonable that any person should have such a
prerogative, which would be an engine of mischief: for thereby
(bearing sway in general assemblies of bishops) he would be
enabled and irresistibly tempted to domineer over the world ;
to abuse princes, and disturb states ; to oppress and enslave
the church; to obstruct all reformation; to enact laws; to
promote and establish errors serviceable to his interests: the
which effects of such power exercised by him in the synod of
Trent, and in divers other of the later general synods, expe-
rience hath declared.

IIT. If the pope were sovereign of the church, the legislative

y Quero tamen ab his, judicium quod testes, et judices? Sed tali judicio nec
pretendunt, ubinam possit agitari, an humana debent committi negotia,nedum
apud ipsos, ut iidem sint inimici, et divine legis integritas. P. Gel. Ep. 4.

Pope’s Supremacy. 295

power, wholly or in part, would belong to him; so far, at least,
that no synod, or ecclesiastical consistory, could without his
consent determine or prescribe any thing; his approbation
would be required to give life and validity to their decrees ;
he should at least have a negative, so that nothing might
pass against his will: this is a most essential ingredient of
sovereignty ; and is therefore claimed by the pope, who long
hath pretended that no decrees of synods are valid without
his consent and confirmation.

*But the decrees made by the holy popes of the chief see of the
Roman church, by whose authority and sanction all synods and
holy councils are strengthened and established, why do you say,
that you do not receive and observe them ?

aLastly, as you know nothing is accounted valid, or to be re-
ceived in universal councils, but what the see of St. Peter has
approved ; so, on the other side, whatever she alone has rejected,
that only is rejected.

bWe never read of any synod that was valid, unless it were
confirmed by the apostolic authority.

‘We trust no true Christian is now ignorant, that no see is
above all the rest more obliged to observe the constitution of each
council, which the consent of the universal church hath approved,
than the prime see, which by its authority confirms every synod,
and by continued moderating preserves them according to its
principality, &e.

But this pretence, as it hath no ground in the divine law,
or in any old canon, or in primitive custom ; so it doth cross
the sentiments and practice of antiquity ; for that in ancient

* Decretalia autem, que a sanctis
pontificibus prime sedis Romane ec-
clesiz sunt instituta, cujus auctoritate
atque sanctione omnes synodi, et sancta
concilia roborantur, et stabilitatem su-
munt, cur vos non habere, vel observare
dicitis? Papa Nic. I. Ep. 6. (ad Pho-
tium.)

a Denique ut in universalibus con-
ciliis, quid ratum vel quid prorsus ac-
ceptum, nisi quod sedes B. Petri pro-
bavit (ut ipsi scitis) habetur; sicut e
contrario quod ipsa sola reprobavit,
hoe solummodo consistat hactenus re-
probatum. P. Nich. J. Ep. 7.

b Nulla unquam synodus rata

legatur, quee apostolica auctoritate non
fuerit fulta. P. Pelag. IJ. Ep. 8.
( Dist. 17.)

© Confidimus quod nullus jam vera-
citer Christianus ignoret uniuscujusque
synodi constitutum, quod universalis
ecclesie probavit assensus, non ali-
quam magis exequi sedem pre czeteris
oportere, quam primam ; que et unam-
quamque synodum sua auctoritate con-
firmat, et continuata moderatione cus-
todit, pro suo scilicet principatu, &c.
P. Gelas. I. Ep. 13. (ad Epise. Dard.)
Vid. p. 647. Tract. de Anath. God
hath promised to bless particular synods.
Matt. xviii. 19.

296 A Treatise of the

synods divers things were ordained without the pope’s consent,
divers things against his pleasure.

What particular or formal confirmation did St. Peter yield
to the assembly at Jerusalem /

That in some of the first general synods he was not appre-
hended to have any negative voice, is by the very tenor and
air of things, or by the little regard expressed toward him,
sufficiently clear. There is not in the synodical Epistles of
Nice or Sardica any mention of his confirmation.

Interpretatively all those decrees may be supposed to pass
without his consent, which do thwart these pretences ; for if
these are now good, then of old they were known and ad-
mitted for such; and being such, we cannot suppose the pope
willingly to have consented in derogation to them.

Wherefore the Nicene canons establishing ecclesiastical ad-
ministrations without regard to him, and in authority equalling
other metropolitans with him, may be supposed to pass without
his consent.

The canons of the second general council, and of all others
confirming those ; as also the canons of all synods which ad-
vanced the see of Constantinople, his rival for authority, above
its former state, first to a proximity in order, then to an equality
of privileges with the see of Rome, may, as plainly contrary to
his interest and spirit, be supposed to pass without his consent :
and so divers popes have affirmed. If we may believe pope
Leo, (as I suppose,) the canons of the second council were not
transmitted to Rome: they did therefore pass, and obtain in
practice of the catholic church, without its consent or know-
ledge. Pope Gregory I. saith, 4 that the Roman church did
not admit them ; wherein it plainly discorded with the catholic
church, which with all reverence did receive and hold them :
and in despite to the canon of that synod, advancing the royal
eity to that eminency, pope Gelasius I.e would not admit it

¢ Persuasioni tue in nullo penitus
suffragatur, quorundam § episcoporum
ante 60, ut jactas, annos, nunquamque
a predecessoribus tuis ad apostolice
sedis transmissa notitiam Leo,
Ep. 53. (ad Anat.) Conc. Constant.
can. 3. Concil. Chale. can. 9, 17, 28.
Syn. Trull. can. 36.

d Romana autem ecclesia eosdem
canones vel gesta synodi illius hactenus

non habet, nec accipit; in hoc autem
eandem synodum accepit quod est per
eam contra Macedonium definitum. P.
Greg. M. Ep. vi. 31. The same pope
Leo I. doth affirm. Zp. 53.

e ejus civitatis que non solum
inter sedes numeratur, sed nec inter
metropolitanorum jura censetur, &c.
P. Gelas. I, Ep. 13. (ad Episc. Dard.)

—_——s ee ae

Pope’s Supremacy. 2907

for so much as a metropolitan see. O proud insolency ! O con-
tentious frowardness ! O rebellious contumacy against the ca-
tholic church and its peace! (Such was the humour of that
see, to allow nothing which did not suit with the interests of
its ambition.)

But further, divers synodical decrees did pass expressly
against the pope’s mind and will: I pass over those at Tyre,
at Antioch, at Ariminum, at Constantinople, in divers places
of the east, (the which do yet evince that commonly there was
no such opinion entertained of this privilege belonging to the
pope,) and shall instance only in general synods.

In the synod of Chalcedon equal privileges were assigned “Ica xpe-
to the bishop of Constantinople, as the bishop of Rome had ; 7 p
this with a general concurrence was decreed and subscribed, civodos éxs-
although the epope’s legates did earnestly resist, clamour, and mwa,
protest against it; the imperial commissioners and all the ov p-
bishops not understanding or not allowing the pope’s negative ne
voice.

And whereas pope Leo (moved with a jealousy, that he who
thus had obtained an equal rank with him should aspire to get
above him) did fiercely dispute, exclaim, inveigh, menace Ep. 53, 54,
against this order, striving to defeat it, pretending to annul it, °° °°”
labouring to depress the bishop of Constantinople from that
degree, which both himself and his legates in the synod had
acknowledged due to him: in which endeavour divers of his
successors did imitate him; { Husebius, bishop of Doryleum,
said, I have willingly subscribed, because I have read this canon
to the most holy pope of Rome, the clergy of Constantinople being
present, and he received it.

Yet could not he or they accomplish their design ; the vene-
ration of that synod and consent of Christendom overbearing
their opposition; the bishop of Constantinople sitting in all
the succeeding general synods in the second place, without any

e Inde enim fratres nostri, ab apo-
stolica sede directi, qui vice mea synodo
presidebant, probabiliter atque constan-
ter illicitis ausibus obstiterunt, aperte
reclamantes, &c. Leo I. Ep. 53,54. Oi
elAaBéotatra éxicxowa eBdnoay, ovdels
jvayKdoOm. (Act. xvi. p. 469. against
P. Leo’s assertion, that the consent was
extorted.) Td é« woAAov kparijcay tos
Kata ouvodiuchy exupdoauey Yio,

say the fathers to pope Leo. (p. 475-)
By a synodical vote we have confirmed
this ancient custom.

f EboéBios érloxowos AopvAaloy elev"
éxdv bméypaya’ éeweidav Kal roy Kavdva
rovrov TG aywrdty ware dv ‘Pduy eye
avéyvev, wapdytTwy KAnpik@y Kevoray-
TivouTéAews, kal dredétaro airdév. Syn.
Chale. Act. xvi. (p. 462.) supra.

298 A Treatise of the

contrast; so that at length popes were fain to acquiesce in the
bishop of Constantinople’s possession of the second place in
dignity among the patriarchs.

In the fifth general synod pope Vigilius did make a consti-
tution, in most express terms prohibiting the condemnation of
the three chapters, (as they are called,) and the anathematiza-
tion of persons deceased in peace of the church; 8 We dare not
ourselves, says he, condemn Theodorus, neither do we yield to
have him condemned by any other: and in the same constitu-
tion he orders and decrees," That nothing be said or done by
any to the injury or discredit of Theodoret, bishop of Cyrus,
a man most approved in the synod of Chalcedon: iand the
same, says he, have the decrees of the apostolical see deter-
mined, that no man pass a new judgment upon persons dead,
but leave them as death found them. * Lastly, by that constitu-
tion he specially provides, that (as he had before said) nothing
might be derogated from persons dying in the peace and commu-
nion of the universal church, by his condemning that perverse
opinion.

Yet did the synod (in smart terms reflecting on the pope,
and giving him the lie, not regarding his opinion or authority)
decree, that persons deceased were liable to be anathematized ;
'they did anathematize Theodorus, they did expressly con-
demn each of the chapters; they threatened deposition or

€ Eum (Theodorum) nostra non au-
demus damnare sententia, sed nec ab
alio quopiam condemnari concedimus.
Vig. Const. p. 186.

h Statuimus atque decernimus nihil
in injuriam atque obtrectationem proba-
tissimi in Chalcedonensi synodo viri, hoc
est Theodoreti episcopi Cyri, sub taxa-
tione nominis ejus a quoquam fieri vel
proferri. [bid.

i Idemque regulariter apostolice sedis
definiunt constituta, nulli licere noviter
aliquid de mortuorum judicare personis ;
sed in hoc relinqui, in quo unumquem-
que supremus dies invenit——.

k Hac presentis constitutionis dispo-
sitione quam maxime providemus, ne
(sicut supra diximus) personis, que in
pace et communione universalis ecclesiz
quieverunt, sub hac damnati a nobis
perversi dogmatis occasione aliquid de-
rogetur. I/id.

1 Quoniam autem post hec omnia im-

pietatis illius defensoris injuriis contra
Creatorem suum dictis gloriantes dice-
bant non oportere eum post mortem
anathematizare——qui heee dicunt nul-
lam curam Dei judicatorum faciunt, nec
apostolicarum pronunciationum, nec pa-
ternarum traditionum. Coll. viii. p. 289.
Condemnamus autem et anathematiza-
mus una cum omnibus aliis hereticis et
Theodorum. Col/. viii. p. 291. Quod
dicitur a quibusdam quod in communi-
catione et pace defunctus est Theodo-
rus, mendacium est, et calumnia magis
adversus ecclesiam. Coll.v. p. 250, Si
quis conatus fuerit contra hee que pie
disposuimus, vel tradere, vel docere, vel
scribere, siquidem episcopus vel clericus
sit, iste tanquam aliena a sacerdotibus
et statu ecclesiastico faciens, denudabi-
tur episcopatu vel clericatu: si autem
monachus vel laicus sit, anathematiza-
bitur. (Coll. viii. p. 293.)

299

excommunication on whoever should oppose their constitu-
tions; ™they anathematize whoever doth not anathematize
Theodorus.

But pope Vigilius did refuse to approve their doctrine and
sentence; and therefore (which was the case of many other
bishops, as Baronius himself doth confess and argue) was Baron.
driven into banishment; wherein he did expire ®. $ san

Yet posterity hath embraced this synod as a legitimate and
valid general synod; and the popes following did profess the
highest reverence thereto, equally with the preceding general
synods®; so little necessary is the pope’s consent or concur-
rence to the validity of synodical definitions.

Upon this Baronius hath an admirable reflection : P Here
stay, saith he, O reader, and consider the matter attently, (ay,
do so, I pray,) that it is no new thing, that some synod, %
which the pope was not even present by las legates, but did
oppose it, should yet obtain the title of an Qicumenical Synod ;
whenas afterward the popes will did come in, that it should
obtain such a title.

So, in the opinion of this doctor, the pope can easily change
the nature of things, and make that become a general synod
which once was none; yea which, as it was held, did not
deserve the name of any synod at all4. O the virtue of papal
magic! or rather, O the impudence of papal advocates !

The canons of the sixth general council, exhibited by the Can. 2, 7,
Trullane (or Quinisext) synod, clearly and expressly do con- 3 = 55.
demn several doctrines and practices of Rome: I ask whether
the pope did confirm them?! They will, to be sure, as they
are concerned to do, answer, No: and indeed pope Sergius, as
Anastasius in his Life reporteth", did refuse them; yet did

Pope’s Supremacy.

qua synodus, cui nec per legatos ipse
pontifex interfuerit, sed adversatus fu-
erit, titulum tamen obtinuerit cecume-

m Si quis defendit et non anathe-
matizat eum anathema sit. bid.
n ——contra ipsius (pontificis Rom. )

decreta ab ea (synodo) pariter sententia
dicta. Baron. ann. 553. §. 219. Non
consentientes depositi in exilium missi
sunt. Lib. cap. 24.

© Greg. Ep. i. 24. Quintam quoque
synodum pariter veneror, &c. i. 24.
Pelag. II. Ep.—— Agatho. Syn. vi.
Act. 4. Leo. Syn. vi. Act. 18. Hadrian
ad Nectar.

P Hie siste, lector, atque rem attente
considera ; non esse hoc novum, ut ali-

nice ; cum postea ut hujusmodi titu-
lum obtineret, Romani pontificis volun-
tas accessit. Baron. ann. 553. §. 224.

4 Si ad numeros omnes, &c. Plene
consenties ipsam non cecumenice tan-
tum, sed nec private synodi mereri no-
men. Jd. ann. §§3- §. 219

r ——in quibus diversa capitula Ro-
mane ecclesiz contraria scripta inerant.
Anast. in Vit, Joh. VII.

300 A Treatise of the

they pass for legitimate in the whole church; for in their
general synod, (the second Nicene,) without contradiction, one
of them is alleged (out of the very original paper, wherein the
fathers had subscribed) as a canon of the holy general siath
synod; and avowed for such by the patriarch Tarasius, both
in way of argument of defence and of profession in his synod-
ical Epistle to the patriarchs; (where he saith, that together
with the divine doctrines of the sixth synod, he doth also
embrace the canons enacted by itt;) of which Epistle pope
Adrian, in his answer thereto, doth recite a part containing
those words, and “applaud it for orthodox; signifying no
offence at his embracing the Trullane canons. And all those
hundred and two canons are again avowed by the synod in
their antithesis to the synod of Constantinople. In fine, if we
believe Anastasius, pope John VII. did, x being timorous, out
of human frailty, direct these canons, without amendment, by
two metropolites, to the emperor; that is, he did admit them so
as they stand.

But it may be instanced that divers synods have asked the
pope’s consent for ratification of their decrees and acts.

So the fathers of the second general synod, having in an
Epistle to pope Damasus and the western bishops declared
what constitutions they had made, in the close speak thus:
¥In which things, being legally and canonically settled by us, we
do exhort your reverence to acquiesce, out of spiritual charity
and fear of the Lord.

So the synod of Chalcedon did, with much respect, ask
from pope Leo the confirmation of its sanctions. % That you
may know how that we have done nothing for favour or out of
spite, but as guided by the divine direction, we have made

8 Kavoy Tis aylas Kal oixovpertkis
éxtns aovvddov. Syn. Nic. II. Act. iv.
(631.) Tpwrdérumros xdprns early, ev
iméypavay of marépes. Ibid.

t Tis 5 abrijs aylas éxrns ovvddov,
peta mdvtTwy Tov évOécuws Ka) Bewdas
exdwynlevtwy Soypdrwv wap’ abrijs, Ka)
tous éxdobévras Kavdvas admodéxoun.
Act. iii. p. §92.

u Tatrn TH paptupla Tis dp00ddzou
tigtews, &c. Ibid. (p. 363.) Act. vi.
p- 732- (Dist. xvi. cap. 5, &c.)

x Sed hic humana fragilitate timidus
hos nequaquam tomos emendans per

suprafatos metropolitas direxit ad prin-
cipem. Anast. in Vit. Joh. VII.

Y Ois ws évOécuws Kal Kavovikas Trap’
jpiv Kexpatynkdot Kal Thy bwetépay ovy-
xalpew mapaxadroduey evAdBev, Tis
MVEULATIKTS peoiTevovons aydans, Kal
Tov Kupiakov pdBov, &c. Theod, v. g.

z “Iva Bt yvere ws oddity mpbs xapu,
mpds dmréxOeay wemorhnaper, GAN ws
Gelp KuBepvduevar mvevpari, macay div
Tay Tenpayuevwy Thy Sbvauw eyywploa-
pev eis ovoTtacw jnuetépay, Kal Tay Te-
mpayyevwy BeBalwaly re kal cvrynardbe-
ow. Syn. Chale. ad P. Leon. L. p. 476.

Pope’s Supremacy. 301

known to you the force of all that has been done, for your con-
currence, and for the confirmation and approbation of the things
done.

Of the fifth synod pope Leo II. saith, *¢that he agreed to
what was determined in it, and confirms it with the authority of
the blessed St. Peter.

To these allegations we reply, that it was indeed the manner
of all synods, (for notification of things, and promulgation of
their orders; for demonstration and maintenance of concord ;
for adding weight and authority to their determinations; for
engaging all bishops to a willing compliance in observing
them, for attestation to the common interest of all bishops in
the Christian truth, and in the governance and edification of
the church,) having framed decrees concerning the public
state, to demand in fairest terms the consent to them of all
catholic bishops, who were absent from them, to be attested
by their subscription.

So did Constantine recommend the Nicene decrees to all
bishops, undertaking that they would assent to them >.

So (more expressly) the synod of Sardica, in their Epistle
to all bishops of the catholic church; ¢*Do ye also, our bre-
thren and fellow-ministers, the more use diligence, as being
present in spirit with our synod, to yield consent by your sub-
scription, that concord may be preserved every where by all the
Sellow-ministers.

So did pope Liberius request of the emperor Constantius,
dthat the faith delivered at Nice might be confirmed by the
subscription of all bishops.

So did Athanasius ¢ procure a synod at Alexandria to
confirm the decrees at Sardica and in Palestine concerning
him.

&@ Tois wap abris dpicbeiot ovvavel,
kal TH abOeyvtig tod pwaxaplov TMérpou
BeBaot. P. Leo II. Ep. (p. 306.)

b "Acudvws déxer0e Thy Tov Ocod xd-
pw Kal Oclay ds GAnOas evToAhv—. De
Vit. Const. iii. 20. Kal airds 3 77
buetépg ayxwolg dpéom trecxduny. Ib.
iii. 19.

© Srovddoare 5 wGddAov Kal sues,
a5eApol Kal gvAArciToupyol, &s TH Tve-
part cuvévres TH ovvddy Hua cuverun-
oiferOar 80 twoypapis tuerépas, trip

Tov Tapa mdytTwy Tav mayTaxov avA-
Aerroupyav Thy duogwriav Siacd(eo Oa.
Syn. Sard. Epist. apud Athan. in Apol.
ii. p: 766.

d -E¢hre: 8& thy wey ev Nixalq mapa-
Sobeicay mlatiw sxoypapais Tay wdyTw
émoxdrev xpariverOa. Soz. iv. 11.

© Stvodov yevécOar mapecnebate TaY
e& Alytrrov emoxdérwv, Kal exulyplon
trois év SapSoi Kal Maraorivp wepl abrou
Bedoyuévois. Id. iv. 1.

Kara Thy
ouvodiKy)V

Socr. ii. 20.
et Vales.
ann. ibid.

302 A Treatise of the

So the Macedonian bishops are said to have authorized
their agents ‘to ratify the faith of consubstantiality.

Many such instances occur in story, by which it may appear
that the decrees of synods concerning faith, or concerning any
matters of common interest, were presented to all bishops, and
their consent requested or required; because, say the Roman
clergy in St.Cyprian, a decree cannot be firm, which has not
the consent of many.

Whence it is no wonder, if any synods did thus proceed
toward so eminent a bishop as was he of Rome, that they should
endeavour to give him satisfaction ; that they should desire to
receive satisfaction from him of his conspiring with them in
faith, of his willmgness to comply in observing good rules of
discipline ; that (as every vote had force, so) the suffrage of one
in so great dignity and reputation might adjoin some regard
to their judgment ».

The pope’s confirmation of synods, what was it in effect but
a declaration of his approbation and assent, the which did
confirm by addition of suffrage ; as those who were present by
their vote, and those who were absent by their subscription,
are said to confirm the decrees of councils; every such consent

' being supposed to increase the authority; whence the number

of bishops is sometimes reckoned according to the subserip-
tions of bishops absent; as the council of Sardica is sometimes
related to consist of three hundred bishops, although not two
hundred were present, the rest concurring by subscription to
its definitions.

Other bishops, in yielding their suffrage, do express it by,
iT confirm, I define, I decree.

But the effectual confirmation of synods, which gave them
the force of laws, was in other hands, and depended on the
imperial sanction.

So Justinian affirmeth generally: * All these things at di-

f *Evre:Aduevor Kup@oat Ti Tov
éuoovctou miorw. Socr. iv. 12.

£ ——quoniam nec firmum decretum
potest esse, quod non plurimorum vide-
bitur habere consensum. Cler. Rom.
apud Cypr. Ep. 31.

h Tlapaxadovpeyv Toivuy tiunoov Ttais
sais Vhpos Thy kpiow. Syn. Chale, ad
Leon. p. 476.

i Sententias fratrum omnes sequimur,
omnes confirmamus, omnes observandas
esse decernimus. Conc. Rom, P. Hil.
P- 579.

k His itaque omnibus per diversa
tempora subsecutis, preedicti pize recor-
dationis nostri patres ea que in uno-
quoque concilio judicata sunt, legibus
suis corroboraverunt, et confirmaverunt ;

Pope’s Supremacy. 303

verse times following, our above-named predecessors, of pious me-
mory, corroborated and confirmed by their laws what each council
had determined, and expelled those heretics who attempted to re-
sist the definitions of the aforesaid four councils, and disturb the
churches.

So particularly Constantine (as Athanasius himself reporteth)
\did by law confirm the decrees of the great synod of Nice: and
Eusebius assureth the same; ™ He, saith he, did ratify the de-
crees of the synod by his authority. His letters are extant, which
he sent about the world, exhorting and requiring all to con-
form to the constitutions of that synod.

So Theodosius did confirm the decrees of the second general
synod, "adding, saith Sozomen, his confirmatory suffrage to their
decree: the which he did at the supplication of the fathers,
addressed to him in these terms; ° We therefore do beseech your
grace, that by your pious edict the sentence of the synod may be
authorized ; that as by the letters of convocation you did honour
the assembly, so you would also confirm the result of things
_ decreed.

The third general synod was also confirmed by Theodosius IT,
as Justinian telleth us; P The above-named Theodosius, of pious
memory, maintaining what had been so justly determined against
Nestorius and his impiety, made his condemnation valid.

And this emperor asserted this privilege to himself, as of
right and custom belonging to him; writing to the synod in
these words; 9 For all things, so as may please God, without
contentiousness and with truth being examined, ought so to be
established by our religiousness.

et hereticos qui definitionibus predic-
torum S. quatuor conciliorum resistere,
et ecclesias conturbare conati sunt, ex-
pulerunt. Justin. in Conc. V. Coll. i.
(p-210.)

1Ta& wap’ exelywy ypapévTa, Tov ouve-
Bpiov Kuwwvady, expdruve véum. Athan.
apud Theod. ii. 4.

m Ta Tis cuvddov déyuata Kup@y ére-
oppayicero. Euseb. de Vit. Const. iii. 23.
“TrodéxeOa Kal Siardrrew delete.
Id. iii. 20.

D Kal 7a pey dde TH cvvddyw ote, ral
6 Bacireis erednpicato. Soz. vii. 9.

KAhoews ypduuact Thy exkAnolay rerf-
nkas, oftw Kal ray SotdvTwy emoppa-
ylons 7d rédos. Pref. ad Can. Conc.
Const. (apud Bin. p. 660.)

P Sed predictus pie recordationis
Theodosius vindicans ea, que ita recte
contra Nestorium et ejus impietatem
fuerant judicata, fecit firmiter obtinere
contra eum factam condemnationem.
Justin. in Quinto Cone. Coll. 1.

4 Xph yap wdvta Kata 7d TE OeG mer-
Aov dpéckew Sixa piroveclas Kal mera
adndeias ekeracbévta obrw mapa Tis ime-
tépas OcoreBelas BeBaiwOijvas. Epist.
Theod. ad Syn. Eph. in Actis Cone.
P- 375:

304 A Treatise of the

The other abortive synod at Ephesus was also confirmed by
Theodosius junior, as Dioscorus in his defence alleged in these
words, which shew the manner of practice in this case; * We
then indeed did judge the things which were judged; the
whole synod did accord with us, and gave verdict by their own
votes, and subscribed; and they were referred to the most reli-
gious emperor Theodosius, of happy memory; and he did by
a general law confirm all things judged by the holy and wcu-
menical synod.

So also did the emperor Marcian confirm the synod of Chal-
cedon, as himself telleth us in his royal edict ; * We, saith he,
having by the sacred edict of our serenity confirmed the holy
synod, did warn all to cease from disputes about religion ; with
which pope Leo signifieth his compliance in these terms ; tBu
because by all means your piety and most religious will must be
obeyed, I have willingly approved the synodical constitutions about
confirming the catholic faith and condemning heretics, which pleased
me.
Justinian did with a witness confirm the fifth synod, punish-
ing with banishment all who would not submit to its determi-
nations.

In the sixth synod the fathers did request the emperor, ac-
cording to custom, to confirm its definitions, in these very
words; "Zo what we have determined set your seal, your royal
ratification by writing, and confirmation of them all by your
sacred edicts and holy constitutions, according to custom.

* We beg that by your sacred signing of tt you would give force
to what we have defined and subscribed.

Y We entreat the power of our Lord, guided by God’s wisdom,

T “Hues rolvuy expivayey Ta kexpyuevas
cuviverey hiv nace 7 civodos, Kad raré-
Bero oikelais pwvais, Kal iwéypae* Kal
aynvexOn TE ebocBeotarw BactrE Tijs
Oeias Ahtews Ocodoclw Kai éBeBalwoe
wdvTa Ta Kekpyséva Tapa Tis aylas Kab
oikoupevixis cuvddov véuy yeving. Syn.
Chale. Act. i. p. 59.

8 ‘lep@ Tis herépas ipepdrnros Sia-
Taypari Thy aylav BeBadoavtes civodov
breuvhoapey Emayras, hore tev meph
Opnckelas mavoacba diadrciewv. Conc.
Chale. part. iii. p. 478.

€ Quia vero omnibus modis obedien-
dum est pietati vestre, religiosissimzeque
voluntati, constitutionibus synodalibus,

quee mihi de confirmatione fidei catho-
lice et hereticorum damnatione pla-
cuerunt, libens adjeci sententiam meam.
P. Leo I. Ep.59. (ad Mart. Aug.)

u Kal rots rap’ judy dpio0eior oppa-
vida mapdoxou Thy tuay &yypapov Bact-
Auchy emixtpwow, Kar did Oclwy HdlkTwr,
Kal Tay e& CBous eboeBOv Siardtewy Thy
TolTwy andyvtwy BeBalwow. Syn. VI.
Act. xviil. p. 275.

X Aitotuey 81a Oelas iuav sbmroon-
Mewmoews TL KUpos TapacxécOa TH Tap’
juay éxpwvnlérti evuroypdpy Spy. Ibid.

. 283.
i Y Airotuev Th Oedaogoy Tov Seandrov
kparos mpbs welCova ris dpOoddkou ml-

Pope’s Supremacy. 305

to confirm, for the greater strength and security of the ortho-
dox faith, the copies of our determination read in the hearing
of your most serene majesty, and subscribed by us, that they
may be delivered to the five patriarchal sees with your pious
confirmation.

Accordingly he did confirm that synod by his edict ;
2 All these things being thus ordered by this siath holy and
acumenical synod ; we decree, that none whosoever trouble him-
self further about this faith, or advance any new inventions
about it. |

So he told pope Leo II. in his Epistle to him; aZhis divine
and venerable determination the holy synod has made, to which
we also have subscribed, and confirmed it by our religious edicts,
exhorting all our people, who have any love for Christ, to follow
the faith there written.

Pope Leo tells his namesake Leo the emperor, » that he
must always remember that the imperial power was given him,
not only to rule the world, but more especially to protect the
church.

So by long prescription, commencing with the first general
synod, did the emperor enjoy this prerogative ; and with good
reason, he having an unquestionable warrant and obligation
to promote the welfare of the church, designed by those
conventions; he being the guardian of concord among his
subjects, and protector of their liberties, which might be
nearly concerned in conciliar proceedings; the power of
enacting laws being an incommunicable branch of sovereign
majesty ; he alone having power committed to him, able to
enforce the observance of decrees, without which they would
in effect signify little.

Because also commonly the decrees of synods did in a man-

orews dopdredy te Kal BeBalwow icort-
mous évamoypdpous bpovs Tov avayve-
o0évros kata mapovolay Tov yaAnvoTdrou
iuay Kpdrovs bpov éxdoOijva Tots révTe
mat piapxiKois Opdvois eta THs edoeBovs
ipay brocnpemoews. Ibid. p. 284.

Z Tottwy obtws andvtwy brd Tis aylas
tavtns Kal olkovmevinijs extns cuvddou
SiaturwOévtwy, Sancimus, Sore pndéva
Tav wdvtwy erepdy te wept Thy mlati
epydoacba, I) kavdrepov Sdyuatos eped-
pena unxavicac@a, &c. Ibid. Edict.
Const. p. 294.

@ @ciov 5t ceBdomor bpov 7 ayla avy-
odos é&eBénoev, @ Kal cvvuTeypdvauer,
kal 8¢ edoeBav judy HdlkTwv TovTov
erexupéoamer mpotpevaytes Aravta thy
pirsxpiorov judy Aadv TH ev abrois ey-
yeypaupéevy wicre: cuvérerba, &c. Ibid.
p. 298, 302.

b Debes incunctanter advertere re-
giam potestatem tibi non solum ad
mundi regimen, sed maxime ad ecclesiz
presidium esse collatam, &c, Leo M.

Ep. 75-

306 A Treatise of the

ner retrench some part of the royal prerogative translating or
imparting to others causes before appropriate to his jurisdic-
tion, (as in the case of appeals, and of prohibiting addresses to
court, ordered in the Sardican and other synods ; of exempting
clergymen from secular jurisdiction, from taxes and common
burdens, &c.) which ought not to be done without his license
and authority.

So that the oriental bishops had good reason to tell the
emperor, that °i¢ was impossible, without his authority, to order
the matters under consideration with good law and order.

It is nowise reasonable that any other should have this
power, it being inconsistent with public peace, that in one
state there should be two legislative powers; which might
clash the one with the other, the one enacting sanctions preju-
dicial to the interest and will of the other: wherefore the pope
being then a citizen of Rome, and a subject to the emperor,
could not have a legislative power, or a negative vote in synods,
but that wholly did belong to the imperial authority.

But it is opposed, that some synods have been declared in-
valid for want of the pope’s confirmation; for to the decrees of
the synod at Ariminum it was excepted, 4 that they were null,
because the bishop of Rome did not consent to them: ¢There
could not (say the Roman synod in Theodoret) be any preyudice
From the number of those assembled in Arininum, ut being plain,
that neither the Roman bishop, whose suffrage ought first to have
been received, nor Vicentius, who for so many years did hold his
episcopacy blameless, nor others agreeing to such things. 'To which
exception I answer, that,

1. That which is alleged against the synod of Ariminum
is not the defect of the pope’s confirmation subsequent, but of
his consent and concurrence before it, or in it; ‘which is
very reasonable, because he had a right to be present, and to

© ’Adivatoy yap ds iyyovuecba Biya Tov
iuetépov Kpdrous evtdktws Kal évOécuws
7% Tpokeimeva TuTwWOAYaM. Rel. Orient.
ad Imp. Act. Syn. Eph. p. 372.

a Tév év’Apilyp brevavtiwy tabrns
axtipwv dvrwy, ws pire ‘Pwyalwy émioKd-
my, ure Tov bAdAwv cuvPeuévwr airois,
Kal @s MoAA@Y TaY avTdO. GuVEADbYTwY
amaperbévtwy Tors TéTE Tap altar Bedoy-
pévas. Soz. vi. 23.

vécOa bmd Tov apiOuod Tay ev Apiulye
ouvaxbévtwy, drdre cuveaT Ke, MATE TOY
‘Pwyalwy émindmov, ov mpd mavtwy ee
Thy ywouny exdétaoIa, ofre Oiixevtlov ©
és em rocotros erect Thy emioKoT)y
aomirws eplaater, otire Tov UAAwy Tots
To.ovtToas cuvyKaradeuévwy —. Theod. ii.
22.

f P. Liberius being absent, detained
from it by violence in banishment.

Pope’s Supremacy. 307

concur in all such assemblies, especially being so eminent a
bishop.

2.The same exception every bishop might allege, all having
a like right and common interest to vote in those assemblies.

3. Accordingly the dissent of other bishops, particularly of
those eminent in dignity or merit, is also alleged in exception;
which had been needless, if his alone dissent had been of so
very peculiar force.

4. The emperor, and many other bishops, did not know of
any peculiar necessity of his confirmation.

Again it may be objected, that popes have voided the de-
erees of general synods, as did pope Leo the decrees of the
synod of Chalcedon, concerning the privileges of the Constan-
tinopolitan see, in these blunt words ; But the agreements of
bishops repugnant to the holy canons made at Nice, your faith
and piety joining with us, we make void, and by the authority
of the blessed apostle St. Peter, by a general determination we
disannul: and in his Epistle to those of that synod, 5 For
however vain conceit may arm itself with extorted compliances,
and think its wilfulness sufficiently strengthened with the name
of councils: yet whatever is contrary to the canons of the above-
named fathers will be weak and void. Lastly, in his Epistle
to Maximus, bishop of Antioch, he says, ‘He has such a re-
verence for the Nicene canons, that he will not permit or endure
that what those holy fathers have determined be by any novelty
violated.

This behaviour of pope Leo (although applauded and imi- P. Gelas.
tated by some of his successors) I doubt not to except against = Ipise
in behalf of the synod, that it was disorderly, factious, and ar- Dard.) p.
rogant, (proceeding indeed from ambition and jealousy;) the ating
leading act of high presumption in this kind, and one of the cae
seeds of that exorbitant ambition, which did at length over- P. Pelag. IT.

whelm the dignity and liberty of the Christian republic : yet bee

ym gs og Ps 474
et appetitus suos conciliorum estimet Greg. M.

nomine roborandos, infirmum atque ir- Ep
ritum erit, quicquid a praedictorum pa-

& Consensiones vero episcoporum,
sanctorum canonum apud Niciam con-
ditorum regulis repugnantes, unita no-

biscum vestre fidei pietate, in irritum
mittimus, et per authoritatem beati
Petri apostoli generali prorsus defini-
tione cassamus. P. Leo I. Ep. 55. (ad
Pulcher. Aug.)

h Quantumlibet enim extortis assen-
tationibus sese instruat vanitatis elatio,

trum canonibus discreparit. Ep. 61. (ad
Syn. Chalced.)

i Tanta apud me est Nicenorum ca-
nonum reverentia, ut ea que sunt a
sanctis patribus constituta nec permise-
rim nec patiar aliqua novitate violari.
Leo, Ep. 62. (ad Max. Antioch.)

x 2

308 A Treatise of the

for somewhat qualifying the business it is observable, that he
did ground his repugnancy and pretended annulling of that
decree, (or of decrees concerning discipline,) not so much upon
his authority to cross general synods, as upon the inviolable
firmness and everlasting obligation of the Nicene canons; the
which he (although against the reason of things, and rules of
government) did presume no synod could abrogate or alter.
In fine, this opposition of his did prove ineffectual by the
sense and practice of the church, maintaining its ground
against his pretence.

It is an unreasonable thing, that the opinion or humour of
one man (no wiser or better commonly than others) should be
preferred before the common agreement of his brethren, being
of the same office and order with him; so that he should be
able to overthrow and frustrate the result of their meetings
and consultations, when it did not square to his conceit or
interest ; especially seeing there is not the least appearance
of any right he hath to such a privilege, grounded in holy
scripture, tradition, or custom: for seeing that scripture hath
not a syllable about general synods, seeing that no rule about
them is extant in any of the first fathers, till after three hun-
dred years, seeing there was not one such council celebrated
till after that time, seeing in none of the first general synods
any such canon was framed in favour of that bishop, what
ground of right could the pope have to prescribe unto them,
or thwart their proceedings? Far more reason there is, (in
conformity to all former rules and practice,) that he should
yield to all his brethren, than that all his brethren should
submit to him: and this we see to have been the judgment
of the church, declared by its practice in the cases before
touched.

IV. It is indeed a proper endowment of an absolute sove-
reignty, immediately and immutably constituted by God, with
no terms or rules limiting it, that its will declared in way of
precept, proclamations, concerning the sanction of laws, the —
abrogation of them, the dispensation with them, should be
observed.

This privilege therefore in a high strain the pope challengeth
to himself ; asserting to his decrees and sentences the force
and obligation of laws; so that the body of that canon law,

309

whereby he pretendeth to govern the church, doth in greatest
part consist of papal edicts, or decretal epistles, imitating the
rescripts of emperors, and bearing the same force.

In Gratian we have these aphorisms from popes concerning
this their privilege.

KNo person ought to have either the will or the power to trans-
gress the precepts of the apostolic see.

; Those things-which by the apostolic see have at several
times been written for the catholic faith, for sound doctrines, for
the various and manifold exigency of the church, and the manners
of the faithful, how much rather ought they to be preferred in all
honour, and by all men altogether, upon all occasions whatsoever
to be reverently received !

mT hose decretal epistles which most holy popes have at divers
times given out from the city of Rome, upon their being consulted
with by divers bishops, we decree that they be received with vene-
ration.

nlf ye have not the decrees of the bishops of Rome, ye are to
be accused of neglect and carelessness ; but if ye have them, yet
observe them not, ye are to be chidden and rebuked for your

Pope’s Supremacy.

temerity.

° All the sanctions of the apostolic see are so to be understood,
as if confirmed by the voice of St. Peter himself.

PBecause the Roman church, over which by the will of Christ
we do preside, is proposed for a mirror and example ; whatsoever
it doth determine, whatsoever that doth appoint, is perpetually
and irrefragably to be observed by all men.

k Nulli fas est vel velle vel posse
transgredi apostolice sedis precepta.
P. Greg. IV. Dist. xix. cap. 5.

! Quanto potius que ipsa (sedes
apostolica) pro catholica fide, profanis
(1. pro sanis) dogmatibus, pro variis et
multifariis ecclesiz necessitatibus et fi-
delium moribus diverso tempore scrip-
sit, omni debent honore prieferri, et ab
omnibus prorsus in quibuslibet oppor-
tunitatibus discretione vel dispensatione
magistra reverenter assumi? 2. Nic. I.
Epist. Dist. xix. cap. 1.

m Decretales epistolas, quas beatis-
simi pape diversis temporibus ab urbe
Roma pro diversorum patrum consulta-
tione dederunt, venerabiliter suscipien-
das decernimus. P. Gelas. I. (in decreto)
lit. a Nic. P. Ep. 42. ad Episc. Gallia.

Dist. xix. cap. I.

n Si decreta Romanorum pontificum
non habetis, de neglectu atque incuria
estis arguendi ; si vero habetis et non
observatis, de temeritate estis corripiendi
et increpandi. P. Nic. I. Ep. 6. ad Phot.
Diss. xx. cap. 2.

o Sic omnes apostolicze sedis sanctio-
nes accipiend sunt, tanquam ipsius di-
vini Petri voce firmate sunt. P. Agatho,
Dist. xix. cap. 2. Vid. Syn. VI. Act. iv.
P- 35-

P Quia in speculum, et exemplum
S. Romana ecclesia, cui nos Christus
preesse voluit, proposita est, ab omni-
bus quicquid statuit, quicquid ordinat,
perpetuo et irrefragabiliter observandum
est. P. Steph. ( Dist. xix. cap. 3.) P. Ge-
las. I. Ep. 9. De Dispens. (p. 633.)

Eph. iv. 5.
Jam. iv. 12.

* apyaia
€4n. Syn.
Constanti-
nop. can. 2.

310 A Treatise of the

4We who according to the plenitude of our power have a right
to dispense above law or right.

This see—that which it might do by its own sole authority, a
is often pleased to define by consent of its priests.

But this power he doth assume and exercise merely upon
usurpation, and unwarrantably ; having no ground for it in
original right or ancient practice.

Originally the church hath no other general lawgiver, beside
our one Lord and one Lawgiver.

As to practice we may observe, ’

1. Anciently (before the first general synod) the church had
no other laws beside the divine laws; or those * which were
derived from the apostles by traditional custom; or those
which each church did enact for itself in provincial synods ;
or which were propagated from one church to another by
imitation and compliance; or which in like manner were
framed and settled.

Whence, according to different traditions, or different rea-
sons and circumstances of things, several churches did vary in
points of order and discipline.

The pope then could not impose his traditions, laws, or cus-
toms upon any church; if he did attempt it, he was liable to
suffer a repulse ; as is notorious in the case, when pope Victor
would (although rather as a doctor than as a lawgiver) have
reduced the churches of Asia to conform with the Roman, in
the time of celebrating Easter ; wherein he found not only
stout resistance, but sharp reproof.

In St. Cyprian’s time every bishop had a free power, ac-
cording to his diseretion to govern his church; and it was
deemed a tyrannical enterprise for one to prescribe to another,
or to require obedience from his colleagues ; as otherwhere by
many clear allegations out of that holy man we have shewed :
‘For none of us, saith he, makes himself a bishop of bishops,

§ Qui secundum plenitudinem potes-
tatis, de jure possumus supra jus dis-
pensare. P. Inn. III. Decret. Greg.
lib. ili. tit. 8. cap. 4.

r Sedes hee — quod singulari etiam
auctoritate perficere valet, multorum
spe sacerdotum decernit definire con-
sensu. P. Nic. I. Ep. 18. (ad Caro-
lum R.) Leo I. Ep. I. cap. 5. P. Hila-

rius in Conc. Rom. p. 578. Caus. 25.
qu. i. cap. 4. P. Urb. Caus. 25. qu. i.
cap. 6. P. Anast. ad Imp. Anast. P.
Siric. Ep. i. (p. 691.)

8 Neque enim quisquam nostrum epi-
scopum se esse episcoporum constituit,
aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi ne-
cessitatem collegas suos adigit ; quando
habeat omnis episcopus pro licentia li-

Pope’s Supremacy. 311

or by a tyrannical terror compels his colleagues to a necessity
of obedience; since every bishop, according to the license of
his own liberty and power, hath his own freedom, and can
no more be judged by another, than he himself can judge
another.

If any new law were then introduced, or rule determined
for common practice, it was done by the general agreement of
bishops, or of a preponderant multitude among them, to whom
the rest out of modesty and peaceableness did yield compli-
ance; according to that saying of the Roman clergy to St.
Cyprian, (upon occasion of the debate concerning the man-
ner of admitting lapsed persons to communion,) t7hat de-
cree cannot be valid, that hath not the consent of the major
part.

The whole validity of such laws or rules did indeed wholly
stand upon presumption of such consent; whereby the common
liberty and interest was secured.

2. After that by the emperor’s conversion the church, en-
_joying secular protection and encouragement, did reduce itself,
as into a closer union and freer communication of parts, so
into a greater uniformity of practice ; "especially by means of
great synods, wherein (the governors and representatives of all
churches being called unto them, and presumed to concur in
them) were ordained sanctions, taken to oblige all; the pope
had indeed a greater stroke than formerly, as having the first
place in order, or privilege of honour, in ecclesiastical assem- Mpwreia
blies, where he did concur ; yet had no casting vote, or real”
advantage above others: all things passing by majority of
vote: this is supposed as notorious in the acts of the fifth
council: * This, say they, is a thing to be granted, that in
councils we must not regard the interlocution of one or two,
but those things which are commonly defined by all, or by the
most.

bertatis et potestatis sue arbitrium pro-
prium ; tamque judicari ab alio non
possit, quam nec ipse potest alterum ju-
dicare. Cypr. in Conc. Carthag.

t Quoniam nec firmum decretum pot-
est esse, quod non plurimorum videbi-
tur habuisse consensum. Cler. Rom. ad
Cypr. (Epist. 31.)

« Idem enim omnes credimur opera-

ti, in quo deprehendimur eadem omnes
censure et disciplinz consensione so-
ciati. Cler. Rom. ad Cypr. Ep. 31.

X Illo certe constituto, quod in conci-
liis non unius vel secundi interlocutio-
nem attendere oportet, sed hee que
communiter ab omnibus vel ampliori-
bus definiuntur. Coneil. v. Collat. 6. p.
263.

Kparteitw 7
Tav mrEL6-
vov vidos.
Conc. Nic.
can. 6.

312 A Treatise of the

So also in the fifth council, George, bishop of Constan-

tinople, saith, that Y seeing every where the council of the multi-
tude, or of the most, doth prevail, it is necessary to anathematize
the persons before mentioned.

3. Metropolitan bishops in their provinces had far more
power, and more surely grounded, than the pope had in the
whole church, (for the metropolitans had an unquestioned
authority, settled by custom, and confirmed by synodiecal de-
crees,) yet had not they a negative voice in synodical debates :
for it is decreed in the Nicene synod, that in the designation
of bishops, (which was the principal affair in ecclesiastical
administrations,) plurality of votes should prevail.

It is indeed there said, that none should be ordained yapls
yvaepns, without the opinion of the metropolitan: but that doth
not import a negative voice in him, but that the transaction
should not pass in his absence, or without his knowledge, ad-
vice, and suffrage ; for so the apostolical canon (to which the
Nicene fathers there did allude and refer, meaning to inter-
pret it) doth appoint, that the metropolitan should 2do nothing
dvev tis mdvTwv yvoduns, without the opinion of all, that is,
without suffrage of the most, concluding all; (for surely that
canon doth not give to each one a negative voice.) And so the
synod of Antioch (held soon after that of Nice, which there-
fore knew best the sense of the Nicene fathers, and how the
custom went) doth interpret it, decreeing, that *a bishop
should not be ordained without a synod, and the presence of
the metropolitan of the province; in which synod yet they
determine, that > plurality of votes should carry it; no pe-
culiar advantage in the case being granted to the metro-
politan.

Seeing therefore provincial synods were more ancient than
general, and gave pattern to them; if we did grant the same
privilege to the pope in general synods, as the metropolitans
had in provincial, (which yet we cannot do with any good

Y ’Emeidn Tov wANGous, Aro Tov TOA-
A@v maytaxov 7 BovAh Kparei, avay-
Kaidy eotw dvouaoTl Ta AexOevTa mpda-
wna avabeuaticbjva. VI. Syn. Act. xvi.
Pp. 249.

Z Kata xavdva exxdnoiaotinoyv, GAAG
unde exeivos Uvev THs Tay TdyTwY yvo-

uns toeltw Tt. Apost. Can. 34.

a ’Enlaxomov uh xXEtpotoveicOa dixa
auvdbov, kal mapovalus Tod év TH untpo-
nércr Tis emapxlas. Syn. Ant. Can. 19.
kpareivy Thy Tov TrELbvwY Wi-
gov. Ibid. Kpareirw h tav mreibvor

Whpos. Syn. Nic. Can. 6.

Pope’s Supremacy. 313

reason or ground,) yet could not the pope thence pretend to
an authority of making laws by himself.

4. It was then a passable opinion, that fe, as one, was
in reason obliged to yield to the common judgment of his
colleagues and brethren; as the emperor Constantius told
pope Liberius, that ‘the vote of the plurality of bishops ought to
prevail.

5. When pope Julius did seem to cross a rule of the
church, by communicating with persons condemned by synods,
the fathers of Antioch did ‘smartly recriminate against him,
shewing that they were not to receive canons from him.

6. So far was the pope from prescribing laws to others,
that he was looked upon as subject to the laws of the church
no less than others; as the Antiochene fathers did suppose,
©complaining to pope Julius of his transgressing the canons: the
which charge he doth not repel by pretending exemption, but
by declaring that he had not offended against the canons,
and retorting the accusation against themselves; as the
African fathers supposed, when they told pope Celestine,
fthat he could not admit persons to communion, which had
been excommunicated by them, that being contrary to a
decree of the Nicene synod; as the Roman church supposed
itself, when it told Marcian, sthat they could not receive him
without leave of his father who had rejected him. This the
whole tenor of ecclesiastical canons sheweth, they running in
a general style, never excepting the pope from the laws pre-
seribed to other bishops.

7. The privilege of dispensing with laws had then been a
strange hearing, when the pope could in no ease dispense
with himself for infringing them, without bringing clamour
and censure upon him ?,

tous, &c. Epist. ad P. Celest. I.
gos ioxtew dpelAc. Theod. ii. 16.

& Od duvducda kvev Tijs emitporis Tov

4 Tyéun xows apodpérepov 50 emarto-
Ais Gvreykadrova: TH lovAlw, SnAodvres
un Seiv Kavoviter@a wap’ aitod. Socr. ii.
15.

© 'Tuets &s mapa xavdvas wovhoavras
nas eueupacbe P. Julii Epist.
apud Athanas. in Apol. ii. p. 748. Twés
ciaw of mapa kavdvas mpdtavres, Hueis,
&c. p. 748.

f Mn3e robs map’ juav aroxowwrvh-

tiulov matpés gov TovTO Toijoa. Epiph.
Her. 42.

h It was then a maxim becoming the
mouth of a pope, Universe pacis tran-
quillitas non aliter poterit custodiri, nisi
sua canonibus reverentia intemerata ser-
vetur. ’. Leo I. Ep. 62. The tran-
quillity of an universal peace cannot
otherwise be kept, unless due reverence
be paid to the canons.

P. Hil.
Ep.2. N.B
P. Innoc. I.
Ep. ii. 12.
P. Hil.
Ep. 4. :
Gelas. I

Ep. ix.

p- 634. xiii.

39-
De Anath.
p. 645.

* P, Zos. 1.
Ep. 7. (ad
Episc. Vi-
enn. et
Narb. )
Caus. xxv.
qu. i. ea 7

P. Siri

314 A Treatise of the

8. It had indeed been a vain thing for synods with so much
trouble and solemnity to assemble, if the pope without them
could have framed laws, or could with a puff of his mouth
have blown away the results of them by dispensation.

9. Even in the growth of papal dominion, and after that
the seeds of Roman ambition had sprouted forth to a great
bulk, yet had not popes the heart or face openly to challenge
power over the universal canons, or exemption from them ;
but pretended to be the chief observers, guardians, defenders,
and executors of them; or of the rights and privileges of
churches established by them: for while any footsteps of
ancient liberty, simplicity, and integrity did remain, a claim
of paramount or lawless authority would have been very ridi-
culous and very odious. Pope Zosimus I.* denieth that he
could alter the privileges of churches.

10. If they did talk more highly, requiring observance to
‘their constitutions, it was either in their own precinct, or in
the provinces where they had a more immediate jurisdiction,
or in some corners of the west, where they had obtained more
sway ; and in some cases, wherein their words were backed
with other inducements to obedience; for the popes were
commonly wise in their generations, accommodating their dis-
course to the state of times and places.

11. It is also to be observed, that often the popes are sup-
posed to speak and constitute things by their own authority,
which indeed were done by synods, consisting of western
bishops more closely adhering to that see, in regard to those
regions'; the decrees of which synods were binding in those
places, not so much by virtue of papal authority, as proceed-
ing from the consent of their own bishops: how ready soever
he were to assume all to himself, pretending those decrees as
precepts of the apostolical see.

Whence all the acts of modern popes are invalid, and do
not oblige, seeing they do not act in synod; but only of their
own head, or with the advice of a few partisans about them,
men linked in common interest with them to domineer over
the church.

i"Anaca kata bicw obyodos. Conc. Act. iv. p. 60. N. The pope did in
Eph. p. 332. Zbvodo. avqjxovoa tH those councils ask the placets. P. Hil.
cvvédy amoatoAiKod Opdvov. Syn. VI. in Cone. R. (p. 578.)

——

Pope's Supremacy. 315

12. Yet even in the western countries, in later times, their
decrees have been contested, when they did seem plainly to
clash with the old canons, or much to derogate from the
liberties of churches; nor have there wanted learned persons
in most times, who, so far as they durst, have expressed their
dislike of this usurpation.

k For although the bishop of Rome be more venerable than the
rest that are in the world, upon account of the dignity of the
apostolical see, yet it is not lawful for him in any case to trans-
gress the order of canonical governance: for as every bishop
who is of the orthodox church, and the spouse of his own see,
doth entirely represent the person of our Saviour; so generally
no bishop ought pragmatically to act any thing in another’s
diocese.

13. In the times of pope Nicholas I. the Greeks did not
admit the Roman decrees; so that pope in an epistle to Circa an.
Photius complains, !that he did not receive the decrees of the a
popes, whenas yet they ordained nothing but what the natural,
what the Mosaical, and what the law of grace required. And
in another epistle he expostulates with him for saying, that
mthey neither had nor did observe the decrees made by the holy
popes of the prime see of the Roman church.

14, That which greatly did advance the papal jurisdiction,
and introduced his usurpation of obtruding new decrees on
the church, was the venting of the forged Decretal Epistles via. Hi-
under the name of old popes; which when the pope did allege "°™
for authorizing his practices, the French bishops, endeavour-
ing to assert their privileges, did allege that "they were not
contained in the whole body of their canons.

15. The power of enacting and dispensing with ecclesiastical

k Licet namque pontifex Romane ec-
clesiz ob dignitatem apostolice sedis
ceteris in orbe constitutis reverentior
habeatur, non tamen ei licet transgredi
in aliquo canonici moderaminis tenorem ;
sicut enim unusquisque orthodoxe ec-
clesiz pontifex ac sponsus propriz sedis
uniformiter speciem gerit Salvatoris, ita
generaliter nulli convenit quippiam in
alterius procaciter patrare episcopi dice-
cesi. Glab. Rod. 2.4. Vid. Baron. ann.
996. sect. 22, 23.

| Noli quia decreta ipsorum non sus-
ceperis amplius asseverare, cum ipsi

nihil nisi quod naturalis, quod Mosaica,
necnon et gratiz lex jussit, instituant.
P. Nie. I. Ep.11. (ad Phot.)

m Decretalia autem, que a sanctis
pontificibus prime sedis Romane eccle-
siz sunt instituta,—cur vos non habere
vel observare dicitis? Jd. Ep. 6. (ad
Phot.)

n Quanquam quidam vestrum scrip-
serint haud illa decretalia priscorum
pontificum in toto codicis canonum cor-
pore contineri descripta, &c. P. Nie, I.
Ep. 42. (ad Gallia Epise.)

P. Greg. I.
Ep. xi. 56.

316 A Treatise of the

laws, touching exterior discipline, did of old belong to the
emperor. And it was reasonable that it should; because
old laws might not conveniently suit with the present state
of things and the public welfare; because new laws might
conduce to the good of church and state, the care of which
is incumbent on him; because the prince is bound to use his
power and authority to promote God’s service, the best way
of doing which may be by framing orders conducible thereto.

Accordingly the emperors did enact divers laws concerning
ecclesiastical matters, which we see extant in the codes of
Theodosius and Justinian.

© These things, saith the council of Arles, we have decreed to
be presented to our lord the emperor, desiring his clemency, that
if any thing be defective, it may be supplied by his prudence ;
if any thing be unreasonable, it may be corrected by his judg-
ment; if any thing be reasonably ordered, it may by his help, the
divine grace assisting, be perfected.

We may observe, that popes did allow the validity of impe-
rial laws. Pope Gregory I. doth allege divers laws of divers
emperors concerning ecclesiastical affairs, as authentic and
obligatory rules of practice.

16. Divers churches had particular rights of independency
upon all power without themselves.

Such as the church of Cyprus in the Ephesine synod did
claim and obtain the confirmation of.

Such was the ancient church of Britain before Austin came
into England.

PThe Welsh bishops are consecrated by the bishop of St. David's,
and he himself in like manner is ordained by others, who are, as
wt were, his suffragans, professing no manner of subjection to any
other church.

V. Sovereign power, immediately by itself, when it pleaseth,
doth exercise all parts of jurisdiction, setting itself in the tri-
bunal ; or mediately doth execute it by others, as its officers
or commissioners.

© Hec—domino Imperatori preesen-
tanda decrevimus, poscentes ejus cle-
mentiam ut siquid hic minus est, ejus
prudentia suppleatur, si quid secus
quam se ratio habet, ejus judicio emen-
detur ; si quid rationabiliter taxatum
est, ejus adjutorio divina opitulante cle-
mentia perficiatur. Conc. Arel. iv. cap.

26. ann. 813. (sub Carolo M.)

Pp Episcopi Walliz a Menevensi an-
tistite sunt consecrati, et ipse similiter
ab aliis tanquam suffraganeis est con-
stitutus, nulla penitus alii ecclesiz facta
professione vel subjectione. Girald.
Cambr. Itin, ii. 1.

Pope’s Supremacy. 317

Wherefore now the pope doth claim and exercise universal Bell. ii. 18,
jurisdiction over all the clergy; requiring of them engagements °°
of strict submission and obedience to him; demanding that all
causes of weight be deferred to him; citing them to his bar,
examining and deciding their causes; condemning, suspend-
ing, deposing, censuring them, or acquitting, absolving, re-
storing them, as he seeth cause, or findeth in his heart 4; he
doth encourage people to accuse their pastors to him, in case
any doth infringe his laws and orders.

But (in general) that originally or anciently the pope had no
such right appropriate to him may appear by arguments, by
cross instances, by the insufficiency of all pleas and examples
alleged in favour of this claim. For,

1. Originally there was not at all among Christians any
jurisdiction like to that which is exercised in civil govern-
ments, and which now the papal court doth execute. For this
our Saviour did prohibit, and St. Peter forbad the presbyters r Pet. v.
Katakupievey TOV KAjpwv. And St. wéwasen affirmeth the ore gh
-episcopal power not to be av@evria, or apx7. And ecclesiastical in Eph.
history doth inform us, that such a jurisdiction was lately in- ee

Hier. Ep. 3.
troduced in the church, as by other great bishops, so especially 62-

by the bishop of Rome: * For, saith Socrates, from that time Spa
the episcopacy of Alexandria, beyond the sacerdotal order, did‘: 219:
assume a domineering power in affairs.

The which kind of power the Roman bishops had long
before assumed; for, saith he, Sthe episcopacy of Rome, in
like manner as that of Alexandria, had already a great while
ago gone before in a domineering power beyond that of the
priesthood.

At first the episcopal power did only consist in paternal
admonition, and correption of offenders, exhorting and per-
suading them to amendment ; and in case they contumaciously , Go, y, 4,
did persist in disorderly behaviour, bringing them before the ' 2.

ii. 6.
congregation; and the cause being there heard and proved, » =

4 Per hoc illam de tota ecclesia judi- ¥ Kal yap ef exelvov 7 ericxomh ’Ade-

care. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 4. Cunctos ipse favdpelas répa rijs leparinis tdkews xara
judicaturus a nemine est judicandus. dvvacrelay trav mpayudtwy trAaBe Thy
Dist. x1. cap. 6. Caus. 2. qu. 7. cap. 45, &pxhv. Socr. vii. 7.
&c. Sacra statuta et veneranda decreta 8 THs ‘Pwpualwy éemioKxor)s duolws
episcoporum causas, utpote majora nego- 77 ’AAckavdpéwv wépa Tis lepwotwns emi
tia nostre definiendas censure manda- dvvacrelay dn wdAa mpoeAPovons. Socr.
runt. P. Nic. I. Ep. 38. vil. II.

Can. 5.

318 A Treatise of the

with its consent imposing such penance or correction on them
as seemed needful for the public good, or their particular
benefit ; * A// things, saith St. Cyprian, shall be examined, you
being present and judging: and, (elsewhere,) “according to your
divine suffrages ; according to your pleasure.

2. Originally no one bishop had any jurisdiction over an-
other, or authority to judge his actions; as St. Cyprian (who
well knew the current judgment and practice of his age) in
many places doth affirm; who particularly doth reflect on the
Roman bishop for presuming to censure his brethren who
dissented from him ; v Let us all, saith he, expect the gudgment
of our Lord Jesus Christ, who only hath power to prefer us to the
government of his church, and to judge of what we do.

3. Even the community of bishops did not otherwise take
notice of, or intermeddle with, the proceedings of any bishop.
in his precinct and charge; except when his demeanour did
concern the general state of the church, intrenching upon the
common faith, or public order and peace.

In other cases, for one or more bishops to meddle with the
proceedings of their brother, was taken for an dAAorpioemoxonia,
a pragmatical intrusion upon another's business ; and an inva-
sion of that liberty which did belong to each bishop by the
grant of our Lord, and the nature of his office.

As by those passages of St. Cyprian, and the declaration of
the synod with him, doth appear.

4. In cases needing decision for the public good of the
church, the law and custom of the church, confirmed by the
Nicene synod, did order, that jurisdiction should be exercised,
and all causes finally determined in each province; so that no
regard is had to the pope, no exception in favour of him being
expressed or implied.

The which constitution, if we believe pope Leo himself, can-
not in any case by any power be revoked or infringed *.

t Examinabuntur singule, presenti-
bus et judicantibus vobis. Cypr. Ep. 12.
(fratribus in plebe.)

u Secundum vestra divina suffragia.
Cypr. Ep. 40. Secundum arbitrium
quoque vestrum. Jd. (Ep. 46.) Tertul.
Apol. 39. Ibidem :

Vv Expectemus universi judicium Do-
mini nostri Jesu Christi, qui unus et

solus habet potestatem et przponendi
nos in ecclesiam suam gubernatione et
de actu nostro judicandi. Cypr. in Cone.
Carth.

x In venerabilis concilii Niceni con-
tumelia szepe versatus, alienarum tibi
provinciarum jura temerarie rapuisti.
P. Felix Acacio, apud Baron. ann. 484.
sect. 17.

Popes Supremacy. 319

That is most expressly confirmed by the synod of Antioch,
in the code of the universal church; yf any bishop accused
of certain crimes shall be condemned by all the bishops in the
province, and all shall unanimously vote against him, he shall
not be judged again by others; but the unanimous sentence of the
bishops of the province shall remain valid.

Here is no consideration or exception of the pope.

5. Accordingly in practice, synods, without regard or re-
course to the pope, did judge bishops upon offences charged
against them.

6. The execution of those judgments was intrusted to metro-
politan bishops; or had effect by the people’s consent ; for it
being declared that any bishop had incurred condemnation,
the people did presently desert him.

Every bishop was obliged to confer his part to the execu-
tion ; as pope Gelasius affirmeth 2.

7. If the pope had such judicial power, seeing there were
from the beginning so many occasions of exercising it, there
would have been extant in history many clear instances of it ;
but few can be alleged, and those (as we shall see) impertinent
or insufficient.

8. Divers synods (great and smaller) did make sanctions
contrary to this pretence of the pope; appointing the decision
of causes to be terminated in each diocese, and prohibiting
appeals to him; which they would not have done, if the pope |
had originally, or according to common law and custom, a
supreme judicial power.

9. The most favourable of ancient synods to papal interest,
that of Sardica, did confer on the pope a power, qualified in
matter and manner, of causing episcopal causes to be revised;
which sheweth that before he had no right in such cases, nor
then had an absolute power.

10. The pope’s power of judging bishops hath been of old
disclaimed as an illegal and upstart encroachment.

When the pope first nibbled at this bait of ambition,
St. Cyprian and his bishops did reprehend him for it.

Y Ettts éxloxoros énl rio eyKAhuact
Katryopnbels xpileln iad wdvtwv Tav év
TH éwapxla émoxérwy, mdvtes Te oOu-
gwva piay car’ abrod ekevéynoey Vipor,
Tovrov unkérs wap’ érépois BindCerOac
GAAG pévery BeBalay thy aiupwvov Tay
éml rijs érapxlas emoxdrwv ardpacw.

Syn. Ant. Can. 16.

z Quod non solum presuli apostolico
facere licet, sed cuicunque pontifici, ut
quoslibet et quemlibet locum, secundum
regulam hereseos ipsius ante damnate,
a catholica communione discernant. P.
Gelas. I. Ep. 4.

Justin.
Nov. exxiii.
cap. 3.
Jubemus

Episc.Rom.

Upon a
sovereign

320 A Treatise of the

The bishop of Constantinople denied that pope Gelasius
alone might condemn him; *according to the canons—the
pope ranteth at it, and reasoneth against it; but hath no
material argument or example fur it, (concerning the papal
authority peculiarly,) beside the Sardican canon.

11. The popes themselves have been judged for misde-
meanour, heresy, schism; as hereafter we shall shew.

12. The popes did execute some judgments, only by a right
common to all bishops, as executors of synodical decrees >.

13. Other bishops did pretend to judicature, by privilege :
as Juvenalis, bishop of Jerusalem, did pretend that to him
did belong the judgment of the bishop of Antioch ¢.

14. The popes were subject to the emperors; who, when
they pleased, did interpose to direct or qualify all jurisdiction;
commanding the popes themselves: wherefore the popes were
not judges sovereign, but subordinate.

Pope Gregory I. did refer the great question about the title of
acumenical bishop to the judgment of the emperor Mauricius4.

These things will more fully appear in the discussion of the
particulars concerning the chief branches of jurisdiction ; more
especially under the tenth branch of sovereignty.

They allege that passage of Valentinian in his Epistle to
Theodosius, ¢ That the most blessed bishop of Rome, to whom
antiquity hath given a priesthood over all, hath a see and power
to judge both of faith and priests.

This was suggested by pope Leo and his adherents to the
young emperor; but it signifieth no more, but that in the
judgment of priests (as of faith) he was to have his share, or
at most to be a leading person therein.

Theodosius (a mature, grave, pious prince) did not regard
that pretence of Leo, nor the appeal of Flavianus ‘.

VI. To the sovereign of any state belongeth the choice,

@ Euphemium vero miror, si ignoran-
tiam suam ipse non perspicit, qui dicit
Acacium ab uno non posse damnari
. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 4. Nobis oppo-
nunt canones . Id. ibid.

b Quod non solum presuli apostclico
facere licet, &c. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 4.
(Supr. in Arg. 6.) Vid. Epist. 13.

© °Expiy “lwdyyny TG ANOTTOALK@
THs ‘lepocoAtpwr aryias TOU cod exKAn-
clas timakotoa, Kal tTivhoa’ map @ pd-
Aura os abtoy Tév ’AvTioxéwy Opdvov
é& GmoaroAiKhs aKoAovOlas Kal mapadd-

cews iOtvecOat, kat map’ avT@ SindCerOa.
Syn. Eph. Act. iv. (p. 400.)

d ut piissimus dominus Mauri-
tius ipsum illud negotium judicare dig-
naretur. Greg. Ep. iv. 22.

© “Iva pakapimtaros eémiokotwos Tis
‘Pwuaiwy mérAews, @ Thy lepwodtyny Kata
rdvtwv 7 apxadTns mapérxe, Xpay Kah
evmoplay éxew mepl te mlarews Kal fepéwy
xplvew . Act. Syn. Chale. p. 25.

f£ "Iva 5 mpodexOels cuvaxbevtav ex
maons THS oikovunevns Kal TY AoLTOY

lepéwy . Ibid. p. 28.

Pope’s Supremacy. 321

constitution, confirmation, commissionating of all inferior ma- all inferior
gistrates ; that none uncapable, unworthy, or unfit for offices, eae
or disaffected to the state, be intrusted with the management
of affairs.

Wherefore the pope doth claim and exercise these preroga-
tives so far as he can; pretending at least that no bishop can
be constituted without his designation, or his license, and his
confirmation of the nomination, collation, or election.

And these privileges by the great advocates are upon highest Bell. iv. 24.
terms asserted to him.

In this matter may be distinguished,

1. The designation of the person by election or otherwise.

2. The confirmation of that.

3. The ordination or consecration of him to his office ;_ the
which conferreth on him his character and authority.

4. The authority by which he acteth.

Into all these the pope hath intruded himself, and he will
have a finger in them.

1. He gladly would have drawn to himself the collation
and disposal of all benefices, challenging a general right to
dispose of all at his pleasure*: but not having been able
wholly to deprive princes and patrons of their nominations,
and corporations of their election; yet he hath by reservations,
provisions, collations of vacancies apud sedem, resignations, Clem. IV.
devolutions, and other such tricks, extremely encroached on ae ae y
the rights of all, to the infinite vexation, damage, and mischief p- '4, &c.
of Christendom.

2. He pretendeth that no bishop shall be ordained without
his license.

3. He obligeth the person ordained to swear obedience to
him.

4. He pretendeth that all bishops are his ministers and
deputies.

But no such privileges have any foundation or warrant in
holy scripture, in ancient doctrine, or in primitive usage : they
are all encroachments upon the original rights and liberties of

& Licet ecclesiarum, personatuum, dig- cap. 2. Vid. ibid. cap. iv. 10. xii. 20.
nitatum, aliorumque beneficiorum eccle- Although the plenary disposal of all
siasticorum plenaria dispositio ad Ro- churches, parsonages, dignities, and
manum noscatur pontificem pertinere, other ecclesiastical benefices be known
&e. Clem. IV. in Sexto, lib. iii. tit. 4. to belong to the pope of Rome, &c,

Act. i. 15.

322 A Treatise of the

the church, derived from ambition and avarice; subsisting
upon usurpation, upheld by violence.

This will appear from a survey of ancient rules and practices
concerning this matter.

The first constitution after our Lord’s decease of an eccle-
siastical person was that of Matthias into the vacant aposto-
late, or bishopric of Judas"; wherein (upon St.Peter’s motion)
iall the disciples present did by consent present two; * out of
whom God himself did elect one, by determining the lot to fall
upon Matthias; so that this designation being partly human,
partly divine, so far as it was human, it went by free election
of the whole fraternity ; and St. Peter, beside generally sug-
gesting the matter to be done, did assume nothing peculiar
to himself.

The next constitution we meet with is that of deacons to
assist the apostles and elders in discharge of inferior offices ;
wherein the apostles did commit the designation of the per-
sons to the ! multitude of the disciples, who elected them; and
presented them to the apostles, who, by prayer and laying on
of hands, did ordain them. Nor had St. Peter in this action
any particular stroke.

As to the constitution of bishops, in the first apostolical
times the course was this: the apostles, and apostolical per-
sons, (who were authorized by the apostles to act with their
power, and in their stead,) did in churches founded by them
constitute bishops, such as divine inspiration, or their grace
of discretion, did guide them to™; so did St.John in Asia,
setting those apart for the clergy whom the Spirit had marked
out.

This was not done without the consent of the Christian
people, as Clemens Romanus telleth us in his excellent Epistle
to the Corinthians’: but he doth not acquaint us (although
he were himself bishop of Rome) that the pope had any thing
to do in such constitutions, or in confirmations of them ; the

h ’Emoxowhy avrod AdBu repos. tépous, ws ey coi dierakdunv. Tit. i. 5..

Act. i. 20. Ataxploers mvevudtwy. 1 Cor. Xil. 10.
i Kal Zornoay duo. Ver. 23. D KAhpy eva ye KAnpéowv tev bd Tod
k Avddecov ex tobtwy Tav dv0 va by Tveduaros onuawoutver. Kus. ili. 23.
éEerAdiw. Ver. 24. © Tobs obv Katacrabévras bw éxetvwy,
1 Act. vi. 2, 5. Td mAjO0s Tov pabn- 7 perati vp’ érépwv eddAoyluwv avdpar,
tay Kar ebeddtavTo. suvevdoknodaons éxxdnolas dons. Clem.

m Ka) karacthons kata méAw mperBu- pist. p. §7-

Pope’s Supremacy. 323

whole church, saith he, consenting ; why doth he not add, for
his own sake, and the pope confirming ?

In the next times, when those extraordinary persons and
faculties had expired, when usually the churches planted were
in situation somewhat incoherent and remote from each other,
upon a vacancy the clergy and people of each church did elect
its bishop; in which action commonly the clergy did propound
and recommend a person, or persons, and the people by their
consent approve, or by their suffrages elect one® ; astrict ex-
amination of his life and doctrine intervening: the which order
Tertullian briefly doth intimate in those words, P The presidents
of the church are certain elders well approved, who have obtained
that honour, not by price, but by proof.

It may be inquired, how a bishop then was ordained, in case
his city was very remote from any other churches ?

Did they send for bishops from distant places to ordain
him? Or did the presbyters of the place lay their hands on
him? Or did he receive no other ordination than that he had

before of presbyter? Or did he abide no bishop till opportunity

did yield bishops to ordain him? Or did Providence order,
that there should be no such solitary churches? The ancient
commentator, contemporary to St. Ambrose, and bearing his
name, did conceive, that upon decease of a bishop the elder of

the presbyters did succeed into his place’. Whence had he In Eph. iv.

this? out of his invention and conjecture, or from some tradi- "*
tion and history?

Afterward, when the faith was diffused through many pro-
vinees, that churches grew thick and close, the general practice
was this: the neighbour bishops (being advertised of a vacancy,
or want of a bishop) did convene at the place; then in the
congregation the clergy of the place did propound a person,
yielding their attestation to his fitness for the charge; which
the people hearing did give their suffrages, accepting him, if
no weighty cause was objected against him; or refusing him,

© Kal otto: SoximalécOwoay mp@rtor, 4 Primum presbyteri episcopi appella-
elra Siaxovelrwoay, avéyxAntra dyres. bantur ut recedente uno sequens el suc-
1 Tim. iii. 10. cederet, &c. Vid. Dist. Ixvi. cap. 2. At

P President probati quique seniores, first presbyters were called bishops, that
honorem istum nonpretio, sedtestimonio one departing, the next might succeed
adepti. Tertull. A pol.39. Plenadiligentia, him.
exploratione sincera. Cypr. Ep.68.

¥ 2

324 A Treatise of the

if such cause did appear: then, upon such recommendation
and acceptance, the bishops present did adjoin their approba-
tion and consent; then by their devotions, and solemn laying
on of their hands, they did ordain or consecrate him to the
function.

Of this course most commonly practised in his time we have
divers plain testimonies in St. Cyprian, the best author extant
concerning these matters of ancient discipline: "For which
reason, saith he, that from divine tradition and apostolical
observation is to be observed and held, which also is with us, and
almost through all provinces, kept; that for duly celebrating
ordinations unto that people, for whom a bishop is ordained, all
the neighbour bishops of the same (province or people) should
resort ; and a bishop should be chosen, the people being present,
which most fully knoweth the life of each one, and hath from his
conversation a thorough insight into his practice; the which we
see done with you in the ordination of our colleague Sabinus,
that by the suffrage of all the fraternity, and by the judgment of
all the bishops, which had assembled in the presence, and had
sent letters to you about him, the bishopric should be deferred to
him.

Again, *A people obedient to the Lord’s commands, and
fearing God, ought to separate itself from a wicked bishop,
(such a notoriously wicked bishop as those were of whom he
treateth, who had renounced the faith,) and not to mingle
itself with the sacrifices of a sacrilegious priest ; seeing espe-
cially that it hath a power either to choose worthy priests, or
to refuse those who are unworthy; the which also we see to
descend from divine authority, that a bishop should be chosen,

r Propter quod diligenter de tradi-
tione divina et apostolica observatione
observandum est et tenendum, quod
apud nos quoque et fere per provincias
universas tenetur; ut ad ordinationes
rite celebrandas, ad eam plebem cui
prepositus ordinatur, episcopi ejusdem
proximi quique conveniant, et episcopus
deligatur plebe presente, que singulo-
rum vitam plenissime novit, et unius-
cujusque actum de ejus conversatione
perspexit; quod et apud vos factum
videmus in Sabini college nostri ordi-
natione, ut de universe fraternitatis
suffragio, et de episcoporum, qui in

presentia convenerant, quique de eo ad
vos literas fecerant, judicio episcopatus
ei deferretur. Cypr. Ep. 68.

8 Plebs obsequens preeceptis Domini-
cis, et Deum metuens, a peccatore pree-
posito separare se debet, nec se ad sacri-
legi sacerdotis sacrificia miscere; quando
ipsa maxime habeat potestatem vel eli-
gendi dignos sacerdotes, vel indignos re-
cusandi ; quod et ipsum videmus de di-
vina auctoritate descendere ; ut sacerdos
plebe presente sub omnium oculis deli-
gatur, et dignus atque idoneus publico
judicio ac testimonio comprobetur——.
Cypr. Ep.

Pope's Supremacy. 325

the people being present, before the eyes of all ; and that he who
is worthy and fit should be approved by public judgment and
testimony.

Again, when (saith he concerning himself) ta bishop is Suffragio
substituted in the place of one deceased, when he is peaceably nit Check
chosen by the suffrage of all the people,—and whom, if accord- anus eligi-

agg Optat.
ing to the divine instructions, the whole fraternity would obey,— ,.
no man would move any thing against the college of priests ;
none after the divine judgment, after the suffrage of the people,
after the consent of the fellow-bishop, would make himself judge,
not indeed of the bishop, but of God.

Again, “Cornelius was made bishop by the judgment of God
and his Christ, by the testimony of almost all the clergy, by the
suffrage of the people, being then present, and by the college of
priests, ancient and good men: and, * Cornelius being in the
catholic church ordained by the judgment of God, and by the
suffrage of the clergy and people.

Again, When a bishop is once made, and is approved by
the testimony and the judgment of his colleagues, and of the
people? ——.

The author of the Apostolical Constitutions thus in the Const.
person of St. Peter very fully and clearly describeth the Pag bones
manner of ordination of bishops in his times: After one of t Postquam
the chief bishops present has thus prayed, the rest of the priests wantin
with all the people shall say, Amen ; and after the prayer, one &e.
of the bishops shall deliver the eucharist into the hands of the
person ordained, and that morning he shall be placed by the
rest of the bishops in his throne, all of them saluting him with a
kiss in the Lord. After the reading of the Law and Prophets,
of our Epistles, the Acts and Gospel, he who is ordained shall
salute the church with these words, The grace of our Lord

* Ceterum quando episcopus in locum
defuncti substituitur, quando populi uni-
versi suffragio in pace deligitur—cui si
secundum magisteria divina obtempe-
raret fraternitas universa, nemo adver-
sum sacerdotum collegium quidquam
moveret ; nemo post divinum judicium,
post populi suffragium, post coepisco-
porum consensum, judicem se jam non
episcopi sed Dei faceret——. Cypr.
Ep. 55.

" Factus est autem Cornelius episco-

pus de Dei et Christi ejus judicio, de
clericorum pene omnium testimonio, de
plebis, quee tunc affuit, suffragio, et de
sacerdotum antiquorum et bonorum vi-
rorum collegio ——. Cypr. Ep. 52.

x Cornelio in catholica ecclesia de
Dei judicio, et cleri ac plebis suffragio
ordinato . Cypr. Ep. 67.

y Episcopo semel facto, et collegarum
ac plebis testimonio et judicio compro-
bato——. Ep. 41. (ad Cornel.)

326

A Treatise of the

Jesus Christ, and the love of God the Father, and the fellowship

of the Holy Ghost, be with you all, Amen.

And with thy spirit.
people.

And let all answer,

After which words let him exhort the

Thus it was then, in a practice so obvious and observable,
that a pagan emperor took good notice of it, and chose to
imitate it in constituting the governors of provinces, and
other officers; *When (saith Lampridius of Alexander Se-
verus) he would either give rulers to provinces, or make prest-
dents, or ordain procurators, he set up their names, exhorting
the people, if they had any thing against them, to prove it by
manifest evidence; tf they could not make their accusation
good, they were to die for it: and he said it would be hard
not to do that in the choice of governors of provinces, to whom
the lives and fortunes of men were intrusted, which the Christ-
ians and Jews did in setting up those who were to be ordained

preests.

Afterward, in process of time, when (the gaps of distance
being filled up, and Christendom becoming one continued
body) ecclesiastical discipline was improved into a more com-
plete shape, for constitution of a bishop, all the dishops of a

Madads province did convene, (or such as could with convenience, the
aN ae others signifying their mind by writing,) and having approved

stantinop. him who was recommended by the clergy, and allowed by the
people, they did ordain him ; the metropolitan of the province

Theod. v.

ratifying what was done.

So the Nicene synod, regarding the practice which had

commonly obtained, did appoint, with a qualification to be
Vid. Can. generally observed ; @/¢ is most fit, say they, that a bishop be
— An. constituted by all bishops in the province; but if this be hard,
tioch. Can. gither because of urgent necessity, or for the length of the way,

"7 a Laoa. then three of the body being gathered together, (those also who

Can. 12—.

Conc. Afr.

Can. 13.

are absent conspiring in opinion, and yielding their consent

z Ubi aliquos voluisset vel rectores
provinciis dare, vel prepositos facere,
vel procuratores id est rationales ordi-
nare, nomina eorum proponebat, hor-
tans populum, ut siquid haberet crimi-
nis, probaret manifestis rebus; si non
probasset, subiret poenam capitis ; dice-
batque grave esse, quum id Christiani
et Judei facerent in preedicandis sacer-

dotibus qui ordinandi sunt, non fieri in
provinciarum rectoribus, quibus et for-
tunz hominumcommitterentur et capita. -
Lamprid. in Alex. Sev. cap. 45.

a ’Enloxomoy mpoonke pddriTa pev
ind wdvtwv Trav ev TH erapxla Kablora-
cbai—rd Be Kipos TY ywouevwy B150-
cba Kab’ Exdorny erapxiay TE pnTpo-
moAlTyn . Cone. Nic. Can. 4.

Pope’s Supremacy. 327

in writing,) let the ordination be performed, but let the rati-
fication of what is done be assigned to the metropolite in each
province.

In this canon (the which is followed by divers canons of
other synods) there is no express mention concerning the
interest of the clergy and people in election of the bishops ;
but these things are only passed over, as precedaneous to the
constitution or ordination, about which only the fathers did
intend to prescribe; supposing the election to proceed ac-
cording to former usual practice.

That we ought thus to interpret the canon, so that the fa-
thers did not intend to exclude the people from their choice,
doth appear from their synodical epistle ; wherein they decree
concerning bishops constituted by Meletius, who, returning
to communion with the church, did live in any city, that,
bTf any catholic bishop should happen to die, then should those
who were already received ascend into the honour of him deceased;
in case they should appear worthy, and the people should choose,
the bishop of Alexandria withal adding his suffrage to him, and
his confirmation : the which words with sufficient evidence do
interpret the canon not to concern the election, but the ordi-
nation of bishops.

Thus the fathers of the second general synod plainly did
interpret this canon by their proceeding ; for they, in their Theod. v. 9.
synodical epistle to pope Damasus and the western bishops,
did assure him, that they in the constitution of bishops for
the principal eastern sees, had followed this order of the
synod of Nice, together with the ancient law of the church¢;
in agreement whereto they had ordained Nectarius bishop
of Constantinople, 4 with common consent, under the eyes of the
most religious emperor Theodosius, and of all the clergy, the
whole city adjoining also its suffrage; and that for Antioch, ¢the

b Ei 5€ twas cuuBaln avaratcacba
tay év TH exKkAnoia, THYiKavTa Tpocava-
Balvew eis THY Tihy TOU TETEAEUTHKOTOS
Tovs Upts mpocAnpdévtas, udvov ei Ekin
palvowro, kal 5 Aads aipoiro, guvemiyn-
piovros a’t@, kal émogpparyl(ovtos Tod
Tis ‘AAekavipelas émirxdrov. Socr. i. 9.
Theod. i. 9.

&xorovOws :
pera Kowns duovolas, br’ bWert
kal Oeopirdeordrov Bacikéws Ocodoclov,
mayvtTdés Te TOU KANpov, Kal waaons éxuln-
piCouervns Tijs wéAEws.

e éxlaxorov PAaBiavdv of Te Tijs
érapxilas, kal Tis AvatoAucis Sioixhoews
cuvdpaudvres Kavovixds exeipoTévncay,
mdons cuu~hpov tis éxxAnolas Sawep
5a ds wis Tov Gydpa Tiunaodons.

Ath. Apol.
ii, p. 726.

Orat. xix.
310. Epist.
21.

Euseb. de
Vit. Const.
iii. 59, 60.
Socr. i. 24.
Mepicbév-
TOS TOU
mAnGovs—.
Sozom. vi.
23-Marcell.
lib. 27.
Aix7j S1a-
Kpidey Td
TA7G0os—.
Socr. i. 24.
Soz. iii. 4.
Theod. iv.
6.

328 A Treatise of the

bishops of the province and of the eastern diocese concurring, had
canonically ordained Flavianus bishop, the whole church consent-
ing, as with one voice, to honour the person.

Indeed the practice generally doth confirm this, the people
every where continuing to elect their bishop: so did the peo-
ple of Alexandria demand Athanasius for their bishop. So pope
Julius did complain, that Gregory was intruded into the place
of Athanasius ; ‘ not being required by the presbyters, not by the
bishops, not by the people. So Gregory Nazianzen describeth
the elections of bishops in his times to be carried by the
power of wealthy men, and impetuousness of the people. So
Austin intimateth the same in his speech about designation
of a successor to himself; § J know, says he, that after the
decease of bishops the churches are wont to be disturbed by am-
bitious and contentious men. So the tumults at Antioch, in
choosing a bishop after Eustathius ; at Rome, after Liberius ;
at Constantinople, after Alexander; at Milan, when St.Ambrose
was chosen.

So Stephanus, bishop of Ephesus, in justification of him-
self, saith, » Me forty bishops of Asia, by the suffrage of the
most noble and of the substantial citizens, and of all the most
reverend clergy, and of all the rest of the whole city, did or-
dain: and his competitor Bassianus, ‘Me, with great constraint
and violence, the people and the clergy and the bishops did
imstall.

In the synod of Chalcedon, Eusebius, bishop of Aneyra,
saith, that * the whole city of Gangra did come to him, bring-
ing their suffrages: Posidius telleth us of St. Austin, that
| in ordaining priests and clergymen he deemed the greater con-
sent of Christians, and the custom of the church, was to be fol-
lowed,

f My aitnbévra ruis mpeaBurépats, wh
rap émakdrwv, uh) rapa Aaw@y. Ath. ibid.
P- 749-

& Scio post obitus episcoporum per
ambitiosos aut contentiosos solere eccle-
sias perturbari . Aug. Ep. 110.

h ’Eue reooapdxovta émioxomo Tis
*Aclas Whpw kal tT&v AaumrpoTdtwy, Kai
TaV Aoydbwy, Kal TOD ebAaBeoTdToU Tay-
Tos KAhpov, kal Tv AoIMGY TdvTwY Tis
wérAews mhons exeipotévncay. Cone.
Chale. Act. xi. p. 404.

i Eye 5€ wera moAdAts avdyrns kal
Blas évOpovl(ovow eis thy aithy woAw
“Epeoov 6 Aads, kal 6 KAjpos, Kad of ént-
oxora. Ibid.

k “Araca yap 7 wéAis HAVE mpds enue
eis *"Aykipay kal éxdmoay Ta Wndlopara.
Syn. Chale. Act. xvi. p. 462.

1 In ordinandis vero sacerdotibus et
clericis consensum majorem Christiano-
rum, et consuetudinem ecclesiz sequen-
dam esse arbitrabatur. Posid. in Aug.
Vit. cap. 20.

Popes Supremacy. 329

So Celestine the First ; "Let no bishop be given them against
their wills ; let the consent and request of the clergy, the people,
and the order, be expected: and pope Leo the First; " When
there shall be an election of a bishop, let him be preferred who
has the unanimous consent of the clergy and people ; so that if
the votes be divided, and part for another person, let him, by the
Judgment of the metropolitan, be preferred, whose merits and
interest are greatest; only that none may be ordained against
their wills, or without their desire, lest the unwilling people con-
temn or hate a bishop whom they never desired, and become less
religious than they ought, because they could not have such a
bishop as they would. And in other of his Epistles, ° There
is no reason that they should be accounted bishops, who were
neither chosen by the clergy, nor desired by the people, nor
with the metropolitan’s order consecrated by the provincial
bishops

P Certainly the desires of the citizens and the testimonies of
the people should have been expected, with the gudgment of the
honourable, and the choice of the clergy, which in the ordina-
tions of priests used to be observed by those who knew the rules
of the fathers —% When peaceably, and with such concord as God
loves, he who is to be a teacher of peace is ordained by the agree-
ment of all. Let priests who are to be ordained be required
peaceably and quietly ; la the subscription of the clergy, the
testimony of the honourable, the consent of the order and people
be observed ; let him who is to preside over all be chosen by all.

m Nullus invitis detur episcopus ;
cleri, plebis, et ordinis consensum ac
desiderium requiratur Celest. I.
Ep. 2.

n Cum ergo de summi sacerdotis
electione tractabitur, ille omnibus pre-
ponatur, quem cleri plebisque consensus
concorditer postularint; ita ut si in
aliam forte personam partium se vota
diviserint, metropolitani judicio is alteri
preferatur, qui majoribus et studiis
juvatur et meritis, tantum ut nullus
invitis et non petentibus ordinetur ;
ne civitas episcopum non optatum aut
contemnat aut oderit, et fiat minus re-
ligiosa quam convenit, cui non licuit
habere quem voluit. P. Leo I. Ep. 84.
ad Anastas.

nec a plebibus expetiti, nec a provin-
cialibus episcopis cum metropolitani ju-
dicio consecrati. P. Leo I. Ep. 92.

p Expectarentur certe vota civium,
testimonia populorum, quereretur ho-
noratorum arbitrium, electio clericorum,
que in sacerdotum solent ordinationi-
bus ab his qui norunt patrum regulas
custodiri. P. Leo J. Ep. 89. Dist. \xiii.
cap. 27

4 Quum per pacem, et Deo placitam
concordiam consonis omnium studiis
qui doctor pacis futurus est ordinatur.
Ibid.

r Per pacem et quietem sacerdotes qui
prefuturi sunt postulentur; teneatur
subscriptio clericorum, honoratorum tes-
timonium, ordinis consensus et plebis ;
qui prefuturus est omnibus, ab omnibus
eligatur. Ibid.

330 A Treatise of the

And pope Nicholas 1; Pp Because we know the custom of your
royal city, that none can arrive at the top of the highest priestly
power without the assent ofthe ecclesiastical people and the emperor's

suffrage.

Now in all these proceedings it is most apparent that there
was no regard had to the pope, or any thought of him, out
of his particular territory ; which he had as metropolitan, (or
afterwards as primate in some parts of the west.) Nowhere
else had he the least finger in the constitution of a bishop
any where through the whole church ; no, not of the least

clergyman.

Vid. P.Leo, © When by St.Cyprian so largely and punctually the manner

Ep. 84,
107.

‘Ts of constituting bishops is declared; when the Nicene canons

and those of other synods do so carefully prescribe about the
ordination of them; when so many reports concerning the
election of bishops do occur in history ; why is there not a
tittle of mention concerning any special interest of the Roman

bishops about them ?

So true is that of Alb. Crantzius; 47here was no need then
of apostolical confirmation ; it was sufficient, if the election were
approved by the archbishop: now the church of Rome has assumed
to herself the rights of all churches.

We may by the way observe, that in the first times they
had not so much as an absolute power of ordaining a presbyter
in the church of his own city without leave of the clergy and
people ; as may be inferred from that passage in Eusebius,
where pope Cornelius relateth that the bishop who ordained
Novatus, "being hindered from doing it by all the clergy and by
many of the laity, did request that it might be granted to him to
ordain that one person: and he that so hardly could ordain one
priest in his own church, what authority could he have to con-
stitute bishops in all other churches ?

Bell. ii.18, | To all these evidences of fact our adversaries do oppose
me some instances of popes meddling in the constitution of bi-

p P. Nich. I. Ep. 5. Quia consuetu-
dinem vestram novimus in regia urbe,
minimo apicem archieratice potestatis
aliquem posse habere sine ecclesiastice
plebis assensu atque imperiali suffra-
gio . P. Joh. VIII. Ep. Ixx. Dist.
62.

4 Nihil tum opus erat apostolica con-

firmatione ; satis erat electionem ab |
archiepiscopo comprobari: nunc ad se
omnium ecclesiarum jura traxit Romana
ecclesia. Crantz. Metrop. vii. 45.

Yr Avaxwdvuduevos bird mayTds TOD KAH-
pov, GAAd Kal Aaikav worAdrAdy, Hklwoe
ovyxwpnOivat aiTt@ TovTov udvoy xELpo-
tovnoat. P. Cornel. apud Eus. vi. 43.

Pope’s Supremacy. 331

shops; as, pope Leo I. saith, that Anatolius did, *dy the fa-
vour of his assent, obtain the bishopric of Constantinople. The
same pope is alleged as having confirmed Maximus of An-
tioch. The same doth write to the bishop of Thessalonica, (his
vicar,) that he should confirm the elections of bishops by his
authorityt. He also confirmed Donatus, an African bishop ;
v—We will that Donatus preside over the Lord's flock, wpon
condition that he remember to send us an account of his faith.
Also Gregory I. doth complain of it, as of an inordinate act,
that a bishop of Salonze was ordained without his knowledge,
Pope Damasus did confirm the ordination of Peter Alexan-
drinus; * The Alexandrians, saith Sozomen, did render the
churches to Peter, being returned from Rome, with the letters
of Damasus, which confirmed both the Nicene decrees, and his
ordination: but what, I pray, doth confirmation here signify,
but approbation? for did he otherwise confirm the Nicene
decrees? did they need other confirmation ?

To the former instances we answer, that being well con-
sidered they do much strengthen our argument; in that they
are so few, so late, so lame, so impertinent: for if the pope had
enjoyed a power of constituting bishops, more instances of its
exercise would have been producible; indeed it could not be but
that history would have been full of them; the constitution of
bishops being a matter of continual use, and very remarkable.
At least they might have found one instance or other to allege
before the times of that busy pope Leo; in whose time, and
by whose means, papal authority began to overflow its banks.
And those which they produce do nowise reach home to the
point; Anatolius did obtain the bishopric of Constantinople by
the help of the emperor, and by the assent of the popes fa-
vourY : what then? Anatolius being put into that see in the

S Satis est quod vestre pietatis auxi-
lio, et mei favoris assensu episcopatum
tante urbis obtinuit. P. Leo, Ep. 54.
De Marc. iii. 14. sect. 1.

t Ut ordinationem rite celebrandam
tua quoque firmet authoritas. P. Leo,
Ep. 84. (ad Anastas.)

“ Donatum—ita Dominico volumus
gregi preesidere, ut libellum fidei suze
ad nos meminerit dirigendum —. P.
Leo, Ep. 87.

Y Salonitane civitatis episcopus ne
ac responsali meo nesciente ordinatus
est, et facta res est, que sub nullis an-

terioribus principibus evenit. Greg. Ep.
iv. 34.

X “AArckavdpeis* eraveAOdvt: 5& TdTe
Tétp amd rijs ‘Péuns meta ypauudrwv
Aaudoov tate év Nixala ddfavTa, kal rhy
abtov xeipotoviay KupoivTwy, maptdway
Tas éxxAnolas. Sozom. vi. 39.

y Nos enim vestre fidei et interven-
tionis habentes intuitum, cum secun-
dum suze consecrationis authores ejus
initia titubarent, benigniores erga ip-
sum quam justiores esse voluimus——.
P. Leo, Ep. 55. (ad Martianum.)

332 A Treatise of the

room of Flavianus, by the influence of Dioscorus, (whose re-
sponsal he had been,) and having favoured the Kutychian fac-
tion, pope Leo might thence have had a fair colour to disavow
him, as uncapable of that function and dignity, he being so
obnoxious? ; both having such a flaw in his ordination, and
having been guilty of great faults, adherence to the party of
Dioscorus, and irregularly ordaining the bishop of Antioch ;
but he, out of regard to the emperor's intervention, did acknow-
ledge Anatolius for bishop; this was the favowrable assent,
with which he upbraideth Anatolius, having displeased him :
and what doth this signify

Again, pope Leo did not reject Maximus bishop of An-
tioch from communion, nor disclaimed his ordination, although
liable to exception®: what then? is this a confirmation of him?
No such matter; it was only, which in such a vixenly pope
was a great favour, a forbearance to quarrel with him, as not
duly ordained; which any other bishop might have done. If
a pope had a flaw in his ordination, another bishop might
refuse him.

Again, pope Leo did enjoin the bishop of Thessalonica to
confirm ordinations: what is,that to the purpose? It belonged
to that bishop, as a metropolitan, by the canons, to confirm
those in his province, or, as a primate, to confirm those in
his diocese: it belonged to him, as the pope’s vicar in those
territories to which the pope had stretched his jurisdiction, to
execute the pope’s orders: but what is this to universal au-
thority ? It is certain, that Ilyricum was then in a more special
manner subjected to the pope’s jurisdiction than any of the
other eastern churches; what therefore he did there, cannot be
drawn into consequence as to other places.

The same may be said in answer to the complaint of pope
Gregory, and to any the like instances.

Moreover, surreptitious, presumptuous, pragmatical intru-
sions, or usurpations of power, do not suffice to found a right
in this or any other case ; to which purpose, and wholly to

z Decessore enim tuo B. memorie principia—-. P. Leo, Ep. 53. ad Ana-
Flaviano propter defensionem catho- ol. Liber. cap. 12.
lice veritatis ejecto, non immerito cre- 4 Quod nos amore reparande fidei,
debatur quod ordinatores tui contra et pacis studio retractare cessavimus.
sanctorum canonum constituta videren- P. Leo, Ep. 54. (ad Marcian.) Conc.
tur sui similem consecrasse——Post illa Chale. Act. 10.
itaque ordinationis tuz non inculpata

Pope’s Supremacy. 333

invalidate any such pleas, these observations may be con-
sidered.

1. There do oceur divers instances of bishops, who did
meddle in ordinations of other bishops, so as to bear great
stroke in constituting them, who did not thereby pretend to
universal jurisdiction ; and it would be extremely ridiculous
thence to infer they had any reasonable claim thereto.

Thus it was objected to Athanasius, that he presumed to
ordain in cities which did not belong to himy. 7 Kusebius of
Constantinople did obtrude Eusebius Emissenus to be bishop
of Alexandria. Eustathius of Antioch did ordain Evagrius Socr. iv.14.
bishop of Constantinople. *Euzoius delivered unto Lucius
the bishopric of Alexandria. Lucifer, a Sardinian bishop,
did ordain Paulinus bishop of Antioch. They for a salvo say,
as the pope’s legate: but upon what ground or testimony ?
Why did not historians tell us so much? The pope had then
been hissed at, if he had sent legates about such errands; it
was indeed out of presumption and pragmatical zeal to serve
a party, then ordinary in persons addicted to all parties, right
and wrong; it not being then so expressly forbidden by the
canons as afterward.

Theognis and Theodorus did make Macedonius bishop of Soz. ii. 6.
Constantinople. ©Theophilus of Alexandria did obtain St.Chry-
sostom. 4The Egyptian bishops surreptitiously did consti-
tute Maximus, the Cynic philosopher, bishop of Constanti-
nople. ¢Acacius (who had as little to do there as the pope)
did thrust Eudoxius into the throne of Constantinople.
fMeletius, of Antioch, did constitute St. Gregory Nazianzen
to the charge of Constantinople. &Acacius and Patrophilus,
extruding Maximus, did in his room constitute Cyril bishop of
Jerusalem. Pope Leo doth complain of Anatolius, that against

Y ’Auéres Tor kal TovTO eyKAnua abt@
ériyyov, ws év méAcot undty a’Tt@ mpoc-
nkovoas xeipotoveiy érdAunoev. Soz iii.
21

z °Eml toy ’Adctavdpelas mpoeBAnOn
Opdvov imd EboeBiov Tod Kwvortaytwov-
mérews emioxdmrov. Soz. ii. 5.

a°Em) 7r@ mwapadoitva Aovklw Té ’A-
perav@ tas éxe? exxAnalas. Socr. iv. 21.

b’Exeipordynoe tov MavAivoy émlaxo-
mov. Socr. iii. 6. vi. 2.

d Totrov KAépaytes thy xeipotoviay
érickorov KwyoravtwoumdAews KaTéoTn-
gay of tote e& Aiyirrou auveAnavOdres.
Soz. vii. 9.

f Hin mpény cis KavotaytwotwoAw
5a thy Tpnyoplov xardoracw adixd-
pevos. Soz. vil. 2, 3.

2 ’Axdxios pev yap Kal TMarpddiros
Mdiiwov toy ‘lepocoAduwy etwOhoavres
KipiAAov avtixatéarnoay. Socr. ii. 238.

h Post consecrationem Antiocheni epi-

334 A Treatise of the

the canonical rule he had assumed to himself the ordination of
the bishop of Antioch.

2. To obviate these irregular and inconvenient proceedings,
having crept in upon the dissensions in faith, and especially
upon occasion of Gregory Nazianzen being constituted bishop
of Constantinople by Meletius, and Maximus being thrust
into the same see by the Egyptians, (whose party for a time
the Roman church did countenance,) the second general synod
did ordain, that no bishop should intermeddle about ordina-
tions without the bounds of his own diocese.

3. In pursuance of this law, or upon the ground of it, the
pope was sometimes checked, when he presumed to make a
sally beyond his bounds in this or the like cases.

As when pope Innocent I. did send some bishops to Con-
stantinople for procuring a synod to examine the cause of
St. Chrysostom ; those of Constantinople ‘did cause them to
be dismissed with disgrace, as molesting a government beyond
their bounds.

4. Even in the western parts, after that the pope had wrig-
gled himself into most countries there, so as to obtain sway
in their transactions, yet he in divers places did not meddle
in ordinations ;—j We do not, says pope Leo I, arrogate to our-
selves a power of ordaining in your provinces.

Even in some parts of Italy itself the pope did not confirm
bishops till the times of pope Nicholas I, as may be collected
from the submission then of the bishop of Ravenna to that
condition, ‘that he should have no power to consecrate bishops
canonically elected in the regio Flaminia, unless it were granted
him by letters from the apostolic see.

And it was not without great opposition and struggling
that he got that power otherwhere than in his original pre-
cinets, or where the juncture of things did afford him special
advantage.

5. If examples would avail to determine right, there are
more and more clear instances of emperors interposing in the

scopi, quam tibimet contra canonicam rum provinciarum defendimus. P. Leo,

regulam vendicasti . P. Leol. Ep. Ep. 89.

53. (ad Anatol.) k ——et ne electos etiam canonice in
i Tobs piv brepoplay apxhv évoxAh- Flaminia episcopos consecrandi facul-

cavtas atluws exmeup0ijvat mapecnet- tatem haberet, nisi id sibi a sede aposto-

agay. Sozom. viii. 28. lica literis concederetur. Plat. in P.
j Non enim nobis ordinationes vestra- Nichol. I.

Pope's Supremacy. 335

constitution of bishops than of popes; as they had ground in
reason, and authority in holy scripture: And Zadok the priest « Kings ii.
did the king put in the room of Abiathar. Constantine did in- **
terpose at the designation of a bishop at Antioch in the room
of Eustathius. Upon Gregory Nazianzen’s recess from Con- Euseb. de
stantinople, Theodosius (that excellent emperor, who would ie rem,
not have infringed right) !did command the bishops present to
write in paper the names of those whom each did approve wor-
thy to be ordained, and reserved to himself the choice of one;
and accordingly they obeying, he, out of all that were nomi-
nated, did elect Nectarius. “Constantius did deliver the see
of Constantinople to Eusebius Nicomediensis. Constantius was
angry with Macedonius, " because he was ordained without his
license. He °rejecting Eleusius and Syleanus did order other
to be substituted in their places. When, before St. Ambrose,
the see of Milan was vacant, Pa synod of bishops there did
entreat the emperor to declare one. Flavianus said to the em-
peror Theodosius, 4Give forsooth, O king, the sce of Antioch to
whom you shall think good. *The emperor did call Nestorius
from Antioch to the see of Constantinople ; and he was, saith
Vineentius Lir., selected by the emperor's judgment. The favour
of Justinian did advance ' Menas to the see of Constantinople :
and the same did prefer Eutychius thereto". He did put in
pope Vigilius.

In Spain the kings had the election of bishops by the de- Cone. To-
crees of the council of Toledo. oak
That the emperor Charles did use to confirm bishops pope - 0% a

John VIII. doth testify, reproving the archbishop of Verdun, .., 3.,

1 Tpoordtavtros tov BaciAéws Tors
iepedow eyypdya xdprn Tas tpoonyoplas
dv éxaora Soxid(Covow eis Thy XEtpoTo-
viay atlwy, éavr@ 5¢ puAdtavros Tov evos
Thv alpeoww—kal Nextdpiov aipetras.
Sozom. vii. 8.

m EioceBlm toy KwvotavtwoumdAcws
Opdvov mapédwrev. Id. iii. 4.

DOr: amply aitoy émtpéva, exeipo-
tovhOn. Id. iii. 6.

P Abrdv 4 abvodos iglov Wnolcacba
—. Id. iv. 7.

Q Tovydpta Bds @ BovAe thy *Avrio-

xéwv Opdvov, & BaoiAcd——. Id. v. 23.

r Visum est imperatoribus nullum or-
dinare de Constantinopolitana ecclesia
pontificem Nestorium quasi uti-
lem ad docendum Constantinopolin prin-
cipes evocaverunt, Lib. Brev. 6. Socr.
vii. 29.

8 Quem tanto imperii judicio electum,
tanto sacerdotum studio prosecutum
Vine, Lir. p. 330.

t Tunc papa principis favore Menam
pro eo (Anthimo) ordinavit antistitem.
Lib. cap. 21.

u ——dveBlBace tov Ebrixiov. Evag.
iv. 38.

336 A Treatise of the

for rejecting a bishop *whom the clergy and people of the city
had chosen, and the emperor Charles had confirmed by his con-
sent.

When Macarius, bishop of Antioch, for monothelitism was
deposed in the sixth synod, the bishops under that throne did
request the presidents of the synod to suggest another to the
emperor to be substituted in his roomy.

In Gratian there are divers passages wherein popes declared,
that they could not ordain bishops to churches, even in
Italy, without the emperor’s leave and license. As 7indeed
there are also in later times other decrees, (made by popes of
another kidney, or in other junctures of affairs,) which forbid
princes to meddle in the elections of bishops; as in the
‘seventh synod, and in the eighth synod as they call it, upon
occasion of Photius being placed in the see of Constantinople
by the power of the court. #And that of pope Nicholas I, by
which discordance in practice we may see the consistence and
stability of doctrine and practice in the Roman church.

The emperors for a long time did enjoy the privilege of
constituting or confirming the popes: for, says Platina, in
the Life of Pelagius II, nothing was then done by the clergy in
electing a pope, unless the emperor approved the election. He
did confirm pope Gregory I. and pope Agatho.

¢Pope Adrian, with his whole synod, did deliver to Charles
the Great the right and power of electing the pope and ordain-
ing the apostolic see. He moreover defined that archbishops

x Quem clerus et populus civitatis
eligerat, pizeque memorize Carolus impe-
rator suo consensu firmaverat—. P.
Joh. VIIT. Ep. 70.

Y Aitotuey thy iperépay evdokdryTa
Tov avayayat TG evocBeatdTw Kal——
jpav Seardrn Kal weydrdw@ Baoidre? érepov
avtl Maxaplou—bia 7d wh xnpevew Tov
toovTov Opdvov. Syn. VI. Act. xii. (p.
208.)

Z Dist. lxili. cap.g. Greg. I. Ep. iv.
15. cap. 15—18. P. Leo IV. et Steph.
Dist. lxiii. cap. 6,7. Ibid. cap. 1, 2.

a Ibid. cap. 4. [It is a notorious
thing, that most princes in the west, in
Germany, France, England, did invest
bishops till the time of pope Gregory
Vil, when that boisterous man did
raise so much stir in Christendom to
dispossess them of that right; which

they enjoyed, not only as princes, but
as founders, patrons, benefactors, pro-
tectors of churches. |

b Nihil a clero in eligendo pontifice
actum erat, nisi ejus electionem impe-
rator approbasset. Plat. in Pelagio II.
(p. 154.) Dist. 63. Plat. p. 155. Vid.
Joh. Diac. et Anastas. Dist. lxiii. cap.
@8:

¢ Hadrianus autem papa cum uni-
versa synodo tradiderunt jus et potes-
tatem eligendi pontificem, et ordinandi
apostolicam sedem insuper archie-
piscopos et episcopos per singulas pro-.
vincias ab eo investituram accipere de-
finivit ; et nisi a rege laudetur et inves-
tiatur episcopus, a nemine consecretur ;
et quicunque contra hocdecretum ageret,
anathematis vinculo eum innodavit.
Dist. \xiii. cap. 22.

Pope’s Supremacy. © 337

and bishops in every province should receive investiture from
him: and that if a bishop were not commended and invested
by the king, he should be consecrated by none; and whoever
should act against this decree, him he did noose in the band of
anathema.

The like privilege did pope Leo VIII. attribute to the
emperor Otho I. 4 We give him, says he, for ever power to
ordain a successor and bishop of the chief apostolic see, and
change archbishops, &e. And Platina, in his Life, says, * That
being weary of the inconstancy of the Romans, he transferred all
authority to choose a pope from the clergy and people of Rome
to the emperor.

Now, I pray, if this power of confirming bishops do by
divine institution belong to the pope, how could he part with
it, or transfer it on others? is not this a plain renunciation in
popes of their divine pretence ?

6. General synods, by an authority paramount, have as- Conc.
sumed to themselves the constitution and confirmation of tens
bishops. So the second general synod did confirm the ordina- Cone. Bas.
tion of Nectarius, bishop of Constantinople, and of Flavianus, io
bishop of Antioch, (fthis ordination, say they, the synod gene-
rally have admitted,) although the Roman church did not
approve the ordination of Nectarius, and for a long time after
did oppose that of Flavianus. So the fifth synod, it seemeth,

did confirm the ordination of Theophanius, bishop of Antioch.
So the synod of Pisa did constitute pope Alexander V ; that
of Constance, pope Martin V; that of Basil, pope Felix V.

7. All catholic bishops in old times might, and commonly
did, confirm the elections and ordinations of bishops, to the
same effect as popes may be pretended to have done; that is,
by signifying their approbation or satisfaction concerning the
orthodoxy of their faith, the attestation to their manners, the
legality of their ordination, no canonical impediment; and
consequently by admitting them to communion of peace and
charity, and correspondence in all good offices, which they

4 Largimur in perpetuum facultatem stantie pertesus authoritatem omnem
successorem, atque summe sedis apo- eligendi pontificis a clero populoque
stolice pontificem ordinandi, ac per hoc Romano ad imperatorem transtulit—.
archiepiscopos seu episcopos, &c, Ibid. Plat. in Leo VIII. p. 291.
cap. 23. f“Hywep tvOecuov xeiporoviay éétaro

e Qui statim Romanorum incon- 72 77s cvvddou Kowdy . Theod. vy. 9.

338 A Treatise of the
express by returning xowvovixal émicroAal in answer to their
synodical-communicatory letters.

Thus did St.Cyprian and all the bishops of that age confirm
the ordination of pope Cornelius, being contested by Novatian ;
as St.Cyprian in terms doth affirm; 8 When the see of St. Peter,
the sacerdotal chair, was vacant, which by the will of God being
occupied, and by all our consents confirmed, &e.— to confirm
thy ordination with a greater authority.

To which purpose, each bishop did write epistles to other
bishops, (or at least to those of highest rank,) acquainting them
with his ordination and instalment, making a profession of his
faith, so as to satisfy them of his capacity of the function.

8. But bishops were complete bishops before they did give
such an account of themselves ; so that it was not in the power
of the pope, or of any others, to reverse their ordination, or
dispossess them of their places. There was no confirmation
importing any such matter: this is plain; and one instance
will serve to shew it; ithat of pope Honorius, and of Sergius,
bishop of Constantinople, who speak of Sophronius, patriarch
of Jerusalem; that he was constituted bishop before their
knowledge, and receipt of his synodical letters.

9. If the designation of any bishop should belong to the
pope, then especially that of metropolitans, who are the chief
princes of the church; but this anciently did not belong to
him. In Afric the most ancient bishop of the province (with-
out election) did succeed into that dignity. Where the metro-
poles were fixed, all the bishops of the province did convene,
and with the consent of the clergy, persons of quality, and the
commonalty, did elect him*. So was St. Cyprian, bishop of

€ Cum locus Petri et gradus cathedre
sacerdotalis vacaret, quo occupato de
Dei voluntate, atque omnium nostrum
consensione firmato. Cypr. Ep. 52. (ad
Anton.)

h Ad comprobandam ordinationem
tuam factam auctoritate majore——.
Ep. 45. ad Corn.

i ‘Os ef dxo7js kal udvns peuabhKapev
THs ‘leporoAupitav xeipotovnbels mpde-
Spos’ obrw yap Ta && Eovs avTod auvo-
Bind péxpe Tov viv edetducba. Syn. VI.
Act. xii. 198. Nuv)d 6€ Gkotouev éem-
axémov Kabeot@tos THs ‘lepocoAvmiT@Y

. P. Honor. ib. p. 198.

k Metropolitano defuncto, cum in lo-
cum ejus alius fuerit subrogandus, pro-
vinciales episcopi ad civitatem metropo-
litanam convenire debebunt, ut omnium
clericorum atque omnium civium vo-
luntate discussa ex presbyteris ejusdem
ecclesiz, vel ex diaconibus optimus eli-
gatur. P. Leo, Ep. 88. The metropo-
litan being dead, when another is to be
put in his place, the provincial bishops
ought to meet in the metropolitan city,
that by the votes of the whole clergy
and citizens, out of the priests or dea-
cons of the same church, the fittest per-
son may be chosen.

Pope's Supremacy. 339

Carthage, elected. So Nectarius of Constantinople, Flavia-
nus of Antioch, and Cyril of Jerusalem, as the fathers of
Constantinople tell us. So Stephanus and Bassianus, rival
bishops of Ephesus, did pretend to have been chosen, as we
saw before.
And for confirmation, there did not need any, there is no
mention of any; except that confirmation of which we spake,
a consequent approbation of them from all their fellow-bishops,
as having no exception against them rendering them unworthy
of communion. In the synod of Chalcedon it was defined,
that the bishop of Constantinople should have equal privileges
with the bishop of Rome; yet it is expressly cautioned there,
that he shall not meddle in ordination of bishops in any pro-
vince, that being left to the metropolitan: 'for a good time,
even in the western parts, the pope did not meddle with the via. concil.
constitution of metropolitans; leaving the churches to enjoy poe sans
their liberties. Afterwards, with all other rights, he snatched Mare. VI.
the collation, confirmation, &c. of metropolitans. Fs
_VII. Sovereigns have a power to censure and correct all
inferior magistrates in proportion to their offences; and in
ease of great misdemeanour, or of incapacity, they can wholly
discharge and remove them from their office.
This prerogative therefore he of Rome doth claim, as most Vid. Gelas.
proper to himself, by divine sanction. HM Pr
i ' p- 640.)
God Almighty alone can dissolve the spiritual marriage between
a bishop and his church. ™ Therefore those three things premised
(the confirmation, translation, and deposition of bishops) are
reserved to the Roman bishop, not so much by canonical consti-
tution, as by divine institution.
This power the convention of Trent doth allow him;
thwarting the ancient laws, and betraying the liberties of the
church thereby, and endangering the Christian doctrine to be
inflected and corrupted to the advantage of papal interest”.

—

1 Mndév emrixowovvros tais exelvwv
xeiporoviais Tov dawrdtrouv apxiemioKd-
mov THs BaciAldos - Act. xvi. p.
464.

m Et ideo tria hec que premisimus
non tam constitutione canonica, quam
institutione divina soli sunt Romano
pontifici reservata. P. Innoc. IIT. in

Gregor. Decrei. lib. i. tit. 7. cap. 2.

n Cause criminales graviores contra
episcopos, etiam heresis, quod absit, que
depositione aut privatione digne sunt,
ab ipso tantum summo Romano ponti-
fice cognoscantur, et terminentur. Cone.
Trid. sess. Xxiv. cap. §.

22%

Syn. Nic.
can. 5.

Syn. Ant.
can. 15.

(An. 269.)

Euseb. vii.

30.
Socr, i. 24.

Socr. ii. 43.

Soz. iii. 14.

Socr. i. 36.

Socr. ii. 29.

340 A T'reatise of the

But such a power anciently did not by any rule or custom
in a peculiar manner belong to the Roman bishop?®.

Premising what was generally touched about jurisdiction ;
in reference to this branch we remark,

1. The exercising of judgment and censure upon bishops
(when it was needful for general good) was prescribed to be
done by synods; provincial or patriarchal (diocesan.) In them
causes were to be discussed, and sentence pronounced against
those who had deviated from faith, or committed misdemean-
ours. So it was appointed in the synod of Nice; as the
African synod (wherein St. Austin was one bishop) did observe,
and urge in their Epistle to pope Celestine, in those notable
words ; P Whether they be clergy of an inferior degree, or whether
they be bishops, the Nicene decrees have most plainly committed
them to the metropolitan’s charge; for they have most prudently
and justly discerned, that all matters whatsoever ought to be
determined in the places where they do first begin: and that the
grace of the Holy Spirit would not be wanting to every particular
province. The same law was enacted by the synod of Antioch,
by the synods of Constantinople, Chalcedon, &e.

Thus was Paulus Samosatenus for his error against the di-
vinity of our Lord, and for his scandalous demeanour, deposed
by the synod of Antioch. Thus was Eustathius, bishop of
Antioch, (being accused of Sabellianism and of other faults,)
removed by a synod of the same place; the which sentence
he quietly did beard. Thus another Eustathius, bishop of
Sebastia, (for his uncouth garb, and fond conceits against mar-
riage,) was discarded by the synod of Gangra. Thus did a
synod of Constantinople abdicate Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra,
for heterodoxy in the point concerning our Lord’s divinity.
For the like cause was Photinus, bishop of Sirmium, deposed
by a synod there, gathered by the emperor’s command. So

° *Enlokomos Kabaiper mdvTa KAnpiKdv
bkvov bvTa Kabaipécews, TARY erlaKoronv,
pévos yap ovx olds re. Const. Ap. viii.
28. A bishop may depose any clerk
who deserves it, except he be a bishop ;
whom to deprive, one bishop alone is
not sufficient.

P Decreta Nicena sive inferioris gra-
dus clericos, sive ipsos episcopos suis

metropolitanis apertissime commise-
runt: prudentissime enim justissime-
que viderunt quecunque negotia in
suis locis ubi orta sunt finienda; nec
unicuique provinciz gratiam 8S. Spiritus
defuturam. Syn. Afr. Ep. ad P. Ce-
lest. I.

Q ‘Hovxy Thy avKopayriay Hveryre.
Soz. ii. 9.

Pope’s Supremacy. 341

was Athanasius tried and condemned (although unjustly as to Socr. i. 28.
the matter and cause) by the synod of Tyre. So was St.Chry-
sostom (although most injuriously) deposed by a synod at
Constantinople. So the bishops at Antioch (according to the Theod. ii.
emperor’s order) deposed Stephanus, bishop of that place, for ‘°
a wicked contrivance against the fame of Euphratas and Vin-
centius.
In all these condemnations, censures, and depositions of bi-
shops,) whereof each was of high rank and great interest in
the church,) the bishop of Rome had no hand, nor so much as
a little finger. All the proceedings did go on supposition of the
rule and laws, that such se Seap were to be passed by synods.
St.Chrysostom dexarevre émurxdrovs xabeihev—deposed fifteen Act. xi.
bishops. nen Chale.
2. In some case a kind of deposing of bishops was assumed Hae §.
by particular bishops, as defenders of the faith, and executors jungenda.
of canons; their deposition consisting in not allowing those to
be bishops, whom for erroneous doctrine, or disorderly behaviour,
(notoriously incurred,) they deemed incapable of the office, pre-
suming their places, ipso facto, voids.
This pope Gelasius I. ‘proposed for a rule, That not only a
metropolitan, but every other bishop, hath a right to separate any
persons or any place from the catholic communion, according
to the rule by which his heresy is already condemned. And upon
this account did the popes for so long time quarrel with the
see of Constantinople, because they did not expunge Acacius
from the roll of bishops, who had communicated with here-
tics". So did St.Cyprian reject Marcianus, bishop of Arles, Cypr. Ep.
for adhering to the Novatians. So Athanasius was said to? aan aa ot
have deposed Arian bishops, and substituted others in their
places. So Acacius and his complices deposed Macedonius Ser. ti. 42.
and divers other bishops. And the bishops of those times
xa0eidov GAA7Aovs, factiously applying a rule taken for granted
then, deposed one anotherY: so Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem,

8 Tivwone amd maons KaSodckijs éxkAn- regulam hzereseos ipsius ante damnatze,a
alas &xowdynroyv elya: ceavtdy, kal dve- catholica communione discernant. Fp. 4.
vépyntov mpos may driv Tay e aidev- u *Ere) ody expay Tov én) xaxodotia
tas ieparixijs. P. Celest. in Nest. Sent. gwpac@évta unr érépas Epxew exKAn-
Eph. Act. p. 195. alas, BidacxddrAov bvoua mepipépew.

* Quod non solum presuli apostolico Conc. sub Men. (p. 10.)
facere licet, sed cuicunque pontifici, ut Y Mpérepov xabeAdy. Socr. ii. 24.
quoslibet et quemlibet locum secundum

’Eiwfoar-
tes. Socr.
ii. 38.
Theod. ii.
26.

Sozom. iv.
24.

342 A Treatise of the

deposed Athanasius. So 7Eusebius of Nicomedia threatened
to depose Alexander of Constantinople, if he would not admit
Arius to communion. Acacius and his complices did eatrude
Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem. He also deposed and eapelled
Cyril of Jerusalem : and deposed many other bishops at Con-
stantinople. #Cyril deposed Nestorius, and Nestorius deposed
Cyril and Memnon. Cyril and Juvenalis deposed John of
Antioch. >John of Antioch, with his bishops, deposed Cyril
and Memnon. Yea after the synod of Ephesus, ‘John of
Antioch, gathering together many bishops, did depose Oyril.
Stephanus, concerning Bassianus; ‘Because he had entered into
the church with swords—therefore he was expelled out of it again
by the holy fathers, both by Leo of Rome, the imperial city, and
by Flavianus; by the bishop of Alewandria, and also by the
bishop of Antioch. Anatolius of Constantinople did reject
Timotheus of Alexandria. Acacius, bishop of Constantinople,
did reject Petrus Fullo.

3. St.Cyprian doth assert the power of censuring bishops,
upon needful and just occasion, to belong to all bishops, for
maintenance of common faith, discipline, and peace.

¢ Therefore, (saith he, writing to pope Stephanus himself)
dear brother, the body of bishops is copious, being coupled by
the glue of concord, and the band of unity, that of any of our
college shall attempt to frame a heresy, or to tear and spoil the
flock of Christ, the rest may succour, and like useful and merciful
shepherds may gather together the sheep of our Lord into the

flock.

Z EvoéBios woAAG SinreiaAes ata, A€-
yav boov ovbérw Kabaiphoev adroy, «i
uh eis Kowwviay Séinra: tov “Apeiov.
Id. i. 37.

a KipiAdos 5€ Gua Kal lovBevarly,
duuvdpuevos Toy “lwdyyny Kkabaipel Kai ad-
rov. 1d. vii. 34.

b ‘H ayla otvod}0s——rodrov pty Ka-
Gaipet did. TH Mpoeipnucva mavTa, Méuvova
Be ds cuvepydv a’rov. Act. Syn. Eph.
p. 380. ‘Os tav Kakav tyyeudvas Kabe-
Aciv jvaryndcOnuev. Ibid. p.320.

© "Iwavyns 8& natakaBwv Thy ’AvTid-
xetav Kal moAAods ouvaryarywy emisndmous
Kabaiper Kipiddoy, Hin KareAnpdra thy
*"Adctdvoperav. Socr. vii- 34.

4 "Ereday abtds eres AGe TH ayw-
Tatn ékkAnola wera tipav ebaaOn

512 ToT mapa Tay aylwy Tlarépwy mapa
Te Tov do.oTdrov THS BaoiAevovons ‘Pa-
uns Aéovtos, Kal Tov waxapioTdtov PAav-
tavod Kal mapa Tod ev Adekavdpela
Kal mapa Tod ev ’Avtioxela. Syn. Chale.
Act. xi. p. 405. ‘O paxdpios év alors
Prauviavds ekedaato avtdv. Ibid. p. 406.
Baron. ann. 457. sect. 34. P. Felix III.
Ep. 4.

e Idcirco enim, frater charissime, co-
piosum corpus est sacerdotum, concor-
diz mutue glutino atque unitatis vinculo
copulatum, ut siquis ex collegio nostro
heresin facere, et gregem Christi lace-
rare, et vastare tentaverit, subveniant
ceteri, et quasi pastores utiles et mise-
ricordes oves Dominicas in gregem col-
ligant. Cypr. Ep. 67. (ad Steph.)

Pope’s Supremacy. 343

The like doctrine is that of pope Celestine J. in his Epistle
to the Ephesine synod.

In matter of faith any bishop might interpose judgment ; bias
Theophilus did proceed to condemn the Origenists without ‘ oa
regard to the pope.

Epiphanius did demand satisfaction of John of Jerusalem.

4. This common right of bishops in some cases is confirmed
by the nature of such censures, which consisted in disclaiming
persons notoriously guilty of heresy, schism, or scandal; and
in refusing to entertain communion with them : which every
bishop, as entitled to the common interests of faith and peace,
might do’.

5. hIndeed in such a case every Christian had a right (yea
an obligation) to desert his own bishop. So John of Jerusalem
haying given suspicion of error in faith, ‘St. Epiphanius did
write letters to the monks of Palestine not to communicate with
him, till they were satisfied of his orthodoxy. Upon which ac-
count St. Jerome living in Palestine did decline communica-
tion with the patriarch thereof; asking him, if it were any
where said to him, or commanded, that without satisfaction con-
cerning his faith, they were bound to maintain communion with
him. So every bishop, yea every Christian, hath a kind of
universal jurisdiction.

6. If any pope did assume more than was allowed in this
ease by the canons, or was common to other bishops of his
rank, it was an irregularity and an usurpation. Nor would
examples, if any were producible, serve to justify him, or to

f AxovécOw Taira mapa mdvTwy eis Td

ad Petr. Hier. (p. 24.)

Kowdv, KUpior aeAgol év TalTn TH
povrid: opvyyducda of mavtaxod Kal ava
mwacay oikoupéyny TH exelvwy diadoxy Td
bvoua Kuplov KnpirrovTes &c. Conc.
Eph. Act. ii. p. 324. Tovyapoty mepi-
orotdacrdy eat, kal mpaxtéov Srws Ka-
ary Kow@ 7a eumorevOevTa, Kal 51d Tis
GrogroAiKis diadox 7s €ws Tov viv cvcxe-
Gévra pvddtauer. Ibid. p. 325.

& Cypr. Ep. 67. “Ooo: rapa tovs em)
1H mlore: Tév warépwy Timous diaTpar-
TovTal, €avTois emd-youct Ta ek TaY Kavd-
voy emitiuia. Thalass. in Syn. Chale.
Act. i. p. 191. "Exphy yap thy iuerépay
aydrnv pweuynuévny Tay waTpiKGy wapa-
ddcewv undéva cvyxwpeiv Ta KexwAULEVa
moteiv, GAG Kal ef Tis TOAUNpds haveln
mdon Suvdue: dvaytioieOa. P. Agapet.

h Eixérws tuets emiorduevar Thy Tav
Oelwy kavdvev exdixnow apxicpedow wd-
voy apudrrew, Thyde Tis dplis mlaorews
ov pdvoy iepwuévois, GAAG Kal maT)
dp00ddim Xpioriavg. Menas. (tom. iv.
p- 10.) Plebs, &c. Deum metuens-—.
Cypr. Ep. 68. Vid. P. Nich. I. Ep. 8.
(p. 506.)

i Cunctis monachis ab eodem Epipha-
nio scripta venerunt, ut absque satis-
factione fidei nullus ei temere commu-
nicaret. Flier. Ep. 61. (ad Pammach.)
cap. 15.

k Alicubine dictum, aut tibi alicubi
mandatum est, quod sine satisfactione
fidei communionem tuam subiremus ?
Ibid. Quod tibi non communicemus,
fidei est. bid. cap. 16.

Theophi-
lus, John
of Antioch,
Dioscorus.

Novam le-
gem, &c.
Vid. de
Conc. Sard.

Soz. iii. 11.

344, A Treatise of the

ground a right thereto, any more than the extravagant pro-
ceedings of other pragmatical and factious bishops, in the same
kind, (whereof so many instances can be alleged,) can assert
such a power to any bishop.

7. When the pope hath attempted in this kind, his power
hath been disavowed, as an illegal, upstart pretence.

8. Other bishops have taken upon them, when they appre-
hended cause, to discard and depose popes. So did the orien-
tal faction at Sardica depose pope Julius for transgressing, as
they supposed, the laws of the church, in fostering heretics
and criminal persons condemned by synods. So did the synod
of Antioch threaten deposition to the same pope. So did the
patriarch Dioscorus make show to reject pope Leo from com-
munion. So did St. Hilary anathematize pope Liberius.

9. Popes, when there was great occasion, and they had a
great mind to exert their utmost power, have not yet presumed
by themselves, without joint authority of synods, to condemn
bishops'. So pope Julius did not presume to depose Eusebius
of Nicomedia, his great adversary, and so much obnoxious by
his patronising Arianism. Pope Innocent did not censure
Theophilus and his complices, who so irregularly and wrong-
fully had extruded St. Chrysostom, although much displeased
with them ; but endeavoured to get a general synod to do the
business. Pope Leo I. (though a man of spirit and animosity
sufficient) would not, without assistance of a synod, attempt to
judge Dioscorus, who had so highly provoked him, and given
so much advantage against him, by favouring Kutyches, and
persecuting the orthodox.

Indeed often we may presume that popes would have de-
posed bishops, if they had thought it regular, or if others
commonly had received that opinion, so that they could have
expected success in their attempting it. But they many times
were angry when their horns were short, and shewed their teeth
when they could not bite.

10. What has been done in this kind by popes jointly with
others, or in synods, (especially upon advantage, when the
cause was just and plausible,) is not to be ascribed to the au-
thority of popes as such. It might be done with their influence,

1 An qui in hominem imperatorem synodo dejici debuerunt? P. Gelas. I.
peccasse dicebatur, nulla interveniente Ep. 13.

Pope’s Supremacy. 345

not by their authority: ™so the synod of Sardica (not pope
Julius) cashiered the enemies of Athanasius ; so the synod of
Chalcedon (not pope Leo) deposed Dioscorus; so the Roman
synod (not pope Celestine) checked Nestorius; and that of
Ephesus deposed him. The whole western synod (whereof he
was president) had a great sway.

11. If instances were arguments of right, there would be
other pretenders to the deposing power. Particular bishops
would have it, as we before shewed.

12. The people would have the power; for they have some-
times deposed popes themselves, with effect.

So of pope Constantine, Platina telleth us, "at length he is
deposed by the people of Rome, being very much provoked by the
indignity of the matter.

13. There are many instances of bishops being removed or
deposed by the imperial authority. This power was indeed ne-
cessarily annexed to the imperial dignity ; for all bishops being
subjects of the emperor, he could dispose of their persons, so
as not to suffer them to continue in a place, or to put them
from it, as they demeaned themselves, to his satisfaction or
otherwise, in reference to public utility. It is reasonable, if
they were disloyal or disobedient to him, that he should not
suffer them to be in places of such influence, whereby they
might pervert the people to disaffection. It is fit that he
should deprive them of temporalties.

The example of Solomon deposing Abiathar.

Constantine M. °commanded Eusebius and Theogonius to
depart out of the cities over which they presided as bishops.

Constantius deposed Paulus of Constantinople P.

m ‘H ayla ‘Pwualwy cbvodos pavepa
tetimwke. Cyril. ad Joh. Ant. Conc.
Eph. p. 197, 332. Syn.p.11,60. *A-
mooToAikds Opdvos, kal 7 abvodos ab’tod.
Const. Sacr. in Syn. VJ. p. 11. "Ayd0ev
éricxomos aby Tacs Tais cvvddos Tals
aynkovoas TH cuvddp Tov amoaroAKod
Opdvov-——. Ibid. p. 60. ‘Amdons kara
Stow ovvddov. Act. Eph. p. 332. Sit
heec in te fixa damnatio a me, et ab his
qui sub me constituti episcopales sedes
gubernare noscuntur——. P. Felix ad
Petrum Antioch. apud Baron. ann. 483.
sect. 68.

n Tandem a sede dejicitur a populo
Romano ira et indignitate rei percito.

Plat. p. 223. P. Leo VIII. p. 291. A-
nastasius. Piat. p. 131.

© EvoéBioy 5¢ Kal Ocoydvioy pevyew
mpocétatey &s émoxémovy wédcis. Soz. i.
21. Téte piv ovro KabnpéOncay, Kal
Tav méAewy e&nAdbnoay. Theodor. i. 20.
He threatened Athanasius to depose
him—éay yap yv@ as Kexddrveas Twas
abtav Tis exxAnolas ueraroovuévous, F)
dmelptas tis eicddov, arooTeA@ mapa-
Xpiiua tov Kabaiphoovrd ce ef euijs KeAev-
cews, Kal Tav Térwy eTaoThoorTa.
Socr. i. 27. Athanas. Apol. ii. p. 778.

P Toby TlavAov oxodrd(ew érolnoer.
Socr. ii. 7-

1 Kings ii.

35:

Evag. ii. 11.
Lib.cap. 15.
P. Leo I.
Epist. 99.

Lib. cap.22.

Evag. iv.
41,11.

346 A Treatise of the

Constantius ejected all that would not subscribe to the creed
of Ariminum4.

The emperor Leo deposed Timotheus Atlurus, for which
pope Leo did highly commend and thank him. ©

The emperors discarded divers popes.

Constantius banished pope Liberius, and caused another to
be put in his room.

Otho put out John the Twelfth.

Justinian deposed pope Silverius, and banished pope Vigi-
lius.

Justinian banished Anastasius, bishop of Antioch; extruded
Anthimus of Constantinople, and Theodosius of Alexandria.

Neither indeed was any great patriarch effectually deposed
without their power or leave.

Flavianus was supported by Theodosius against the pope.

Dioscorus subsisted by the power of Theodosius junior.

The deposition of Dioscorus, in the synod of Chalcedon,
was voted with a reserve of, "If it shall please our most sacred
and pious lord.

In effect the emperors deposed all bishops which were or-
dained beside their general laws: as Justinian having pre-
scribed conditions and qualifications concerning the ordinations
of bishops, subjoineth, s But if any bishop be ordained without
using our forementioned constitution, we command you that by all
means he be removed from his bishopric.

14. The instances alleged to prove the pope’s authority in
this case are inconcludent and invalid.

They allege the case of Marcianus, bishop of Arles; con-
cerning whom (for abetting Novatianism) St. Cyprian doth
exhort pope Stephanus, that he would direct letters to the
bishops of Gaul and the people of Arles, that he being for
his schismatical behaviour removed from communion, another
should be substituted in his room‘.

q Thy be éxdoow Tis dvaryywodcions ev $ Si quis autem citra memoratam ob-

"Apilvy mlarews exeAevoer cis TAS wep)
*IraAlay exxanolas exméumecOa, mpoo-
tdgas Tovs uh BovAouévous jmoypdew
auth, eke@o0a Tav exxAnoiwy, Kal eis
Tous Timous altav érépovs avTiKabl-
atac@an. Id. ii. 37-

t Ei rapaoralyn TG Ccsordtw, kal edoe-
Beotdary juav deondry. Act. ii. p. 202.

servationem episcopus ordinetur, jube--
mus hunc omnibus modis episcopatu de-
pelli. Justin. Novell. exxiii. cap. 1.

t Cypr. Ep. 67. Dirigantur in pro-
vinciam et ad plebem Arelate consisten-
tem literee, quibus abstento Marciano
alius in ejus locum substituatur

Pope's Supremacy. 347

The Epistle, grounding this argument, is questioned by a
great critic; but I willingly admit it to be genuine, seeing
it hath the style and spirit of St. Cyprian, and suiteth his
age, and I see no cause why it should be forged ; wherefore,
omitting that defence, I answer, that the whole matter being
seriously weighed, doth make rather against the pope’s cause
than for it ; for if the pope had the sole or sovereign author-
ity of rejecting bishops, why did the Gaulish bishops refer the
matter to St.Cyprian? why had Marcianus himself a recourse
to him ?

St. Cyprian doth not ascribe to the pope any peculiar au-
thority of judgment or censure, but a common one, which
himself could exercise, which all bishops might exercise ; “Jt
is, saith he, our part to provide and succour in such a case ; for
therefore is the body of priests so numerous, that—by joint en-
deavour they may suppress heresies and schisms.

The case being such, St. Cyprian earnestly doth move pope
Stephanus to concur in exercise of discipline on that schis-
‘matic, and to prosecute effectually the business by his letters ;
persuading his fellow-bishops in France, * that they would not
suffer Marcianus to insult over the college of bishops; (for to
them it seemeth the transaction did immediately belong.)

To do thus St. Cyprian implieth and prescribeth to be the
pope’s special duty, not only out of regard to the common Multo ma-
interest, but for his particular concernment in the case ; that °° aa
schism having been first advanced against his predecessors.

St. Cyprian also (if we mark it) covertly doth tax the pope Quod ne-
of negligence, in not having soon enough joined with himself reeset
and the community of bishops in censuring that delinquent. abstentuas.

We may add, that the church of Arles and Gaul being
near Italy, the pope may be allowed to have some greater
sway there than otherwhere in more distant places ; so that
St. Cyprian thought his letters to quicken discipline there
might be proper and particularly effectual.

« Cui rei nostrum est consulere, et * Facere te oportet plenissimas literas
subvenire Idcirco copiosum est ad coepiscopos nostros in Galliis con-
corpus sacerdotum . Quando ipse stitutos, ne ultra Marcianum collegio
est ab universis sacerdotibus judica- nostro insultare patiantur ——.
tus

Marc. vii.
1, 6.

348 A Treatise of the

These things being duly considered, what advantage can
they draw from this instance? doth it not rather prejudice their.
cause, and afford a considerable objection against it ?

We may observe, that the strength of their argumentation
mainly consisteth in the words guébus abstento ; the which (as
the drift of the whole Epistle and parallel expressions therein
do shew) do signify no more than quibus efficiatur ut abstento,
which may procure him to be excommunicated ; not gue con-
tineant abstentionem, which contain excommunication, as P. de
Marca glosseth : although admitting that sense, it would not
import much, seeing only thereby the pope would have signi-
fied his consent with other bishops: wherefore de Marca hath
no great cause to blame us, that we do not deprehend any
magnificent thing in this place for the dignity of the papal see :
indeed he hath, I must confess, better eyes than I, who can
see any such mighty things there for that purpose.

As for the substitution of another in the room of Marcianus,
that was a consequent of the excommunication ; and was to be
the work of the clergy and people of the place ; for when by
common judgment of catholic bishops any bishop was rejected,
the people did apply themselves to choose another.

I adjoin the resolution of a very learned writer of their
communion, in these words:

y In this case of Marcianus, bishop of Arles, if the right of
excommunication did belong solely to the bishop of Rome, where-
fore did Faustinus, bishop of Lyons, advertise Cyprian, bishop
of Carthage, who was so far distant, concerning those very things
touching Marcianus, which both Faustinus himself, and other

y In hac Marciani episcopi Arela-
tensis causa sj jus abstinendi sive ex-
communicandi competebat soli episcopo
Romano, cur Faustinus episcopus Lug-
dunensis Cypriano episcopo Carthagini-
ensi longe dissito semel atque iterum
significat ea de Marciano, que jam uti-
que ipse Faustinus et alii ejusdem pro-
vincie episcopi nunciaverant Stephano
proximiori, et omnium episcoporum
principi? Dicendum igitur factum id
fuisse aut per negligentiam Stephani ;
aut quod magis videtur, per disciplinam
que tunc in ecclesia vigebat, ut omnes

quidem in circumpositis locis, sed pre-
sertim urbium clarissimarum episcopi in
commune consulerent ecclesiz, viderent-
que ne quid detrimenti res Christiana
catholica caperet, Itaque super isto
Marciani Arelatensis facinore, Lugdu-
nensem episcopum ad Romanum et
Carthaginiensem dedisse literas, istum

vero ut remotissimum dedisse vicissim -

suas ad Romanum, ut fratrem et colle-
gam, qui in propinquo facilius posset
de negotio et cognoscere et statuere.
Rigalt, in Cypr. Ep. 67.

— |

Pope’s Supremacy. 349

bishops of the same province, had before sent word of to Stephen,
bishop of Rome, who lived nearest, being moreover of all bishops
the chief? It must either be said, that this was done because of
Stephen’s negligence ; or, what is more probable, according to the
discipline then used in the church, that all bishops of neighbouring
places, but especially those presiding over the most eminent cities,
should join their counsels for the welfare of the church, and that
Christian religion might not receive the least damage in any of
its affairs whatsoever: hence it was, that in the case of Marcianus,
bishop of Arles, the bishop of Lyons writ letters to the bishop of
Rome and Carthage ; and again, that the bishop of Carthage, as
being most remote, did write to the bishop of Rome, as being his
brother and colleague, who by reason of his propinquity might more
easily know and judge of the whole matter.

The other instances are of a later date, (after the synod of
Nice,) and therefore of not so great weight ; yea, their having
none more ancient to produce, doth strongly make against the
antiquity of this right; it being strange, that no memory
should be of any deposed thereby for above three hundred
years : but however such as they are, they do not reach home
to the purpose.

They allege Flavianus, bishop of Antioch, deposed by pope Bell. de
Damasus, as they affirm. But it is wonderful they should bo": *®
have the face to mention that instance; the story in short
being this :*7e great Flavianus (a most worthy and orthodox
prelate, whom St. Chrysostom in his Statuary Orations doth
so highly commend and celebrate) being substituted in the
place of Meletius by the quire of bishops, a party did adhere to Theod. v.
Paulinus ; and after his decease they set up Evagrius, ordaining <>". -
him (as Theodoret, who was best acquainted with passages on Soz. viii. 3.
that side of Christendom, reporteth) against many canons of
the church.

Yet with this party, the Roman bishops, * not willing to
know any of these things, (three of them in order, Damasus,
Siricius, Anastasius,) did conspire, instigating the emperor

2T@ peyddAw SrAaBiavG yadrgeralvov- Aovtes thy Evayplov wey kowwviay he-
TES eod. md(ovro, kava SAaBiavod tas BaciAlnas
8 AN’ Buws Ttobtwy oddity eidéva: Oé- exlynoav axods. Theod. ib.

350 A Treatise of the

against Flavianus, and reproaching him as supporter of a
tyrant against the laws of Christ.

But the emperor having called Flavianus to him, and re-
ceived much satisfaction in his demeanour and discourse, did
remand and settle him in his place; The emperor, saith Theo-
doret, wondering at his courage and lis wisdom, did command
him to return home, and to feed the church committed to him:
at which proceeding when the Romans afterward did grumble,
the emperor gave them such reasons and advices, that they
complied, and did entertain communion with Flavianus.

It is true, that upon their suggestions and clamours the
emperor was moved at first to order that Flavianus should
go to Rome, and give the western bishops satisfaction: but
after that he understood the quality of his plea, he freed him
of that trouble, and without their allowance settled him in
his see.

Here is nothing of the pope’s deposing Flavianus ; but of
his embracing in a schism the side of a competitor, it being in

such a case needful that the pope or any other bishop should ~

choose with whom he must communicate, and consequently
must disclaim the other; in which choice the pope had no
good success; not deposing Flavianus, but vainly opposing
him ; wherefore this allegation is strangely impertinent, and
well may be turned against them.

Indeed in this instance we may see how fallible that see
was in their judgment of things, how rash in taking parties
and fomenting discords, how pertinacious in a bad cause, how
peevish against the common sense of their brethren; (espe-
cially considering, that before this opposition of Flavianus the
fathers of Constantinople had, in their letter to pope Damasus
and the occidental bishops, approved and commended him to
them; highly asserting the legitimateness of his ordination ;)
in fine, how little their authority did avail with wise and con-
siderate persons, such as Theodosius M. was¢.

b Abrod Kal tiv dvdpeiay Kal Thy ¢ Theod. v. 9.——otre Tis éerapxlas, |

coplay Oavudoas 6 Pacreds, Thy ev- Kal Tis dvuroAucts Siomhoews ovvdpa-
eykovoay KatadaBeiv, Kal thy eyxeipi- pdyTes KavoviKas éxeiporévnoav——iy-
cOcioay rowmaivew exxAnolay exédcvocv. Tep EvOecuov xeiporoviay edékato Kal Td
Theod. ibid. Tis cuvé5ou KoLvov.

Pope’s Supremacy. 351

De Marca representeth the matter somewhat otherwise out sa V- 15.
of Socrates ; but take the matter as Socrates hath it, and it | rg iY
signifieth no more, than that both Theophilus and Damasus
would not entertain communion with Flavianus, as being un-
capable of the episcopal order, for having violated his oath,
and caused a division in the church of Antioch: what is this
to judicial deposition? and how did Damasus more depose
him than Theophilus, who upon the same dissatisfaction did
in like manner forbear communion? whenas indeed a wiser
and better man than either of them, St. Chrysostom, did hold
communion with him, and did at length (saith Socrates, not
agreeing with Theodoret) reconcile him to them both.

They allege the deposition of Nestorius. But who knoweth
not that he was for heretical doctrine deposed in and by a
general synod? 4 Pope Celestine did indeed threaten to with-
draw his communion, if he did not renounce his error. But
had not any other bishop sufficient authority to desert a per-
verter of the faith? *Did not his own clergy do the same, being
commended by pope Celestine for it? ‘Did not Cyril in writing
to pope Celestine himself affirm, that he might before have de-
clared that he could not communicate with him? Did Nes-
torius admit the pope’s judgment? No, as the papal legates
did complain, *he did not admit the constitution of the apostolical
chair. Did the pope’s sentence obtain effect? No, not any;
for, notwithstanding his threats, Nestorius did hold his place
till the synod ; the emperor did severely rebuke Cyril for his
fierceness, (and implicitly the pope,) and did order that no
change should be made, till the synod should determine in the
case; not regarding the pope’s judgment: so that this instance
may well be retorted, or used to prove the insignificancy of
papal authority then.

d PuwoKera, bri abrds Thy 7; mer épay voujs. P.Celest. ad Clerum, &c. Const.
Koivwvlay Exe ov duvhrerat, hw wy——. Act. Eph. P- 190.
P. Celest. ad Cyril. in Cone. Eph. Act. f "Eyam 5€ duodoye@ Kal ro BovAndels
p- 281. TlavreA@s amd tov ovvedplov guvodin@ ypdupart pavepdy al’T@ KaTa-
jpav, kal Tis Tav Xpioriavay avvddov orijoat, Sti Tavta A€yorTt Kal ppovoivri
GrexArclaOns, éay wh edOéws Ta KaKGs Kowwveiv ov Suvducba. Cyril. Ep. ad
cipnucva imd cod di0p6w07. Ibid. Epist. Celest. Act. Eph. p. 177.
ad Nest. p. 186. "Amd rijs juerépas Koi- & Tov timoy tis drooroAKis Kabédpas
vevias amoxwpl(ouev. (ad Joh. Ant. od« edéfaro. Conc. Eph. Act. iii. p. 331.
p- 196.) Vid. Theodos. 2. Epist. in Cone, Eph,
© Maxapla 5& buws 7 ayéAn, Wa- p. 224, 225.
peaxev 5 Kipios xplvew wep) rijs idlas

Baron. ann.
433- sect.
38, 39-

P. Nich. IL.
Epist. 8.
(ad Mich.)

Fac. Herm.
p. 150.

352 A Treatise of the

They allege also Dioscorus of Alexandria deposed by pope
Leo: but the case is very like to that of Nestorius, and ar-
gueth the contrary to what they intend: he was, for his mis-
demeanours, and violent countenancing of heresy, solemnly in
a general synod accused, tried, condemned, and deposed ; the
which had long before been done, if in the pope, his professed
and provoked adversary, there had been sufficient power to
effect it.

Bellarmine also allegeth pope Sixtus III. deposing Polycro-
nius, bishop of Jerusalem: but no such Polycronius is to be
found in the registers of bishops then, or in the histories of
that busy time, between the two great synods of Ephesus and
Chalcedon; and the acts of Sixtus, upon which this allegation
is grounded, have so many inconsistencies, and smell so rank
of forgery, that no conscionable nose could endure them ; and
any prudent man, as Binius himself confesseth, would assert
them to be spurious. Wherefore Baronius himself doth reject
and despise them; who gladly would lose no advantage for
his master. Yet pope Nicholas I. doth precede Bellarmine
in citing this trash ; no wonder, that being the pope who did
avouch the wares of Isidore Mercator.

They allege Timotheus, the usurper of Alexandria, de-
posed by pope Damasus; and they have indeed the sound
of words attesting to them; * These are heads upon which
the B. Damasus deposed the heretics Apolinarius, Vitalius, and
Timotheus.

The truth is, that Apolinarius, with divers of his disciples,
in a great synod at Rome, at which Petrus, bishop of Alexan-
dria, together with Damasus, was present, was condemned and
disavowed for heretical doctrine ; whence Sozomen saith, that
ithe Apolinarian heresy was by Damasus and Peter, at a synod
in Rome, voted to be excluded from the catholic church.

On which account if we conclude that the pope had an au-
thority to depose bishops, we may by like reason infer that
every patriarch and metropolitan had a power to do the like;

h Tadrd éort Ta Kepdraa ed’ ois 5 modAovds Eprew mptos Aduacos 6 ‘Pw-
Tpicpakdpios Aduacos Kabeidev *AmroAt- palwv emloxoros, kat Tlérpos 6 ’Adetar-
vdpiov, Kal Bitdduov, kal Tydbeov robs Spelas, cvvddov yevouervns ev “Pwun aa-
aiperixovs. Orient. ad Rufum, apud Aotplay Tijs KabdrAov exxanalas éeynol-
Bin. p. 396. gavTo. Soz. vi. 25.

i Ma@av otv tabrny thy alpeow «is

Pope’s Supremacy. 353

there being so many instances of their having condemned and
disclaimed bishops supposedly guilty of heresy; as particu-
larly John of Antioch, with his convention of oriental bishops,
did pretend to depose Cyril and Memnon, as guilty of the
same Apolinarian heresy; alleging, that to !exscind them was
the same thing as to settle orthodoxy. The which deposition
was at first admitted by the emperor.

The next instance is of pope Agapetus (in Justinian’s time, Ann. 536.
for so deep into time is Bellarmine fain to dive for it) deposing Y'* ™™
Anthimus, bishop of Constantinople. But this instance being
scanned will also prove slender and lame. The case was this :
Anthimus having deserted his charge at Trabisonde did creep
into the see of Constantinople, (a course then held irregular
and repugnant to the canons,) and withal he had imbibed the
Kutychian heresy. Yet for his support he had wound himself
into the favour of the empress Theodora, *a countenancer of * Evag. iv.
the Eutychian sect. Things standing thus, pope Agapetus ‘”
(as an agent from Rome to crave succour against the Goths,
pressing and menacing the city) did arrive at Constantinople.
Whereupon the empress desired of him to salute and consort
with Anthimus™. But he, by petitions of the monks, &c.,
understanding how things stood, did refuse to do so, except
Anthimus would return to his own charge, and profess the
orthodox doctrine. Thereupon the emperor joined with him
to extrude Anthimus from Constantinople, and to substitute
Menas. ° He, say the monks in their libel of request to the
emperor, did justly thrust this Anthimus from the episcopal
chair of this city; your grace affording aid and force both to
the catholic faith and the divine canons. The act of Agapetus
was (according to his share in the common interest) °to declare
Anthimus, in his judgment, uncapable of catholic communion

Ta xara THs exxAnolas
. Libell.

Lib. cap. 21.

1T yap rodrous exndya oddév Ere-
a0éouws ToAUdUEVa wabov

pév eorw t dp0odotlay orijca. Relat.

Orient. ad Imp. in Act. Eph. p. 380.
“Obev kal viv Thy yywpiocbeioay mapa Tis
EvoeBelas iuady Neoroplov, cal Kupla-
Aov, kal Méuvovos xabalpeow edetducba.
Act. p. 385.

m Denique petentibus principibus, ut
Anthimum papa in salutatione et com-
municatione susciperet ; ille fieri inquit
posse, si se libello probaret orthodoxum,
et ad cathedram suam reverteretur.

Monach. p. 7.

nD ’AAAG TovTov Sixalws ekwOhoas Tov
Ths dé Tis wéAews leparixod Opdvov, ovv-
erauuvovons, Kal cuvemisxvovons THTE
KaorAuKh mlorer Kal Trois Oelois Kayden
ris duetépas edoeBelas . Ibid. Et
Syn. Decr. p. 43. Imper. Sanct. p. 128.

* p: 10.
T p. 16.

354 A Treatise of the

and of episcopal function by reason of his heretical opinions,
and his transgression of ecclesiastical orders; which moved
Justinian effectually to depose and extrude him; ? You, say
they, fulfilling that which he justly and canonically did judge,
and by your general edict confirming it; and forbidding that
hereafter such things should be attempted—. And Agapetus
himself saith4, that it was done by the apostolical authority,
and the assistance of the most faithful emperors. The which pro-
ceeding was completed by decree of the synod under Menas,
and that again was confirmed by the imperial sanction.
Whence Evagrius, reporting the story, doth say, concerning
Anthimus and Theodosius of Alexandria, that * because they
did cross the emperor’s commands, and did not admit the decrees
of Chalcedon, they both were expelled from their sees.

It seemeth by some passages in the Acts, that before
Agapetus’s intermeddling, *the monks and ft orthodox bishops
had condemned and rejected Anthimus; according to the
common interest, which they assert all Christians to have mn
regard to the common faith.

As for the substitution of Menas, it was performed sig the
choice and suffrage of the emperor, the clergy, nobles, and people
conspiring ; the pope only (which another bishop might have
done) ordaining or consecrating him; ‘Zhen, saith Liberatus,
the pope by the emperor’s favour did ordain Menas bishop,
consecrating him with his hand.

uAnd Agapetus did glory in this, as being the first ordina-
tion made of an eastern bishop by the hands of a pope: * And
this, said the pope, we conceive, doth add to his dignity, because
the eastern church never since the time of the apostle Peter did

P Ta oby wap’ éxelvov Sixalws Kad Ka-
voviK@s Kekpyueva, wAnpodvTes, Kal did
yevikiis tu@v vouobecias KupovvTes, Kal
Te TOAUTA TOD AOLTOU TOAMACOM a&maryo-
pevovTes

~ 4 / /

q Tas be €v KwvoraytwourdAe: Kabé-
Spas thy UBpw BondotyrTos rod cov, TH
amocToAuKy aidevtia, Kal Tay moTOTa-

; “
twv Bacttéwy TH Bonbelga di0pPdoaper.

t"Ouws 8 oby ds aytixpd ray (1. av7h
TeV TOV) BaciAéws KeAevoudtwy idyres,
kal ph Sexduevar Ta ev Xadnnddvi cvv-
TeOeiméva dup tay oinelwy ekerAabéerny
Opdvev. Evag. iv. 15.

8 Kar’ éxdAoyhv Kal pipov Tay edce-
Beotdrwv jpav Baciréwv, kal Tov eva-
yous THade THs aywrdrns exxdnolas
KAhpov

t Tunc papa principis favore Menam
pro eo ordinavit antistitem, consecrans
eum manu sua . Lib. cap. 21.

u*Oitun Tav yadnvordtwy Baciréwv.
emeyéehacey 7 H emiroyn . Act. P- 24.

xX Kal rodro 5¢ morevouev TH abrot
aéla mpoorBevat, bt. wep ex tTaY xpé-
vov Tod &roardAou Tlérpov ovdéva &AXAOV
oiadelmore exxdanota dvarorich edétaro
éxlakowov Tais xepor TiS huerépas Kabe=
Spas xetpotovnbévra . Ibid.

Pope’s Supremacy. 355

receive any bishop besides him, by the imposition of hands of
those who sat in this our chair.

If we compare the proceedings of Agapetus against Anthi-
mus, with those of Theophilus against St. Chrysostom ; they
are (except the cause and qualities of persons) in all main re-
spects and circumstances so like, that the same reason, which
would ground a pretence of universal jurisdiction to one, would
infer the same to the other.

Baronius allegeth Acacius, bishop of Constantinople, de- Baron. ann.
posed by pope Felix III. But pope Gelasius asserteth, that #°+ °°
any bishop might, in execution of the canons, have disclaimed ~~ = Fe-
Acacius, as a favourer of heretics. And Acacius did not only gp, 6,"
refuse to submit to the pope’s jurisdiction, but slighted ity. - Gelas.
And the pope’s act was but an attempt, not effectual; for “
Acacius died in possession of his see.

VIII. If popes* were sovereigns of the church, they could
effectually, whenever they should see it just and fit, absolve ;
restore any bishop excommunicated from the church, or de-
posed from his office by ecclesiastical censure: for relief of
the oppressed, or clemency to the distressed, are noble flowers
in every sovereign crown.

Wherefore the pope doth assume this power, and reserveth

it to himself, as his special prerogative ; */¢ 7s, says Baronius,
a privilege of the church of Rome only, that a bishop deposed
by a synod may without another synod of a greater number be
restored by the pope; and pope Gelasius I. says, » That the
see of St. Peter the apostle has a right of loosing whatever the
sentences of other bishops have bound. ¢That the apostolic
see, according to frequent ancient custom, had a power, no synod
preceding, to absolve those whom a synod had unjustly condemned,
and without a council to condemn those who deserved it.

y Ad cujus precipue vocatus examen
vel venire vel mittere non curavit. Ge-
las. Ep. 13.

Zz When a bishop was unjustly cen-
sured upon malice or mistake —— when
he did repent of his error or miscar-
riage——when the case would upon any
account bear favour or pity——.

a Privilegium quidem solius ecclesiz
Romane esse reperitur, ut depositus a
synodo episcopus absque alia synodo
majoris numeri restitui possit per Ro-

manum pontificem. Baron. ann. 449.
sect. 127.

b Quorumlibet sententiis ligata pon-
tificum sedes B. Petri apostoli jus habet
resolvendi. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 13-

© Sedes apostolica frequenter more
majorum, etiam sine ulla synodo pre-
cedente et absolvendi quos synodus
inique damnaverat, et damnandi nulla
existente synodo quos oportuit habuit
facultatem . P. Gelas. I. Ep. 13.

Aa®

356 A Treatise of the

It was an old pretence of popes, that bishops were not
condemned, except the pope did consent, renouncing commu-
nion with them. So pope Vigilius saith of St. Chrysostom
and Flavianus, that 4 although they were violently excluded, yet
were they not looked upon as condemned, because the bishops of
Rome always inviolably kept communion with them.

And before him pope Gelasius saith, that the pope, by not
consenting to the condemnation of Athanasius, Chrysostom, Fla-
vianus, did absolve them.

But such a power of old did not belong to him. For,

1. There is not extant any ancient canon of the church, nor
apparent footsteps of custom, allowing such a power to him.

2. Decrees of synods (provincial in the former times, and
diocesan afterwards) were inconsistent with or repugnant to
such a power; for judgments concerning episcopal causes
were deemed irrevocable, and appointed to be so by decrees
of divers synods; and consequently no power was reserved
to the pope of thwarting them by restitution of any bishop
condemned in them.

Can. Apost. 3. The apostolical canons, (which at least serve to prove or
12 *") '% illustrate ancient custom,) and divers synodical decrees, did
Cone. Nic. prohibit entertaining communion with any person condemned
ee 0: or rejected by canonical judgment; without exception, or re-
oe 9- servation of power of infringing or relaxing that prohibition ;

tioch. 6,15.and pope Gelasius himself says, ‘That he who had polluted
Evag. ti4. himself by holding communion with a condemned person, did

partake of his condemnation. -

4. Whence in elder times popes were opposed and checked

when they offered to receive bishops rejected in particular
Cypr. Ep. synods. So St. Cyprian declared the restitution of Basilides
- by pope Stephanus to be null. So the fathers of the Antio-
chene synod did reprehend pope Julius for admitting Atha-
nasius and Marcellus to communion, or avowing them for bi-
shops, after their condemnation by synods. And the oriental
bishops of Sardica did excommunicate the same pope for

4 Qui licet violenter exclusi sunt, apostolica etiam sola, quia non consen-
non tamen pro damnatis sunt habiti, eo sit, absolvit. P. Gelas. Ep. 3.

quod semper inviolatam eorum commu- f Damnati hominis communione pol-
« nionem Rom. pontifices servaverant. P. lutus, damnationis ejus factus est par-
Vigilius in Constit. Athan. &c. ticeps. P. Gelas. Ep. 13. (p. 640.)

€ Quem (Johannem Chrys.) sedes

Pope's Supremacy. 357

communicating with the same persons. Which instances do
shew, that the pope was not then undoubtedly, or according
to common opinion, endowed with such a power.

But whereas they do allege some instances of such a power,
I shall premise some general considerations apt to clear the busi-
ness, and then apply answers to the particular allegations.

1. Restitution commonly doth signify no more, than ac-
knowledging a person (although rejected by undue sentence)
to be de jure worthy of communion, and capable of the epi-
scopal office ; upon which may be consequent an obligation to
communicate with him, and to allow him his due character ;
according to the precept of St. Paul, Follow righteousness, 2 Tim. ii.
faith, charity, peace, with them that call upon the Lord with a**
pure heart.

This may be done when any man notoriously is persecuted
for the truth and righteousness. Or when the iniquity and
malice of pretended judges are apparent, to the oppression of
innocence. Or when the process is extremely irregular: as in
the cases of Athanasius, of St. Chrysostom And this is
not an act of jurisdiction, but of equity and charity, incum-
bent on all bishops: and there are promiscuous instances of
bishops practising it. Thus Socrates saith, that Maximus,
bishop of Jerusalem, §did restore communion and dignity to
Athanasius. And so Cyril of Alexandria, and John of Antioch,
being reconciled and reduced to a good understanding of each
other, did restore to each other their sees ; rescinding the cen-’aaahros
sures, which in heat they had denounced each on other. oases:
Which sheweth that restitution is not always taken for an act Socr.vii.33.
of jurisdiction, wherein one is superior to another; for those
persons were in rank and power coordinate.

2. Restitution sometime doth import no more than a con-
siderable influence toward the effects of restoring a person to
communion or office; no judicial act being exercised about the
case; > The emperor writing that Paulus and Athanasius should
be restored to their sees, availed nothing—. That was a restitu-
tion without effect.

Thus a pope’s avowing the orthodoxy, or innocence, or

E ’AmodlSwot kal abtds thy Kowwviay So00jvar MavaAw xal "A@avacly rods oi-
"ASavacle Kal thy &flay. Socr. ii. 24. kelous témous, oldty mAdov jwiero. Id.
h Tpdvavyros rod Bacitéws, bore dwo- ii. 20.

Theod. v.
23.

358 A Treatise of the

worth of a person, after a due information about them, (by
reason of the pope’s eminent rank in the church, and the re-
gard duly had to him,) might sometimes much conduce to re-
store a person; and might obtain the name of restitution, by
an ordinary scheme of speech.

3. Sometimes persons said to be restored by popes are also
said to be restored by synods, with regard to such instance or
testimony of popes in their behalf. In which case the judicial
restitution, giving right of recovery and completion thereto,
was the act of the synodi.

4, When cases were driven to a legal debate, popes could .
not effectually resolve without a synod, their single acts not
being held sufficiently valid. So notwithstanding the declara-
tions of pope Julius in favour of Athanasius, for the effectual
resolution of his case the great synod of Sardica was convened.
So whatever pope Innocent I. did endeavour, he could not
restore St. Chrysostom without a general synod.

Nor could pope Leo restore Flavianus, deposed in the se-
cond Ephesine synod, without convocation of a general synod,
the which he did so often sue for to the emperor Theodosius, for
that purpose. Pope Simplicius affirmed, that Petrus Moggus,
khaving been by a common decree condemned as an adulterer,
(or usurper of the Alexandrian see,) could not without a common
council be freed from condemnation.

5. Particular instances do not ascertain right to the person
who assumeth any power; for busybodies often will exceed
their bounds.

6. Emperors did sometimes restore bishops. Constantine,
as he did banish Eusebius of Nicomedia and others, so he
did revoke and restore them; so says Socrates, ! They were
recalled from banishment by the emperor’s command, and re-
ceived ther churches. Theodosius did assert to Flavianus
his right, whereof the popes did pretend to deprive him;
which did amount to a restitution; (at least to the Roman-
ists, who do assert Flavianus to be deposed by the popes.)

i Note, It is an ordinary style of votes natum tanquam adulterum communi
in synods for the restitution of a bishop, concilio damnatione liberari. Zid. cap.
I restore. Vid. Cone. Chale. Act.i. p. 18.

165. That is, I give my vote for his 1 -AvexrAhOnody te THs ekoptas ex Ba-
restitution. aiAiKov mpooTdypuaTous, Kal Tas eKKAn-

k Oportebat communi decreto dam- ias éavtav &réAaBov. Socr. i. 14.

Pope’s Supremacy. 359

Instantius and Priscillianus were by the ™rescript of the ein-
peror Gratianus restored to their churches. Justinian did order
pope Silverius to be restored, in case he could prove his
innocence.

7. Commonly restitution was not effectual without the em-
peror’s consent; whence Theodoret, although allowed by the
great synod, did acknowledge his restitution especially due to
the emperor; as we shall see in reflecting on his case.

Now to the particular instances produced for the pope, we
answer :

1. They pretend, that pope Stephanus did restore Basilides
and Martialis, Spanish bishops, who had been deposed ; for
which they quote St.Cyprian’s Epistle, where he says, " Basi-
hides going to Rome imposed upon our colleaque, Stephen, who
lived a great way off, and was ignorant of the truth of the
matter ; seeking unjustly to be restored to his bishopric from
which he had justly been deposed.

But we answer; the pope did attempt such a restitution
by way of influence and testimony, not of jurisdiction ; where-

fore the result of his act in St.Cyprian’s judgment was null
and blamable ; which could not be so deemed, if he had acted
as a judge; for a favourable sentence, passed by just author-
ity, is valid, and hardly liable to censure’. The clergy of
those places, notwithstanding that pretended restitution, did
conceive those bishops uncapable; and did request the judg-
ment of St.Cyprian about it; which argueth the pope’s judg-
ment not to have been peremptory and prevalent then in such
eases. St.Cyprian denieth the pope, or any other person, to
have power of restoring in such a case; and exhorteth the

m Rescriptum eliciunt, quo calcatis o

que prius decreta erant, restitui eccle-
siis jubebantur: hoc freti Instantius et
Priscillianus repetivere Hispanias. Sulp.
Sev. ii. 63. Revocari Romam Silve-
rium jussit, et de literis illis judicium
fieri, ut—-si false fuissent probate, resti-
tueretur sedi sue. Liberat. Breviar. cap.
22.

n Romam pergens Stephanum colle-
gam nostrum longe positum, et geste
rei ac tacite veritatis ignarum fefellit,
ut exambiret reponi se injuste in epi-
scopatum, de quo fuerat juste depositus.
Cypr. Ep. 68.

quare etsi aliqui de collegis
nostris extiterunt, qui deificam disci-
plinam negligendam putant . (Nec
censure congruit sacerdotum mobilis
atque inconstantis animi levitate repre-
hendi. Jd. Ep. 55.) episcopatum
gerere, et sacerdotium Dei administrare
non oportere. Desiderdstis solicitudi.
nem vestram vel solatio vel auxilio sen-
tentiz nostre sublevari. Nec personam
in ejusmodi rebus accipere, aut aliquid
cuiquam largiri potest humana indul-
gentia ; ubi intercedit et legem tribuit
divina prescriptio.

360 A Treatise of the

clergy to persist Pin declining the communion of those bishops.
Well doth Rigaltius ask, (why they should write to St.Cyprian,
if the judgment of Stephanus was decisive; and he addeth,
that indeed ‘the Spaniards did appeal from the Roman bishop to
him of Carthage. No wonder, seeing the pope had no greater
authority, and probably St.Cyprian had the fairer reputation
for wisdom and goodness. Considering which things, what
can they gain by this instance? which indeed doth consider-
ably make against them.

2. They allege the restitution of Athanasius, and of others
linked in cause with him, by pope Julius. ‘He, says Sozo-
men, as having the care of all by reason of the dignity of his see,
restored to each his own church.

I answer, the pope did not restore them judicially, but
declaratively ; that is, declaring his approbation of their right
and innocence, did admit them to communion. Julius in his
own defence did allege, that Athanasius was not legally re-

‘As duobé- jected; so that without any prejudice to the canons he might

tous avrovs
els KOWWw-
viay ™poc-

Socr. i. 36.

Bas, Ep. to.

receive him; and the doing it upon this account, plainly did
not require any act of judgment.
Nay, it was necessary to avow those bishops, as suffering in

ist: the cause of the common faith. Besides, the pope’s proceed-
. ing was taxed, and protested against, as irregular; nor did he

defend it by virtue of a general power that he had judicially
to rescind the acts of synods. And, lastly, the restitution of
Athanasius and the other bishops had no complete effect, till
it was confirmed by the synod of Sardica, backed by the
imperial authority; which in effect did restore them. This
instance therefore is in many respects deficient as to their
purpose.

3. They produce Marcellus being restored by the same
pope Julius.

But that instance, beside the forementioned defects, hath
this, that the pope was grievously mistaken in the case ; whence
St. Basil much blameth him for his proceeding therein.

Pp —— quantum possumus adhorta- pellavere Carthaginiensem adversus Ro-
mur, ne vos cum profanis et maculatis manum. Rigalt.
sacerdotibus communicatione sacrilega 8 Ofa 5t wdvtwv Kndeuovigs abt g mpoc-
misceatis. nkovons bia Thy dklay Tov Opdvov, Exd-

q Sed cur ad Cyprianum si potestas org Thy idiay éxxAnolay arédwxe. Soz.

infinita penes Romanum? Rigalt. ibid. _ iii. 8.
r —— datis ad Cyprianum literis ap-

361

4. They cite the restitution of Eustathius (bishop of Se-
bastia) by pope Liberius, out of an Epistle of St. Basil, where
he says, ‘What the most blessed bishop Liberius proposed to him,
and to what he consented, we know not; only that he brought a
letter to be restored, and upon shewing it to the synod at Tyana
was restored to his see.

I answer, that restitution was only from an invalid depo- Soz. iv. 24.
sition by a synod of Arians at Melitine ; importing only an
acknowledgment of him, upon approbation of his faith pro-
fessed by him at Rome; the which had such influence to the
satisfaction of the diocesan synod at Tyana, that he was re-
stored. Although indeed the Romans were abused by him,
he not being sound in faith; for “he now, saith St. Basil, doth
destroy that faith for which he was receiwed——.

5. They adjoin, that Theodoret was restored by pope
Leo I; for in the Acts of the synod of Chalcedon it is said,
that Yhe did receive his place from the bishop of Rome.

I answer, the act of Leo did consist in an approbation of
the faith, which Theodoret did profess to hold; and a recep-
tion of him to communion thereupon; which he might well gis coww-
do, seeing the ground of Theodoret’s being disclaimed was ont oe ae
misprision, that he (having opposed Cyril’s writings, judged Chale. Act.
orthodox) did err in faith, consenting with Nestorius. 7 hae

Theodoret’s state before the second Ephesine synod is thus
represented in the words of the emperor; “Theodoret, bishop
of Cyrus, whom we have before commanded to mind only his own
church, we charge not to come to the holy synod, before the whole
synod being met, it shall seem good to them that he come and
bear his part in tt.

xHe was not perfectly deposed; as others were, who had

Pope’s Supremacy.

t Tha pév eotw & mpoerebn ate
rapa Tov wakapiordtou émiakdmov AiBe-
plov, tiva 5& abrds cuvébeTo ayvootpmer’
mrAhv bri emiororAhy exduicey a&mroKxad-
wotacav abtov, hy amodclias TH Kara
Téava cvvddp aroxatéctn TE Tén~—.
Bas. Ep. 74.

u Ovtos viv rope? thy mlarw, ed’ n
é5€éxOn. Id.

VY Toy olkeioy amrodkaBov rérov mapa
Tov aywrTdrou apxiemiokdmou Tis “weya-
Awvtmov ‘Paéuns Act. i. p. 53-

W Gcoddpnrov wey ta Tov éexlaKowoy

THs Kpou moAcws, bv Hdn exeAevoauey
Th idlg abrod udvy éxxanola TxoAdcew,
OeomiCouer wh mpérepov eAdeiv eis Thy
aylay cbvodov, éay uh mdon ayia ouvddy
cuvedBovon d6tp Kal abrdy mapayeréa Oat,
Kad Kowwydv yevérOa Tis adris aylas
ovvddov. Imp. Theod. Epist. ad Diosc.
in Syn. Chale. Act. i. p. §3-

x Pro Theodoreto autem et Eusebio
nullus ordinatus est. Liberat.12. Vid.
Cone. Chale. part. iii. p. 490. Excludi
vero ab episcopatu, &c. in imperatoris.
Theod, rescript.

362 A Treatise of the

others substituted in their places.
Kphesine synod.

The pope was indeed ready enough to assume the patronage
of so very learned and worthy a man, who in so very sup-
pliant and respectful a way had addressed to him for succour ;
for whom doth not courtship mollify? And the majority of
the synod (being inflamed against Dioscorus and the Kuty-
chian party) was ready enough to allow what the pope did in
favour of him. Yet a good part of the synod, (the bishops of
Egypt, of Palestine, of Illyricum,) notwithstanding the pope’s
restitution, (that is, his approbation in order thereto,) did
stickle against his admission into the synod; YCrying out,
Have pity on us, the faith is destroyed, the canons proscribe this
man, cast him out, cast out Nestorius’s master. So that the im-
perial agents were fain to compromise the business, permitting
him to sit in the synod, as one whose case was dependent, but
not in the notion of one absolutely restored. *Theodoret's pre-
sence shall prejudice no man, each one’s right of impleading being
reserved both to you and him.

He therefore was not entirely restored, till upon a clear
and satisfactory profession of his faith he was acquitted by
the judgment of the synod. The effectual restitution of him
proceeded from the emperor, who repealed the proceedings
against him; as himself doth acknowledge ; *AJ/ these things,
says he, has the most just emperor evacuated—— to these thongs
he premised the redressing my injuries; and the imperial judges
in the synod of Chalcedon join the emperor in the restitution.
cLet the most reverend Theodoret enter, and bear his part in the
synod ; since the most holy archbishop Leo and sacred emperor
have restored his bishopric to him. Hence it may appear that
the pope’s restitution of Theodoretus was only opinionative,
dough-baked, incomplete ; so that it is but a slim advantage
which their pretence can receive from it.

He was deposed by the

Y "EfeBénoay, ’EAchoate, 4) mlotis
amrdrAdAuTat, of kavdvns TovUTOY éxBdAAov-
aw, Tovtov tw Bare, Tov Biddo0Kadov
Neoroplp ew Barc. Id. p. 54.

(ad Asperam.)

b Tporé0exe tTovtos THS HmeTépas
dduxlas Thy Taow Ep. 138. (ad
Anatol.)

Z Tipdékpiua amd Tov mapcivas O<odHpn-
tov ovdev) yevioera, puvdarTouevov 5n-
AovéTs peta TadTa mayTbs Adyou Kal
bpiv, Kal exelvp—. Ibid.

a ’AAAG Tata mayTa AceAvKev 6 bi-
kaidratos BaoiAeis——. Id. Ep. 139.

© Elaitw kal 5 ebAaBéoratros @e0dé-
pnTos kowwvhowy Th cvvdde, ereday Kat
amexatéaTncey aitg@ Thy emoKowhy 6
ayimraros apxienlexomos Aéwy, kal Oed-
taros Bacivevs-—. Act. i. p- 53.

Pope's Supremacy. 363

IX. It belongeth to sovereigns to receive appeals from all
lower judicatures, for the final determination of causes; so
that no part of his subjects can obstruct resort to him, or
prohibit his revision of any judgment.

This power therefore the pope doth most stiffly assert to
himself. At the synod of Florence, this was the first and
great branch of authority, which he did demand of the Greeks
explicitly to avow: ¢ He will (said his three cardinals to the
emperor) have all the privileges of his church, and that appeals
be made to him. When pope Alexander III. was advised not
to receive an appeal in Becket’s case, he replied in that profane
allusion; «This is my glory, which I will not give to another. He
hath been wont to encourage all people, even upon the slight-
est occasions, iter arripere, (as the phrase is obvious in their
canon law,) to run with all haste to his audience ; ‘ Concerning
appeals for the smallest causes we would have you hold, that the
same deference is to be given them for how shght a matter soever
they be made, as if they were for a greater. See, if you please,
in Gratian’s Decree, Caus. ii. queest. 6. where many papal de- Caus. ii.
erees (most indeed drawn out of the spurious epistles of an- 3" ° pone
cient popes, but ratified by their successors, and obtaining for 16.
current law) are made for appeals to the see of Rome.

It was indeed one of the most ancient encroachments, and
that which did serve most to introduce the rest ; inferring
hence a title to an universal jurisdiction: § They are the canons,
says pope Nicholas I, which will that all appeals of the whole
church be brought to the examination of this see, and have decreed
that no appeal be made from it, and that thus she judge of the
whole church ; but herself goes to be gudged by none other: and
the same pope, in another of his Epistles, says, "Zhe holy
statutes and venerable decrees have committed the causes of

d OérAc Ta mpovdmia wdyTa THs eKKAN-

alas avtov, kal OérAcr Exe Thy ExxAn-
tov-———. Syn. Flor. sess. xxv. p. 846.

& Ipsi sunt canones, qui appellationes
totius ecclesiz ad hujus sedis examen
voluere deferri; ab ipsa vero nusquam

e Hee est gloria mea, quam alteri
non dabo.

f De appellationibus pro minimis
causis volumus te tenere, quod eis pro
quacunque levi causa fiant, non minus
est, quam si pro majoribus fierent, de-
ferendum. Alex. III, Ep. ad Vigorn.
Episc. in Decret. Greg. lib. ii. tit. 28.
cap. If.

prorsus appellari debere sanxerunt, ac
per hoc illam de tota ecclesia judicare
ipsam ad nullius commeare judicium.
P. Nich. I. Ep. 8.

h Sacra statuta, et veneranda decreta
episcoporum causas, utpote majora ne-
gotia nostre definiendas censure man-
darunt. P. Nich. J. Ep. 38.

364 A Treatise of the

bishops, as being weighty matters, to be determined by us —.
‘As the synod has appointed and usage requires, let greater and
difficult cases be always referred to the apostolic see, says pope
Pelagius II. ‘They are the canons which will have the appeals
of the whole church tried by this see, saith pope Gelasius I.

But this power is upon various accounts unreasonable,
grievous, and vexatious to the church ; as hath been deemed,
and upon divers occasions declared, by the ancient fathers,
and grave persons in all times; upon accounts not only blaming
the horrible abuse of appeals, but implying the great mischiefs
inseparably adherent to them.

The synod of Basil thus excellently declared concerning them:
| Hitherto many abuses of intolerable vexations have prevailed,
whilst many have too often been called and cited from the most
remote parts to the court of Rome, and that sometime for small
and trifling matters, and with charges and trouble to be so wearied,
that they sometime think it their best way to recede from their
right, or buy off their trouble with great loss, rather than be at the
cost of suing in so remote a country.

St. Bernard complaineth of the mischiefs of appeals in his
times, in these words: ™How long will you be deaf to the com-
plaints of the whole world, or make as if you were so? Why
sleep you? When will the consideration of so great confusion
and abuse in appeals awake in you? They are made without
right or equity, without due order, and against custom. Neither
place, nor manner, nor time, nor cause, nor person, are con-
sidered : they are everywhere made lightly, and, for the most
part, unjustly: with much more passionate language to the
same purpose.

But in the primitive church the pope had no such power.

i Majores vero et difficiles queestiones
(ut sancta synodus statuit, et beata
consuetudo exigit) ad sedem apostoli-
cam semper referantur. P. Pelag. II.
Epist. 8.

k Ipsi sunt canones, qui appellationes
totius ecclesie ad hujus sedis examen
voluere deferri. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 4.

' Concil. Basil. sess. xxxi. (p. 86.)
Inoleverunt autem hactenus intolerabi-
lium vexationum abusus permulti, dum
nimium frequenter a remotissimis etiam

partibus ad Romanam curiam, et inter-
dum pro parvis et minutis rebus ac
negotiis quamplurimi citari, et evocari
consueverunt, atque ita expensis et la-
boribus fatigari, ut nonnunquam com-

modius arbitrentur juri suo cedere, aut

vexationem suam gravi damno redimere
quam in tam longingua regione litium
subire dispendia, &c. Vid. Opt.

m Bern. de Consid. lib. ili. cap. 2.
Quousque murmur universe terre aut
dissimulas, aut non advertis ?—-—&c.

Pope's Supremacy. 365

1. Whereas in the first times many causes and differences
did arise, wherein they who were condemned and worsted
would readily have resorted thither, where they might have
hoped for remedy, if Rome had been such a place of refuge,
it would have been very famous for it; and we should find
history full of such examples ; whereas it is very silent about
them.

2. The most ancient customs and canons of the church are
flatly repugnant to such a power; for they did order causes
finally to be decided in each province.

So the synod of Nice did decree; as the African fathers
did allege, in defence of their refusal to allow appeals to the
pope: "The Nicene decrees, said they, most evidently did com-
mit both clergymen of inferior degrees and bishops to their metro-
politans.

So Theophilus in his Epistle ; °Z suppose you are not ignorant

what the canons of the Nicene council command, ordaining that a
bishop should judge no cause out of his own district.
_ §. Afterward, when the diocesan administration was intro-
duced, the last resort was decreed to the synods of them, (or
to the primates in them,) all other appeals being prohibited ;
Pas dishonourable to the bishops of the diocese ; reproaching the
canons, and subverting ecclesiastical order : to which canon the
emperor Justinian referred ; 4 For it is decreed by our ances-
tors, that against the sentence of these prelates there should be no
appeal. So Constantius told pope Liberius ; "that those things
which had a form of judgment passed on them could not be re-
scinded. This was the practice (at least in the eastern parts
of the church) in the time of Justinian; as is evident by the
Constitutions extant in the Code and in the Novels’.

n Decreta Nicena sive inferioris gra-
dus clericos, sive episcopos suis metro-
politanis apertissime commiserunt. Syn.
Afr. in Ep. ad P. Celest.

© Arbitror te non ignorare quid pre-
cipiant Niceni concilii canones, san-
cientes episcopum non judicare causam
citra terminos suos—— nam . Pal-
lad. cap. 7.

P Note, That the synod of Constan-
tinople, (Can. 6.) mentioning appeals
to the emperor, secular judicatories, a

general synod, saith, ’Ariudoas tobds Tijs
dioihnoews ericxdmous, &c. Syn. Const.
Can. 6. Concil. Constantinop. Can. 2, 6.
Concil. Chalced. Can. 9, 17.

q Nam contra horum antistitnm sen-
tentias non esse locum appellationi a
majoribus nostris constitutum est. Cod.
Lib. i. tit. 4. cap. 29.

I Ta Hdn tUrov éoxnndra dvadrterGas
ob Btvara:. Theod. xi. 16.

8 Nov. exxiii. cap. 22. Cod, Lib. i. tit.
4. sect. 29. Vid. Gree.

Cypr. Ep.
55. (ad
Corne-
lium.)

Cypr. Ep.
68.

366 A Treatise of the

4. In derogation to this pretence, divers provincial synods

‘ expressly did prohibit all appeals from their decisions.

That of Milevis; ‘ Let them appeal only to African councils
or the primates of provinces ; and he who shall think of appeal-
ing beyond sea, let him be admitted into communion by none in
Afric.

uFor if the Nicene council took this care of the inferior clergy,
how much more did they intend it should relate to bishops also !

5. All persons were forbidden to entertain communion with
bishops condemned by any one church; which is inconsistent
with their being allowed relief at Rome.

6. This is evident in the case of Marcion, by the assertion
of the Roman church at that time.

7. When the pope hath offered to receive appeals, or to
meddle in cases before decided, he hath found opposition and
reproof. Thus when Felicissimus and Fortunatus, having been
censured and rejected from communion in Afric, did apply
themselves to pope Cornelius, with supplication to be admitted
by him; St.Cyprian maintaineth that fact to be irregular and
unjust, and not to be countenanced, for divers reasons. Like-
wise, when Basilides and Martialis, being for their crimes de-
posed in Spain, had recourse to pope Stephanus for restitution,
the clergy and people there had no regard to the judgment of
the pope; the which their resolution St.Cyprian did commend.
and encourage.

When Athanasius, Marcellus, Paulus, &c. having been con-
demned by synods, did apply themselves for relief to pope
Julius; the oriental bishops did highly tax this course as irre-
gular; disclaiming any power in him to receive them, or meddle
in their cause. Nor could pope Julius by any law or instance
disprove their plea; nor did the pope assert to himself any
peculiar authority to revise the cause, or otherwise justify his
proceeding, than by right common to all bishops of vindicating
right and innocence, which were oppressed ; and of asserting

the faith, for which they were persecuted. Indeed at first the

t Non provocent nisi ad Africana cap. 22. Conc. Afr. Can. 72.
concilia, vel ad primates provinciarum ; u Nam si de inferioribus clericis in
ad transmarina autem qui putaverit ap- concilio Niceno hoc preecaverunt ; quan-
pellandum, a nullo infra Africam in to magis de episcopis voluit observari?
communionem suscipiatur. Conc. Milev. Conc. Afr. Can. 105. (vel Epist.)

Pope’s Supremacy. 367

oriental bishops were contented to refer the cause to pope
Julius as arbitrator; which signifieth that he had no ordinary
right; but afterward, either fearing their cause or his preju-
dice, they started, and stood to the canonicalness of the former
decision.

The contest of the African church with pope Celestine, in
the cause of Apiarius, is famous; and the reasons which they
assign for repelling that appeal are very notable and peremp-
tory.

8. Divers of the fathers allege like reasons against appeals.
uSt. Cyprian allegeth these:

1. Because there was an ecclesiastical law against them.

2. Because they contain iniquity; as prejudicing the right
of each bishop granted by Christ, in governing his flock.

3. Because the clergy and people should not be engaged to
run gadding about.

4. Because causes might better be decided there, where
witnesses of fact might easily be had.

_5. Because there is everywhere a competent authority, equal
to any that might be had otherwhere.

6. Because it did derogate from the gravity of bishops to
alter their censure é

7. Pope Liberius desired of Constantius that the judgment
of Athanasius might be made in Alexandria for such reasons,
xbecause there the accused, the accusers, and their defender
were.

8. St. Chrysostom’s argument against Theophilus meddling
in his case may be set against Rome as well as Alexandria.

9. St. Austin, in matter of appeal, or rather of reference to
candid arbitration, (more proper for ecclesiastical causes, ) doth
conjoin other apostolical churches with that of Rome; Y/or
the business, says he, was not about priests and deacons, or the
inferior clergy, but the colleagues, (bishops,| who may reserve

u Refer ad sect. 7. Vid. supr. Opor-
tet utique eos quibus presumus non
circumcursare, nec episcoporum concor-
diam coherentem sua subdola et fallaci
temeritate collidere, sed agere illic cau-
sam suam, ubi et accusatores habere, et
testes sui crimims possint. Cypr. Ep.
55:

x tv0a éb eynadobpevos, kal of ey-

Kadoovtés eiot, kal 5 dytimootmevos ad-
TOY . Theod. xi. 16.

y Neque enim de presbyteris aut dia-
conis, aut inferioris ordinis clericis, sed
de collegis agebatur qui possunt aliorum
collegarum judicio, praesertim apostolica-
rum ecclesiarum, causam suam integram
reservare. Aug. Ep. 162.

368 A Treatise of the

their cause entire for the judgment of their colleagues, especially
those of the apostolical churches. He would not have said so, if
he had apprehended that the pope had a peculiar right of
revising judgments.

10. Pope Damasus (or rather pope Siricius) doth affirm
himself incompetent to judge in a case which had been afore
determined by the synod of Capua ;—7dut, says he, since the
synod of Capua has thus determined it, we perceive we cannot
judge it.

11. Anciently there were no appeals (properly so called, or
jurisdictional) in the church; they were, as Socrates telleth us,
introduced by Cyril of Jerusalem; who *first did appeal to a
greater judicature, against ecclesiastical rule and custom. ‘This
is an argument that about that time (a little before the great
synod of Constantinople) greater judicatories, or diocesan synods,
were established; whenas before provincial synods were the last
resorts.

12. Upon many occasions appeals were not made to the pope,
as in all likelihood they would have been, if it had been supposed
that a power of receiving them did belong to him. Paulus
Samosatenus did appeal to the emperor. The Donatists did
not appeal to the pope, but to the emperor». Their cause was
by the emperor referred, not to the pope singly, (as it ought
to have been, and would have been by so just a prince, if it had
been his right,) but to him and other judges as the emperor’s
commissionerse. Athanasius did first appeal to the emperor.
St.Chrysostom did request the pope’s succour, but he did not
appeal to him as judge; although he knew him favourably

"Avaryxala Aisposed, and the cause sure in his hand; but he appealed to
ee general council: the which Innocent himself did conceive

Buch. Soz. necessary for decision of that cause.
viii. 26.

z Sed cum hujusmodi fuerit concilii who deposed him, appealing to a greater
Capuensisjudicium—— advertimusquod judicature.
a nobis judicandi forma competere non b Illos vero ab ecclesiastico judicio
possit. provocasse, &c. Aug. Ep.162. Ad im-

& Todo pev obv udvos Kal mp@Tos mapa peratorem appeilaverunt. Aug. de Unit.

7d civndes TH exkAnoiactiKg kavdvi Kb- LE cel. cap. 16.

piddos erolnaev, exxaAntros as év inuoci € Quid quod nec ipse usurpavit; ro-
Sicacrnpie xpnoduevos. Socr. ii. 40. gatus imperator judices misit episcopos
Kabaipedeis 3 oby buws exxahtov BiBAlov qui cum ipso sederent, et de tota illa
Tois KabeAovar Siameupduevos pei(ov émi- causa quod justum videretur statuerent.
Kkardéoato dixaocrhpov. Ibid. Being de- Aug. Ep. 162.

posed, he sent a libel of appeal to them

genus \ oe

Pope’s Supremacy. 369

[ There are in history innumerable instances of bishops being
condemned and expelled from their sees, but few of appeals ;
which is a sign that was no approved remedy in common
opinion. |

Eutyches did appeal to all the patriarchs. Theodoret did Infra.
intend to appeal to all the western bishops. Infra.

13. Those very canons of Sardica (the most unhappy that
ever were made to the church) which did introduce appeals to
the pope, do yet upon divers accounts prejudice his claim to
an original right, and do upon no account favour that use of
them, to which (to the overthrow of all ecclesiastical liberty
and good discipline) they have been perverted. For,

1. They do pretend to confer a privilege on the pope; which
argueth that he before had no claim thereto.

2. They do qualify and restrain that privilege to certain
eases and forms; which is a sign that he had no power therein
flowing from absolute sovereignty: for it is strange, that they
who did pretend and intend so much to favour him should clip
his power.

8. It is not really a power which they grant of receiving
appeals in all causes; but a power of constituting judges, qua-
lified according to certain conditions, to revise a special sort
of causes concerning the judgment and deposition of bishops.
Which considerations do subvert his pretence to original and
universal jurisdiction upon appeals.

14. Some popes did challenge jurisdiction upon appeals, as
given them by the Nicene canons, meaning thereby those of
Sardica ; which sheweth they had no better plea, and there-
fore no original right. And otherwhere we shall consider what
validity those canons may be allowed to have.

15. The general synod of Chalcedon (of higher authority
than that of Sardica) derived appeals, at least in the eastern
churches, into another channel; namely, to the primate of each
diocese, or to the patriarch of Constantinople. That this was Can. 9, #7.
the last resort doth appear, from that otherwise they would
have mentioned the pope.

16. Appeals in cases of faith or general discipline were
indeed sometimes made to the consideration of the pope; but
not only to him, but to all other patriarchs and primates, as

370 A Treatise of the

concerned in the common maintenance of the common faith or
discipline. So did Kutyches appeal to the patriarchs.

Baron. ann. 17. The pope, even in later times, even in the western parts,

my Sg 1. hath found rubs in his trade of appeals. Consider the scuffle

Ep. 37, &e. between pope Nicholas I. and Hinemarus, bishop of Rhemes.

Vid. Matt. 18. Christian states, to prevent the intolerable vexations and

eg “" mischiefs arising from this practice, have been constrained to

Statutes of Make laws against them. Particularly England.

peers, In the twelfth age pope Paschal II. complained of king

preemunire,

&e. Henry I. 4¢that he deprived the oppressed of the benefit of appeal-
ing to the apostolic see. It was one of king Henry Ist’s laws,—
enone is permitted to cry from thence, no judgment is thence brought
to the apostolic see. ‘Foreign judgments we utterly remove,—s there
let the cause be tried where the crime was committed. It was one
of the grievances sent to pope Innocent IV, ®that Englishinen
were drawn out of the kingdom by the pope’s authority, to have
their causes heard.

Nor in aftertimes were appeals by law in any case permitted
without the king’s leave; although sometimes by the facility
of princes, or difficulty of times, the Roman court (ever impor-
tunate and vigilant for its profits) did obtain a relaxation or
neglect of laws inhibiting appeals.

19. There were appeals from popes to general councils very
frequently. Vid. The senate of Paris after the concordates
between Lewis XI. and pope Leo X.

Maca yxh. 20. By many laws and instances it appeareth, that appella-

Rom. xi tions have been made to the emperors in the greatest causes;
and that without popes’ reclaiming or taking it in bad part.

Acts xxv. St. Paul did appeal to Cesar. ‘Paulus Samosatenus did ap-

bl peal to Aurelianus. So the Donatists did appeal to Constan-

*Apol. ii. tine. * Athanasius to Constantine. The + Egyptian bishops

Fie int: to Constantine. * Priscillianus to Maximus. Idacius to Gra-

ii. p. 797;

798.

a Vos oppressis apostolice sedis ap- h Quod Anglici extra regnum in causis
pellationem subtrahitis. Eadm. p.113. auctoritate apostolica trahuntur. Matt.
e Nullus inde clamor, nullum inde Paris. p. 699. 10.

judicium ad sedem apostolicam desti- i Ad imperatorem appellaverunt. Aug.
nantur. bid. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 16.

f Peregrina judicia modis omnibus k Ad principem provocavit. Sulp. Sev.
submovemus. Hen. I. Leg. cap. 31. ii. 64. Id. ii. 63. Cone. Ant. Can. P. de

& Ibi semper causa agatur, ubi crimen Marca, iv. 4
admittitur. Ibid.

Pope's Supremacy. 371

tian. So that canons were made to restrain bishops from re-
course ad comitatum.

21. Whereas they do allege instances for appeal, those well
considered do prejudice their cause ; for they are few, in com-
parison to the occasions of them, that ever did arise; they are
nearfall of them late, when papal encroachments had grown ;
some of them are very impertinent to the cause; some of them
may strongly be retorted against them; all of them are in-
valid.

If the pope originally had such a right, (known, unques-
tionable, prevalent,) there might have been producible many,
ancient, clear, proper, concluding instances.

All that Bellarmine (after his own search, and that of his Bell. ii. 21.
predecessors in controversy) could muster, are these following;
upon which we shall briefly reflect: (adding a few others,
which may be alleged by them.)

He allegeth Marcion, as appealing to the pope. Ann. 142.

The truth was, that Marcion, for having corrupted a maid,

was by his own father, bishop of Sinope, 'driven from the
church ; whereupon he did thence fly to Rome, there begging
admittance to communion, but none did grant it™: at which he
expostulating, they replied, "We cannot without the permission
of thy honourable father do this ; for there is one faith, and one
concord ; and we cannot cross thy father our good fellow-minister.
This was the case and issue: and is it not strange this should
be produced for an appeal, which was only a supplication of a
fugitive criminal to be admitted to communion; and wherein
is utterly disclaimed any power to thwart the judgment of a
particular bishop or judge, upon account of unity in common
faith and peace ! Should the pope return the same answer to
every appellant, what would become of his privilege? So that
they must give us leave to retort this as a pregnant instance
against their pretence.

He allegeth the forementioned address of Felicissimus and (spr. Ep.
Fortunatus to pope Cornelius; the which was but a factious **-_ site
circumcursation of desperate wretches ; the which, or any like

1 Epiph. Heer. 42. “Efeodro: rijs éx- tiulov marpds cod TovTo rojoa’ ula ydp

KAnolas. dort tiotis, kai ula dudvoia, wal ob duvd-
Mm *Arodiipdoxe: Kal aveiow eis Thy pela evavTiwOivat TE KAAG TVAAELTOUPY@
‘Péunv. raTpl T@ TG.

Nn Ob duvducba bvev Tijs emitpowis ToD
Bb2

Cypr. Ep.
68.

Ann, 350.

Socr, ii. 20.

372 A Treatise of the

it, St. Cyprian argueth the pope in law and equity obliged not
to regard; because a definitive sentence was already passed on
them by their proper judges in Afric, from whom in conscience
and reason there could be no appeal. So Bellarmine would
filch from us one of our invincible arguments against him.

He also allegeth the case of Basilides ; which also we before
did shew to make against him; his application to the pope
being disavowed by St. Cyprian, and proving ineffectual.

These are all the instances which the first three hundred
years did afford; so that all that time this great privilege lay
dormant.

He allegeth the recourse of Athanasius to pope Julius; but
this was not properly to him as to a judge, but as to a fellow-
bishop, a friend of truth and right, for his suecour and coun-
tenance against persecutors of him, chiefly for his orthodoxy?®.
The pope did undertake to examine his plea, partly as arbi-
trator upon reference of both parties; partly for his own con-
cern, to satisfy himself whether he might admit him to commu-
nion. And having heard and weighed things, the pope denied
that he was condemned in a legal way by competent judges ;
and that therefore the pretended sentence was null; and conse-
quently he did not. undertake the cause as upon appeal. But
whereas his proceeding did look like an exercise of jurisdiction,
derogatory to a synodical resolution of the case, he was opposed
by the oriental bishops, as usurping an undue power. Unto
which charge he doth not answer directly, by asserting to him-
self any such authority by law or custom; but otherwise ex-
cusing himself. In the issue, the pope’s sentence was not
peremptory ; until, upon examining the merits of the cause, it
was approved for just, as to matter, by the synod of Sardicap.
These things otherwhere we have largely shewed; and conse-
quently this instance is deficient.

He allegeth St. Chrysostom, as appealing to pope Inno-
cent 1; 4 but if you read his Epistles to that pope, you will
find no such matter; he doth only complain, and declare to
him the iniquity of the process against him, not as to a judge,
but as to a friend and fellow-bishop concerned, that such

° Aiddoxovres em Kkatadicews Tis Kar’ abtovds Kal Ta Tis mloTews em) olKov-
miotews Tas Kabaipéoes yevéobar. Socr. pevikis cvvddov rédos AaBetv. Ibid.
ii. 20. 9 Tom. vii. Epist. 122, 123. Tpbs thy
P “Qore (Athanasius et Paulus) 74 suerépay dvadpapetv arydeny.

Eee

Pope's Supremacy. 373

injurious and mischievous dealings should be stopped"; re-
questing from him, not judgment of his cause, but succour in
procuring it by a general synod; to which indeed he did
appeal, as Sozomen expressly telleth us; and as indeed he
doth himself affirms. Accordingly pope Innocent did not
assume to himself the judgment of his cause, but did endea-
vour to procure a synod for it, affirming it to be needful: why
so, if his own judgment, according to his privilege, did suffice ?
Why indeed did not pope Innocent (being well satisfied in
the case, yea passionately touched with it) presently summon
Theophilus and his adherents, undertaking the trial? Did
pope Nicholas I. proceed so in the case of Rhotaldus? ‘Why
was he content only to write consolatory letters to him, and to
his people; not pretending to undertake the decision of his
cause? If the pope had been endowed with such a privilege,
it is morally impossible that it should not have shone forth
clearly upon this occasion; it could hardly be that St.Chry-
sostom himself should not in plain terms avow it; that he
should not formally apply to it, as the most certain and easy
way of finding relief; that he should not earnestly mind and
urge the pope to use his privilege: why should he speak of
that tedious and difficult way of a general synod, when so
short and easy a way was at hand? But the truth is, he did
not know any such power the pope had by himself. St.Chry-
sostom rather did conceive all such foreign judicatures to be
unreasonable and unjust; for the argument which he darteth
at Theophilus doth as well reach the papal jurisdiction upon
appeals ; for, "Jt was, saith he, not congruous, that an Egyptian
should judge those in Thrace: why not an Egyptian, as well as
an Italian? And, *Jf, saith he, this eustom should prevail, and
it become lawful for those who will to go into the parishes of
others, even from such distances, and to cast out whom any one

T Tlapakad@ thy diuerépay aydrny bia-
vaoTivai, Kal guvadyioa, Kal maya
Toijoa, ore oriva tavta 7a KaKd.

8 Oikoupevichy amexare? td otvodor.
Soz. viii. 17. "AAA ardytwy juav Kal
civodov émKarovpévwy. Theod. v. 34.
Oixoumevuchy 5¢ advodov cuvaryeipat oTou-
5d(wv. Soz. viii. 26. *Avayxala ear)
Bidyvwois cvvodinh. Thid.

*"Avtioxelas otk exowdvnoay 7H éxBorp
"Iwdvvov, GAAG Bid ypauudtwr THs wérews

Tov KX7jpov mapeuvOnoay, Kal edurx€-
patvoy Tots ToAuuact. Theoph. Soz. viii.
26.

u Ob yap axdrovdoy hy roy eE Alyi-
wTrov Tois év Opp SixdCeiv.

x Ei yap Tovro Kparha ere Td &€os Kal
etby yévorto Tots BovAopévais eis GAAo-
tplas amévar mapoixlas, kal éx TocovTwy
Biaornudr wy, Kal éxBddAAew obs by €0éA04
Tis, kat’ etovolay idlay mpdrroyvtas drep
ty éédrwow, tore Sri wdvta olyhoera
. Epist. 122.

Kata Td
00s Tav
ovvddwr.

p. 25.

374 A Treatise of the

pleaseth, doing by their own authority what they please, know
that all things will go to wreck—. Why may not this be said
of a Roman, as well as of an Alexandrian! St.Chrysostom
also (we may observe) did not only apply himself to the pope,
but to other western bishopsy; particularly to the bishops of
Milain and Aquileia, whom he called Beatissimi Domini: did
he appeal to them ¢

He allegeth Flavianus, bishop of Constantinople, appealing
to pope Leo2: but let us consider the story. Flavianus for
his orthodoxy (or upon other accounts) very injuriously
treated and oppressed by Dioscorus, who was supported by
the favour of the imperial court, having in his case no other
remedy, did appeal to the pope; who alone among the patri-
archs had dissented from those proceedings. The pope was
himself involved in the cause, being of the same persuasion ;
having been no less affronted and hardly treated (considering
their power, and that he was out of their reach) and con-
demned by the same adversaries.

To him therefore, as to the leading bishop of Christendom,
in the first place interested in defence of the common faith,
together with a synod, not to him as sole judge, did Flavianus
appeal. *He, (saith Placidia, in her Letter to Theodosius) did
appeal to the apostolic see, and to all the bishops of these parts ;
that is, to the rest of Christendom, which were not engaged
in the party of Dioscorus: and to whom else could he have
appealed ¢

Valentinian, in his Epistle to Theodosius, in behalf of pope
Leo, saith, that he did appeal according to the manner of
synods; and whatever those words signify, that could not be
to the pope, as a single judge: for before that time, in what-
ever synod was such an appeal made? what custom could
there be favourable to such a pretence?

But what his appeal did import is best interpretable by the
proceeding consequent ; which was not the pope’s assuming to

y Scripsimus ista et ad Venerium Me-

diolanensem, et ad Chromatium Aquile-

giensem episcopum. Pallad. cap. 2.

Z Flavianus autem contra se prolata
sententia per ejus legatos sedem aposto-
licam appellavit libello. Liber. cap. 12.
Necessitate coactus fuit ita agere, eo

quod reliqui patriarche adessent——.
Mare. vii. 7. -

a ‘Qs mponyovmevov Placidia.
Ilpds Tov GmogroAiKdy Opdvoy Kal mpds
ndvtas émoKkérovs Tév mepav ToUTwY.

Syn. Chale. Act. i. p, 26.

eth een cern

Popes Supremacy. 375

himself the judicature, either immediately or by delegation of
judges, but endeavouring to procure a general synod for it;
the which endeavour doth appear in many Epistles to Theo-
dosius and to his sister Pulcheria, soliciting that such a synod
might be indicted by his order; »A// the bishops, saith pope
Leo, with sighs and tears do supplicate your grace, that because
our agents did faithfully reclaim, and bishop Flavianus did pre-
sent them a libel of appeal, you would command a general synod
to be celebrated in Italy.

Dioscorus and his party would scarce have been so silly as
to condemn Flavianus, if they had known (which, if it had
been a case clear in law, or obvious in practice, they could
not but have known) that the pope, who was deeply engaged
in the same cause, had a power to reverse (and revenge) —
their proceedings. Nor would the good emperor Theodosius
so pertinaciously have maintained the proceedings of that
Ephesine synod, if he had deemed the pope duly sovereign
governor and judge; or that a right of ultimate decision upon
appeal did appertain to him. Nor had the pope needed to
have taken so much pains in procuring a synod, if he could
have judged without it. Nor would pope Leo (a man of so
much spirit and zeal for the dignity of his see) have been so
wanting to the maintenance of his right, as not immediately
to have proceeded unto trial of the cause, without precarious
attendance for a synod, if he thought his pretence to such
appeals as we now speak of to have been good or plausible in
the world at that time.

The next case is that of Theodoret. His words indeed,
framed according to his condition, needing the patronage of
pope Leo, being then high in reputation, do sound fayvour-
ably; but we abstracting from the sound of words must re-
gard the reason of things. His words are these; ‘/ expect the
suffrage of your apostolic see, and beseech and earnestly entreat
your holiness to succour me, who appeal to your right and just
judicature.

b Omnes mansuetudini vestre cum C’Eya 5¢ rod arogroAiKod bud Opd-
gemitibus et lachrymis supplicant sacer- vou mepiuévw Thy Yipov, Kal ixerebw Kal
dotes, ut quia et nostri fideliter recla- é&yvTi(BoA@ Thy chy ayidrnta érautvar por
marunt, et eisdem libellum appellationis 1d dp0dv dudy Kal Slxaiov erimadounev
Flavianus episcopus dedit, generalem xpirhpiov. Theod. Ep.113. (ad P. Leo-

synodum jubeatis intra Italiam cele- nem.)
brari——. P. Leo, Epist. 25.

376 A Treatise of the

He never had been particularly or personally judged, and
therefore did not need to appeal, as to a judge; nor therefore
is his application to the pope to be interpreted for such; but
rather as to a charitable succourer of him in his distress, by
his countenance and endeavour to relieve him4.

He only was supposed erroneous in faith, and a perilous
abettor of Nestorianism, because he had smartly contradicted
Cyril; which prejudice did cause him to be prohibited from
coming to the synod of Ephesus; and there in his absence to
be denounced heterodox.

His appeal then to the pope (having no other recourse, in
whom he did confide, finding him to concur with himself in

Ta yap map’ opinion against Eutychianism) was no other than (as the

buav Kpi67y-
odueva
oréptouev
étrota by 7.

word is often used in common speech, when we say, I appeal
to your judgment in this or that case) a referring it to the
pope’s consideration, whether his faith was sound and ortho-
dox; capacitating him to retain his office: the which upon
his explication and profession thereof (presented in terms of
extraordinary respect and deference) the pope did approve ;
thereby (as a good divine, rather than as a formal judge)
acquitting him of heterodoxy: the which approbation (in re-
gard to the great opinion then had of the pope’s skill in those
points, and to the favour he had obtained by contesting against
the Eutychians) did bear great sway in the synod; so that
(although not without opposition of many, and not upon ab-
solute terms) he was permitted to sit among the fathers of
Chalcedon.
Observations.

1. We do not read of any formal trial the pope made of
Theodoret’s case; that he was cited, that his accusers did
appear, that his cause was discussed ; but only a simple appro-
bation of him.

4 Vid. Ep. 112. ad Domnum. *AAAd = mpoadhoavres ypdupacw—. Epist.145.

Kope Tov amrdyTa dbuolws Kaddup Karé-
opatev, ore Kaheoas els Sixaorhpiov,
ore wapdyra Kplvas pera TocovTous
paras Kal mévous wh Bikacdpevos Ka-
Texpl0nv. Oi be Sicadtatro diKaoral
Tov axdyta Katéxpwoy ob BindoayTes,
pardov 5 Kal Alav érawéoavres Ta 57-
Gev eis xatrnyoplay jay emibobévra avy-
ypaupara. Epist. 138.

Vid. Theod. Epist. supr. et Ep. 127,
129. Kal pe vdpos évOdde xabelpye: Ba- .
oirKds. BaotAccots yedupact Kwavdév-
Tes KaTahaBeiv Thy “Epeoor . Ep.
138, 139. Madetv avTiBor@ wrap dua
etre xph we orépkar Thy Ubixov TabTny
Kabaipeow, wh. Ep. 113. “Qore Kad
Tas THs avaToAns exxAnolas THs tpueré-
pas amodatom Kndenovlas. Ep. 118.

Pope’s Supremacy. 377

2. We may observe, that Theodoret did write to Flavianus
in like terms: We entreat your holiness to fight in behalf of the
Jaith which is assaulted, and to defend the canons which are
trampled under foot.

3. We may observe, that Theodoret expecting this favour
of pope Leo, and thence being moved to commend the Roman
see to the height, and to reckon its special advantages, doth
not yet mention his supremacy of power, or universality of
jurisdiction : for those words, sit befitteth you to be prime in
all things, are only general words relating to the advantages
which he subjoineth; of which he saith, » for your throne is
adorned with many advantages, in a florid enumeration where-
of he passeth over that of peculiar jurisdiction; he nameth the
magnitude, splendour, majesty, and populousness of the city ;
the early faith praised by St.Paul, the sepulchres of the two
great apostles, and their decease there ; but the pope’s being
universal sovereign and judge (which was the main advantage
whereof that see could be capable) he doth not mention: why ?
because he was not aware thereof, else surely he would not
have passed it in silence’.

4. We may also observe, that whatever the opinion of
Theodoret was now concerning the pope’s power, he not long
before did hardly take him for such a judge, when he did op-
pose pope Celestine, coneurring with Cyril, at the first Ephe-
sine synod. He then indeed, looking on pope Celestine as a
prejudiced adversary, did not write to him, but to the other
bishops of the west, as we see by those words in his Epistle to
Domnus; And we have written to the bishops of the west about
these things, to him of Milain, I say, to him of Aquileia, and him
of Ravenna, testifying), &e.

f Thy chy aywotvny mapakadotuev
TS TorAcuounerns TlaTews bmepuaxioa,
kal tay rarnbévtwr brepaywricacba Ka-
vévev. Theod. Epist. 86.

& Aw wdyta yap iuiv mpwrevew ap-
pérres —.

h TloAAois yap 6 duérepos Opdvos koo-
Metros WACoveKTHuaci. “Exe: yap 6 may-
dyios Opdvos exeivos tay Kata Thy ol-
Koupévny éxxanoiav Thy ipyeuoviav, bid
mTOAAG, Kal mpd TaY LAAwY amdyTwr, bri
aipeTixis weuévnne Svowdlas dudnros, cal

ovdels ravaytia ppovay eis exeivoy éxdéi-
gev, GAAA Thy amrooroAKhy xdpw a&Kh-
parov SiepiAate. Theod. Ep. 116. (ad
Renatum Presb.)

i That holy see has the principality
over the churches in all the world for
many reasons; but especially because
she continued free from the taint of
heresy, and none otherwise minded ever
sat in her, she having kept the apostolic
state always unmixed.

j Kal rots GcopiAcordrois 5 rijs dv-

Greg. lib. ii.

Indict. 11.
Ep. 6.

378 A Treatise of the

5. Yea we may observe, that Theodoret did intend, with the
emperor's leave, to appeal, or refer his cause, to the whole body
of western bishops, as himself doth express in those words to
Anatolius, ‘7 do pray your magnificence, that you would request
this favour of our dread sovereign, that I may have recourse to
the west, and may be judged by the most religious and holy
bishops there.

Bellarmine further doth allege the appeal of Hadrianus,
bishop of Thebes, to pope Gregory I, the which he received
and asserted by excommunicating the archbishop of Justiniana
Prima, for deposing Hadrianus, without regard to that appeal.
I answer,

1. The example is late, when the popes had extended their
power beyond the ancient and due limits: those maxims had
got in before the time of that worthy pope; who thought
he might use the power of which he found himself pos-
sessed.

2. It is impertinent, because the bishop of Justiniana had
then a special dependence upon the Roman see; from whence
an universal jurisdiction upon appeal cannot be inferred.

3. It might be an usurpation; nor doth the opinion or
practice of pope Gregory suffice to determine a question of
right; for good men are liable to prejudice, and its con-
sequences,

To these instances produced by Bellarmine some add the
appeal of Eutyches to pope Leo; to which it may be ex-
cepted, that if he did appeal, it was not to the pope solely,
but to him with the other patriarchs ; so it is expressly said
in the Acts of the Chalcedon synod; |!His deposition being
read, he did appeal to the holy synod of the most holy bishop
of Rome, and of Alexandria, and of Jerusalem, and of Thessa-
lonica: the which is an argument, that he did not apprehend

cews émickdmos, TG MediodrAdvov pny, Beopireorarors kal aywrdros émokd-

mois diucacacbas.

kal TG ’Axuidelas kad 7a ‘PaBévyns mreph
TovTwv éypdyaper, Siapaprupdpevor ws
THs "AmoAwaplov TadTa Kkavoroulas me-
pay stree: Theod. Epist. 112.

k ’AyTiBorA@ Thy bperépay peryadompe-
mewayv, TalTny aitrjou thy xdpw Thy
KadAlyixov Kopuphy, bore pe Thy éowé-
pay karadaBeiv, kal rapa Tots év éxelyn

Theod. Ep. 119. (ad
Anatol.)

1 *Avaywwokouervns Tijs Kabarperews,
émekadéoaTo Thy aylav abvodov TOU aryiw-
tarov émirkdmov ‘Péuns, nal "AAckar-
Bpelas, wal ‘lepoooAvuwv, kal Oeaoadro-
vikns. Syn. Chale. Act. 1.

379

the right of receiving appeals did solely or peculiarly belong
to him of Rome.

Liberatus saith, that "Johannes Talaida went to Calendion,
patriarch of Antioch, and taking of him intercessory synodical
laters, appealed to Simplicius, bishop of Rome, as St. Athanasius
had done, and persuaded him to write in his behalf to Acacius,
bishop of Constantinople.

In regard to any more instances of this kind we might gene-
rally propose these following considerations :

1. It is no wonder, that any bishop being condemned, espe-
cially in causes relating to faith or common interest, should
have recourse to the Roman bishop, or to any other bishop of
great authority, for refuge or for relief; which they may hope
to be procured by them by the influence of their reputation,
and their power among their dependents.

2. Bad men, being deservedly corrected, will absurdly re-
sort any whither with mouths full of clamour and calumny ; if
not with hope of relief, yet with design of revenge; as did
Marcion, as did Felicissimus, as did Apiarius to the pope.

3. Good men being abused will express some resentment,
and complain of their wrongs, where they may presume of a
fair and favourable hearing: so did Athanasius, Flavianus,
St. Chrysostom, Theodoret, apply themselves to the same
bishops, flourishing in so great reputation and wealth.

So did the monks of Egypt, (Ammonius and Isidorus,)
from the persecutions of Theophilus, fly to the protection and
succour of St. Chrysostom; which gave occasion to the trou-
bles of that incomparable personage ; the which is so illus-
trious an instance, that the words of the historian relating it
deserve setting down.

"They jointly did endeavour, that the trains against them
might be examined by the emperor as judge, and by the bishop

Pope’s Supremacy.

m Ingressus est ad Calendionem An-
tiochenum patriarcham, et sumptis ab
eo intercessionis synodicis literis Ro-
manum pontificem Simplicium appella-
vit, sicut B. fecerat Athanasius, et sua-
sit scribere pro se Acacio Constantino-
politano episcopo -——. Liber. cap. 18.
Baron. ann. 483. sect. 1.

Nn Kowy te éorovdalov mapa Baciret
Kpitp Kal “lwdyyvn Te emicndrw édAéy-
xecba Tas Kar’ abray ériBovdAds: Govto

yap evd{kov mappnalas abrdy éemimedod-
pevoy duvvdc0a Ta Sixaa BonPeiy adrois
6 5& mporeAOdvtas ad’T@ Tos kvdpas di-
Aodpdvws edékaro, kal ev Ting elxe, wal
eUyec0a: em) exxanolas odk exwduce
eypave 5t Ocoplaw xowwvlay abrois amo-
Bovvat, ds dp0as wept Ocod SofdCovew ei
Be Blkn Séor xplvecOar Ta Kat’ abtods,
amoatdAAew bv alte Boxe? dixacduevor.
Soz. viii. 13-

380 A Treatise of the

John; for they conceived that he having conscience of using a
just freedom, would be able to succour them according to right :
but he did receive the men applying to him courteously, and
treated them respectfully, and did not hinder them from praying
in the church— He also writ to Theophilus to render communion
to them, as being orthodox; and if there were need of judging
their case by law, that he would send whom they thought good to
prosecute the cause.

If this had been to the pope, it would have been alleged for
an appeal; and it would have had as much colour as any
instance which they can produce.

4. And when men, either good or bad, do resort in this
manner to great friends, it is no wonder if they accost them
in highest terms of respect, and with exaggerations of their
eminent advantages; so inducing them to regard and favour
their cause.

5. Neither is it strange, that great persons favourably
should entertain those who make such addresses to them,
they always coming crouching in a suppliant posture, and with
fair pretences; it being also natural to men to delight in see-
ing their power acknowledged ; and it being a glorious thing
to relieve the afflicted: for °emnence is wont to incline toward
infirmity, and with a ready good-will to take part with those
who are under. So when Basilides, when Marcellus, when
Eustathius Sebastenus, when Maximus the Cynic, when Api-
arius were condemned, the pope was hasty to engage for them;
more liking their application to him, than weighing their
cause.

6. And when any person doth continue long in a flourish-
ing estate, so that such addresses are frequently made to him,
no wonder that an opinion of lawful power to receive them
doth arise both in him and in others; so that of a voluntary
friend he become an authorized protector, a patron, a judge of
such persons in such cases.

X. The sovereign is fountain of all jurisdiction; and all.

inferior magistrates derive their authority from his warrant and
commission, acting as his deputies or ministers, according to

© Pirei pddora KdprrecOu To mpo- Exovolov TH éAatTwudvp mpoorlberOau.
éxov mpos Td doOevts, nal 3” ebvolas Greg. Naz. Orat, 23.

a ‘

Pope’s Supremacy. 381

that intimation in St. Peter,—zhether to the king as supreme, : Pet. ii. 13.
or to governors as sent by him.

Accordingly the pope doth challenge this advantage to
himself, that he is the fountain of ecclesiastical jurisdiction ;
pretending all episcopal power to be derived from him.

P The rule of the church, saith Bellarmine, ts monarchical ;
therefore all authority is in one, and from him is derived to
others; the which aphorism he well proveth from the form
of creating bishops, as they call it; 9 We do provide such a
church with such a person; and we do prefer him to be father
and pastor and bishop of the said church; committing to him
the administration in temporals and spirituals in the name of the
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

Pope Pius I], in his Bull of Retractation, thus expresseth
the sense of his see; "Jn the militant church, which resembleth
the triumphant, there is one moderator and judge of all, the
ewar of Jesus Christ, from whom, as from the head, all power
and authority is derived to the subject members ; the which doth
immediately flow into it from the Lord Christ.

A congregation of cardinals, appointed by pope Paulus III,
speaking after the style and sentiments of that see, did say
to him, * Your holiness doth so bear the care of Christ’s church,
that you have very many ministers, by which you manage
that care; these are all the clergy, on whom the service of God
is charged ; especially priests, and more especially curates, and
above all, bishops.

Durandus, bishop of Mande, according to the sense of his
age, saith, ‘The pope is head of all bishops, from whom they

P Regimen ecclesiz est monarchicum ;
ergo omnis auctoritas est in uno, et ab
illo in alios derivatur. Bell. iv. 24.
Epiph. Heer. 42.

4 Providemus ecclesiz tali de tali per-
sona, et preeficimus eum in patrem, et
pastorem, et episcopum ejusdem eccle-
siz, committentes ei administrationem
in temporalibus et spiritualibus ; in no-
mine, &c. Jhid.

T In ecclesia militanti, que instar tri-
umphantis habet, unus est omnium mo-
derator et arbiter Jesu Christi vicarius,
a quo tanquam capite omnis in subjecta
membra potestas et authoritas deriva-
tur, que a Christo Domino sine medio
in ipsum influit. P. Pius 17. in Bull.

Retract.

s Sanctitas vestra ita gerit curam
ecclesiz Christi, ut ministros plurimos
habeat, per quos curam exerceat ; hi au-
tem sunt clerici omnes, quibus mandatus
est cultus Dei; presbyteri presertim,
et maxime curati, et pre omnibus epi-
scopi——. Apud Cham, de Pont. Geum,
10, 13-

t Summus pontifex caput est omnium
pontificum, a quo illi tanquam a capite
membra descendunt, et de cujus pleni-
tudine omnes accipiunt quos ipse vocat
in partem solicitudinis, non in plenitu-
dinem potestatis. Durand. Mimat. Offic.
i. x. 17.

382 A Treatise of the

as members from an head descend, and of whose fulness all
receive ; whom he calls to a participation of his care, but admits
not into the fulness of his power.

This pretence is seen in the ordinary titles of bishops, who
style themselves bishops of such a place, “by the grace of God
and of the apostolic see. O shame!

The men of the Tridentine convention (those great betray-
ers of the church to perpetual slavery, and Christian truth
to the prevalency of falsehood, till God pleaseth) do, upon

This was an divers occasions, pretend to qualify and empower bishops to
gene perform important matters, originally belonging to the episco-
pal function, as the pope’s delegates.

But contrariwise according to the doctrine of holy scripture,
and the sense of the primitive church, the bishops and pastors
of the church do immediately receive their authority and com-
mission from God; being only his ministers.

Col. i. 7. The scripture calleth them the ministers of God, and of
a. ii, Christ, (so Epaphras, so Timothy, in regard to their ecclesi-
2, ~~. _ astical function are named,) the stewards of God, the servants
1 Tim. iv. 6.
Tit.i.7. Of God, fellow-servants of the apostles.
yg t+ The scripture saith, that the Holy Ghost had made them
Naz.Or. 30. bishops to feed the church of God; that God had given them,
4 add and constituted them in the church; for the perfecting of the
29. saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the
body of Christ ; that is, to all effects and purposes concerning
their office: for the work of the ministry compriseth all the
duty charged on them, whether in way of order or of govern-
ance*; as they now do precariously and groundlessly in
reference to this case distinguish: and edifying the body doth
import all the designed effects of their office ; particularly those
which are consequent on the use of jurisdiction; the which
2 Cor. x.8. St. Paul doth affirm was appointed for edification ; according,
xiii 10 gaith he, to the authority which God hath given me for edifica-
Mpoisrdue- tion, and not for destruction. ‘Vhey do preside in the Lord.

vo evKuply. They allow no other head but our Lord, from whom all the
1 Thess. v.

2, body, &e.
Eph.iv.16. ‘The fathers clearly do express their sentiments to be the
same.
a N. Dei et apostolice sedis gratia x Ordo confertur a Deo immediate,

episcopus Colon jurisdictio mediate. Bell. iv. 25.

-_e

Pope’s Supremacy. 383

St. Ignatius saith, that the bishop Ydoth preside in the
place of God; and that we must look upon him as our Lord
himself, (or as our Lord’s representative ;) that therefore we
must be subject to him as unto Jesus Christ.

St. Cyprian affirmeth *ecach bishop to be constituted by the
judgment of God and of Christ: and that in his church he is
for the present a judge in the place of Christ :—and that our
Lord Jesus Christ, one and alone, hath a power both to prefer us
to the government of his church, and to judge of our acting.

St. Basil; >A prelate is nothing else but one that sustaineth
the person of Christ.

St. Chrysostom ; ° We have received the commission of am-
bassadors, and come from God; for this is the dignity of the
episcopal office.

d Jt behoveth us all, who by divine authority are constituted
in the priesthood, to prevent, &e.

Wherefore the ancient bishops did all of them take them-
selves to be vicars of Christ, not of the pope, and no less than
the proudest pope of them all; whence it was ordinary for
them in their addresses and compellations to the bishop of
Rome, and in their speech about him, to call him their dro-
ther, their colleague, their fellow-minister ; which had not been
modest, or just, if they had been his ministers or shadows.

Yea, the popes themselves, even the highest and haughtiest Leo, Ep.84.

of them, who of any in old times did most stand on their pre-
sumed preeminence, did yet vouchsafe to call other bishops
their fellow-bishops and fellow-ministers.

Those bishops of France with good reason did complain of
pope Nicholas I. ¢for calling them his clerks; whenas, if his

¥ MpoxaOnuévou Tod emoxdrov els 76-
mov @cov. Ign. ad Magnes.

Z Toy otv éxioxoroy SijAov Sri as ade
Tov Tov Kipioy det rpooBAérew. Ign. ad
Eph. “Otay émoxdéry brordoceade os
"Inood Xpiot@. Ign. ad Trall.

@ De Dei et Christi ejus judicio.
Cypr. Ep. 52. et alili sepe. Unus in
ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos, et ad tem-
pus judex, vice Christi. Jd. Ep. 55. Sed
expectemus universi judicium Domini
nostri Jesu Christi, qui unus et solus
habet potestatem et preponendi nos in
ecclesie sure gubernatione, et de actu
nostro judicandi. Jd. in Cone. Carthag.

b‘O yap Kabnyotuevos ovdiy erepdy
eat, 5 Tov owripos eréxav mpdowmov.
Bas. Const. Mon. cap. 22.

© ‘Hueis tolvuy mpecBelas avedetdueda
Adyor kal Howey Tapa Tod cod, TovTo
ydp dori Td Tis émioxorijs aflwua. Chrys.
in Coloss. Orat. 3.

d Oportere nos omnes, qui Deo auc-
tore sumus in sacerdotio constituti illius
certaminibus obviare, &c. Anatol. in
Syn. Chale. p. 512.

e Sciesque nos non tuos esse ut te
jactas et extollis clericos, quos ut fratres
et coepiscopos recognoscere si elatio per-
mitteret, debueras. Ann. Pith.

‘Hueis Tol-

papa". De

Chrys. sup.

384 A Treatise of the

pride had suffered him, he should have acknowledged them for his
brethren and fellow-bishops.

In fine, the ancient bishops did not allege any commission
from the pope to warrant their jurisdiction, but from God ;
f If Moses’s chair were so venerable, that what was said out of
that ought therefore to be heard, how much more is Christ’s
throne so! We succeed him, from that we speak, since Christ has
committed to us the ministry of reconciliation.

& That which ts committed to the priest, it is only in God’s
power to give.

h Since we also, by the mercy of Christ our King and God,
were made ministers of the gospel.

This is a modern dream, born out of ambition and flattery,
which never came into the head of any ancient divine.

It is a ridiculous thing to imagine that Cyprian, Athanasius,
Basil, Chrysostom, Austin, &c. did take themselves for the
vicegerents or ministers of the popes; if they did, why did
they not, so frequent occasion being given them, in all their
volumes, ever acknowledge it? why cannot Bellarmine and his
complices, after all their prolling, shew any passage in them
importing any such acknowledgment ; but are fain to infer it,
by far-fetched sophisms, from allegations plainly impertinent
or frivolous ?

The popes indeed in the fourth century began to ‘practise a
fine trick, very serviceable to the enlargement of their power ;
which was to confer on certain bishops, as occasion served, or
for continuance, the title of their vicar or lieutenant; thereby
pretending to impart authority to them: whereby they were
enabled for performance of divers things, which otherwise by
their own episcopal or metropolitical power they could not per-
form. By which device they did engage such bishops to such
a dependence on them, whereby they did promote the papal
authority in provinces, to the oppression of the ancient rights
and liberties of bishops and synods, doing what they pleased

f Ei d Mwcéws Opdvos obrws jy aidé-
ouos, ws BC exeivov axovec0a, TOAAG
parrov 6 Xpurtov Opdvos; exeivov nucis
5redciducba, ard tobrov pbeyyducda, ad’
ob Kal 6 Xpiotds Cero ev huiv thy dia-
koviov THis KaTadAayis. Chrys. in Co-
loss. Orat. 3.

&°A yap eyxexelpiata 5 lepeds, Ocod

udvov éor) SwpetoOat, &c. Chrys. in Joh.
Orat. 83.

h °’Erel ody kal ets Ader TOD Toup-
Baciréws (1. mapBariréws) jar Xpi-
OTOU TOU Ocod iepovpyod Tod evaryyeAlouv
exAnpodnuev—. Flavian. in Chale. Act.
i, p. 4.

Pope’s Supremacy. 385

under pretence of this vast power communicated to them ; and
for fear of being displaced, or out of affection to their favourer,
doing what might serve to advance the papacy.

Thus did pope Celestine constitute Cyril in his room. Evagr. Act.
Pope Leo appointed Anatolius of Constantinople. Eph. p.134.
Pope Felix Acacius of Constantinople. Act. Cone.
Pope Hormisdas Epiphanius of Constantinople. nape

Pope Simplicius to Zeno bishop of Seville—> We thought i mb
convenient that you should be held up by the vicariat authority
of our see.

So did Siricius and his successors constitute the bishops of
Thessalonica to be their vicars in the diocese of Illyricum,
wherein being then a member of the western empire they had
caught a special jurisdiction ; to which pope Leo did refer in
those words, which sometimes are impertinently alleged with
reference to all bishops, but concern only Anastasius, bishop
of Thessalonica ; ‘We have intrusted thy charity to be in our
stead, so that thou art called into part of the solicitude, not into
plenitude of the authority. |

So did pope Zosimus bestow a like pretence of vicarious P. Joh.
power upon the bishop of Arles, which city was the seat of the ae =
temporal exarch in Gaul.

So to the bishop of Justiniana Prima in Bulgaria, (or Dar-
dania Europza,) the like privilege was granted, [by procure-
ment of the emperor Justinian, native of that place. |

Afterwards temporary or occasional vicars were appointed,

(such as Austin in England, Boniface in Germany,) who in
virtue of that concession did usurp a paramount authority ;
and by the exercise thereof did advance the papal interest ; de-
pressing the authority of metropolitans and provincial synods.

So at length legates, upon occasion dispatched into all
countries of the west, came to do there what they pleased,
using that pretence to oppress and abuse both clergy and
people very intolerably.

Whence divers countries were forced to make legal provi- P. Pasch.
sions for excluding such legates, finding by much experience ay
that their business was to rant and domineer in the pope’s p. 113, &c.

h Congruum duximus vicaria sedis dimus charitati, ut in partem sis voca-
nostre te auctoritate fulciri. Baron. tus solicitudinis, non in plenitudinem
ann. 482. sect. 46. potestatis. P. Leo, Ep. 84. (ad Anastas.

i Vices enim nostras ita tue credi- T'hessal.)

Bell. ii. 10.

386 A Treatise of the

name, to suck money from the people, and to maintain luxuri-
ous pomp upon expense of the countries where they came.

1 Of this, John X XII. doth sorely complain ; and decrees
that all people should admit his legates, under pain of inter-
dicts.

In England, pope Paschal finds the same fault in his letter
to king Henry I. Nuneios, or letters from the apostolic see,
unless by your majesty’s command, are not thought worthy any
admittance or reception within your jurisdiction: mone com-
plains thence, none appeals thence for judament to the apostolic
see™.

The pope observing what authority and reverence the arch-
bishops of Canterbury had in this nation, whereby they might
be able to check his attempts, did think good to constitute those
archbishops his legates of course, (/egatos natos,) that so they
might seem to exercise their jurisdiction by authority derived
from him; and owing to him that mark of favour, or honour,
with enlargement of power, might pay him more devotion, and
serve his interests.

Bellarmine doth from this practice prove the pope’s sovereign
power; but he might from thence better have demonstrated
their great cunning. It might, from such extraordinary de-
signation of vicegerents, with far more reason be inferred, that
ordinarily bishops are not his ministers.

XI. It is the privilege of a sovereign, that he cannot be
called to account, or judged, or deposed, or debarred commu-
nion, or anywise censured and punished ; for this implieth a
contradiction or confusion in degrees, subjecting the superior
to inferiors ; this were making a river run backwards ; this
were to dam up the fountain of justice; to behead the state ;
to expose majesty to contempt.

Wherefore the pope doth pretend to this privilege, accord-
ing to those maxims in the canon law, drawn from the sayings
of popes (either forged or genuine, but all alike) obtaining au-
thority in their court”.

1 Extrav. commun. i. 1. (p. 310.) Oc- destinantur. P. Pasch. II, Eadm.

culti inimici regni. Matt. Pur. p.524-. pp. 113.

m Sedis apostolic nuncii vel liter n Bell. ii. 26. de Conc. ii. 17. Grat.
preter jussum regie majestatis nullam Dist. xl. cap. 6. xxi. 7. Caus. ix. qu. 3.
in potestate tua susceptionem aut adi- cap. 10.—Extrav. comm. lib. i. tit. 8.
tum promerentur, nullus inde clamor, cap.1. P. Leo IX. Ep.i. cap. 10—17.
nullum judicium ad sedem apostolicam P. Nich. I. Ep. 8. (p. 504.) P. Joh.

Ne ergot

Pope’s Supremacy. 387

And according to what pope Adrian let the eighth synod
know, ° because, says he, the apostolic church of Rome stoops not
to the judgment of lesser churches. They cite also three old
synods, (of Sinuessa, of Rome under pope Silvester, of Rome
under Sixtus III,) but they are palpably spurious, and the
learned amongst them confess it.

But antiquity was not of this mind; for it did suppose him
no less obnoxious to judgment and correction than other
bishops, if he should notoriously deviate from the faith, or
violate canonical discipline.

The canons generally do oblige bishops without exception
to duty, and (upon defailance) to correction: why is not he
excepted, if to be excused or exempted ? .

Tt was not questioned of old, but that a pope, in case he
should notoriously depart from the faith, or notably infringe
discipline, might be excommunicated : the attempting it upon
divers occasions doth shew their opinion, although it often
had not effect, because the cause was not just and plausible ;
the truth and equity of the case appearing to be on the
pope’s side.

St. Isidore Pelusiota denieth of any bishop’s office, that it
is apx7) avuTedOvvos, an uncontrollable government.

In the times of Polycrates and pope Victor the whole
eastern church did forbear communion with the pope P.
Firmilian told pope Stephanus, that by conceiting he might
excommunicate all other bishops, he had excommunicated
himself. The fathers of the Antiochene synod did threaten
to excommunicate and depose pope Julius. 47hey did promise
to Julius peace and communion, if he did admit the deposition
of those whom they had expelled, and the constitution of those
whom they had ordained ; but if he did resist their decrees, they
denounced the contrary. ‘The oriental bishops at Sardica did
excommunicate and depose him. St. Hilary did anathematize
VIII. Ep. 75. (p. 31.) P. Gelas. Ep. 4.

(p. 625, 626.) Ep. 13. (p. 640.) P. Greg.
VII. Ep. 8, 21.

édéxovro. Epiph. Her. 7o. Audiano-
rum. Dum enim putas omnes abs te
abstineri posse, solum te ab omnibus

© Aid 7d Thy drooToAiKkhy exxAnolay
THs ‘Pouns TH TeV eAaTTévwy wh bToO-
kirrew kploe. P. Adrian. in Syn. VIIL.
Act. vii. p. 963.

P “Ev te xpévois TloAvKpdrous kal
Bikrwpos ws % avaToAh mpds Thy Siow
Siaepoueva elpnvikd wap’ GAAHAwY obk

abstinuisti. Firm. apud Cypr. Ep.

G Acyouevy pev “lovAl@ ri Kadalpeow
Tay mpds a’tay éAnAautvwr, Kal Thy Ka-
rdoTacw Tay am abtav xeiporovnbévTawr,
eiphynv Kal Kowwviay érnyyéAAovTo" ay-
Horanéevy 5¢ Trois dedoyudvas Tavarrla
mponydpevoav. Sozom. iii. 8.

cce@

Soz. iii. If.

388 A Treatise of the

Anathema pope Liberius, upon his defection to the Arians. * Dioscorus
py did attempt to excommunicate pope Leo. * Acacius of Con-
tT Nceph, stantinople renounced the communion of pope Felix. + Timo-
xvi.17. Ba- theus Atlurus cursed the pope. The ‘ African bishops did
ry gets synodically excommunicate pope Vigilius. {Pope Anastasius
+Baron. was rejected by his own clergy. § Pope Constantine, by the
S22, ~—- people; || and so was pope Leo VIII. { Divers bishops of
¢Plat. Italy and Illyricum did abstain from the pope’s communion
P Dist.xix, for a long time, because they did admit the fifth synod.
cap. 21, 22.t Photius did excommunicate and depose pope Nicholas I.
p. 223. “Maurus, bishop of Ravenna, did anathematize pope Vitalianus.
ey ca The emperor Otho II. having with good advice laboured to
II. Ep. reclaim pope John XII, without effect, did * indict a council,
Bare, ann, Calling together the bishops of Italy, by the gudgment of whom

669. sect. 2. the life of that wicked man should be judged ; and the issue
. CS: was, that he was deposed. Pope Nicholas I. desired to be
cap. 41. judged by the emperor. The fifth synod did in general terms
condemn pope Vigilius; and the emperor Justinian did banish
him for not complying with the decrees of it. The sixth and
seventh general synods did anathematize Honorius by name,
when he was dead, because his heresy was not before confuted;
and they would have served him so if he had been alive.
oo Tait Divers synods (that of Worms, of Papia, of Brescia, of Mentz,
ann. 1033. Of Rome, &e.) did reject pope Gregory VII. Pope Adrian
sect. 3- himself in the eighth synod (so called) did confess, that a pope
being found deviating from the faith might be judged, as
Honorius was. Gerbertus (afterward pope Sylvester II.) did

Baron. maintain, that popes might be held as ethnics and publicans,
992. se

a, if they did not hear the church. The synod of Constance did
bap Bas. judge and depose three popes.

XXXViii. The synod of Basil did depose pope Eugenius ; affirming,
p- 101.

that yY the catholic church hath often corrected and gudged

r-Erdaynoe 5& Kal dxowwvnotay bra- Vit. Ignatii. Patr. apud Bin. p. 892.
yopetoa: KaTa TO apxvemurkdmov Tis Baron. ann. 863—.

peydans ‘Pdéyns A€ovtos. Evagr. il. 4. u Communi totius sancti concilii
s Africani antistites Vigilium Rom. consensu depositus. Luitprand. vi. 6.
episc. damnatorem capitulorum synoda- x Concilium indicit, convocatis

liter a catholica communione, reservato episcopis Italie, quorum judicio vita
ei poenitentie loco, recludunt. (1. ex- sceleratissimi hominis dijudicaretur.
cludunt.) Vict. Tun. post Cons. Basilii Plat. in Joh. XIII. (pro XII.) Vid.
V.C, ann. 10. Baron. ann. g6o. et Binium.

. Kadalpeow ds evéuiore Kal avabepa- y Ecclesia catholica sepenumero
Tigpdy em’ oddevi Adyw moretras NikoAaov. summos pontifices sive a fide delirantes

Pope’s Supremacy. 389

popes, when they either erred from the faith, or by their ill man-
ners became notoriously scandalous to the church.

zThe practice of popes to give an account of their faith
(when they entered upon their office) to the other patriarchs
and chief bishops, approving themselves thereby worthy and
capable of communion, doth imply them liable to judgment.

Of the neglect of which practice Euphemius, bishop of Con- aoe Ep.
stantinople, did complain. ann. 492.

Of this we have for example the Synodical Epistles of pope Ver" 7°
Gregory I. de Unit.

XII. To the sovereign in ecclesiastical affairs it would ae
belong to define and decide controversies in faith, discipline,
moral practice ; so that all were bound to admit his definitions,
decisions, interpretations. He would be the supreme inter-
preter of the divine law, and judge of controversies. No
point or question of moment should be decided without his
cognizance. This he therefore doth pretend to; taking upon
him to define points, and requiring from all submission to his
determinations. Nor doth he allow any synods to decide ques-
tions.

But the ancients did know no such thing. In case of con-
tentions, they had no recourse to his judgment; they did not
stand to his opinion, his authority did not avail to quash dis-
putes. They had recourse to the holy scriptures, to catholic
tradition, to reason; they disputed and discussed points by
dint of argument.

Irenzeus, Tertullian, Vincentius Lirinensis, and others, dis-
coursing of the methods to resolve points of controversy, did
not reckon the pope’s authority for one. Divers of the fathers
did not scruple openly to dissent from the opinions of popes ;
nor were they wondered at, or condemned for it.

So St. Paul did withstand St. Peter. So Polyearpus dis- Gal. ii. rr.
sented from pope Eleutherius. So Polycrates from pope Victor. Babess) >
So St. Cyprian from pope Stephen. So Dionysius Alex. from
pope Stephen. All which persons were renowned for wisdom
and piety in their times.

sive pravis moribus notorie ecclesiam noviter constituto formam fidei sue ad
scandalizantes correxit, et judicavit sancta secclesias prerogare. P. Gelas. I.
Cone. Bus. sess. 12. Ep. 1. ad Laur.

% Mos est Romane ecclesie sacerdoti

390 A Treatise of the

Highest controversies were appeased by synods out of the
holy scripture, catholic tradition, the analogy of faith, and
common reason, without regard to the pope. Divers synods
in Afric and Asia defined the point about rebaptization with-
out the pope’s leave, and against his opinion. The synod of
Antioch condemned the doctrine of Paulus Samosatenus, with-
out intervention of the pope, before they gave him notice.
In the synod of Nice the pope had very small stroke. The
general synod of Constantinople declared the point of the d-
vinity of the Holy Ghost against Macedonius, without the
pope; who did no more than afterward consent: this the synod
of Chalcedon, in their compellation to the emperor Marcian,
did observe ; * Zhe fathers met in Sardica to suppress the relics of
Arianism, communicated their decrees to the eastern bishops ; and
they who here discovered the pestilence of Apolinarius made known
theirs to the western.

The synod of Afric defined against Pelagius, before their
informing pope Innocentius thereof; not seeking his judgment,
but desiring his consent to that which they were assured to be
truth.

Divers popes have been incapable of deciding controversies,
themselves having been erroneous in the questions controverted:
as pope Stephanus, (in part,) pope Liberius, pope Felix, pope
Vigilius, pope Honorius, &e. And in our opinion all popes for
many ages.

It is observable how the synod of Chalcedon, in their allo-
cution to the emperor Marcian, do excuse pope Leo for ex-
pounding the faith, m his Epistle, (the which it seems some
did reprehend as a novel method disagreeable to the canons ;)
b Let not them, say they, object to us the Epistle of the marvellous
prelate of Rome, as obnoxious to imputation of novelty ; but if a
be not consonant to the scriptures, let them confute tt ; or Uf it be
not consentaneous to the fathers who have preceded ; or if tt be not
apt to confute the irreligious, &e.

a Kal of pev ex Zapdicjs nata taev
’Apelov Acwhdvwv Gywrvicdpevor Tos ev
avarort Thy Kplow e&éreumor, of 5€ év-
tavda Thy AroAwaplov Abunv pwpdoar-
Tes Tos év Bice Thy Whpov eyvdpiCor.
Conc. Chalced. ad Marc. Orat. p. 468.

b ‘Os Eévnv tid Kal rots Kavdow ob
vevomopuerny THs emarodAns diaBddAn

thy sbytativ. Act. Syn. Chale. p. 465. |
M? tolvuy juiy Tod Oavuacrod ris ‘Pw-
uns mpoedpou Thy emiaToAy, WS KaLvOTO-
plas @yKkAnua, mpoopepétwoay’ GAA Ei
uh obupwvos tats ypapais, eAeyxérw-
cay’ ei ph Tots mpodaBodor matpaow
budbotos* ei wh mpds ducceBa@vy Karnyo-
play yeyévntai—— .

Pope’s Supremacy. 391

It was not his judicial authority which they did insist upon
to maintain his Epistle, but the orthodoxy and intrinsic use-
fulness of it to confute errors ; upon which account they did
embrace and confirm it by their suffrage.

XIII. If the pope were a sovereign of the church, as they
make him, it were at least expedient that he should be infal-
lible ; for why otherwise should he undertake confidently to
pronounce in all cases, to define high and difficult points, to
impose his dictates, and require assent from all? if he be falli-
ble, it is very probable that often he doth obtrude errors upon
us for matters of faith and practice.

Wherefore the true fast friends of papal interest do assert Bell. lib. iv.
him to be infallible, when he dictateth as pope, and setting
himself into his chair doth thence mean to instruct the whole
church. And the pope therefore himself, who countenanceth
them, may be presumed to be of that mind.

Pighius said bouncingly, °Zhe judgment of the apostolic see
with a council of domestic priests, is far more certain than the
judgment of an universal council of the whole earth without the
pope.

This is the syllogism we propose :

The supreme judge must be infallible ;

The pope is not infallible: therefore——

The major, the Jesuits, canonists, and courtiers are obliged
to prove, it being their assertion; and they do prove it very
wisely and strongly.

The minor is asserted by the French doctors; and they do
with clear evidence maintain it.

The conclusion we leave them to infer who are concerned.

It isin effect pope Gregory’s argumentation ; xo bishop can be
universal bishop, (or universal pastor and judge of the church,)
because no bishop can be infallible ; for that the lapse of such
a pastor would throw down the church into ruin, by error and
impiety. “Therefore the universal church, which God forbid, falls,
when he falls who is called wniversal.—The state and order of our

¢ Longe certius est unius apostolice a statu suo corruit, quando is qui voca~-
sedis cum concilio domesticorum sacer- tur universalis cadit. Greg. M. Epist.
dotum judicium, quam sine pontifice iv. 32. Totius familie Domini status
judicium universalis concilii totius orbis et ordo nutabit, si quod requiritur in
terrarum. Pighius de Hier. lib. 6. corpore, non inveniatur in capite. P.
4 Universa ergo ecclesia, quod absit, Leo, Ep. 87.

P. Gelas. I.

Ep. ix.
p- 636.

De Con-
secr. Dist.
ii. cap. 12.
Greg. Ep.
Vii. 110. ii.
62. iv. 32,
36, 38.

392 A Treatise of the

Lord's family will decay, when that which is required in ed body
as not to be found in the head.

But that he is not infallible, much experience and history
do abundantly shew.

The ancients knew no such pretender to infallibility; other-
wise they would have left disputing, and run to his oracular
dictates for information. They would have only asserted this
point against heretics. We should have had testimonies of it
innumerable. It had been the most famous point of alle.

I will not mention pope Stephanus universally approving
the baptism of heretics against the decrees of the synod of
Nice and other synods. Nor pope Liberius complying with
Arianism. Nor pope Innocent J. and his followers, at least
till pope Gelasius, first asserting the communion of infants for
needful. Nor pope Vigilius dodging with the fifth synod.
Nor pope Honorius condemned by so many councils and popes
for monothelitism. But surely pope Leo and pope Gelasius
were strangely deceived, when they condemned partaking in
one kind. Pope Gregory was foully out, when he condemned
the worship of images ; and when he so declaimeth against the
title of universal bishop ; and when he avowed himself a sub-

in #ob. yp, Ject to the emperor Mauritius ; and when he denied the books

xix. cap. 13.

XViii. 14.

Grat. de

Consecr. ii.

Dist. ii.
cap. 42.

of Maccabees to be canonical ; and when he asserted the per-
fection of holy scripture. Pope Leo II. was mistaken, when
he did charge his infallible predecessor Honorius of monothe-
litism ; f pope Nicholas was a little deceived, when he deter-
mined the attrition of Christ’s body. Pope Urban II. was out,
when he allowed it $lawful for good catholics to commit murder
on persons excommunicate. Pope Innocent IV. erred, when
he called kings the pope’s slaves.

Surely those popes did err, who confirmed the synods of
Constance and Basil; not excepting the determinations in
favour of general councils being superior to popes'. All those
popes have devilishly erred, who have pretended to dispose of

€ In nullo aliter sapere quam res se them with.
habet angelica perfectio est. Aug. de & Grat. Caus. xxili. qu. §. cap. 47.
Bapt. contr. Don. ii. 5. Not to think h Mancipia pape. Matt. Paris. ann.
of a thing otherwise than it is, is an 1253.
angelical perfection. i Joh. XXI1. Gerson. Serm. in Pasch,
f If many popes had been writers, we Occam. Celestinus -—. Alph. A Castro.
should have had more errors to charge Heer. i. 4. Bin. tom. vii. p. 994.

Pope’s Supremacy. 393

kingdoms; to depose princes; to absolve subjects of their
oaths. Pope Adrian II. did not take the pope to be infallible,
when he said he might not be judged, excepting the case of
heresy; and thereby excuseth the orientals for anathematizing
Honorius, he being accused of heresy.

There is one heresy, of which, if all histories do not lie
grievously, divers popes have been guilty; a heresy defined
by divers popes; the ‘heresy of simony; how many such here-
tics have sat in that chair! of which how many popes are
proclaimed guilty with a loud voice in history! * The hand,
says St. Bernard, does all the papal business: shew me a man
in all this greatest city who would admit thee to be pope with-
out the mediation of a bribe! Yea how few for some ages
have been guiltless of this heresy! It may be answered, they
were no popes, because their election was null; but then the
church hath often and long been without a /ead. Then num-
berless acts have been void; and creations of cardinals have
been null; and consequently there hath not probably been
any true pope for a long time.

In the judgment of so many great divines, which did con-
stitute the synod of Basil, many popes (near all surely) have
been heretics ; who have followed or countenanced the opinion,
that popes are superior to general councils; the which there
is flatly declared heresy. Pope Eugenius by name was there
declared !@ pertinacious heretic, deviating from the faith.

It often happeneth, that the pope is not skilled in divinity,
as pope Innocent X. was wont to profess concerning himself,
(to wave discourse about theological points:) he therefore
cannot pronounce, in use of ordinary means, but only by
miracle, as Balaam’s ass. So pope Innocent X. said, that
mthe vicar of Jesus Christ was not obliged to examine all things

_ i P. Greg. VII. Ep. lib. iii. 7. Simo-
niaca heresis. P. Jul. II. Conc. Lat.
sess. 5. (p.57-) Idem electus non apo-
stolicus, sed apostaticus, et tanquam he-
resiarcha, &c. Ibid. Tract. iv. sect. 12,
16. Decernimus, quod—-—sed etiam
contra dictum sicelectum vel assumptum
a simoniaca labe opponi et excipi possit
sicut de vera et indubitata hzresi—.

k Omne papale negotium manus a-
gunt; quem dabis mihi de tota maxima
urbe, qui te in papam receperit pretio

non intercedente? Bern. de Consid.
iv. 2.

1 A fide devius, pertinax heereti-
cus——. Concil. Basil. sess, Xxxiv. p.
96, 107.

m Le pape respondit, que le vicaire
de J.C. n’estoit point obligé d’examiner
toutes choses par la dispute ; que la vé-
rité de ses décrets dépendoit seulement
de Vinspiration divine. Memor. Hist.
de 5. Propos.

394 A Treatise of the

by dispute; for that the truth of his decrees depended only on
divine inspiration. What is this but downright quakerism,
enthusiasm, imposture ?

Pope Clemens V. did not take himself to be infallible, when
in his great synod of Vienna, the question, whether, beside
remission of sin, also virtue were conferred to infants, he re-
solved thus very honestly,—* The second opinion, which says,
that informing grace and virtues are in baptism conferred
both upon infants and adult persons, we think fit with the con-
sent of the holy council to be chosen; as being more probable,
and more consonant and agreeable to the divinity of the modern
doctors.

Which of the zo popes were in the right, pope Nicholas IV,
who decided that our Lord was so poor that he had right to
nothing, or pope John XXII, who declared this to be a
heresy, charging our Lord with injustice /

XIV. A sovereign is in dignity and authority superior to
any number of subjects, however conjoined or congregated ;
as a head is above all the members, however compacted : he
is not supreme, who is anywise subject or inferior to a senate,
or anyeassembly in his territory.

Therefore the pope doth claim a superiority over all coun-
cils; pretending that their determinations are invalid without
his consent and confirmation ; that he can rescind or make
void their decrees; that he can suspend their consultations,
and translate or dissolve them.

And Baronius reckons this as one error in Hinemarus,
bishop of Rheims, °that he held as if the canons of councils
were of greater authority in the church of God than the decrees
of popes, which, says he, how absurd and unreasonable an opin-
ion ut is, &e.

P That the authority of the apostolic see in all Christian ages

Bell. iv. 14.
(p. 1318.)
Confer.
Sext. lib. v.
tit.12. cap.
-.

Extrav.
Joh. XXIT.
tit. xiv. cap.

3—5-

Bellarm. de
Concil. ii.

17.

D Opinionem secundam, que di-
cit tam parvulis quam adultis conferri
in baptismo informantem gratiam et vir-
tutes, tanquam probabiliorem ac docto-
rum modernorum theologiz magis con-
sonam et concordem sacro approbante
concilio duximus eligendam. Clem. in
Tit. 1.

absurda et ab omni ratione penitus
aliena, &c. Baron. ad ann. 992. sect. 56.
Concil. Later. V. sess. 11. p.152. Th.
Cajet. Orat. in Cone. Lat. p. 36.

p Apostolice vero sedis auctoritas,
quod cunctis seculis Christianis ecclesiz
prelata sit universe, et canonum serie
paternorum, et multiplici traditione fir-
matur. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 8. (O impu-
dentiam ! )

Pope’s Supremacy. 395

has been preferred before the universal church, both the canons of
our predecessors and manifold tradition do confirm.

This is a question stiffly debated among Romanists: but the
most (as Aineas Sylvius, afterward pope Pius IT, did acutely
observe) with good reason do adhere to the pope’s side, be-
cause the pope disposeth of benefices, but cowncils give none.

But in truth anciently the pope was not understood supe-
rior to councils: for “greater is the authority of the world than
of one city, says St.Jerome. He was but one bishop, that had
nothing to do out of his precinct. He had but his vote in
them; he had the first vote, as the patriarch of Alexandria
the second, of Antioch the third—but that order neither gave
to him or them any advantage, as to decision; but common
consent, or the suffrages of the majority, did prevail. He was
conceived subject to the canons no less than other bishops.
Councils did examine matters decreed by him, so as to follow
or forsake them as they saw cause. The popes themselves did
profess great veneration and observance of conciliar decrees.
Pope Leo I. did oppose a canon of the synod of Chalcedon,

(not pretending his superiority to councils, but the invio-
lability of the Nicene canons,) but it notwithstanding that
opposition did prevail.

Even in the dregs of times, when the pope had clambered
so high to the top of power, this question in great numerous
synods of bishops was agitated, and positively decided against Concil.
him; both in doctrine and practice. ray mons,

The synod of Basil affirmeth the matter of these decrees to Cone. Bas.
be a ‘verity of the Christian faith, which whoever doth pertina-— a
ciously resist is to be deemed a heretic—. ‘Those fathers say,
that snone of the skilful did ever doubt of this truth, that the
pope, i things belonging to faith, was subject to the judgment of
the same general councils that the council has an authority
immediately from Christ, which the pope is bound to obey. Those
synods were confirmed by popes, without exception of those
determinations.

a Major est auctoritas orbis quam
urbis. Hier. ad Evag.

¥ Veritas catholice fidei, cui pertina-
citer repugnans est censendus heereticus.
Concil. Bas. sess. 33.

8 Nec unquam aliquis peritorum du-
bitavit summum pontificem in his que

fidem concernunt judicio eorundem con-
ciliorum universalium esse subjectum.
Cone. Basil. Decret. p.117. Concilium
habet potestatem immediate a Christo,
cui papa obedire tenetur . Cone
Bas. sess. 38, p.101.

306 A Treatise of the

Great churches, most famous universities, a mighty store
of learned doctors of the-Roman communion, have reverenced
those councils, and adhered to their doctrine. Insomuch that
the cardinal of Lorrain did affirm him to be an heretic in
France, who did hold the contrary.

These things sufficiently demonstrate that the pope cannot
pretend to supremacy by universal tradition; and if he can-
not prove it by that, how can he prove it? Not surely by
scripture, nor by decrees of ancient synods, nor by any clear
and convincing reason.

XV. The sovereign of the church is by all Christians to be
acknowledged the chief person in the world, inferior and sub-
ject to none; above all commands; the greatest emperor
being his sheep and sudyect.

Asin Israel He therefore now doth pretend to be above all princes.

— rary Divers popes have affirmed this superiority. They are allowed

rSam. xv. and most favoured by him who teach this doctrine. In their

iy Missal he is preferred above all kings, being prayed for before
them.

Rom. xiii1. But in the primitive times this was not held; for St. Paul
requires every soul to be subject to the higher powers. Then
the emperor was avowed the first person, next to God; tZo
whom, says Tertullian, they are second, after whom they are
Jirst, before all and above all gods. Why? &c. we wor-
ship the emperor as a man next to God, and less only than
God. And Optatus, uSince there is none above the em-
peror but God who made him. While Donatus extolleth him-
self above the emperor, he raises himself, as it were, above
humanity, and thinks himself to be God, and not man. For

Chrys. in the king is the top and head of all things on earth. Then

Rom-xill.t- even gpostles, evangelists, prophets, all men whoever were sub-
ject to the emperor. ‘The emperors did command them, Weven

t ——a quo sunt secundi, post quem ut se ut Deum non hominem estima-
primi ante omnes, et super omnes deos; ret. Id. Ibid. Bacireds yap kopup) rat
quidni? cum super omnes homines, qui kepadh tay émi Tis yas éotw amdyTwr.
utique vivunt. Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. Chrys. ’Avip. B’. p. 463.

Colimus imperatorem ut hominem a w Jubemus igitur beatissimos epi-
Deo secundum, et solo Deo minorem. scopos et patriarchas, hoc est senioris
Tertul. ad Scap. cap. 2. Rome, et Constantinopoleos, et Alex-

u Cum super imperatorem non sit andriz, et Theopoleos, et Hierosolymo-
nisi solus Deus, qui fecit imperatorem. rum. Justinian. Novel. cxxiii. cap. 3.
Opt.3. Vid. Tr.v. sect.14. Dum se P.Greg. M. Ep. ii. 62. supra in pref.
Donatus super imperatorem extollit, sect. iv. tract. 5. sect. 14.
jam quasi hominum excesserat modum,

397

the blessed bishops and patriarchs of old Rome, Constantinople,
Alexandria, Theopolis and Jerusalem. Divers popes did avow
themselves subject to the emperor.

XVI. The confirmation of magistrates, elected by others, is Vid sect. s.
a branch of supremacy which the pope doth assume. a i.

Baronius saith that this was the ancient custom; and that P. Nic. I.
pope Simplicius did confirm the election of Calendion, bishop rae aia
of Antioch.

x Meletius confirmed the most holy Greaory in the bishopric of
Constantinople.

But the truth is, that anciently bishops being elected did
only give an account of their choice unto all other bishops ;
especially to those of highest rank, desiring their approbation
and friendship, for preservation of due communion, correspond-
ence, and peace. So the synod of Antioch gave account to the
bishops of Rome and Alexandria, y and all their fellow-ministers
throughout the world, &c. of the election of Domnus after Paulus
Samosatenus. So the fathers of Constantinople acquainted
pope Damasus and the western bishops with the constitution of
Nectarius, Flavianus, &c.

This was not to request confirmation, as if the pope or
other bishops could reject the election, if regular, but rather
to assure whom they were to communicate with. 2 We have
(say the fathers of the synod against Paulus Samosatenus)
signified this, (our choosing of Domnus into Paulus’s room,)
that you may write to him, and receive letters of communion from
him.—And St. Cyprian, *7That you and our colleagues may
know to whom they may write, and from whom they may receive
letters.

Thus the bishops of Rome themselves did acquaint other Vid.
bishops with their election, their faith, &e. So did Cornelius ; 07°,
whom therefore St. Cyprian asserteth as established by the Unit. Eccl.
consent and approbation of his colleagues ; » When the place of

Pope’s Supremacy.

sect. I.

X "EBeBalwoe TG Cevcordty Tpnyoply
Thy Tis KwyorayvtwourdAews mpocdplay.
Theod. v. 8.

Y Kal trois xata thy oikoupévny mracr
ovAAeiToOupyois . Euseb. vii. 30.

% *EdnAdoapéy re ipiv bxws Totty
yodonre, kal Ta mapa tubTov KowwriKd
5exnobe ypdupara . Euseb. ibid;

& Ut scires tu, et college nostri qui-

bus scribere, et literas mutuo a quibus
vos accipere oporteret ——. Cypr. Ep.
§5- (ad Cornel.)

b Cum locus Petri, et gradus ca-
thedrz sacerdotalis vacaret, quo occu-
pato de Dei voluntate, atque omnium
nostrim consensione firmato —~ . Cypr.

Ep. 52-

Vid. Bern.

P.Innoc.

IIL. inGreg.
Decr. lib. i.

tit. 7. cap.
1.—&c.

398 A Treatise of the

Peter and the sacerdotal chair was void, which by God’s will being
occupied, and with all our consents confirmed, &c.—‘and the tes-
timony of our fellow-bishops, the whole number of which all over
the world unanimously consented.

The emperor did confirm bishops, as we see by that notable
passage in the synod of Chalcedon; where Bassianus, bishop
of Ephesus, pleading for himself, saith, 4Ouwr most religious
emperor knowing these things presently ratified it, and by a
memorial published it, confirming the bishopric ; afterwards he
sent his rescript by Eustathius, the silentiary again confirming
it.

XVII. It is a privilege of sovereigns to grant privileges,
exemptions, dispensations.

This he claimeth ; but against the laws of God and rights of
bishops; against the decrees of synods—against the sense of
good men in all times.

XVIII. It is a prerogative of sovereign power, to erect,
translate spiritual presidences.

Wherefore this the pope claimeth. Cum ex illo, &e.

But at first he had nothing to do therein, except in his own
province or diocese.

As Christianity did grow and enter into cities, so the neigh-
bour bishops did ordain bishops there.

Princes often, as they did endow, so they did erect episcopal
sees, and did, as was suitable, change places.

Pope Paschal II. doth by complaining attest to this, writing
to the archbishop of Poland, ¢ What shall I say of the transla-
tions of bishops, which among you are presumed to be made, not
by apostolic authority, but the king’s command ?

XIX. It is a great prerogative of sovereignty to impose
taxes on the clergy or people.

Wherefore the pope doth assume this; as for instance that
decree of pope Innocent IV. in the first synod of Lyons ; f By

c et coepiscoporum testimonio,
quorum numerus universus per totum
mundum concordi unanimitate consen-
sit. Ibid.

d Tvobs 5¢ radra dé eboeBeotaTos juav
Baoirebs, ed0bs TovTo abtd eBeBalwoe,
Kal ebbéws 31a irouvnorixod edhAwoev ev
pavepS, BeBaay rhy émickorhy: pera
TavTa GméoTeihe chxpay mdAw bia Eb-
orablov Tod ZiAevtiaptov BeBasotoay Thy

émiaxomhyv. Conc.Chale. Act. xi. (p. 404.)

€ Quid super episcoporum translatio-
nibus loquar, que apud vos non aucto-
ritate apostolica, sed nutu regis presu-
muntur? P. Pasch. IJ. Ep. 6. Pre-
ter authoritatem nostram episcoporum
translationes presumitis adm. p.
115.

f Ceterum ex communi concilii ap-
probatione statuimus, ut omnes omnino

399

the common consent of the council we ordain that all the clergy, as
well those who are under authority as the prelates, pay for three
years a twentieth part of their ecclesiastical revenues towards the
assistance of the Holy Land, into the hands of those who shall be
thereto appointed by the prudence of the apostolic see.— And let
all know that this they are bound faithfully to do under pain of
excommunication.

But antiquity knew no such impositions: when the church,
the clergy, the poor, were maintained and relieved by voluntary
offerings, or obventions.

Even the invidious splendour of the Roman bishop was sup-
ported by the odlations of matrons, as Marcellinus observeth*.

This is an encroachment upon the right of princes, unto
whom clergymen are subjects, and bound to render tribute to Rom. xiii-7.
whom tribute belongeth.

SUPPOSITION VII.
A further grand assertion of the Roman party is this, That the
papal supremacy is indefectible and unalterable.

' But good reasons may be assigned, why, even supposing that
the pope had an universal sovereignty in virtue of his succession
to St. Peter conferred on him, it is not assuredly consequent,
that it must always, or doth now belong to him. For it might
be settled on him, not absolutely, but upon conditions, the
which failing, his authority may expire. It might be God’s
will that it should only continue for a time. And there are
divers ways whereby, according to common rules of justice, he
might be disseized thereof.

1. If God had positively declared his will concerning this
point, that such a sovereignty was by him granted irrevocably
and immutably, so that in no case it might be removed or
altered, then indeed it must be admitted for such ; but if no
such declaration doth appear, then to assert it for such is to

Pope’s Supremacy.

clerici, tam subditi quam prelati, vige-
simam ecclesiarum proventuum usque
ad triennium conferant in subsidium
Terr Sanctz, per manus eorum, qui ad
hoc apostolica fuerint providentia ordi-
nati. sciantque se omnes ad hoc
fideliter observandum per excommuni-
cationis sententiam obligatos. Lugdun.
Coneil. 1. (anno 1245.)

g Ut ditentur oblationibus matrona-
rum. Marcel.27. Vid. Const. Apost. ii.
25. Nam qui constituerunt vel funda-
runt sanctissimas ecclesias pro sua sa-
lute et communis reipublice, relique-
runt illis substantias, ut per eas debeant
sacre liturgiz fieri, et ut illis a mini-
strantibus piis clericis Deus colatur.
Cod. Lib. i. tit. 3. sect. 42.

John xix.
es.

Rom. xiii.
I—.

Dan. v. 21.
Ps. Ixxv. 7.

400 A Treatise of the

derogate from his power and providence; by exemption of
this case from it. It is the ordinary course of Providence so
to confer power of any kind or nature on men, as to reserve to
himself the liberty of transferring it, qualifying it, extending
or contracting it, abolishing it, according to his pleasure, in
due seasons and exigencies of things. Whence no human
power can be supposed absolutely stable, or immovably fixed
in one person or place.

2. No power can have a higher source, or firmer ground,
than that of the civil government hath; for all such power is
from Heaven; and in relation to that it is said, There is no power
but from God ; the powers that are, are ordained by God: but yet
such power is liable to various alterations, and is like the sea,
having ebbs and flows, and ever changing its bounds, either
personal or local.

Any temporal jurisdiction may be lost by those revolutions
and vicissitudes of things, to which all human constitutions
are subject; and which are ordered by the will and providence
of the Most High, who ruleth in the kingdom of men, appoint-
ing over it whom he pleaseth ; putting down one, and setting up
another.

Adam, by God’s appointment, was sovereign of the world ;
and his first-born successors derived the same power from him:
yet in course of time that order hath been interrupted, and
divers independent sovereignties do take place.

Every prince hath his authority from God, or by virtue of
divine ordination, within his own territory; and according to
God’s ordinance the lawful successor hath a right to the same
authority ; yet by accidents such authority doth often fail
totally, or in part, changing its extent.

Why then may not any spiritual power be liable to the same
vicissitudes? Why may not a prelate be degraded as well as
a prince ? Why may not the pope, as well as the emperor, lose
all, or part of his kingdom ?

Why may not the successor of Peter, no less than the heir
of Adam, suffer a defailure of jurisdiction ? |

That spiritual corporations, persons, and places, are subject
to the same contingencies with others, as there is like reason
to suppose, so there are examples to prove: God removed his

Jer. vii. 12, Sanctuary from Shiloh; Go ye now unto my place, which was

14.

Pope’s Supremacy. 401

in Shiloh, where I set my name at first, &e. He deserted Jeru-

salem. He removeth the candlesticks. He placed Eli (of the Rev. ii. s.
family of Ithamar) in the high priesthood, and displaced his

race from it: J said indeed, saith God, that thy house, and the x Sam. ii.
house of thy father, should walk before me for ever: but now thet cingsii.
Lord saith, Be it far from me, &e. 27.

3. The reason and exigency of things might be sufficient
ground for altering an universal jurisdiction; for when it
should prove very inconvenient or hurtful, God might order
such an alteration to happen, and men be obliged to allow it.

As God first did institute one universal monarchy, but that
form (upon the multiplication of mankind, and peopling of the
earth) proving incommodious, Providence gave way for its
change, and the setting up of particular governments; to
which men are bound to submit : so God might institute a sin-
gular presidency of the church; but when the church grew
vastly extended, so that such a government would not conve-
niently serve the whole, he might order a division, in which we
should acquiesce. |

4. It hath ever been deemed reasonable, and accordingly
been practised, that the church, in its exterior form and poli-
tical administrations, should be suited to the state of the world,
and constitution of worldly governments, that there might be
no clashing or disturbance from each to other.

Wherefore, seeing the world is now settled under so many
civil sovereignties, it is expedient that ecclesiastical discipline
should be so modelled as to comply with each of them.

And it is reasonable, that any pretence of jurisdiction should
vail to the public good of the church and the world.

That it should be necessary for the church to retain the
same form of policy, or measure of power affixed to persons or
places, can nowise be demonstrated by sufficient proof, and it
is not consistent with experience ; which sheweth the church
to have subsisted with variations of that kind.

There hath in all times been found much reason or necessity
to make alterations, as well in the places and bounds of ecele-
siastical jurisdiction, as of secular empire.

Wherefore St. Peter’s monarchy, reason requiring, might be
cantonized into divers spiritual supremacies; and as other ee-
clesiastical jurisdictions have been chopped and changed, en-

402 A Treatise of the

larged or diminished, removed and extinguished, so might that
of the Roman bishop. The pope cannot retain power in any
state against the will of the prince: he is not bound to suffer
correspondences with foreigners, especially such who appa-
rently have interests contrary to his honour and the good of
his people.

5. Especially that might be done, if the continuance of such
a jurisdiction should prove abominably corrupt, or intolerably
grievous to the church.

6. That power is defectible, which according to the nature
and course of things doth sometime fail.

But the papal succession hath often been interrupted by
contingencies, (of sedition, schism, intrusion, simoniacal election,
deposition, &c. as before shewed,) and is often interrupted by
vacancies from the death of the incumbents.

7. If, leaving their dubious and false suppositions, (concern-
ing divine institution, succession to St. Peter, &c.) we consider
the truth of the case, and indeed the more grounded plea of
the pope, that papal preeminence was obtained by the wealth
and dignity of the Roman city, and by the collation or counte-
nance of the imperial authority; then by the defect of such ad-
vantages it may cease or be taken away; for when Rome hath
ceased to be the capital city, the pope may cease to be head of
the church. When the civil powers, which have succeeded
the imperial, each in its respective territory, are no less abso-
lute than it, they may take it away, if they judge it fit; for
whatever power was granted by human authority, by the same
may be revoked; and what the emperor could have done, each
sovereign power now may do for itself.

An indefectible power cannot be settled by man; because
there is no power ever extant at one time greater than there is
at another; so that whatever power one may raise, the other
may demolish; there being no bounds whereby the present
time may bind all posterity.

However, no human law can exempt any constitution from
the providence of God; which at pleasure can dissolve what-
ever man hath framed. And if the pope were divested of all
adventitious power, obtained by human means, he would be
left very bare; and hardly would take it worth his while to
contend for jurisdiction.

—— 1

Pope’s Supremacy. 403

8. However or whencesoever the pope had his authority,
yet it may be forfeited by defects and defaults incurred by
him.

If the pope doth encroach on the rights and liberties of
others, usurping a lawless domination, beyond reason and
measure, they may in their own defence be forced to reject
him, and shake off his yoke.

If he will not be content to govern otherwise than by in-
fringing the sacred laws, and trampling down the inviolable
privileges of the churches, either granted by Christ, or esta-
blished by the sanctions of general synods; he thereby de-
priveth himself of all authority; because it cannot be admitted
upon tolerable terms, without greater wrong of many others,
(whose right outweigheth his,) and without great mischief to
the church, the good of which is to be preferred before his
private advantage.

This was the maxim of a great pope, a great stickler for
his own dignity; for when the bishop of Constantinople was
advanced by a general synod above his ancient pitch of dig-
nity, that pope opposing him did say, that » whoever doth affect
more than his due, doth lose that which properly belonged to him :
the which rule, if true in regard to another’s case, may be
applied to the pope; Mor with what judgment ye judge, ye shall Matt. vii. 2.
be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured
to you again.

On such a supposition of the papal encroachment, we may
return his words upon him; ‘Jt is too proud and immoderate a
thing to stretch beyond one’s bounds, and, in contempt of anti-
quity, to be willing to invade other men’s right, and to oppose
the primacies of so many metropolitans, on purpose to advance
the dignity of one.

k For the privileges of churches, being instituted by the canons
of the holy fathers, and fixed by the decrees of the venerable synod
of Nice, cannot be plucked wp by any wicked attempt, nor altered
by any innovation.

h Propria perdit, qui indebita concu- P. Leo J. Ep. 55.
piscit. P. Leo I. Ep. 54. k Privilegia enim ecclesiarum, sanc-

i Superbum nimis est etimmoderatum torum patrum canonibus instituta, et
ultra fines proprios tendere, et antiqui- venerabilis Nicenw synodi fixa decretis,
tate calcata alienum jus velle preripere ; nulla possunt improbitate convelli, nulla

utque unius crescat dignitas, tot metro- novitate mutari. /did.
politanorum impugnare primatus — .

pd@

404 A Treatise of the

\Far be it from me, that I should in any church infringe
the decrees of our ancestors made in favour of my fellow-
priests; for I do myself injury, if I disturb the rights of my
brethren. |

The pope surely (according to any ground of scripture, or
tradition, or ancient law) hath no title to greater principality
in the church, than the duke of Venice hath in that state :
now if the duke of Venice, in prejudice to the public right
and liberty, should attempt to stretch his power to an abso-
luteness of command, or much beyond the bounds allowed
him by the constitution of that commonwealth, he would
thereby surely forfeit his supremacy, (such as it is,) and afford
cause to the state of rejecting him: the like occasion would
the pope give to the church by the like demeanour.

9. The pope, by departing from the doctrine and practice
of St. Peter, would forfeit his title of successor to him; for in
such a case no succession in place or in name could preserve
it; ™The popes themselves had swerved and degenerated from
the example of Peter.

They are not the sons of the saints, who hold the places of
the saints, but they that do their works. (Which place is rased
out of St. Jerome.)

They have not the inheritance of Peter, who have not the faith
of Peter, which they tear asunder by ungodly division.

So Gregory Nazianzen saith of Athanasius, that Phe was
successor of Mark no less in piety than presidency: the which
we must suppose to be properly succession: otherwise the mufti
of Constantinople is successor to St. Andrew, of St. Chry-
sostom, &c. the mufti of Jerusalem to St. James.

If then the bishop of Rome, instead of teaching Christian
doctrine, doth propagate errors contrary to it; if, instead of
guiding into truth and godliness, he seduceth into falsehood
and impiety; if, instead of declaring and pressing the laws of

1 Absit hoc a me, ut statuta majorum
consacerdotibus meis in qualibet ecclesia
infringam, quia mihi injuriam facio, si Petri fidem non habent, quam impia

fratrum meorum jura perturbo. Greg.J. divisione discerpunt. Ambr. de Pen.
Epist. ii. 37. i. 6

m Pontifices ipsi a Petri vestigiis dis-
cesserant. Plat. in Joh. x. (p.275-)

n Non sanctorum filii sunt, qui te-
nent loca sanctorum, sed qui exercent
opera eorum . Hieron. ad Heliod.

P Odx’ firrov ris evoeBelas, Hh Tis
mpoedplas Siddox0s jv 5h Kad kuplws
broAnmréoy Siadoxhv' Td wev yap dbud-
yvwpov kal dud0povoy’ rd de avrlBotov kad
avr lOpovoy . Greg. Naz. Or, 21.

Pope’s Supremacy. 405

God, he delivereth and imposeth precepts opposite, prejudicial,
destructive of God’s laws; if, instead of promoting genuine
piety, he doth (in some instances) violently oppose it; if, in-
stead of maintaining true religion, he doth pervert and cor-
rupt it by bold defaleations, by superstitious additions, by foul
mixtures and alloys; if he coineth new creeds, articles of
faith, new scriptures, new sacraments, new rules of life, obtrud-
ing them on the consciences of Christians; if he conformeth
the doctrines of Christianity to the interests of his pomp and
profit, making gain godliness; if he prescribe vain, profane,
superstitious ways of worship, turning devotion into foppery
and pageantry; if, instead of preserving order and peace,
he fomenteth discords and factions in the church, being a
makebait and incendiary among Christians; if he claimeth
exorbitant power, and exerciseth oppression and tyrannical
domination over his brethren, cursing and damning all that
will not submit to his dictates and commands; if, instead of
being a shepherd, he is a wolf, worrying and tearing the flock
by cruel persecution: he by such behaviour, ipso facto, de-
priveth himself of authority and office; he becometh thence
no guide or pastor to any Christian ; there doth in such case
rest no obligation to hear or obey him; but rather to decline
him, to discost from him, to reject and disclaim him4.

This is the reason of the case; this the holy scripture doth
prescribe; this is according to the primitive doctrine, tradi-
tion, and practice of the church. For,

10. In reason, the nature of any spiritual office consisting
in instruction in truth and guidance in virtue toward attain-
ment of salvation; if any man doth lead into pernicious error
or impiety, he thereby ceaseth to be capable of such office:
as a blind man, by being so, doth cease to be a guide; and
much more he that declareth a will to seduce; for, "Who so
blind as he that will not see ?

No man can be bound to follow any one into the ditch ; or Matt.xv.14.
to obey any one in prejudice to his own salvation; to die in Ezek.iii.18.
his iniquity. Seeing God saith in such a case, pdrnv o€Bovrat

4 Non facit ecclesiastica dignitas
Christianum. Hier. Ecclesiastical dig-
nity makes not a Christian. Non om-
nes episcopi episcopi sunt. Jd. All
bishops are not bishops. Of wap’ abrois

Katdokorot, ov yap éxloxowo:.. Athan.
Const. Ap. viii. 2. They with them are
scouts or spies, not overseers or bishops.

r Luke vi. 39. Mari Sivara: TupAds
Tuprdy ddnyeiv ;

Matt. xv. 9.

P. R. 2, 30.
(p. 1083.)

Matt. xxiii.
2. xv. 6.

Matt. xv.
14.

Matt. vii.
15.

Matt. xxiv.

ri
Gal. i. 8,9.

406 A Treatise of the

ue, In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the pre-
cepts of men.

They themselves do acknowledge, that heretics cease to be
bishops; and so to be popes. Indeed they cease to be Christ-
ians; for, ¢&éorpamta: 6 Tovodros, such a one is subverted.

11. According to their principles, the pope hath the same
relation to other bishops and pastors of the church, which
they have to their people; he being pastor of pastors: but if
any pastor should teach bad doctrine, or prescribe bad prac-
tice, his people may reject and disobey him; therefore, in
proportion, the pastors may desert the pope misguiding or
misgoverning them. In such cases any inferior is exempted
from obligation to comply with his superior, either truly or
pretendedly such.

12. The case may be, that we may not hold communion
with the pope, but may be obliged to shun him; in which
ease his authority doth fail, and no man is subject to him.

13. This is the doctrine of the seripture. The high priest
and his fellows, under the Jewish economy, had no less au-
thority than any pope can now pretend unto; they did sit a
the chair of Moses, and therefore all their true doctrines and
lawful directions the people were obliged to learn and ob-
serve; but their false doctrines and impious precepts they were
bound to shun’; and consequently to disclaim their author-
ity, so far as employed in urging such doctrines and precepts ;
"Agere avtovs, Let them alone, saith our Saviour, they are blind
leaders of the blind. Under the Christian dispensation the
matter is no less clear; our Lord commandeth us to beware
of false prophets; and to see that no man deceive us; although
he wear the clothing of a sheep, or come under the name of
a shepherd (coming in his name—). St.Paul informeth us,
that if an apostle, if an angel from heaven, doth preach beside
the old apostolical doctrine, (introducing any new gospel, or
a divinity devised by himself,) he is to be held accursed by us.

2Cor. i. 24. He affirmeth, that even the apostles themselves were not lords

2 Cor. xiii.

7, 8.

of our faith, nor might challenge any power inconsistent with
the maintenance of Christian truth and piety; We, saith he,
can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth: the which

8 Matt. xvi.6. ‘Opare kal mpooéxere Ver.12. Beware and take heed of the
amd tis Cuns——Grd ris Sidbax7js. leaven of the doctrine.

Pope’s Supremacy. 407

an ancient writer doth well apply to the pope, saying, that he

tcould do nothing against the truth more than any of his fellow-

priests could do; which St.Paul did in practice shew, when he

resisted St. Peter, declining from the truth of the gospel. He
chargeth, that "if any one doth érepodidacxandeiv, teach hetero-

doxies, we should stand off from him; that ¥ if any brother

walketh disorderly, and not according to apostolical tradition, we

should withdraw from him; that if any one doth * raise divi-

sions and scandals beside the doctrines received from the apostles,

we should decline from him; that we are to refuse any heretical Tit. iii. 10.
person. He telleth us, that Y grievous wolves should come into

the church, not sparing the flock ; that from among Christians Acts xx. 30-
there should arise men speaking perverse things, to draw diset-

ples after them: but no man surely ought to follow, but to

shun them.

These precepts and admonitions are general, without any
respect or exception of persons great or small, pastor or lay-
man: nay, they may in some respect more concern bishops
than others; for that they declining from truth are more
dangerous and contagious.

14. The fathers (in reference to this case) do clearly accord,
both in their doctrine and practice. St. Cyprian telleth us,
that 7a people obedient to the Lord’s commandments, and fearing
God, ought to separate itself from a sinful bishop; that is, from
one guilty of such sins which unqualify him for Christian com-
munion, or pastoral charge ; and, «Let not, addeth he, the com-
mon people flatter itself, as if it could be free from the contagion
of quilt, if it communicate with a sinful bishop ; whose irreligious
doctrine or practice doth render him uncapable of communion ;
for > how (saith he otherwhere) can they preside over integrity
and continence, if corruptions and the teaching of vices do begin
to proceed from them ?

t Nee aliquid contra veritatem, sed
pro veritate, plus suis consacerdotibus
potest. Fac. Hermian. ii. 6. Gal. ii.11,
14. "Ort obk dpSorodoic: mpds Thy adAh-
Geray Tov evaryyeAlov.

ur Tim. vi. 3, 5. Ef ris érepodidacka-
Ae? aplaraco amd Tay ToLOUTwY.

w 2 Thess. iii. 6. SréAdceoOa: amd
mavTds adeApov——.

X Rom. xvi. 17. ExxAlvew amd abrav.

Y Acts xx. 29. EloeAetoovras eis duas.

z Plebs obsequens preceptis Domini-
cis et Deum metuens a peccatore pre-
posito separare se debet. Cypr. Ep. 68.

a Nec sibi plebs blandiatur, quasi
immunis esse a contagio delicti possit
cum sacerdote peccatore communicans.
Cypr. Ep. 68.

b Quomodo enim possunt integritati
et continentie presse, si ex ipsis inci-
piant corruptele et vitiorum magisteria
procedere? Cypr. Ep. 62.

408 A Treatise of the

°They who reject the commandment of God, and labour to esta-
blish their own tradition, let them be strongly and stoutly refused
and rejected by you.

St. Chrysostom, commenting on St. Paul’s words, Jf J, or
an angel——-saith, that St. Paul ¢meaneth to shew, that dignity
of persons is not to be regarded where truth is concerned ; that
© af one of the chief angels from heaven should corrupt the gospel,
he were to be accursed; that f not only, if they shall speak things
contrary, or overturn all, but if they preach any small matter
beside the apostolical doctrine, altering the least point whatever,
they are liable to an anathema.

And otherwhere, very earnestly persuading his audience to
render due respect and obedience to their bishop, he yet in-
terposeth this exception, &[fhe hath a perverse opinion, although
he be an angel, do not obey him; but if he teacheth right things,
regard not his life, but his words.

hE cclesiastical judges, as men, are for the most part deceived.

iFor neither are catholic bishops to be assented to, if peradven-
ture in any case they are mistaken, so as to hold any thing contrary

to the canonical scriptures of God.

kTf there be any church which rejects the faith, and does not
hold the fundamentals of the apostolical doctrine, it ought to be
Jorsaken, lest it infect others with its heterodoxy.

If in such a case we must desert any church, then the Ro-
man ; if any church, then much more any bishop, particularly

him of Rome.

This hath been the doctrine of divers popes.
|Which not only the apostolical prelate, but any other bishop

© Qui mandatum Dei rejiciunt, et
traditionem suam statuere conantur,
fortiter a vobis et firmiter respuantur.
Cypr. Ep. 40. (p. 73-)

d "AAAG Betta: BovAduevos, S71 aklwua
mpocanrwy ov mpociera, Stay mepl GAn-
Gelas 6 Adyos H. Chrys. in Gal. i. 9.

f Kal obx elwev, edy evaytia Karary-
yOAwow, } dvatpémwot Td wav, GAAG
Kav puxpdv ti evaryyeAlQwvta map’ d
evayyedioduca, Kay To TUXdY TapaKWh-
cwo, aydbeua éotwoay. Ibid.

& Ei ev yap ddyua exer deo paypevor,
Kav tryyedos 7, wh melOov" ci Be bpd

diddone, un TE Biw mpdcexe, GAAG ToIs
phuaot. Chrys. in 2 Tim. Orat. 2.

h Ecclesiastici judices ut homines ple-
runque falluntur . Aug. contr. Crese.
ii. 21.

i Quia nec catholicis episcopis con-
sentiendum est, sicubi forte falluntur,
ut contra canonicas Dei scripturas ali-
quid sentiant. August. de Unit. Ecel.
cap. 10.

k Si qua est ecclesia, que fidem
respuat, nec apostolic preedicationis
fundamenta possideat, ne quam labem
perfidiz possit aspergere deserenda est.
Ambr. in Luc. ix. (p. 85.)

1 Quod non solum preesuli apostolico
facere licet, sed cuicunque pontifici, ut

Pope’s Supremacy. 409

may do, viz. discriminate and sever any men, and any place,
Srom the catholic communion, according to the rule of that fore-
condemned heresy.

mF aith is universal, common to all, and belongs, not only to
clergymen, but also to laics, and even to all Christians.

“Therefore the sheep which are committed to the cure of their
pastor ought not to reprehend him, unless he swerve and go astray
JSrom the right faith.

15. That this was the current opinion, common practice
doth shew, there being so many instances of those who re-
jected their superiors, and withdrew from their communion,
in case of their maintaining errors, or of their disorderly
behaviour ; such practice having been approved by general
and great synods, as also by divers popes.

When Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, did introduce
new and strange doctrine, ° divers of his presbyters did rebuke
him, and withdraw communion from him; which proceeding is
approved in the Ephesine synod.

Particularly Charisius did assert this proceeding in those
remarkable words presented to that same synod ; Pit ts the
wish and desire of all well-affected persons, to give always all
due honour and reverence especially to their spiritual fathers
and teachers: but if it should so happen, that they, who ought
to teach, should instil unto those who are set under them such
things concerning the faith as are offensive to the ears and
hearts of all men, then of necessity the order must be inverted,
and they who teach wrong doctrine must be rebuked of those who
are their inferiors.

Pope Celestine I. in that case did commend the people of

quoslibet et quemlibet locum, secundum
regulam hzreseos ipsius ante damnate,
a catholica communione discernant. P.
Gelas. I. Ep. 4.

m Fides universalis est, omnium com-
munis est, non solum ad clericos, verum
etiam ad laicos, et ad omnes omnino
pertinet Christianos. P. Nich. J. Ep.
viii. p- 506.

n Oves ergo que pastori suo com-
misse fuerint, eum nec reprehendere,
nisi a recta fide exorbitaverit, debent
—. P. Joh. I. Ep.1. (apud Bin. tom.
iii. p. 812.)

° Ev tq ouvedplp wodAdnis Ties TaY

evAaBeortdtwy mpecBuTépwr HAeytay ab-
Tov, kal bia Thy arelOeiay abtovd Tis ab-
Tov Kkoivwvlas airovs é&€éBadkov—. Conc.
Eph. part. i. p. 220.

P Evx?) mev Gra: tots eb ppovovai,
Tiuhy del Kal mpémovoay aida mvevmari-
kois pdAiota matpdot Kal didacndrdos
dmovenew ef 3€ mov cuuBh Tors 5idd-
oxew dgelAovtas ToaiTa Tois ianxdos
evnxe repli Tis mlorews, ola ras awdy-
Twy &kodas wal xapdlas KxataBAdrre,
avdynn Thy Tdbw aytadAdrrec@a, Kal
rovs kaxas Siddonew éAoudvous brd Tav
hocdvev dierdéyxeo0a, Charis. in Conc.
Eph. Act. vi. p. 358.

410 A Treatise of the

Constantinople deserting their pastor ; ' Happy flock, said he,
to whom the Lord did afford to judge about its own pasture.

St. Jerome did presume to write very briskly and smartly
in reproof of John, bishop of J pemaqaney in whose province he
a simple presbyter did reside.

sWho makes a schism in the church? we whose whole house
in Bethlehem communicate with the church, or thou, who either
believest aright, and proudly concealest the truth, or art of a
wrong belief, and really makest a breach in the church? Art
thou only the church? And is he who offendeth thee excluded
From Christ ?

‘ Malchion, presbyter of Antioch, disputed against Paulus
Samosatenus, his bishop.

Beatus, presbyter, confuted his bishop, Elipandus of Toledo.

u But if the rector swerve from the faith, he is to be reproved
by those who are under him.

16. The case is the same of the pope; for if other bishops,
who are reckoned successors of the apostles, and vicars of
Christ within their precinct ; if other patriarchs, who sit in
apostolical sees, and partake of a like extensive jurisdiction, by
incurring heresy or schism, or committing notorious disorder
and injustice, may be deprived of their authority, so that their
subjects may be obliged to forsake them, then may the pope
lose his: for truth and piety are not affixed to the chair of
Rome more than to any other; there is no ground of asserting
any such privilege, either in holy scripture or in old tradition;
there can no promise be alleged for it, having any probable
show, (that of Oravi pro te being a ridiculous pretence,) it
cannot stand without a perpetual miracle; there is in fact
no appearance of any such miracle; from the ordinary causes
of great error and impiety (that is, ambition, avarice, sloth,
luxury) the papal state is not exempt, yea, apparently, it is

¥ Maxdpuos dt duws 7 &yéAn H mapéoxev
6 Kupios xplvew rept tis idlas vous.
Celest. I. in Conc. Eph. p. 190.

8 Quis scindit ecclesiam? nos quo-
rum omnis domus in Bethlehem in
ecclesia communicat; an tu qui aut
bene credis, et superbe de fide taces,
aut male et vere scindis ecclesiam ?——

An tu solus ecclesia es; et qui te
offenderit a Christo excluditur? Hier.

Ep. lxi. cap. 16. Ep. lxii.
t Malchion disertissimus Antiochenze
ecclesize presbyter, adversus Paulum

Samosatenum, qui Antiochene ecclesiz

episcopus dogma Artemonis instaurarat,
disputavit. Hieron. in Catal.

u Quod si a fide exorbitaverit rector,
tune arguendus erit a subditis. sid.
Hisp. de Offic. iii. 39. Vid. Thomam
Aq. in 4. Dist. xix. Art. 2.

2 Ce ee ei a na i i Di te i ai

oe en ee ee

Pope’s Supremacy. 411

more subject to them than any other ; all ages have testified
and complained thereof.

17. Most eminent persons have in such cases withdrawn
communion from the pope; as otherwhere we have shewed by
divers instances.

18. The canon law itself doth admit the pope may be
judged if he be a heretic.—* Because he that is to judge all per-
sons 13 to be judged of none, except he be found to be gone astray
Srom the faith.

The supposition doth imply the possibility ; and therefore
the case may be put that he is such, and then he doth (accord-
ing to the more current doctrine ancient and modern) cease to
be a bishop, yea a Christian; hence no obedience is due to
him ; yea no communion is to be held with him.

19. This in fact was acknowledged by a great pope, allowing
the condemnation of pope Honorius for good, because he was
erroneous in point of faith: Yor (saith he, in that which is
ealled the eighth synod) although Honorius was anathematized
after his death by the oriental bishops, it is yet well known that
he was accused for heresy; for which alone it is lawful for
inferiors to rise up against superiors.

Now that the pope (or papal succession) doth pervert the
truth of Christian doctrine, in contradiction to the holy serip-
ture and primitive tradition; that he doth subvert the prac-
tice of Christian piety, in opposition to the divine commands ;
that he teacheth falsehoods, and maintaineth impieties, is noto-
rious in many particulars, some whereof we shall touch.

We justly might charge him with all those extravagant doc-
trines and practices which the high-flying doctors do teach,
and which the fierce zealots upon occasion do act; for the
whole succession of popes of a long time hath most cherished
and encouraged such folks, looking squintly on others, as not
well affected to them; but we shall only touch those new and
noxious or dangerous positions, which great synods, managed
and confirmed by their authority, have defined, or which they

X Quia cunctos ipse judicaturus ane- dvaToAuwav pera Odvarov dvdbeua éppéOn,
mine est judicandus, nisi deprehendatur b8uws yywordy éoriv, dri emi aipéoes ka-
a fide devius. Grat. Dist. xl. cap. 6. tryoph@n, 50 hw Kal udvoy tkeor: robs
Vid. P. Innoc. IIT. apud Laun. contra drodeerrépous trav peiCévwv karetari-
Baron——. oragda. Syn. VIII. Act. vii. p. 963.

y Kal yap «i xa) rq ‘Ovoply bd trav

Matt. iv.10.
Rey. xix.
10. Xxii. 9.
Col. ii. 18.
Rom. i. 25.

1 Cor. iv. 5.
Rom. xiv.
4.

1 John v.
21.

412 A Treatise of the

themselves have magisterially decreed ; or which are generally
practised by their influence or countenance.

It is manifest, that the pope doth support and cherish as his
special favourites the ventors of wicked errors; such as those
who teach the pope's infallibility, his power over temporal
princes, to cashier and depose them, to absolve subjects from
their alleqiance—the doctrine of equivocation, breach of faith
with heretics, &c. the which doctrines are heretical, as inducing
pernicious practice ; whence whoever doth so much as commu-
nicate with the maintainers of them, according to the principles
of ancient Christianity, are guilty of the same crimes.

The holy scripture and catholic antiquity do teach and en-
join us to worship and serve God alone, our Creator; forbid-
ding us to worship any creature, or fellow-servant ; even not
angels: 7For I who am a creature will not endure to worship
one like to me. |

«But the pope and his clients do teach and charge us to
worship angels and dead men; yea even to venerate the relics
and dead bodies of the saints.

The holy scripture teacheth us to judge nothing (about the
present or future state of men, absolutely) before the time,
until the Lord come, who will bring to light the hidden things of
darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of hearts, and then
each man shall have praise of God.

But the pope notoriously (in repugnance to those precepts,
anticipating God’s judgment, and arrogating to himself a know-
ledge requisite thereto) doth presume to determine the state
of men, canonizing them, declaring them to be saints, and
proposing them to be worshipped; and on the other side, he
damneth, curseth, and censureth his fellow-servants.

God in his law doth command us not »¢o bow down our-
selves unto any image, or worship the likeness of any thing
in heaven, or earth, or under the earth; the which law (whe-
ther moral or positive) the gospel doth ratify and confirm,
charging us to keep ourselves from idols, and to fly worshipping

* Kriopa yap dv ob avétoua rv
dpo.ov mpookuveiy. Bas. apud Sozom. vi.
16.
4 Similiter et sanctos una cum Christo
regnantes venerandos atque invocandos
esse :—atque horum reliquias esse vene-

randas. Pii IV. Profess. Fid. Bonum
atque utile esse eos invocare——sancto-
rum quoque corpora a fidelibus ve-
neranda esse. Conc. Tid.

b Exod. xx. 4. Ob moihoeis ceavTg@
elwaov, ovdé mayTds duolwpa——.

bate pl te

413

of idols, that is, to observe the Second Commandment; the iCor. x.
validity whereof the fathers most expressly assert ; and divers (4:7- ,

m. Alex.
of them were so strict in their opinion about it, that they Tertul.
deemed it unlawful so much as to make any image.

But the pope and his adherents (in point-blank opposition
to divine law and primitive doctrine) require us to fall down
before and to worship images. ‘Moreover we decree, that the
images of saints be especially had and retained in churches, and
that due honour and veneration be imparted to them——-so that
by those images which we kiss, and before which we uncover the
head and fall down, we adore Christ, and venerate the saints
whose likeness they bear.

Neither is he satisfied to recommend and decree these un-
warrantable venerations, but (with a horrible strange kind of
uncharitableness and ferity)doth he “anathematize those who teach
or think any thing opposite to his decrees concerning them; so that
if the ancient fathers should live now, they would live under
this curse.

The holy scripture, under condition of repentance and Ezek. xviii.
amendment of life, upon recourse to God and trust in his mre iy
mercy, through Jesus Christ our Saviour, doth offer and pro- Marki. 15.
mise remission of sins, acceptance with God, justification and
salvation; this is the tenor of the evangelical covenant; nor
did the primitive church know other terms.

But the pope doth preach another doctrine, and requireth
other terms, as necessary for remission of sins and salvation ;
for he hath decreed the confession of all and each mortal sin,
which a man by recollection can remember, to a priest, to be
necessary thereto; anathematizing all who shall say the con-
trary; although the fathers (particularly St. Chrysostom fre-
quently) have affirmed the contrary¢.

The which is plainly preaching another gospel, (forged by
himself and his abettors,) as offering remission upon other

Pope’s Supremacy.

¢ [magines porro —— sanctorum in
templis presertim habendas, et retinen-
das ; eisque debitum honorem et vene-
rationem impertiendam ita ut per
imagines, quas osculamur, et coram qui-
bus caput aperimus, et procumbimus,
Christum adoremus, et sanctos quorum
ille similitudinem gerunt, veneremur.
Conc. Trid. sess. 25.

a Siquis autem his decretis contraria

docuerit, aut senserit, anathema sit. Ibid.

e Si quis dixerit in sacramento poeni-
tentiz ad remissionem peccatorum ne-
cessarium non esse jure divino confiteri
omnia et singula peccata mortalia, quo-
rum memoria cum debita et diligenti
premeditatione habeatur anathe-
ma sit. Sess. xiv. de Pen. Can.7. If
any one shall say, that in the sacra-
ment of penance it is not necessary by

414 A Treatise of the

terms than God hath prescribed ; and denying it upon those
which Christianity proposeth.

He teacheth that no sin is pardoned without absolution of a
priest.

He requireth satisfaction imposed by a priest, besides re-
pentance and new obedience, as necessary. Which is also
another gospelf.

¢He dispenseth pardon of sin upon condition of performances
unnecessary and insufficient ; such as undertaking pilgrimages
to the shrines of saints, visiting churches, making war upon infidels
or heretics, contributing money, repeating prayers, undergoing
corporal penances, &c. Which is likewise to frame and pub-
lish another gospel.

These doctrines are highly presumptuous, and well may be
reputed heretical.

Rom.xiii. | God hath commanded, that every soul should be subject to the

Tiij.1, gher powers temporal, as to God’s ministers ; so as to obey

1Pet. their laws, to submit to their judgments, to pay tribute to them.

rf ae th And the fathers expound this law to the utmost extent and

Chrys. advantage: »Ifevery soul, then yours; of any attempt to except
you, he goes about to deceive you.

But the pope countermandeth, and exempteth all clergy-
men from those duties, by his canon law; excommunicating
lay judges who shall perform their office in regard to them.
i Because indeed some lay persons constrain ecclesiastics, yea
and bishops themselves, to appear before them, and to stand to
their judgment, those that henceforth shall presume to do so, we

divine right to confess all and singular
mortal sins, the remembrance whereof
may be had by due and diligent premedi-
tation, let him be anathema.

f Si quis negaverit ad integram et
perfectam peccatorum remissionem re-
quiri—contritionem, confessionem, et
satisfactionem. Sess.xiv. Can.4. If any
shall deny that contrition, confession,
and satisfaction, is required, to the en-
tire and perfect remission of sin.

& Et qui Hierosolymam proficiscun-
tur, et ad Christianam gentem defen-
dendam, et tyrannidem infidelium de-
bellandum efficaciter auxilium prebu-
erint, quorum peccatorum remissionem
concedimus . Cone. Lat. I. Can.11.
And whoever go to Jerusalem, and

powerfully afford help to defend Chris-
tian people, and to subdue the tyranny
of infidels, to them we grant forgiveness
of their sins ;

h Si omnis et vestra——-si quis ten-
tat excipere, conatur decipere. Bern.
Ep. 42.

i Lex canonica simpliciter eos eximit.
Bell. de Cler. cap.1. Sane quia laici
quidam ecclesiasticas personas et ipsos
etiam episcopos suo judicio stare com-
pellunt, eos qui de cztero id preesump-
serint, a communione fidelium decerni-
mus segregandos. Conc. Lat. III. Can.
14. Ibid. 11.15. Steph. VI. Ep. 1.

tom. i. p. 130.) Nichol. I. Ep. 8.
tom. vi. p. 513.)

= =

415

decree that they shall be separate from the communion of the
Faithful.

The scriptures do represent the king (or temporal sovereign) Tertul. Opt.
as supreme over his subjects, to whom all are obliged to yield a om
special respect and obedience: the fathers yield him the same ome Ep.ii.
place, above all, next to God; and subject to God alone: the 9” Agatho, &e.
ancient good popes did iiekcincleliodies themselves servants and
subjects to the emperor.

But later popes, like the man of sin in St. Paul, have advanced 2 Thess. ii.
themselves above all civil power; claiming to themselves a su- +
pereminency, not only of rank, but of power, over all Christian
princes; even to depose them. ‘Christ has committed the rights
both of terrestrial and celestial government to that blessed man who
bears the keys of eternal life.

Tf the secular power be believers, God would have them subject
to the priests of the church— Christian emperors ought to submit,
and not prefer the execution of their laws to the rulers of the
church.

God by indispensable law hath obliged us to retain our
obedience to the king, even pagan; charging us under pain of
damnation to be subject to him, and not to resist him

But the pope is ready upon occasion to discharge subjects
from that obligation, to absolve them from their solemn oaths
of allegiance, to encourage insurrection against him, to prohibit
obedience——. ™ We observing the decrees of our holy predecessors,
by our apostolical authority absolve those from their oath who were
bound by their fealty and oath to excommunicated persons: and we

Sorbid them by all means that they yield them no allegiance, till
they come and make satisfaction.

Thus doth he teach and prescribe rebellion, perjury—to-
gether with all the murders and rapines consequent on them:
which is a far greater heresy than if he should teach adultery,
murder, or theft to be lawful. For they are enjoined by no

k Christus beato eterne vite clavi-
gero terreni simul et coelestis imperii
jura commisit. P. Nich. II. apud Grat.
Dist. xxii. cap. 1. Greg. VII. Ep. viii. 21.

— Pope’s Supremacy.

m Nos sanctorum preedecessorum nos-
trorum statuta tenentes, eos qui excom-
municatis fidelitate aut sacramento con-
stricti sunt, apostolica auctoritate a sa-

Caus. xv. qu. 6. cap. 3.

1 Seculi potestates si fideles sunt,
Deus ecclesiz sacerdotibus voluit esse
subjectas—imperatores Christiani sub-
dere debent executiones suas eccle-
siasticis presulibus, non preferre. P.
Joh. V IIT. apud Grat. Dist.xevi. cap.11.

cramento absolvimus ; et ne eis fidelita-
tem observent omnibus modis prohibe-
mus, quousque ipsi ad satisfactionem
veniant. Greg. VII. in Syn. Rom. Grat.
Caus. xv. qu. 6. cap. 4.

n Fidelitatem enim quam Christiano
principi jurarunt, Deo ejusque sanctis

Ezek. xiii.
3, &c.

416 A Treatise of the

authority to perform the allegiance which they have sworn to a
Christian prince, who ts an adversary to God and his saints, and
contemns their commands.

Not only the holy scripture, but common sense doth shew it
to be an enormous presumption to obtrude for the inspirations,
oracles, and dictates of God, any writings or propositions, which
are not really such.

This the pope doth notoriously, charging us to admit divers
writings (which the greatest part of learned men in all ages
have refused for such) as sacred and canonical; anathematiz-
ing all those who do not hold each of them for such° :—
even as they are extant in a translation, not very exact, and
framed partly out of Hebrew, partly out of Greek, upon
divers accounts liable to mistake; as its author St. Jerome
doth avow.

According to which decree, all who consent with St. Je-
rome, St.Austin, St.Athanasius, &c. with common sense, with
the author of the Second of Maccabees himself, must incur a
curse. What can be more uncharitable, more unjust, more
silly, than such a definition ?

He pretendeth to infallibility, or encourageth them who
attribute it to him; which is a continual enthusiasm, and pro-
fane bold imposture.

The scripture doth avow a singular reverence due to itself,
as containing the oracles of God—.

But the pope doth obtrude the oral traditions of his church
(divers of which evidently are new, dubious, vain—) to be wor-
shipped with equal reverence as the holy scripture. PAnd
also receiwes and venerates, with the like pious respect and
reverence, the traditions themselves—which have been preserved
by continual succession in the catholic church.

Among which traditions they reckon all the tricks and

adversanti, eorum precepta calcanti,
nulla cohibentur auctoritate persol-
vere P. Urb, II, apud Grat.
Caus. xv. qu. 6. cap. 5.

© $i quis autem libros ipsos integros
cum suis partibus, prout in ecclesia ca-
tholica legi consueverunt, et in veteri
vulgata Latina editione habentur, pro
sacris et canonicis non susceperit
anathema sit. Conc. T'rid. sess. 4. But
if any shall not receive for sacred and

canonical those whole books, with the
parts of them, according as they have
been wont to be read in the catholic
church, and are had in the old vulgar .
Latin edition; let him be anathema.

Pp nec non traditiones ipsas
continua successione in ecclesia catho-
lica conservatas pari pietatis affectu ac
reverentia suscipit, et veneratur. Syn.
Trid. sess, 4.

Pope’s Supremacy. 417

trumpery of their mass service; together with all their new
notions about purgatory, extreme unction, &e. 4He also used
several ceremonies, as mystical benediction, lights, incensings,
garments, and many other such things, from apostolical discipline
and tradition.

The scriptures affirm themselves to be written for common
instruction, comfort, edification in all piety; they do there-
fore recommend themselves to be studied and searched by
all people ; as the best and surest means of attaining know-
ledge and finding truth. *The fathers also do much exhort
all people (even women and girls) constantly to read, and dili-
gently to study the scriptures.

‘But the pope doth keep them from the people, locked up
in languages not understood by them; prohibiting translations
of them to be made or used. The scripture teacheth, and
common sense sheweth, and the fathers do assert, (nothing
indeed more frequently or more plainly,) that all necessary
points of faith and good morality are with sufficient evidence
couched in holy scripture, so that @ man of God, or pious 2 Tim. iii.
men, may thence be perfectly furnished to every work; but’ ”’
they contrariwise blaspheme the scriptures, as obscure, danger-
ous, &e.

Common sense dictateth, that devotions should be perform-
ed with understanding and affection; and that consequently
they should be in a known tongue: and St. Paul expressly
teacheth, that it is requisite for private and public edification;
‘From this doctrine of Paul it appears, that it is better for the
edification of the church, that public prayers, which are said
in the audience of the people, should be said in a tongue com-
mon to the clergy and the people, than that they should be said in
Latin.

q Ceremonias item adhibuit, ut mys-
ticas benedictiones, lumina, thymia-
mata, vestes, aliaque id genus multa ex
apostolica disciplina et traditione
Cone. Trid. sess. xxii. cap. 5.11. de
Sacrif. Miss.

r 2 Tim. iii, 15.—Rom. xv. 4.1 Cor.
ix. 10. X. 11. 2 Pet. i. 20. exBpégous.
John v. 39. Acts xvii.11. Psalm cxix.
—Hier. ad Let. Epitaph. Paul. Vit.
Hilar.——. Chrys. in Colos. Or. 9.
Aug. Serm. 55. de temp.

s N. P. PiusIV. did authorize cer-
tain rules for prohibition and permis-

sion of books; in which it is permitted
to bishops to grant a faculty of reading
the scriptures translated but to this
rule there is added an observation, that
this power was taken from bishops by
command of the Roman universal inqui-
sition. Ind. Lib. Prohib. a Clem. VIII.

t 1 Cor. xiv.14. Ex hac Pauli doc-
trina habetur, quod melius est ad ec-
clesiz sdificationem orationes publicas,
que audiente populo dicuntur, dici
lingua communi clericis et populo,
Cajet. in 1 Cor.

quam dici Latine.
xiv.

Matt. xix.
Il.

Vid. tom.
vii. Conc.
p- 465.
Syn. Trid.
sess. Xxiv.
de Matr.
Can. 9.
Matt. v. 32.
xix. 7.

1 Cor. vii.
10.

418 A Treatise of the

All ancient churches did accordingly practise; and most
others do so, beside those which the pope doth ride.

But the pope will not have it so, requiring the public litur-
gy to be celebrated in an unknown tongue; and that most
Christians shall say their devotions like parrots. He ana-
thematizeth those, who "think the mass should be celebrated
in a vulgar tongue; that is, all those who are in their right
wits, and think it fit to follow the practice of the ancient
church.

The holy scripture teacheth us that there is but one Head of
the church; and the fathers do avow no other (as we have
otherwhere shewed.)

But the pope assumeth to himself the headship of the church,
affirming all *power and authority to be derived from him into
the subject-members of the church.

Y We decree that the Roman pontiff is the true vicar of Christ,
and the head of the whole church.

The scripture declareth, that God did institute marriage for
remedy of incontinency and prevention of sin; forbidding the
use of it to none, who should think it needful or convenient
for them; reckoning the prohibition of a among heretical
doctrines: implying it to be bemposing a snare upon men.

But the pope and his complices do prohibit it to whole
orders of men, (priests, &c.) engaging them into dangerous
vows.

Our Lord forbiddeth any marriage lawfully contracted to be
dissolved, otherwise than in case of adultery.

But the pope commandeth priests married to be divorced.
cAnd that marriages contracted by such persons should be
dissolved.

He dissolveth matrimony agreed, by the profession of
monkery of one of the espoused. ‘Jf any shall say, that
matrimony confirmed, not consummate, is not dissolved by the

u aut lingua tantum vulgari a KwAudyrwv yaueiv' 1 Tim. iv. 3.

missam celebrari debere—anathema sit.
Sess. xxii. Can. 9.

x A quo tanquam capite omnis in sub-
jecta membra potestas et authoritas deri-
vetur. P. Pius II. in Bull. Retract.

Y Definimus Romanum pontificem—
verum Christi vicarium totiusque ec-
clesize caput——. Defin. Syn. Flor.

Z Mh ob éxouev eEovaoiav ;—1 Cor. ix. 5.

b Bpdxov éemiBdddAew* t Cor. vii. 35.

¢ Contracta quoque matrimonia ab .

hujusmodi personis disjungi. Cone.
Lat. I. cap. 21. Lat. II. Trid. Sess.
xxiv. Can. 9.

d Si quis dixeritmatrimonium ratum,
non consummatum, per solennem religi-
onis professionem alterius conjugum non
dirimi, anathema sit. Sess. xxiv. Can. 6.

419
profession of religion of either party, let him be ana-

Pope’s Supremacy.

solemn
thema.

Our Saviour did institute and enjoin us (under pain of
damnation, if we should wilfully transgress his order) to eat
of his body, and drink of his blood, in participation of the
holy supper‘.

The fathers did accordingly practise, with the whole church,
till late times.

But “notwithstanding Christ's institution, (as they express it,)
papal synods do prohibit all laymen, and priests not celebrating,
to partake of Christ’s blood ; so maiming and perverting our
Lord’s institution ; ‘and yet they decline to drink the blood of
our redemption.

In defence of which practice, they confound body and Cone. Trid.
blood; and under a curse would oblige us to believe, that Conca teal
one kind doth contain the other; or that a part doth contain *#i- Can. 3.
the whole.

Whereas our Lord saith, that whoso eateth his flesh and Jobn.vi. 54.
drinketh his blood hath dernal life; and consequently supposeth,
that bad men do not partake of his body and blood; yet they
condemn this assertion under a curse’,

The holy scripture, and the fathers after it, commonly do*Aproy 7oi-
call the elements of the eucharist, after consecration, bread 7)”5¢ “°"
and wine ; affirming them to retain their nature. he ree Ge-

But the popish cabal anathematizeth those who say, that ~
bread and wine do then remain.

&If any shall say, that in the holy sacrament of the eucharist the
substance of bread and wine remain—let him be anathema.

The nature of the Lord’s supper doth imply communion and
company; but they forbid any man to say, that a priest may
not communicate alone ; so establishing the belief of nonsense ~
and contradiction.

The holy scripture teacheth us, that our Lord hath departed,

4 Non obstante. Cone. Const. Sess. xiii.
Conc. Trid. Sess. xiii. cap. 8. Can. 3.
Sess. xxi. cap. 4. Can. 3.

e This pope Leol. condemneth. De
Quadr, Serm. iv. (p. 38.) Sanguinem
redemptionis nostre haurire declinant
——. P. Gelasius calleth the division of
the sacrament agrand sacrilege. Gratian.

in De Consecr. Dist. ii. cap. 12-

f Si quis dixerit tantum in usu, &c.
Trid. Cone. Sess. xiii. cap. 8. Can. 4.—

& Si quis dixerit in sacrosancto eu-
charistiz sacramento remanere substan-
tiam panis et vini anathema sit.
Trid. Conc. de Euch. Sess. xiii. Can. 2.
Si quis dixerit missas in quibus sacerdos
solus sacramentaliter communicat, il-
licitas esse, anathema sit. Sess. xxii. de
Sacr. Miss. Can. 8. Sess. xiii. Can. 8.

420 A Treatise of the

and is absent from us in body; until that he shall come to
judge, which is called his presence ; »that heaven, whither he
ascended, and where he sitteth at God’s right hand, must hold
him till the times of the restitution of all things.

But the pope with his Lateran and Tridentine complices
draw him down from heaven, and make him corporally pre-
sent every day, in numberless places here.

The scripture teacheth us, that our Lord is a man, ‘perfectly
like to us in all things.

But the pope and his adherents make him extremely dif-
ferent from us, as having a body at once present in innumera-
ble places; insensible, &c. divested of the properties of our
body ; thereby destroying his human nature, and in effect
agreeing with Kutyches, Apollinarius, and other such pestilent
heretics.

The scripture representeth him born once for us ; but they
affirm him every day made by a priest, uttering the words of
consecration; as if that which before did exist could be made;
as if a man could make his Maker.

Heb. ix.26. The scripture teacheth, that our Lord was once offered for

ig ey expration of our sins; but they pretend every day to offer him

ME mporgo- up as a propitiatory sacrifice.

i These devices, without other foundation than’ a figurative
expression, (which they resolve to expound in a proper sense,
although even in that very matter divers figurative expres-
sions are used, as they cannot but acknowledge,) they with
all violence and fierceness obtrude upon the belief, as one of
the most necessary and fundamental articles of the Christian
religion. }

Eph. ii.8,9. The scripture teacheth us humbly to acknowledge the re-

it. Ul. 5. ° .

Rom. iii. 24. wards assigned by God to be gratuitous and free ; and that we,

on ater we have done all, must acknowledge ourselves unprofitable

32. servants.

But the papists curse those who, although out of humility
and modesty, will not acknowledge the good works of justified
persons to be truly meritorious ; deserving the increase of grace,
eternal life, and augmentation of glory : so forcing us to use saucy
words and phrases, if not impious in their sense.

h 2 Cor. v. 6, Acts ii. 33. Col. i”“Opeire Kara mdvra Trois adeApots

iii. 1. Els 7d Sinvents exdOice. Heb. x. duowOjvos. Heb. ii. 17.
12. “Ov 57 vdpaydy Séxeo0a. Acts iii. 21.

Pope’s Supremacy. 421

The scripture teacheth one church diffused over the whole
world ; whereof each part is bound to maintain charity, peace,
and communion with the rest, upon brotherly terms.

But the Romanists arrogate to themselves the name and
privilege of the only church ; condemning all other churches
besides their own, and censuring all for apostatical who do
not adhere to them, or submit to their yoke; just like the
Donatists, who said that ‘the world had apostatized, excepting
those who upon their own terms did communicate with them;
only the communion of Donatus remained the true church.

The holy scripture biddeth us take care of persons pretend- 1 John iv. t.
ing to extraordinary inspirations ; charging on the Holy Spirit 3 ra
their own conceits and devices.

Such have been their synods, boldly fathering their decrees
on God’s Spirit—. And their pope is infallible, by virtue of
inspiration communicated to him, when he pleaseth to set him-
self right in his chair. Whence we may take them for bodies
of enthusiasts and fanatics: the difference only is, that other
enthusiasts pretend singly, they conjunctly and by conspiracy.
Others pretend it in their own direction and defence, these
impose their dreams on the whole church.

If they say that God hath promised his Spirit to his church, -_ xi-13.
it is true; but he hath no less plainly and frequently promised ; gas rd
it to single Christians, who should seek it earnestly of him. <P es

The ancient fathers could in the scriptures hardly discern Rom. viii.9.
more than two sacraments, or mysterious rites of our religion, rend ee
by positive law and institution of our Saviour to be practised. Christ. Ep.

But the popes have devised others, and under uncharitable *¢ 4
curses propound them to be professed for such!; affirming them
to confer grace by the bare performance of them.

Every clergyman and monk is bound by Pius IV. to profess
™ there are just seven of them; and the Tridentine synod " ana-
thematizeth all those who do say there are more or fewer; although
the ancients did never hit on that number.

k Orbis terrarum apostatavit, et sola impiety and superstition, &c.
remansit Donati communio. Aug. de m Profiteor quoque septem esse pro-
Unit. 12—. prie et vere sacramenta. Bulla Pii IV.
1 Si sacramenta essent pauciora, mag- n Si quis dixerit———esse plura vel
na impietas fuisset, et superstitio, &c. pauciora quam septem anathema sit,
Bell. de Saer. ii. 25. Uf the sacraments Syn. Trid. Sess. vii. Can. 1.
were fewer, there would have been great

Sess. xxiv.
Can. 10.

422 A Treatise of the

° But these owr sacraments both contain grace, and also confer
it upon those who worthily receive them.

They require men to believe under a curse that each of
those were instituted of Christ, and confer grace by the bare
performance.

Particularly, they curse those who do not hold P matrimony
Sor a sacrament, instituted by Christ, and conferring grace. What
can be more ridiculous than to say, that marriage was instituted
by Christ, or that it doth confer grace ?

Yet with another anathema they prefer virginity before it :
and why, forsooth, is not that another sacrament ? And then
they must be comparing the worth of these sacraments, con-
demning those heavily who may conceive them equal, as being
divine institutions.

Lf any shall say that these seven sacraments are so equal one
to another, that one is in no respect of more worth than another,
let him be anathema.

The first, as it seemeth, who reckoned the sacraments to be
seven, was Peter Lombard ; whom the schoolmen did follow ;
and pope Eugenius IV. followed them; * and afterward the
Trent men formed it into an article backed with an anathema.

Upon which rash and peremptory sentence touching all
ancient divines, we may note ;

1. Is it not strange, that an article of faith should be formed
upon an ambiguous word, or a term of art, used with great
variety ?

2. Is it not strange to define a point, whereof it is most
plain that the fathers were ignorant, wherein they never did
agree or resolve any thing ?

3. Yea, whereof they speak variously.

4. Is it not odd and extravagant to damn or curse people
for a point of so little consideration or certainty ?

© Hec vero nostra et continent gra-
tiam, et ipsam digne suscipientibus con-
ferunt. P. Eug. in Instr. Arm. Si quis
dixerit per ipsa novee legis sacramenta ex
opere operato, non conferri gratiam
anathema sit. Ibid. Can. 8.

P Si quis dixerit matrimonium non esse
vere ac proprie unum ex septem legis e-
vangelice sacramentis, a Christo Domino
institutum —— neque gratiam conferre,

anathema sit. Sess. xxiv. Can. 1.

4 Si quis dixerit hee septem sacra-
menta ita esse inter se paria, ut nulla
ratione aliud sit alio dignius, anathema ©
sit. Sess. vii. Can. 3.

¥ Nove legis septem sunt sacramenta,
&c. P. Eug. in Instr. Arm. Bellarmine
could find none before him. Vid. de Sa-
cram, ii. 25.

Pope’s Supremacy. 423

5. Is it not intolerable arrogance and presumption to define,
nay, indeed, to make an article of faith, without any manner
of ground or colour of authority either from scripture or the
tradition of the ancient fathers s?

The holy scripture forbiddeth us to call any man master upon Matt. xxiii.
earth, or absolutely to subject our faith to the dictates of any or ad
man; it teacheth us that the apostles themselves are not lords 1 Thess. v.
of our faith, so as to oblige us to believe their own inventions ; (..), jg.
it forbiddeth us to swallow whole the doctrines and precepts of Matt. xv. 9.
men, without examination of them. It forbiddeth us to admit
‘wartous and strange doctrines.

But the pope and Roman church exact from us a submission
to their dictates, admitting them for true, without any further
inquiry or discussion, barely upon his authority. " They who
are provided of any benefices whatever, having cure of souls, let
them promise and swear obedience to the Roman church.

They require of us without doubt to believe, to profess, to

assert innumerable propositions, divers of themnew and strange,
_nowise deducible from seripture or apostolical tradition, the very
terms of them being certainly unknown to the primitive church,
devised by human subtilty, curiosity, contentiousness——divers
of them being (in all appearance, to the judgment of common
sense) uncertain, obscure, and intricate ; divers of them bold
and fierce; divers of them frivolous and vain; divers of them
palpably false. Namely, all such propositions, as have been
taught by their great juntos, allowed by the pope, especially
that of Trent.

xMoreover all other things delivered, defined, and declared by
the sacred canons and awcumenical councils, and especially by the
holy synod of Trent, I undoubtedly receive and profess; and also
all things contrary thereunto, and all heresies whatsoever condemned
and rejected and anathematized by the church, I in like manner

8 Multa dicuntur a veteribus sacra-
menta preeter ista septem. Bell. de Sacr.
ii.24. Many things are by the ancients
called sacraments besides these seven.

tur. Sess. xxv. cap. 2. de Ref.

X Cetera item omnia a sacris canoni-
bus et cecumenicis conciliis, ac preecipue
a sacrosancta Tridentina synodo tradita,
definita,et declarata, indubitanter recipio
atque profiteor; simulque contraria om-

t Aiaxais mouwlAas, nal Eévais uh
mrepipéperde. Heb. xiii. 9.

« Provisi de beneficiis quibuscunque
curam animarum habentibus——in Ro-
manee ecclesiz obedientiam spondeant ac
jurent. Conc. Trid. Sess. xxiv. cap. 12.
de Ref. —— nec non veram obedientiam
summo pontifici spondeant et profitean-

nia, atque hereses quascunque ab eccle-
sia damnatas et rejectas et anathemati-
zatas ego pariter damno, respuo, et ana-
thematizo. P. Pii IV. profess. Hance
veram catholicam fidem, extra quam nulla
salus esse potest. Ibid.

Rom. xiv.1.
zy, I, 7°

Formaliter
justos. Sess.
vi. Can. 10.

Ex opere

James iii.2.

4.24 A Treatise of the

do condemn, reject, and anathematize This is the true ca-
tholic faith, out of which there can be no salvation.

This usurpation upon the consciences of Christians (none like
whereto was ever known in the world) they prosecute with most
uncharitable censures ; cursing and damning all who do not in
heart and profession submit to them, obliging all their consorts
to join therein, against all charity and prudence.

The scripture enjoineth us to bear with those who are weak
in faith, and err in doubtful or disputable matters.

But the popes, with eruel uncharitableness, not only do cen-
sure all that cannot assent to their devices, which they obtrude
as articles of faith ; but sorely persecute them with all sorts of
punishments; even with death itself; a practice inconsistent with
Christian meekness, with equity, with reason; and of which the
fathers have expressed the greatest detestation.

y They have unwoven and altered all theology from head to foot,
and of divine have made it sophistical.

The pope, with his pack of mercenary clients at Trent, did
indeed establish a scholastical or sophistical, rather than a
Christian theology; framing points, devised by the idle wits
of latter times, into definitions and peremptory conclusions,
backed with curses and censures: concerning which conclusions
it is evident,

That the apostles themselves would not be able to under-
stand many of them.

That the ancient fathers did never think any thing about
them.

That divers of them consist in application of artificial terms

’ and phrases devised by human subtilty.

That divers of them are in their own nature disputable ;
were before disputed by wise men; and will ever be disputed
by those who freely use their judgment.

That there was no need of defining many of them.

_ That they blindly lay about them, condemning and cursing
they know not who, fathers, schoolmen, divines, &¢. who have
expressly affirmed points so damned by them.

That many truths are uncharitably backed with curses,
which disparageth them; (seeing a man may err pardonably—
TOAAG yap TTaloyev Amavres,) in many things we offend all.

y Totam theologiam a capite usque sophisticam fecerunt. Erasm. pref. ad
ad calcem retexuerunt, et ex divina Hieron.

Pope’s Supremacy. 425

For instance, what need was there of defining, what need of Sess. v.
cursing those, who think concupiscence to be truly and properly pl
sim, upon St. Paul’s authority calling it so‘

That yAdam presently upon his transgression did lose the
sanctity and justice in which he was constituted ?

What need of cursing those who say that men are justified Sess. vi.
by the sole remission of sins, according to St. Paul’s notion “"''
and use of the word justification ?

What need of cursing those, who say the 2grace of God, by
which we are justified, is only the favour of God ; whereas it
is plain enough that God’s grace there in St. Paul doth signify
nothing else, applied to that case?

Or that faith is nothing else, but a reliance in God's mercy, Sess. vi.
remitting sins for Christ ; seeing it is plain that St. Paul doth Com. 34,
by faith chiefly mean the belief of that principal point of the
gospel?

Or that good works do not cause an increase of justification ;
seeing St. Paul doth exclude justification by works ; and it is a
free work of God—uncapable of degrees ?

Or that after remission of sin in justification, >a guilt of
paying temporal pain doth abide?

Or that a man cannot by his works merit increase of grace, Sess. vi.
and glory, and eternal life; seeing a man is not to be blamed, mecnss
who doth dislike the use of so saucy a word; the which divers
good men have disclaimed ?

What need of cursing those, who do not take the sacraments
to be precisely seven? or who conceive that some one of their po sacra-
seven may not be truly and properly a sacrament; seeing the prea
word sacrament is ambiguous, and by the fathers applied to pi ae
divers other things, and defined generally by St.Austin, signwm °s¢ Plu

i 7 . vel pauci-
rei sacre ; and that before Peter Lombard ever did mention ora quam
? septem.
that number‘ Sess. vii.

What need of damning those, who do conceive the sacra- Can.1.
. ae Sess. vil.
ments equal in dignity ? Cen. 8
What need of defining, that sacraments do confer grace ew Sess. vii.
* * © Can. 8.
opere operato? which is an obscure scholastical phrase.

y Cum mandatum Dei in paradiso vorem Dei.
fuisset transgressus, statim sanctitatem a Sess. vi. Can. 24. Non autem ipsius
et justitiam in qua constitutus fuerat augende causam
amisisse. Sess. v. Can. 1. b Ut nullus remaneat reatus poenwe
% Sess. vi. Can.11. Aut etiam gra- temporalis exolvende Sess. vi.
tiam qua justificamur esse tantum fa- Can, 30. Sess. xiv. de Panit. Can. 15.

Sess. vii.
Can. II.

Sess. vii.
Can. 13.

Sess. iv.

426 A Treatise of the Pope’s Supremacy.

What need of cursing those who say, that a °character is not
impressed in the soul of those who take baptism, confirmation, or
orders ; seeing what this character is, (or this spiritual and
indelible mark,) they do not themselves well understand or
agree?

What need of cursing those, who do not think that the validity
of sacraments (and consequently the assurance of our being
Christians) dependeth on the intention of the minister ?

What need of cursing those, who think that a pastor of the
church may change the ceremonies of administering the sacra-
ments; seeing St.Cyprian often teacheth, that every pastor
hath full authority in such cases within his own precinct ?

What need of defining the Second book of Maccabees to be
canonical, against the common opinion of the fathers, (most
expressly of St. Austin himself,) of the most learned in all ages,
of pope Gelasius himself, (in Decret.) which the author himself
(calling his work an epitome, and asking pardon for his errors)
disclaimeth, and which common sense therefore disclaimeth ¢?

Their new creed of Pius IV. containeth these novelties and
heterodoxies. 1. Seven sacraments. 2. Trent doctrine of justifica-
tion and original sin. 3. Propitiatorysacrifice ofthe mass. 4. Tran-
substantiation. 5. Communicating under one kind. 6. Purgatory.

7. Invocation of saints. 8. Veneration of relics. 9. Worship of

images. 10. The Roman church to be the mother and mistress of
all churches. 11. Swearing obedience to the pope. 12. Recewing
the decrees of all synods, and of Trent.

¢ Non imprimi characterem in anima. d Hoc est signum quoddam spirituale,
Sess. vii. Can. 9. et indelebile. Ibid.

€ Fidem minutis dissecant ambagibus
Ut quisque lingua nequior.
Solvunt ligantque questionum vincula
Per syllogismos plectiles——.
Prudent. in Apotheos.

A DISCOURSE

CONCERNING THE

UNITY OF THE CHURCH.

Non habet charitatem Dei, qui ecclesie non diligit unitatem. AvuG. DE Bart. 3.

Epues. iv. 4.

One body, and one spirit.

THE unity of the church is a point which may seem somewhat
speculative, and remote from practice; but in right judgments
it is otherwise ; many duties depending upon a true notion and
consideration of it; so that from ignorance or mistake about
it we may incur divers offences or omissions of duty; hence in
holy scripture it is often proposed as a considerable point, and
useful to practice.

And if ever the consideration of it were needful, it is so now,
when the church is so rent with dissensions, for our satisfaction
and direction about the questions and cases debated in Christ-
endom; for on the explication of it, or the true resolution
wherein it doth consist, the controversies about church-govern-
ment, heresy, schism, liberty of conscience, and by consequence
many others, do depend; yea, indeed, all others are by some
parties made to depend thereon.

St.Paul, exhorting the Ephesians, his disciples, to the main-
tenance of charity and peace among themselves, doth for in-
ducement to that practice represent the unity and community
of those things which jointly did appertain to them as Christ-
ians: the unity of that body whereof they were members; of
that spirit which did animate and act them; of that hope to
which they were called; of that Lord whom they all did wor-
ship and serve; of that faith which they did profess; of that
baptism whereby they were admitted into the same state of
duties, of rights, of privileges; of that one God and universal
Father, to whom they had all the same relations.

428 A Discourse concerning

He beginneth with the unity of the body; that is, of the
Christian church; concerning which unity, what it is, and
wherein it doth consist, I mean now to discourse.

In order to clearing which point, we must first state what
the church is, of which we discourse; for the word church is
ambiguous, having both in holy scripture and common use
divers senses somewhat different. For,

1. Sometimes any assembly or company of Christians is
Rom.xvi.5.called a church; as when mention is made of the church in
a such @ house ; (whence Tertullian saith, * Where there are three,

even laics, there is a church.)

2. Sometimes a particular society of Christians, living in spi-
ritual communion, and under discipline; as when, ” the church
at such a town; °the churches of such a province; the churches ;
all the churches, are mentioned: according to which notions
St. Cyprian saith, that there is a © church, where there is a
people united to a priest, and a flock adhering to their shepherd :
and so Ignatius saith, ‘that without the orders of the clergy a
church vs not called.

3. A large collection of divers particular societies combined
together in order, under direction and influence of a common
government, or of persons acting in the public behalf, is
termed a church: as the church of Antioch, of Corinth, of
Jerusalem, &c. each of which at first probably might consist
of divers congregations, having dependencies of less towns an-
nexed to them; all being united under the care of the bishop
and presbytery of those places; but however, soon after the
apostles’ times, it is certain that such collections were, and
were named churches.

ae xvi. 4, The society of those who at present or in course of time
Eph. iii. 10. profess the faith and gospel of Christ, and undertake the evan-
wnt ‘3° gelical covenant, in distinction to all other religions; particularly
15. to that of the Jews: which is called the synagogue.

5. The whole body of God’s people that is, ever hath been,

a Ubi tres, ecclesia est, licet laici. Acts xvi. 5. Rev. ii. 7, 11. Kar’ éexAn-
Tert. de Exh. Cast. cap. 7. ctav, Acts xiv. 23.

» Acts viii.1. xiv.27. v.11. 1Cor.i.1. © Ecclesia, plebs sacerdoti adunata, et
Col. iv. 16. 1 Thess. i.1. 2 Cor.i.1. pastori suo grex adherens. Cypr. Ep.
Rev. ii. 1, &c. Rom. xvi. 1. 69.

4 Rom. xvi. 4. 1 Cor. iv. 17. xi. 16,

the Unity of the Church. 429

or ever shall be, from the beginning of the world to the con- Acts xii. 1.
summation thereof, who having (formally or virtually) be- mae
lieved in Christ, and sincerely obeyed God’s laws, shall finally, sas. a9.
by the meritorious performances and sufferings of Christ, be xiv.
saved, is called the church.

Of these acceptions the two latter do only come under pre-
sent consideration; it being plain that St.Paul doth not speak of
any one particular or present society; but of all at all times who
have relation to the same Lord, faith, hope, sacraments, &c.

Wherefore, to determine the case between these two, we
must observe,that to the latter of these (that is, to the catholic
society of true believers and faithful servants of Christ, dif-
fused through all ages, dispersed through all countries, where-
of part doth sojourn on earth, part doth reside in heaven, part
is not yet extant; but all whereof is described in the register
of divine pre-ordination, and shall be re-colleected at the resur- Eph. i. ro.
rection of the just; that, I say, to this church) especially all
the glorious titles and excellent privileges attributed to the
church in holy scripture do agree.

This is the body of Ohrist, whereof he is the head, and ~~ i. 18,
Saviour.

This is the spouse, and wife of Christ ; whereof he is the ae v.25,
bridegroom and husband. Soni aie 7.
This is the house of God ; whereof our Lord is the master ; Matt. xxi.
Swhich is built upon a rock, so that the gates of hell shall not maa

prevail against it.

This is "the city of God ; the new, the holy, the heavenly Jeru-
salem, the mother of us all.

This is the Sion, which the Lord hath chosen, which he hath Ps. exxxii.
desired for his habitation, where he hath resolved to place his 7
rest and residence for ever.

This is the mountain of the Lord, seated above all mountains, |s- te.
unto which all nations shall flow. :

This is the elect generation, royal priesthood, holy nation, ' Pet. ii. 9.
peculiar people.

This is the general assembly, and church of the first-born, who’ a /

are enrolled in heaven.

& Matt. xxi. 13. 1 Tim. iii. 15. Heb. h Rev. iii. 12. xxi. 2, ro. Gal. iv. 26.
iii. 5. 1 Pet.ii. 5. Eph. ii, 21. Matt. Heb. xii. 22.
xvi. 18.

Acts xx. 28.
a ap v. ‘lhe
26, 2

John x. 16.

Ezek.
XXXVIi. 24.
xxiv. 23.
John xvii.
20.

430 A Discourse concerning

This is the church which God hath purchased with his own
blood ; and for which Christ hath delivered himself, that he might
sanctify it, and cleanse it, with the washing of water by the word,
that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having
spot, or wrinkle, nor any such thing; but that it might be holy
and unblemished.

To this church, as those high elogies most properly do ap-
pertain, so that unity which is often attributed to the church
doth peculiarly belong thereto.

This is that one body, into which we are all baptized by one

i, Sprit; which is knit together, and compacted of parts afford-
-ing mutual aid, and supply to its nourishment and inerease ;

the members whereof do hold a mutual sympathy and com-
placence; which is joined to one Head, deriving sense

i, and motion from it; which is enlivened and moved by one
_ Spirit.

This is that one spiritual house, reared upon the foundation
of the prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ being the chief corner-
stone ; m whom all the building fitly framed together groweth
unto an holy temple in the Lord.

This is that one family of God, whereof Christ is the oiko-

‘ deondrns, whence good Christians are oikeio. Ocod.

This is that one city, or corporation, endued with an ample

‘charter and noble privileges, in regard to which St. Paul saith
- Weare ouumoXira tov aylwy, (fellow-citizens of the saints,) and
,, that our 7oAfrevya (our civil state and capacity) 7s in heaven,

or that we are citizens thereof.
That one holy nation, and peculiar people, (the spiritual

Israel,) subject to the same government and law, (that which

is called the kingdom of heaven ;) enjoying the same franchises
and privileges; following the same customs and fashions;
using the same conversation and language; whereof Jesus
Christ is the Lord and King.

This is the one flock, under one Shepherd.

This is the society of those for whom Christ did pray, that —
they might be all one.

It is true, that divers of these characters are expressed to re-
late to the church after Christ; but they may be allowed to
extend to all the faithful servants of God before, who in effect

the Unity of the Church. 431

were Christians, being saved upon the same account; and
therefore did belong to the same body.

To this church in a more special and eminent manner all
those titles, and particularly that of wnity, are ascribed ; but
the same also in some order and measure do belong and are
attributed to the universal church sojourning upon earth.

For because this visible church doth enfold the other, (as
one mass doth contain the good ore and base alloy *; as one Matt.iii.r2.
floor the corn and the chaff; as one field the wheat and the \\y lee
tares ; as one net the choice fish and the refuse; as one fold
the sheep and the goats; as one tree the living and the dry John xv. 2.
branches :) because this society is designed to be in reality
what the other is in appearance, the same with the other:
because therefore presumptively every member of this doth
pass for a member of the other, (the time of distinction and Matt. xiii.
separation not being yet come :) because this in its profession °~
of truth, in its sacrifices of devotion, in its practice of service
and duty to God, doth communicate with that: therefore
commonly the titles and attributes of the one are imparted
to the other.

All, saith St. Paul, are not Israel who are of Israel ; nor is Rom. ix. 6.
he a Jew that is one outwardly ; yet in regard to the conjunc- ring 18.
tion of the rest with the faithful Israelites, because of external
consent in the same profession, and conspiring in the same
services, all the congregation of Israel is styled a holy nation,
and peculiar people’.

So likewise do the apostles speak to all members of the
church as to elect and holy persons, unto whom all the privi-
leges of Christianity do belong; although really hypocrites
and bad men do not belong to the church, nor are concerned in
its unity, as St. Austin doth often teach™,

i Ex quo vocantur sancti, est ecclesia
in terra. Aug. in Psal. 128. Since men
are called saints, there is a church upon
earth. Sancti ante legem, sancti sub
lege, sancti sub gratia, omnes hi per-
ficientes corpus Domini in membris
sunt ecclesie constituti. Greg. Mag.
Epist. 24. Saints before the law, saints
under the law, saints under the gospel,
all these make up the body of Christ,
and are reckoned among the members
of the church.

k One great house hath vessels of

honour and dishonour. 2 Tim. ii. 20.
(Rom. ix. 21.)

1 Sicut lilium in medio spinarum, ita
proxima mea in medio filiarum
Unde filias appellat, nisi propter com-
munionem sacramentorum? Aug. de
Unit. Eccl. cap. 13. As the lily among
thorns, so is my love among the daugh-
ters Why doth he call them
daughters, but for the communion and
agreement in sacraments ?

m Non ad eam pertinent avari, rap-
tores, fueneratores. Videntur esse in

432 A Discourse concerning

The places therefore of scripture which do represent the
church one, as unquestionably they belong (in their principal
notion and intent) to the true universal church (called the
church mystical and invisible); so may they by analogy and
participation be understood to concern the visible church
catholic here in earth; which professeth faith in Christ, and
obedience to his laws ™.

And of this church (under due reference to the other) the
question is, Wherein the unity of it doth consist, or upon what
grounds it is called one; being that it compriseth in itself so
many persons, societies, and nations ?

For resolution of which question, we may consider, that a
community of men may be termed one upon several accounts
and grounds; as,

For specifical unity of nature, or as unum genus ; so are all
men one by participation of common rationality; ro avOpeémuwor,
humanum genus.

For cognation of blood; as, gens una; so are all Jews,
however living dispersedly over the world, reckoned one nation,
or people ; so all kinsmen do constitute one family: and thus
also all men, as made of one blood, are one people.

For commerce of language ; so Italians, and Germans, are
esteemed one people, although living under different laws and
governments.

For consent in opinion, or conformity in manners and
practices ; as, men of the same sect in religion or philosophy,
of the same profession, faculty, trade: so Jews, Mahometans,
Arians; so orators, grammarians, logicians ; so divines, law-
yers, physicians, merchants, artisans, rustics, &c.

For affection of mind, or compacts of good-will; or for

ecclesia, non sunt. Aug.de Bapt. contr. 18. Multi tales sunt in sacramentorum
Don. iv. 1. vi. 3. Ecclesiam veram communione cum ecclesia, et tamen jam

intelligere non audeo nisi in sanctis et
justis. Ibid. v.27. I dare not under-
stand the true church to be but among
holy and righteous men. Pax autem
hujus unitatis in solis bonis est—sicut
autem isti qui intus cum gemitu tole-
rantur, quamvis ad eandem Columbe
unitatem et illam gloriosam ecclesiam,
non habentem maculam aut rugam, aut
aliquid ejusmodi non pertineant. Idem
de Bapt. iii. 18. Nec regenerati spiritu-
aliter in corpus et membra Christi coz-
dificentur nisi boni, &c. Aug. de Unit.

non sunt in ecclesia. Idem de Unit. Eccl.
cap. 20. There are many such who
communicate in sacraments with the
church, and yet they are not in the
church. Omnes mali spiritualiter a bo-

nis sejuncti sunt. De Bapt. vi. 4. All

evil men are spiritually severed from
the good.

m’ExkAnolay Kar@ Td LOpoirpa TOY
éxAext@v. Clem. Alex. Str. p. 514. I
call the church the congregation of the
elect.

the Unity of the Church. 433

links of peace and amicable correspondence ; in order to mu-
tual interest and aid; as, friends and confederates.

For being ranged in order under one law and rule; as,
those who live under one monarchy, or in one commonwealth;
as the people in England, Spain, France ; in Venice, Genoa,
Holland, &e.

Upon such grounds of unity, or union, a society of men is
denominated one; and, upon divers such accounts, it is plain
that the catholic church may be said to be one. For,

I. It is evident, that the church is one by consent in faith My sheep
and opinion concerning all principal matters of doctrine, espe- 7"),
cially in those which have considerable influence upon the x. 27, 16.
practice of piety toward God, righteousness toward men, and
sobriety of conversation ; to teach us which the grace of God Tit. ii. 12.
did appear.

As he that should in any principal doctrine differ from Regulafidei
Plato, (denying the immortality of the soul, the providence of {\8'™™m0-

bilis et ir-

God, the natural difference of good and evil,) would not be ———
Platonist ; so he that dissenteth from any doctrine of import- = re

ance, manifestly taught by Christ, doth renounce Christianity. % '-

All Christians are delivered into one form of doctrine; to Rom.vi.17.
which they must stiffly and steadfastly adhere, seeping the on re
depositum committed to them: they must * strive together for xiii. 9.
the faith of the gospel, and + earnestly contend for the faith 9 2
which was once delivered to the saints: they must hold fast! a iv. Apr
the form of sound words—in faith and love which is in Christ tude 3. q
Jesus ; that great salvation, which at first began to be spoken Heb iis S
by the Lord, and was confirmed unto them by his hearers, God
also bearing them witness with signs and wonders, and with
divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his? - ye
own will. ves -

They are bound fo mind, or think, one and the same thing ; Cae

to stand fast in one spirit with one mind ; to walk by the SO Nk oe
ul. 7.

rule ; to be joined together in the same mind and in the same pri). iii, 16.
judgment ; with one mind and mouth to glorify God, the Father ing a
of our Lord Jesus Christ. ‘agleve-

They are obliged to disclaim consortship with the gainsay- * ee a
ers of this doctrine ; to stand off from those who do érepodokeiv, 5.3
or who do not consent to the wholesome words—of our Lord ¢.

ess. iii.

Rom. xvi.
17.

Tit. iii. 10.
Matt. vii.15.
XXiv. II.
Acts xx.
29, 30.

2 Pet. ii. 1.
Eph. iv. 14.
Gal. i. 8.
Gal. iii. 28,
(26.)

*EkéoTpa-
nTat 6 ToI-
ovTos.

Tit. iii. 11.
Rom. xvi.
17.

2 John to.

434 A Discourse concerning

Jesus Ohrist, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness :
to mark those who make divisions and scandals beside the doc-
trine which Christians had learned, and to decline from them:
to reject heretics: to beware of false prophets, of seducers ; of
those who speak perverse things to draw disciples after them:
to pronounce anathema upon whoever shall preach any other
doctrine.

Thus are all Christians one in Christ Jesus: thus are they
(as Tertullian speaketh) "confederated in the society of a sacra-
ment, or of one profession.

°This preaching and this faith the church having received,
though dispersed over the world, doth carefully hold, as inhabit-
ing one house ; and alike believeth these things, as if tt had one
soul, and the same heart, and consonantly doth preach, and teach,
and deliver these things, as if it had but one mouth.

PAs for kings, though their kingdoms be divided, yet he equally
expects from every one of them one dispensation, and one and the
same sacrifice of a true confession and praise. So that, though there
may seem to be a diversity of temporal ordinances, yet an unity
and agreement in the right faith may be held and maintained
among them.

In regard to this union in faith peculiarly the body of
Christians, adhering to it, was called the catholic church,
from which all those were esteemed ipso facto to be cut off
and separated who in any point deserted that faith ; such a
one, (saith St. Paul,) egéorpanta:, is turned aside, or hath left
the Christian way of life. He in reality is no Christian, nor
is to be avowed or treated as such, but is to be disclaimed,
rejected, and shunned. .

4 He, saith St. Cyprian, cannot seem a Christian, who doth not
persist in the wnity of Christ’s gospel and faith.

n De societate sacramenti confoede-
rantur. Tertull. in Marc. iv. §.

© TodTo Td Khpuypya TapeiAnpvia, kal
Tavtny Thy mlotw 7 exKAnota Kal mep ev
bAw TE Kdopy Sicomapyevn emiUEAGs Spu-
Adowe: &s eva olkov oixotca’ Kal duolws
morever TovTas ws play puxhy Kal Thy
a’thvy éxovca xapdlav' Kal cvppdvws
ravra «npbacer kal diddonet, Kal mapadl-
Swot, ws ev ordua KexTnuevn. Tren. i. 3.
(apud Epiph. Her. 31.)

Pp Reges —— quorum etsi divisa sunt

regna, zqualiter tamen de singulis dis-
pensationem exigit, unamque de eis
vere de se confessionis hostiam laudis
exspectat—ut etsi dispositionum tem-
poralium videatur esse diversitas, circa
ejus fidei rectitudinem unitatis conso-
nantia teneatur. (P. Leo IJ. Epist. 5.
ad Ervigium R. Hisp.)

4 Nec Christianus videri potest, qui
non permanet in evangelii ejus et fidei
veritate. Cypr. de Unit. Eccl.

the Unity of the Church. 435

‘Tf, saith Tertullian, a man be a heretic, he cannot be a
Christian.

Whence Hegesippus saith of the old heretics, that they did
divide the unity of the church by pernicious speeches against God
and his Christ.

t The virtue (saith the pastor Hermes, cited by Clemens Alex.)

-which doth keep the church together, is faith.

So the fathers of the sixth council tell the emperor, that
Uthey were members one of another, and did constitute the one body
of Christ, by consent in opinion with him and one another ; and
by faith.

xWe ought in all things to hold the unity of the catholic
church; and not to yield in any thing to the enemies of faith and
truth. |

yIn each part of the world this faith is one, because this is the
Christian faith.

He denies Christ, who confesses not all things that are
Christ's.

Hence in common practice, whoever did appear to differ
from the common faith, was rejected as an apostate from
Christianity, and unworthy the communion of other Christ-
ians,

There are points of less moment, more obscurely delivered
in which Christians without breach of unity may dissent,
about which they may dispute, in which they may err—with-
out breach of unity, or prejudice to charity®.

The faith of Christians did at first consist in few points,
those which were professed in baptism, whereof we have divers
summaries in the ancients—by analogy whereto all other pro- fren.i. 2.
positions were expounded, and according to agreement whereto

r Si heretici sunt, Christiani esse et veritatis hostibus cedere. Cypr. Ep.
non possunt. Tert. de Preser. cap.37- 71. (ad Quint. de Steph. P.)

8 Ofrwes euépicay Thy Evwow Tis ex- — ¥ Utriusque partis terrarum fides ista
KkAnolas pOopiualois Adyors KaTa Tov una est, quia et fides ista Christiana est.
cov, kal kata ToD Xpiorod adrov. Bus. Aug. contr. Jul. i. 2. (p. 203, 2.)

Hist. iv. 22. z Negat Christum, qui non omnia

t ‘H ovvéxovea Thy éxxAnclay aperh, que Christi sunt confitetur. Amdér. in
4 riots éori. Herm. apud Clem. Strom. Lue. lib. vi. cap. 9. p. go. (Vid. p. 85.)
ii, p. 281. a Alia sunt in quibus inter se aliquando

U MeAGy GAAHAwy bvTwy jay, KalTd etiam doctissimi atque optimi regule
tv cGua cumorévrev Xpiorod 3a THs catholice defensores, salva fidei compage
mpos aitrdy wal GAAHAovs duodofias kal non consonant, &c. Aug. contr, Jul.i.2.
alarews. Conc. VI. Act. xviii. p. 271. p. 205. Totum hoc genus liberas habet

x Per omnia debemus ecclesiw catho- observationes. dug. ad Jan. Ep. 118.86.
lice unitatem tenere, nec in aliquo fig (ad Casal.)

rf{2

Johnxv.12.
1John iii.
Il.

1 Thess. iv.

John xiii.
35-

Phil. ii. 2.
1 Pet. iii. 8.
Gal. vi. 2,
10.

1Cor. xii.
26.

Actsiv. 32.

Eph. v. 2.
1Cor. xvi.
14.

436

A Discourse concerning

sound doctrines were distinguished from false: so that he was
accounted orthodox who did not violate them—.

>So he that holds that immovable rule of truth which he received
at his baptism, will know the words and sayings and parables which
are taken out of the scriptures, &c.

II. It is evident, that all Christians are united by the bands
of mutual charity and good-will.

They are all bound to wish one another well, to have a com-
placence in the good, and a compassion of the evils incident to
each other, to discharge all offices of kindness, succour, conso-
lation to each other.

This is the command of Christ to all ; (This is my command-
ment, saith he, That ye love one another ;) this is the common
badge by which his disciples are discerned and distinguished,
Hereby, saith he, shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye
love one another: they must have the same love: they must love
as brethren, be compassionate, pitiful, courteous each to other: they
must bear one another's burdens ; and especially, as they have op-
portunity, do good to the household of faith. If one member suffer,
all the members must suffer with it; and if one member be
honoured, all the members must rejoice. The multitude of
them who believe must be (like that in the Acts) of one heart
and of one soul. They must walk in love, and do all things in
love.

Whoever therefore doth highly offend against charity, ma-
ligning or mischieving his brethren, doth thereby separate
himself from Christ’s body, and cease to be a Christian.

They that are enemies to brotherly charity, whether they
are openly out of the church, or seem to be within, they are
Pseudo-Christians and Anti-Christs—When they seem to be
within the church, they are seaprated from that invisible con-
junction of charity; whence St. John, They went out from us,
but were not of us. He saith not, that by their going out they

b Sic autem qui regulam veritatis
immobilem apud se habet quam per
baptismum accepit, hec quidem que
sunt ex scripturis nomina et dictiones et
parabolas cognoscet, &c. Tren. i.1. Vid.
Gr. (p. 4-)

et Antichristi. Aug. de Bapt. iii. 19.—

Cum intus videntur, ab illa invisibili .

charitatis compage separati sunt; unde
Johannes, (1 John ii. 19.) Ex nobis
exierunt, sed non erant ex nobis.—
Non ait quod exeundo alieni facti sunt,
sed quod alieni erant, propter hoc eos
exisse declaravit. Ibid.

—

the Unity of the Church. 437

were made aliens, but because they were aliens, therefore he declarcth
that they went out.

Wherefore the most notorious violations of charity being
the causing of dissensions and factions in the church, the cause-
less separation from any church, the unjust condemnation of
churches whoever was guilty of any such unchristian beha-
viour was rejected by the fathers, and held to be no Christian.

Such were the Novatians, the Donatists, the Meletians, the
Luciferians—and other schismatics.

‘For what can be more acceptable and pleasant, than to see those
who are severed and scattered into so many places, yet knit and
joined together in the bond and union of charity, as harmonious
members of the body of Christ.

€In old time—when the church of God flourished, being
rooted in the same faith, united in love: there being, as it
were, one conspiracy or leaque of different members in one
body.

{For the communion of the Spirit is wont to knit and wnite men’s
minds ; which conjunction we believe to be between us and your
charitable affection.

® They therefore who by the bond of charity are incorporated into
the building settled upon the rock.

h But the members of Christ are joined together by the charity
of union, and by the same cleave close to their head, which is
Christ.

III. All Christians are united by spiritual cognation and 1 Pet. i. 23.
alliance; as being all regenerated by the same incorruptible seed, \°" * a
being alike born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the Gal. iii. 26.
will of man, but of God ; whence, as the sons of God, and brethren wager
of Christ, they become brethren one to another; so that it is a
peculiar title or appellation of Christians, the brethren signifying Heb. ii. 10,

II.

a Ti yap by yévorro xapiéorepoy, h rovs $= Thy aydrny budy wemoretxauev. Bas.

rogolTy TE WAGE: Tav Témwy Bicipype-
vous TH 5a Tis aydrns évooe Kabopav
eis wlay weA@y apuoviay év aduari Xpio-
tov dedéc0a. Bas. Ep. 220.

© "Em trav dpxaidy Kaipav jvika
hvOouv al exxAnola Tod cod eppiCauevat
TH mlore:, jvwudvar TH dydrn* bowep ev
évl oda: mias cvurvolas diapdpwv ue-
Adv brapxotons. Bas. Ep. 338.

‘H xara Tvetua ovvdpeia eumoeiv
mwégune Thy olxelwow, Iw huiv elvar mpds

Epist. 182.

&¢ Qui ergo compage charitatis incor-
porati sunt eedificio super petram consti-
tuto, &c. Aug. de Unit. cap. 18.

h Membra vero Christi per unitatis
charitatem sibi copulantur, et per ean-
dem capiti suo coherent, quod est
Christus. Aug. de Unit. cap. 2. Omnes
sancti sibi charitate cohwrent——. Aug.
de Bapt. vi. 3.

438 A Discourse concerning

1 Cor. vii. all Christian people; and a brother being the same with a

Rum. xiv, Christian professor.

10, &c. IV. The whole Christian church is one by its incorporation
into the mystical body of Christ; or as fellow-subjects of that
spiritual, heavenly kingdom, whereof Christ is the sovereign

They are head and governor; whence they are governed by the same

under a co- ° ee ae °

venant of laws, are obliged by the same institutions and sanctions; they

allegiance. partake of the same privileges, and are entitled to the same

Eph. iv. 4. promises, and encouraged by the same rewards ; (being called
in one hope of their calling.)

ead soir So they make up one spiritual corporation or republic,

roe, Rom, Whereof Christ is the sovereign Lord.

a aha iThough the place disjoin them, yet the Lord joins them together,

being their common Lord, &c.

Hence an habit of disobedience doth sever a man from this
body ; for, Not every one that saith, Lord, Lord, shall enter into
the kingdom of heaven, or continue therein. Every such person
who denieth God in works is a rebel, an outlaw, renouncing
his allegiance, forfeiting his title to God’s protection and
favour.

Matt. vii.
21.

Tit. i. 16.

John x. 27.
' voice.

He is separated from the body, by not holding the head.

\[t is a he, to call one’s self a Christian, and not to do the works
of Christ.

m [[¢ that does not the work of a Christian name, seems not to
be a Christian.

nWhen instead of the works themselves he begins to oppose even
the most apparent truth, whereby he is reproved, then he 1s cut off
(from the body, or the church).

Hence St. Austin often denieth wicked persons to be in the
church, or to appertain unto its unity.

°For when there is one and the same Lord, that dwelleth in

Col, ii. 9.

Vid. supra.

kHe is not @ sheep of Christ, because he doth not hear his.

i Ei 8 6 rémos xwpl(er, GAA’ 6 Kipios
avrovs cuvdrre Kowds dv, &c. Chrys. in
1 Cor. Orat. 1. Vid.

k Qui eum non sequitur, quomodo
se ovem ejus dicere audebit? Aug. de
Unit. Ecel. cap. 10.

1 Mendacium est, Christianum se
dicere, et opera Christi non facere.
Ambr.

m Qui Christiani nominis opus non

agit, Christianus non esse videtur. Salv.
de Guh. D. 4.

n —— Cum pro ipsis operibus etiam —

veritati apertissime, qua redarguitur,
resistere coeperit, tunc preciditur, Aug.
de Unit. Eccl. cap. 20.

© Nam quum Dominus unus atque
idem sit, qui habitat in nobis, conjungit
ubique et copulat suos vinculo unitatis.
Firmil. apud Cypr. Ep. 75.

es a

the Unity of the Church. 439

us, he every where joins and couples those that are his with the
bond of unity.

V. All Christians are linked together in peaceable concord
and confederacy ; so that they are bound to live in good cor-
respondence ; to communicate in works of piety and devotion;
to defend and promote the common interest of their profes-
sion.

Upon the entrance of the gospel by our Lord’s incarnation,
it was by a celestial herald proclaimed, Peace on earth, and Luke ii. 14.
good-will among men. It was our Lord’s office to preach Acts x. 36.
peace. It was a principal end and effect of his death to recon- rege
cule all men, and to destroy enmity. He specially charged his Eph. ii. r4.
disciples eipnvevew év addAnjdows, to maintain peace one with Markix.so.
another. It was his will at parting with them, Peace I leave John xiv.
with you. _

The apostles frequently do enjoin to pursue peace with all 2 Tim. ii.
them who call upon the Lord with a pure heart; to follow the ~”
things which make for peace and edification mutual ; to keep Rom. xiv.

_ the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Eph, iy. 3.

It was in the prophecies concerning the evangelical state
declared, that under it, the wolf should dwell with the lamb, Isa. xi. 6.
and the leopard should lie down with the kid, and the sucking pe: pel
child should play on the hole of the asp; that is, that men ofii. 4. They
all tempers and conditions, by virtue of this institution, should pea
be disposed to live innocently, quietly, and lovingly together ; ™°re-
so that they should not hurt or destroy in all God’s holy
mountain ; for that would be a duty incumbent on the dis-
ciples of this institution, which all good Christians would
observe.

The evangelical covenant, as it doth ally us to God, so it doth
confederate us together: the sacraments of this covenant are
also symbols of peace and amity between those who undertake
it. Of baptism it is said, that so many of you as have been Gal. iii. 27,
baptized into Christ have put on Christ ; and thence, Ye are >
all one in Christ Jesus. All in one spirit have been baptized Cor. xii.
into one body. And in the eucharist, by partaking of one in- ie
dividual food, they are transmuted into one body and sub-
stance; We, saith St. Paul, being many are one bread, one 1Cor. x. 17.
body ; for all of us do partake of one bread.

Phil. i. 27.

440 A Discourse concerning

PBy which sacraments also our people appear to be united :
for, as many grains collected, and ground, and mingled together,
make one bread; so in Christ, who is the bread of heaven, we
may know ourselves to be one body, that our company or number
be conjoined and united together.

4 With us there is both one church, and one mind, and undivided
concord.

"Let us hold the peace of the catholic church in the unity of
concord.

‘The bond of concord remaining, and the individual sacrament
of the catholic church continuing, &e.

‘He therefore that keeps neither the unity of the Spirit, nor
the conjunction of peace, and separates himself from the bond of
the church, and the college (or society) of priests, can have neither
the power of a bishop, nor the honour.

Thus in general. But particularly, all Christians should
assist one another in the common defence of truth, piety, and
peace, when they are assaulted, in the propagation of the faith,
and enlargement of the church, which is ovvadAciv rh alore
Tov evayyediov, to contend together for the faith of the gospel ; to

t Tim. i.18. 6¢ good soldiers of Christ ; warring the good warfare ;—striving

Vil. 12.

2Tim. iv. 7./or the faith once delivered to the saints.

Jude 3.

Cypr. Ep.
67.

Hence if any where any heresy or bad doctrine should
arise, all Christians should be ready to declare against it; that
it may not infect, or spread a doubt arising, as in the case of
celebrating Haster; " They all, with one consent, declared by
letters the decree of the church to all every where.

Especially the pastors of the churches are obliged with con-
sent to oppose it.

P Quo et ipso sacramento populus

8 Manente concordiz vinculo, et per-
noster adunatus ostenditur: ut quem-

severante catholicze ecclesiz individuo

admodum grana multa in unum col-
lecta, et commolita, et commixta, panem
unum faciunt ; sic in Christo, qui est
panis coelestis, unum sciamus esse cor-
pus, cui conjunctus sit noster numerus
et adunatus. Cypr. Ep. 63.

4 Nobis et ecclesia una, et mens
juncta, et individua concordia. Cypr.
Ep. 57.

r Catholice ecclesie pacem concor-
die unitate teneamus. Ep. 45.

sacramento, &c. Ep. 52. (ad Anton. p.
6.)

. t Qui ergo nec unitatem Spiritus, nec
coujunctionem pacis observat, et se ab
ecclesiz vinculo, atque a sacerdotum col-
legio separat, episcopi nec potestatem
potest habere, nec honorem, &c. lid.
Pp: 97:

“Tidvres Te mid youn B¢ emioroAGv
exkaAnoiarrixoy Bdypa trois maytaxdoe
dveruTovvro. Euseb. v. 23.

the Unity of the Church. 441

| xWhile we laboured here, and withstood the force of envy with
the whole strength of our faith, your speech assisted us very
much.

Thus did the bishops of several churches meet to suppress
the heresy of P. Samosatenus.

This was the ground of most synods.

YSo they who afterward in all places and several ways were
gathered together against the innovations of heretics, gave their
common opinion in behalf of the faith, as being of one mind:
what they had approved among themselves in a brotherly way,
that they clearly transferred to those who were absent: and they
who at the council of Sardis had earnestly contended against the
remainders of Arius, sent their judgment to those of the eastern
churches: and they who had then discovered the infection of
Apolinarius, made their opinions known to the western.

If any dissension or faction doth arise in any church, other
churches, upon notice thereof, should yield their aid to quench
and suppress it; countenancing the peaceable, checking and
disavowing the factious.

Thus did St.Cyprian help to discountenance and quash the
Novatian schism.

Thus when the oriental churches did labour under the Vid. Ep. 42.
Arian faction, and dissensions between the catholics, St. Basil op Nag
(with other orthodox bishops consorting with him) did write
to the western bishops (of Italy and France) to yield their
succour.

For this, my brother, we must earnestly endeavour, and ought
to endeavour, to have a care, as much as in us lies, to hold the
unity delivered to us from the Lord, and by the apostles, whose
successors we are; and what lies in us, &e.

All Christians should be ready, when opportunity doth

x Laborantes hic nos et contra invi- vioduevor Tots ev GvaToAR Ti Kplow &t-

diz impetum totis fidei viribus resisten-
tes, multum sermo vester adjuvit, &c.
Cypr. Ep. 23.

¥Y Obras of wera Tatra wayTax7 Toi-
KlAws él trois tTa&v alperixay GOpo.o8év-
Tes Kawlopact Kowhy as cimubuxor Thy
irip rijs wlarews Vipov Grep adeAgixas
éavtois éSoxluacay, Taira tTpayas Tois
amrovet diaropOuevoartes* Kal of wey ex
Zapdixis xara Tay Apelou Acabavwr ayw-

éreurov’ of 5¢ évravOa Thy ‘AmwoAwaplouv
Abunv owpdoavtes, Tois ev Sioe Thy Yij-
gov eyvépiCov. Syn. Chalced. ad Imper.
Conc. Chalced. pars iii. p. 78.

Z Hoc enim vel maxime, frater, labo-
ramus, et laborare debemus, ut unita-
tem a Domino, et per apostolos nobis
successoribus traditam, quantum possu-
mus, obtinere curemus ; et quod in no-
bis est, &c. Cypr. Ep. xlii. p. 78.

Ep. 398.

Cod. Afr.
Can. 101.

Cod. Afr.
Can. 123.

442 A Discourse concerning

invite, to admit one another to conjunction in offices of piety
and charity; in prayer, in communion of the eucharist, in
brotherly conversation, and pious conference for edification
or advice.

aSo that he who flies and avoids communion with us, you in

your prudence may know, that such a man breaks himself off.

FSrom the whole church.

St.Chrysostom doth complain of Epiphanius ;

b Then when he came to the great and holy city Constantinople,
he came not out into the congregation according to custom and the
ancient manner, he joined not himself with us, nor communicated
with us in the word, and prayer, and the holy communion, &e.

So Polyearp, being at Rome, did communicate with P. Ani-
cetus®.

If dissension arise between divers churches, another may
interpose to reconcile them; as did the church of Carthage,
between that of Rome and Alexandria.

If any bishop were exceedingly negligent in the discharge
of his office, (to the common damage of truth and piety,) his
neighbour bishops might admonish him thereto; and, if he
should not reform, might deprive him of communion.

All Christians should hold friendly correspondence, as oc-
casion doth serve, and as it is useful, to signify consent in
faith, to recommend persons, to foster charity, to convey
succour and advice, to perform all good offices of amity and
peace.

ASiricius, who is our companion and fellow-labourer, with
whom the whole world by mutual commerce of canonical or com-
municatory letters agree together with us in one common society.

€The catholic church being one body, tt is consequent thereto,
that we write and signify one to another, &e.

a“Qare 6 Thy mpds huas Kowwvlay Kntos Thy ebxapiotiay TH TModvKdpry,

amobiipdokwy wi) AavOavérw iuay Thy
axplBeay mdons éavtdoy rijs éxxAnolas
amoppnyvis. Bas. Ep. 75.

b Eira tis peydAns Kal Oeodirois
KwvoraytivovTéArcws émPais ov eis ex-
KAnolay e&7jA0e Kata 7d ciwds, Kal Tdy
bvwbev xpathoayta Oeopdy obx Huiv ovv-
evéveTo, ob Adyou perédwxev, e edyijs,
ov Kowwvlas, GAA’ &roBas Tod mAolov, &c.
Chrys. ad Innoc. P. (Ep. 122.)

c°Ev tH exxAnola mapexdpnoev 6’ Avi-

Kat’ évtpomhy SnAovdtt. Euseb. v. 24.

d Damaso Siricius hodie, qui noster
est socius, cum quo nobis totus orbis
commercio formatarum in una commu-

nionis societate concordant. Opt. lib, ii. .

. 40.
[ e ‘Evds cépatos byTos THs KaBoALKis
exnanolas axddrovddy ear. ypdpew Tuas
Kal onuaivery GAAhAots, &c, Alex. Alex-
andriz. Socr. i.6. Theod.

— tk

the Unity of the Church. 443

In cases of doubt or difficulty one church should have re-
course to others for advice; and any church should yield it.

Both common charity and reason requires, most dear brethren,
that we conceal nothing from your knowledge of those things
which are done among us, that so there may be common advice
taken by us concerning the most useful way of ordering ecclesi-
astical affairs.

One church should acquaint others of any extraordinary
transaction concerning the common faith or discipline ; re- Buseb. vii.
questing their approbation and countenances. 3°.

Thus did the eastern churches give account to all other
churches of their proceedings against P. Samosatenus.

Which letters are sent all the world over, and brought to the
notice of all the churches, and of all the brethren.

When any church, or any pastor, was oppressed or injured,
he might have recourse to other churches for their assistance,
in order to relief.

\Let him who is cast out have power to apply himself to the
neighbouring bishops, that his cause may be carefully heard and
discussed.

Thus did Athanasius (being overborne and expelled from
his see by the Arian faction) go for refuge to the church of
Rome.

St. Chrysostom had recourse to the bishop of Rome, and to
those of the west, as also to the bishop of Antioch.

VI. Now, because in the transacting of these things the
pastors have the chief hand, and act in behalf of the churches
which they inspect, therefore is the church united also by
their consent in doctrine, their agreement in peace, their
maintaining intercourse, their concurrence to preserve truth
and charity.

k We ought all to be vigilant

f Et dilectio communis et ratio ex-
poscit, fratres charissimi, nihil consci-
entiz vestre subtrahere de his que apud
nos geruntur, ut sit nobis circa utilita-
tem ecclesiasticz administrationis com-
mune consilium. Cyp. Ep. 29. (ad Cler.
Rom.)

& The practice of this we see fre-
quently in St.Cyprian’s Epistles ; par-
ticularly in Epist. 4,15, 23, 29, 3°, 42,
48. (P. Corn.)

h Que litere per totum mundum

and careful for the body of the

miss sunt, et in notitiam ecclesiis om-
nibus et universis fratribus perlate sunt.
Cypr. Ep. 52. (ad Anton. p.g2.) Serip-
simus ad Cornelium collegam nostrum,
&e. Ibid.

i Habeat potestatem is qui abjectus
est, ut episcopos finitimos interpellet, et
causa ejus audiatur ac diligenter tracte-
tur, &c. Cone. Sard. Can. 17. Vid.
Cod. Afr. can. 125.

k Omnes nos decet pro corpore totius
ecclesia, cujus per varias quasque pro-

Cypr. Ep.
41, 42, 52.
(p- 93-)
Theod. v. 9.
Euseb. de
P. Samos.

444

A Discourse concerning

whole church, where members are dispersed through many several

provinces.

k Seeing the church, which is one and catholic, is not rent nor
divided, but truly knit and united together by the bond of priests

united one to another.

' This agrees with the modesty and discipline and the very life
of all, that many of the bishops meeting together might order alt
things in a religious way by common advice.

mThat, since it having pleased God to grant us peace, we begin
to have greater meetings of bishops, we may also by your advice

order and reform every thing.

"Which that, with the rest of our colleagues, we may stead-
Jastly and firmly administer; and that we may keep the peace of
the church, in the unanimity of concord, the divine favour will

vouchsafe to accomplish.

°A great number of bishops—we met together.

Bishops being chosen did acquaint other bishops with it ;
Plt was sufficient, saith St. Cyprian to Cornelius, that you
should by your letters acquaint us that you were made a bi-

shop.

Declare plainly to us who is substituted at Arles in the room
of Marcian, that we may know to whom we should direct our
brethren, and to whom we should write.

All churches were to ratify the elections of bishops duly

made by others, and to communicate with those.

And like-

wise to comply with all reasonable acts for communion.
To preserve this peace and correspondence, it was a law and

vincias membra digesta sunt, excubare.
Cypr. Ep. 30. (Cler. Rom. ad Cypr. P.)
Quod servis Dei, et maxime sacerdoti-
bus. Cypr. Ep. 42. (ad Cornel.) Id-
circo copiosum corpus est sacerdotum,
&e. Cypr. Ep. 67. (p.161.)

k Quando ecclesia, que catholica una
est, scissa non sit, neque divisa, sed sit
utique connexa, et coherentium sibi
invicem sacerdotum glutino copulata.
Cypr. Ep. 69.

! Hoc verecundie et discipline et vite
ipsi omnium convenit—ut episcopi plu-
res in unum convenientes—disponere
omnia consilii communis religione pos-
simus. Cypr. Ep.14. (Clero suo.)

™m™ Ut cum pace a Domino nobis data
plures przpositi convenire in unum coe-
perimus, communicato etiam vobiscum

consilio disponere singula et reformare
possimus. Cypr. Ep.15. (Clero Rom.)

n Quod ut simul cum ceteris collegis
nostris stabiliter ac firmiter administre-
mus, atque ut catholic ecclesiz pacem
concordiz unanimitate teneamus, per-
ficiet divina dignatio. Cypr. Ep. 45.
(ad Cornel.)

P Satis erat, ut tu te episcopum fac-
tum literis nunciares. Cyprian. ad Cor-
nel. (Epist. 42.)

4 Significa plane nobis quis in locum
Marciani Arelate fuerit substitutus, ut
sciamus ad quem fratres nostros dirigere,
et cui scribere debeamus. Cypr. Ep.67.
ad P. Steph.

the Unity of the Church. 445

custom, that no church should admit to communion those
which were excommunicated by another; or who did schis-
matically divide.

tWe are all believed to have done the same thing, whereby we
are found to be all of us associated and joined together by the same
agreement in censure and discipline.

The decrees of bishops were sent to be subscribed‘.

VII. All Christian churches are one by a specifical unity of
discipline, resembling one another in ecclesiastical administra-
tions, which are regulated by the indispensable sanctions and
institutions of their sovereign.

They are all bound to use the same sacraments, according
to the forms appointed by our Lord, not admitting any sub-
stantial alteration.

They must uphold that sort of order, government, and min-
istry in all its substantial parts, which God did appoint in the x Cor. xii.
church, or give thereto, as St. Paul expresseth it; it being 8 Eo. ia oe
temerarious and dangerous thing to innovate in those matters Rom. xii.
which our Lord had a special care to order and settle. Acts. 28

‘Nor can they continue in the church that have not retained
divine and ecclesiastical discipline, neither in good conversation,
nor peaceable life.

In lesser matters of ceremony or discipline (instituted by Ep. Firmil.
human prudence) churches may differ, and it is expedient. they \\ (pas: aly
should do so, in regard to the various circumstances of things, ' ng et 86.
and qualities of persons to which discipline should be accom-*"?"™
modated; but no power ought to abrogate, destroy, or infringe,
or violate the main form of discipline, constituted by divine
appointment.

Hence, when some confessors had abetted Novatianus against
Cornelius, (thereby against a fundamental rule of the church,
necessary for preserving of peace and order therein, that but
one bishop should be in one church,) "St. Cyprian doth thus
complain of their proceeding—.

r Idem enim omnes credimur operati, qui deificam et ecclesiasticam discipli-

in quo deprehendimur eadem omnes cen- nam nec actus sui conversatione, nec
sure, et discipline consensione sociati. morum pace tenuerunt. 2. Cornel.
Cler. Rom. ad Cypr. Epist. 31- apud Cyprian. Ep. 48. Vid. Ep. 73. (ad

8 Vid. Cone, Sard. P.Leonis II. Ep.2. Jud.)
(ad Hisp. Epise.) N B. p. 385. (tom. v.) u Gravat enim me, atque contristat,
P. Bened. Il. Ep. 16. (p. 404.) &e. Ep. 44. (ad Confess. Rom.)

t Nec remanere in ecclesia possunt

446 A Discourse concerning

(To act any thing) ‘against the sacrament of divine ordination
and catholic unity, once delivered, makes an adulterate and contrary
head out of the church.

x Forsaking the Lord’s priests contrary to the evange-
lical discipline; a new tradition of a sacrilegious institution
starts up.

y There ts one God, and one Christ, and one church, and one
see founded upon Peter by the word of the Lord; besides one altar
and one priesthood, another altar cannot be erected, nor a new
priesthood ordained.

Hence were the Meletians rejected by the church, for intro-
ducing ordinations ;

Hence was Aérius accounted a heretic, for meaning to inno-
vate in so grand a point of discipline, as the subordination of
bishops and presbyters.

VIII. It is expedient that all churches should conform to
each other in great matters of prudential discipline, although
not instituted or prescribed by God: for this is a means of pre-
serving peace, and is a beauty or harmony. For difference of
practice doth alienate affections, especially in common people.

So the synod of Nice:

“That all things may be alike ordered in every diocese, it hath
seemed good to the holy synod, that men should put up their prayers
to God standing, (viz. between Easter and Whitsuntide, and
upon the Lord’s day.)

The church is like the world ; for as the world doth consist
of men, all naturally subject to one King, Almighty God ; all
obliged to observe his laws, declared by natural light ; all made
of one blood, and so brethren ; all endowed with common rea-
son; all bound to exercise good offices of justice and humanity
toward each other ; to maintain peace and amity together ; to
further each other in the prosecution or attainment of those

Vv Contra sacramentum semel tradi-
tum divin dispositionis et catholicz
unitatis adulterum et contrarium caput
extra ecclesiam facit. Cyprian. Epist.
42. (ad Cornel.)

x Relictis Domini sacerdotibus
contra evangelicam disciplinam nova
traditio sacrilege institutionis exsurgat.
Cypr. Ep. 40. (Plebi sue.)

y Deus unus est, et Christus unus, et
ecclesia una, et cathedra una super Pe-
trum Domini voce fundata; aliud al-

tare constitui, aut sacerdotium novum
fieri preter unum altare, ef unum sa-
cerdotium, non potest. Ibid.

Z “Crip Tov mayTa ev méon mapoila
bpolws TarTecOa, EoTaras Coke TH ayia
avvddw tas ebxas arodiidva TH Oeg@.
Can. 20. Tlpds robots Kakcivo mdpeore
guvopay, &s ev TnALKOUT@ Mpdyuari, Kal
rowattn Opnokelas éopTH Siapwvlay &p-
xew eorly a0éusrov. Const. M. in Epist.
ad Eccles. Euseb. Vita Constantini,
il. 18.

the Unity of the Church. 4A7

good things which conduce to the welfare and security of this
present life: even so doth the church consist of persons spi-
ritually allied, professing the same faith, subject to the same
law and government of Christ’s heavenly kingdom; bound to
exercise charity, and to maintain peace toward each other,
and to promote each other’s good in order to the future hap-
piness in heaven.

All those kinds of unity do plainly agree to the universal
church of Christ ; but the question is, Whether the church is
also necessarily, by the design and appointment of God, to be
in way of external policy under one singular government or
- jurisdiction of any kind; so as a kingdom or commonwealth
are united under the command of one monarch or one senate ?

That the church is capable of such an union, is not the
controversy; that it is possible it should be so united, (sup-
posing it may happen that all Christians may be reduced to
one nation, or one civil regiment; or that several nations
spontaneously may confederate and combine themselves into
one ecclesiastical commonwealth, administered by the same
spiritual rulers and judges according to the same laws,) I do
not question; that when in a manner all Christendom did
consist of subjects to the Roman empire, the church then did
arrive near such an unity, I do not at present contest ; but
that such an union of all Christians is necessary, or that it
was ever instituted by Christ, I cannot grant; and, for my
refusal of that opinion, I shall assign divers reasons.

1. This being a point of great consideration, and trenching
upon practice, which every one were concerned to know; and
there being frequent occasions to declare it; yet the holy
scripture doth nowhere express or intimate such a kind of
unity ; which is a sufficient proof that it hath no firm ground.
We may say of it, as St. Austin saith of the church itself,
aI will not that the holy church be demonstrated from human
reasonings, but the divine oracles.

St. Paul particularly, in divers Epistles, designedly treating Eph. iv.
about the unity of the church, (together with other points of Nec xii.
doctrine neighbouring thereon,) and amply describing it, doth Gal. iii. 28.
not yet imply any such unity then extant, or designed to be.

@ Nolo hamanis documentis, sed divinis oraculis sanctam ecclesiam demonstrari,
Aug. de Uni. cap. 3.

448 A Discourse concerning

He doth mention and urge the unity of spirit, of faith, of
charity, of peace, of relation to our Lord, of communion in
devotions and offices of piety; but concerning any union
under one singular visible government or polity he is silent:
he saith, One Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father
of all: not one monarch, or one senate, or one sanhedrin—
which is a pregnant sign that none such was then instituted ;
otherwise he could not have slipped over a point so very
material and pertinent to his discourse.

2. By the apostolical history it may appear, that the apo-
stles, in the propagation of Christianity, and founding of
Christian societies, had no meaning, did take no care, to
establish any such polity.

“Oxaov ixa- They did resort to several places, (whither divine instinct
og Actsxi. 9» reasonable occasion did carry them,) where, by their
Xeworovy}- preaching having convinced and converted a competent num-
votemvensy. Ce” Of persons to the embracing Christian doctrine, they

Tots mpeo Bu-
tépous kar’ did appoint pastors to instruct and edify them, to admin-

sea ister God’s worship and _ service among them, to contain

23: them in good order and peace, exhorting them to main-
tain good correspondence of charity and peace with all
good Christians otherwhere: this is all we can see done
by them.

3. The fathers, in their set treatises, and in their incidental
discourses about the unity of the church, (which was de facto,
which should be de jure in the churech,) do make it to consist’

_ only in those unions of faith, charity, peace, which we have
described, not in this political union.

The Roman church gave this reason why they could not
admit Marcion into their communion, they would not do it
without his father’s consent, between whom and them >there
was one faith and one agreement of mind.

‘Tertullian, in his Apologetic, describing the unity of the
church in his time, saith, °We are one body by our agreement
in religion, our unity of discipline, and our being in the same
covenant of hope.

And more exactly and largely in his Prescriptions ianaae

b ula ydp éorw 7) wloris Kat pla gionis et discipline unitate, et spei foe-
7 6udvora. Epiph. Her. 42. dere. Apol. 39.
¢ Corpus sumus de conscientia reli-

the Unity of the Church. 449

Heretics, the breakers of unity. ‘Therefore such and so many
churches are but the same with the first apostolical one, from
which all are derived: thus they become all first, all apostolical ;
whilst they maintain the same unity; whilst there are a com-
munion of peace, names of brotherhood, and contributions of hos-
pitality among them ; the rights of which are kept up by no other

same hope, the same baptism ;

church.

in a@ word, we are but one

And Constantine the Great in his Epistle to the churches:
(Our Saviour) ‘would have his catholic church to be one:
the members of which, though they be divided into many and
different places, are yet cherished by one spirit, that is, ”y the

will of God.
And Gregory the Great :

8Our head, which is Christ, would therefore have us be his
members, that by the joints of charity and faith he might make

us one body in himself.

Clemens Alexandrinus defineth the church ;

hA people gathered together out of Jews and Gentiles into one
faith, by the giving of the testaments fitted into unity of faith.

iThis one church therefore partakes of the nature of unity,

d Itaque tot ac tante ecclesie una
est illa ab apostolis prima, ex qua om-
nes ; sic omnes prime, et omnes aposto-
lice ; dum unam omnes probant unita-
tem ; communicatio pacis, et appellatio
fraternitatis et contesseratio hospitalita-
tis ; que jura non alia ratio regit, quam
ejusdem sacramenta una traditio. Ter-
tul. Prescript. cap. 20.

© Una nobis et illis fides, unus Deus,
idem Christus, eadem spes, eadem lava-
cri sacramenta; semel dixerim, una ec-
clesia sumus. Tert. de Virg. vel. 2.

f Kal ulay elvar thy naboAikhy airod
éxxAnolay BeBovAnra’ fs ei wal Ta wd-
dora els moAAOVS Kal Biapdpovs Térous
7a wépn Bixjpnrat, GAA’ Buws év Tved-
matt, Toutéat: TH Oelw BovAtmari OdA-
metait. Const. M. in Ep. ad Eccles.
Euseb. Vit. Const. iii. 18.

& Caput nostrum, quod Christus est,
ad hoc sua esse membra nos voluit, ut
per compagem charitatis et fidei unum

nos in se corpus efficeret. Greg. M.
Ep. vii. 111.

h ‘O é« vdéuou Kal e eOvay cis thy
ulay mlori cuvaryduevos Aads. Strom.
vi. init. Ty nara ras Siabhnas ddoes
oxevaCduevor eis évérnta Tis mloTews.
Ibid. vii. (p. 516.)

i TH your tod évds pioe cvyKAnpod-
Tat éxxAnola 7 ula, hy eis moAAdS KaTa-
téuvery BidCovra aipéceis’ Katd Te oby
iméoraciw, katd te énlyoiy, Kata Te
épx)y, (principium,) xard re efoxhy,
udvny elval pauev Thy apxalay Kal Kabo-
Auchy exxanolay els évérnta mictews
pads Tis Kata Tas olxelas BiabhKas, uaA-
Aov BF Kata thy diabheny Thy play
Siapdpais Tots xpdvois, évds TOU Ocod TP
BovAnuari 8¢ évds Tov Kuplov cuvd-you-
cay Tovs %3n Karatetayutvous, obs mpo-
dépicev, dixalous écoudvous mpd KataBo-
Ajis xéouou eyvwxdés. Strom. vii. (p.

549-)

450 4 Discourse concerning

which heresies violently endeavour to divide into many; and
therefore we affirm the ancient and catholic church, whether we
respect its constitution or our conception of it, its beginning or its
excellency, to be but one; which into the belief of that one creed
which is agreeable to its own peculiar testaments, or rather to
that one and the same testament, in times however different, by
the will of one and the same God, through one and the same Lord,
doth unite and combine together all those who are before or-
dained, whom God hath predestinated, as knowing that they would
be just persons, before the foundation of the world.

Many passages in the fathers, applicable to this point, we
have alleged in the foregoing discourses.

4. The constitution of such an unity doth involve the vest-
ing some person or some number of persons with a sovereign
authority, (subordinate to our Lord,) to be managed in a
certain manner; either absolutely, according to pleasure; or
limitedly, according to certain rules prescribed to it.

But that there was ever any such authority constituted, or
any rules prescribed to it by our Lord or his apostles, doth
not appear; and there are divers reasonable presumptions
against it.

It is reasonable, that whoever claimeth such authority
should for assuring his title shew patents of his commission,
manifestly expressing it ; how otherwise can he justly demand
obedience, or any with satisfaction yield thereto ?

It was just that the institution of so great authority should
be fortified with an undoubted charter, that its right might
be apparent, and the duty of subjection might be certain.

If any such authority had been granted by God, in all like-
lihood it would have been clearly mentioned in scripture; it
being a matter of high importance among the establishments
of Christianity, conducing to great effects, and grounding
much duty. Especially considering that

There is in scripture frequent occasion of mentioning it ;
in way of history, touching the use of it, (the acts of sove-
reign power affording chief matter to the history of any so-

k Catholicam facit simplex et verus morum. Opt. J. (p. 14.) Ecclesia non
intellectus, intelligere singulare, ac ve- parietibus consistit, sed in dogmatum
rissimum sacramentum, et unitas ani- veritate, &c. Hier. Ps. 133.

~~.

the Unity of the Church. 451

ciety ;) in way of direction to those governors how to manage
it; in way of exhortation to inferiors how to behave them-
selves in regard to it; in way of commending the advantages
which attend it: it is therefore strange that its mention is so
balked.

The apostles do often speak concerning ecclesiastical affairs
of all natures, concerning the decent administration of things,
concerning preservation of order and peace, concerning the
furtherance of edification, concerning the prevention and re-
moval of heresies, schisms, factions, disorders: upon any of
which occasions it is marvellous that they should not touch
that constitution which was the proper means appointed for
maintenance of truth, order, peace, decency, edification, and
all such purposes, for remedy of all contrary mischiefs.

There are mentioned divers schisms and dissensions, the
which the apostles did strive by instruction and persuasion to
remove ; in which cases, supposing such an authority in being,
it is a wonder that they do not mind the parties dissenting of
having recourse thereto for decision of their causes, that they
do not exhort them to a submission thereto, that they do not
reprove them for declining such a remedy.

It is also strange, that no mention is made of any appeal
made by any of the dissenting parties to the judgment of such
authority.

Indeed, if such an authority had then been avowed by the
Christian churches, it is hardly conceivable that any schisms
could subsist, there being so powerful a remedy against them;
then notably visible and most effectual, because of its fresh in-
stitution, before it was darkened or weakened by age.

W hereas the apostolical writings do inculeate our subjection
to one Lord in heaven, it is much they should never consider
his vicegerent, or vicegerents, upon earth ; notifying and press-
ing the duties of obedience and reverence toward them.

There are indeed exhortations to honour the elders, and to
obey the guides of particular churches; but the honour and
obedience due to those paramount authorities, or universal go-
vernors, is passed over in dead silence, as if no such thing had
been thought of.

They do expressly avow the secular preeminence, and press
submission to the emperor as supreme; why do they not like-

Gg 2

Rom. Wes I.
Tit. iii
rPet. ii. pe
17+

Acts i ii. 41,

vi. I. Viii. I.

Acts. ix. 31.

XV. 41. Xi.
19. Vili. I.
1Cor. xvi.

452 A Discourse concerning

wise mention this no less considerable ecclesiastical supremacy,
or enjoin obedience thereto? why honour the king, and be subject
to principalities, so often, but honour the spiritual prince or
senate doth never occur?

If there had been any such authority, there would probably
have been some intimation concerning the persons in whom it
was settled, concerning the place of their residence, concerning
the manner of its being conveyed, (by election, succession, or
otherwise.)

Probably the persons would have some proper name, title,
or character to distinguish them from inferior governors ; that
to the place some mark of preeminence would have been af-
fixed.

It is no unlikely that somewhere some rules or directions
would have been prescribed for the management of so high a
trust, for preventing miscarriages and abuses to which it is
notoriously liable.

It would have been declared absolute, or the limits of it
would have been determined, to prevent its enslaving God’s
heritage.

But of these things in the apostolical writings, or in any
near those times, there doth not appear any footstep or preg-
nant intimation.

There hath never to this day been any place but one, (namely
Rome, ) which hath pretended to be the seat of such an author-
ity; the plea whereof we largely have examined.

At present we shall only observe, that before the Roman
church was founded, there were churches otherwhere: there
was a great church at !Jerusalem, (which indeed was ™t¢he
mother of all churches, and was by the fathers so styled, how-
ever Rome now arrogates to herself that title.) There were
issuing from that mother a fair offspring of churches (those of
Judea, of Galilea, of Samaria, of Syria and Cilicia, of divers
other places) before there was any church at Rome, or that
St. Peter did come thither; which was at least divers years
after our Lord’s ascension. St. Paul was converted after
five years he went to Jerusalem, then St. Peter was there;

1 ’ErAnObveto apidurs tay pabnray ‘lepoooAtuos. Conc. open in Synod.
év “lepovoadnu opddpa. Acts vi. 7. Ep. Theod. v. 9.
m Mfrnp aracay Tay exxAnoi@y 7 ev

the Unity of the Church. 453

after fourteen years thence he went to Jerusalem again, and
then St. Peter was there; after that, he met with St. Peter at
Antioch. Where then was this authority seated? How then
did the political unity of the church subsist ? Was the seat of
the sovereign authority first resident at Jerusalem, when
St. Peter preached there? Did it walk thence to Antiochia,
fixing itself there for seven years? Was it thence translated
to Rome, and settled there ever since? Did this roving and
inconstancy become it ?

5. The primitive state of the church did not well comport
with such an unity.

For Christian churches were founded in distant places, as
the apostles did find opportunity, or received direction to
found them; which therefore could not, without extreme
inconvenience, have resort or reference to one authority, any-
where fixed.

Each church therefore separately did order its own affairs,
without recourse to others, except for charitable advice or re-
lief in cases of extraordinary difficulty or urgent need.

Each church was endowed with a perfect liberty, and a full
authority, without dependence or subordination to others, to
govern its own members, to manage its own affairs, to decide
controversies and causes incident among themselves, without
allowing appeals, or rendering accounts to others.

St.John to single churches; wherein they are sappouil able | 40. acc

to exercise spiritual power for establishing decency, removing * Thess. v.
disorders, correcting offences, deciding causes, &c. ay ee
6. This atrovopla, and liberty of churches, doth appear to™!
have long continued in practice inviolate; although tempered
and modelled in accommodation to the circumstances of place
and time.
It is true, that if any church did notoriously forsake the
truth, or commit disorder in any kind, other churches did
sometime take upon them (as the case did move) to warn,
advise, reprove it, and to declare against its proceedings,
as prejudicial, not only to the welfare of that church, but to
the common interests of truth and peace; but this was not
in way of commanding authority, but of fraternal solicitude ;
or of that liberty which equity and prudence do allow to

Tren. iii.
cap. 2.

454 A Discourse concerning

equals in regard to common good: so did the Roman church
interpose in reclaiming the church of Corinth from its dis-
orders and seditions: so did St. Cyprian and St. Denys of
Alexandria meddle in the affairs of the Roman church, ex-
horting Novatian and his adherents to return to the peace of
their church.

It is also true, that the bishops of several adjacent churches
did use to meet upon emergencies, (concerning the maintenance
of truth, order, and peace; concerning settlement and appro-
bation of pastors, &c.) to consult and conclude upon expedients
for attaining such ends; this probably they did at first in a
free way, without rule, according to occasion, as prudence sug-
gested; but afterwards, by confederation and consent, those
conventions were formed into method, and regulated by certain
orders established by consent, whence did arise an ecclesiastical
unity of government within certain precincts, much lke that
of the United States in the Netherlands; the which course
was very prudential, and useful for preserving the truth of
religion and unity of faith against heretical devices springing
up in that free age; for maintaining concord and good cor-
respondence among Christians, together with an harmony in
manners and discipline ; for that otherwise Christendom would
have been shattered and crumbled into numberless parties,
discordant in opinion and practice; and consequently alienated
in affection, which inevitably among most men doth follow dif-
ference of opinion and manners ; so that in short time it would
not have appeared what Christianity was, and consequently
the religion, being overgrown with differences and discords,
must have perished.

Thus in the case about admitting the Lapsi to communion,
St. Cyprian relates, "when the persecution [of Decius] ceased,
so that leave was now given us to meet in one place together, a
considerable number of bishops, whom their own faith and God’s
protection had preserved sound and entire, [from the late apo-
stasy and persecution,| being assembled, we deliberated of the
composition of the matter with wholesome moderation, &e.

n Persecutione sopita, cum data esset turis diu ex utraque parte prolatis, tem-
facultas in unum conveniendi, copiosus peramentum salubri moderatione libra-
episcoporum numerus, quos integros et vimus, &c. Cypr. Ep. 52. (ad Anto-

incolumes fide sua ac Domini tutela nian.)
protexit, in unum convenimus, et scrip-

the Unity of the Church. 455

°Which thing also Agrippinus of blessed memory with his
other fellow-bishops, who then governed the church of Christ in
the African province and in Numidia, did establish; and by
the well-weighed examination of the common advice of them all
together confirmed it.

Thus it was the custom in the churches of Asia, as Firmi-
lian telleth us in those words:

P Upon which occasion it necessarily happens, that every year
we the elders and rulers do come together to requlate those things
which are committed to our care; that if there should be any
things of greater moment, by common advice they be determined.—

Yet while things went thus, in order to common truth and
peace, every church in more private matters touching its own
particular state did retain its liberty and authority, without
being subject or accountable to any but the common Lord ; in
such cases even synods of bishops did not think it proper or
just for them to interpose, to the prejudice of that liberty and
power which derived from a higher source 4.

These things are very apparent, as by the course of ecclesi-
astical history, so particularly in that most precious monument
of antiquity, St. Cyprian’s Epistles; by which it is most evi-
dent, that in those times every bishop or pastor was conceived
to have a double relation or capacity; one toward his own
flock, another toward the whole flock :

One toward his own flock; by virtue of which, he taking vide Epist.
advice of his presbyters, together with "the conscience of his 2a a
people assisting, did order all things tending to particular edi-
fication, order, peace, reformation, censure, &c. without fear of
being troubled by appeals, or being liable to give any account,
but to his own Lord, whose vicegerent he was’.

© Quod quidem et Agrippinus bone
memorize vir cum ceteris coepiscopis
suis qui illo tempore in provincia Africa
et Numidia ecclesiam Domini guberna-
bant, statuit et librato consilii commu-
nis examine firmavit.
(ad Quint.)

P Qua ex causa necessario apud nos
fit, ut per singulos annos seniores et
prepositi in unum conveniamus, ad dis-
ponenda ea que cure nostree commissa
sunt; ut si qua graviora sunt communi
consilio dirigantur . Cypr. Ep. 75.

Cypr. Epist. 71.

4 Superest ut de hac ipsa re singuli
quid sentiamus, proferamus, neminem
judicantes aut a jure communionis ali-
quem si diversum senserit amoventes,—
&ec. Vid. Cone. Carthag. apud Cypr.
p. 399. Vid. Syn. Ant. Can. 9.

r Sub populi assistentis conscientia.
Cc ypr- Epist. 78.

Actum suum disponit, et dirigit
unusquisque episcopus, rationem propo-
siti sui Domino redditurus. Cypr. Ep.
52. Every bishop ordereth and direct-
eth his own acts, being to render an ac-

456

A Discourse concerning

Another toward the whole church, in behalf of his people ;
upon account whereof he did (according to occasion or order)
apply himself to confer with other bishops for preservation of
the common truth and peace, when they could not otherwise
be well upheld than by the joint conspiring of the pastors of

divers churches.

So that the case of bishops was like to that of princes;
each of whom hath a free superintendence in his own terri-
tory, but for to uphold justice and peace in the world, or
between adjacent nations, the intercourse of several princes is

needful.

The peace of the church was preserved by communion of
all parts together, not by the subjection of the rest to one

part.

7. This political unity doth not well accord with the nature
and genius of the evangelical dispensation.

=<" xvii. = Our Saviour affirmed, that his kingdom is not of this world ;
Rom. xiv. and St. Paul telleth us, that it consisteth in a spiritual influence
ee upon the souls of men; producing in them virtue, spiritual
joy, and peace.

It disavoweth and discountenanceth the elements of the
world, by which worldly designs are carried on, and worldly
frames sustained.

It requireth not to be managed by politic artifices, or fleshly
wisdom, but by simplicity, sincerity, plain dealing: as every
subject of it must lay aside all guile and dissimulation, so
especially the officers of it must do so, in conformity to the
2 Cor. i. 12. anostles, who had their conversation in the world (and prose-
lv. 2. 11. 17. ° : . . * : . .

cuted their design) in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with

1 Pet. ii. 1.

count of his purpose to the Lord. Cum
statutum sit omnibus nobis ac z2quum
sit pariter ac justum, ut uniuscujusque
causa illic audiatur, ubi est crimen ad-
missum; et singulis pastoribus portio
gregis sit adscripta, quam regat unus-
quisque prepositus rationem actus sui
Domino redditurus. Cypr. Ep. 55. ad
Since it is ordained by us all,
and it is likewise just and equal that
every man’s cause should be there
judged where the crime is committed,
and to each pastor a portion of the
flock is assigned, which is to rule and
govern, being to give an account of his

act to the Lord. Qua in re nec nos
vim cuiquam facimus, nec legem da-
mus, cum habeat in ecclesiz admin-
istratione voluntatis suze liberum arbi-
trium unusquisque preepositus, rationem
actus sui Domino redditurus. Cypr.
Ep. 72. ad Steph. P. Vide Ep. Ixxiii.
p- 186. Ep. Ixxvi. p. 212. In which.
matter neither do we offer violence to
any man, or prescribe any law, since
every bishop hath in the government of
his church the free power of his will,
being to render an account of his own
act unto the Lord.

the Unity of the Church. 457

Jleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God ; not walking in crafti- 1 Thess. ii.
ness, or handling the word of God deceitfully, &e. 3) 5+

It needeth not to be supported or enlarged by wealth and
pomp, or by compulsive force and violence; for God hath 1 Cor. i.27,
chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; pat. F ‘.
and the weak things of the world to confound the mighty ; and
base, despicable things, &e. that no flesh should glory in his
presence.

And, The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty 2 Cor. x. 4.
through God, &c.

It discountenanceth the imposition of new laws and pre-
cepts, beside those which God hath enjoined, or which are ne-
cessary for order and edification ; derogating from the liberty Matt. xv. 9.
of Christians and from the simplicity of our religion. pee “>

The government of the Christian state is represented purely Gal. fv. i.
spiritual ; administered by meek persuasion, not by imperious
awe; as an humble ministry, not as stately domination; for
the apostles themselves did not lord it over men’s faith, but 2 Cor. i.24.
did cooperate to their joy; they did not preach themselves, 2 Cor. iv. s.
but Christ Jesus to be the Lord; and themselves their servants

Sor Jesus.
It is expressly forbidden to them to domineer over God’s ; Pet. v. 3.
tag 5 a
They are to be qualified with gentleness and patience ; they 2 Cor. vi. 4.

are forbidden to strive, and enjoined to be gentle toward all, be es 3

apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose 2 Tim. ii.
themselves. aaa Isid.
They are to convince, to rebuke, to exhort with all long-suffering 2 Tim. iv. 2.
and doctrine‘.
They are furnished with no arms beside the "divine pan-

oply ; they bear no sword but that of the Spirit, which ts the Epn. vi. 17.

word of God, they may teach, reprove, they cannot
compel
They are not to be entangled in the cares of this life *. 2 Tim. ii. 4.

But supposing the church was designed to be one in this

t Episcopus prmest volentibus, non ovt« épetra: rpds Slay éravopGodvy ra Trav
nolentibus. Hier. Ep. 3. (ad Nepot.) dyuapravdvtwy wralouara——. Chrys.
u "AvaAdBere thy wayorwAlay @cov. de Sacerd.2. "Evraida ob BiaCdpuevor,
Eph. vi. 13. GAAG weldovra Bei woveiy Guelvw TY ToK-
X Mddiora yap ardytwy Xpictiavois odrov. Ibid.

458 A Discourse concerning

manner of political regiment, it must be quite another thing,
nearly resembling a worldly state, yea, in effect soon resolving
“Erepdy 1» itself into such an one: supposing, as is now pretended, that
a quid its management is committed to an ecclesiastical monarch, it
&xas oi must become a worldly kingdom; for such a polity could not
... be upheld without applying the same means and engines, with-
IV.15. out practising the same methods and arts, whereby secular
governments are maintained. .

Its majesty must be supported by conspicuous pomp and
phantastry.

Its dignity and power must be supported by wealth; which
it must corrade and accumulate by large incomes, by exaction
of tributes and taxes.

It must exert authority in enacting of laws for keeping its
state in order, and securing its interests, backed with rewards
and pains; especially considering, its title being so dark, and
grounded on no clear warrant, many always will contest it.

It must apply constraint and force, for procuring obedience,
and correcting transgression.

It must have guards to preserve its safety and authority.

It must be engaged in wars, to defend itself, and make good
its interests.

It must use subtlety and artifice, for promoting its interests,
and countermine the policies of adversaries.

It must erect judicatories, and must decide causes with for-
mality of legal process; whence tedious suits, crafty pleadings,
quirks of law and pettifoggeries, fees and charges, extortion
and barretry, &c. will necessarily creep iny.

Omnis pul- AJ] which things do much disagree from the original consti-

“sepa tution and design of the Christian church, which is averse

iw from pomp, doth reject domination, doth not require craft,

6s. wealth, or force, to maintain it ; but did at first, and may sub-
sist without any such means.

I do not say that an ecclesiastical society may not lawfully,
for its support, use power, policy, wealth, in some measure to
uphold or defend itself; but that a constitution needing such

y Is modus qui frequentatur execra- odus, quod spiritualia sine carnalibus
bilis plane, et qui non dico ecclesiam, sustineri nequeant. Syn. Bas. sess.
sed nec forum deceret, &c. Bern. de xiii. p. 108.

Consid. i. 9. Attendens itaque S. syn-

the Unity of the Church. 459

things is not divine ; or that, so far as it doth use them, it is
no more than human.

Thus in effect we see that it hath succeeded from the pre-
tence of this unity; the which hath indeed transformed the
church into a mere worldly state ; wherein the monarch bear-
eth the garb of an emperor, in external splendour surpassing
all worldly princes ; crowned with a triple crown’.

He assumeth the most haughty titles of, Our most holy
Lord, the Viear-general of Christ, &c. and he suffereth men
to call him the Monarch of kings, &e.

He hath respects paid him, like to which no potentate doth
assume, (having his feet kissed, riding upon the backs of men,
letting princes hold his stirrup and lead his horse*.)

He hath a court, and is attended with a train of courtiers Cardin. vid.
surpassing in state and claiming precedence to the peers of Wis
any kingdom.

He is encompassed with armed guards: Switzers.

He hath a vast revenue, supplied by tributes and imposts,
‘sore and grievous ; the exaction of which hath made divers
nations of Christendom to groan most lamentably.

He hath raised numberless wars and commotions for the
promotion and advancement of his interests.

He administereth things with all depth of policy to advance
his designs.

’He hath enacted volumes of laws and decrees, to which
obedience is exacted with rigour and forcible constraint.

He draweth grist from all parts to his courts of judgment,
wherein all formalities of suspense, all the tricks of squeezing
money, &c. are practised, to the great trouble and charge of
parties concerned.

Briefly, it is plain that he doth exercise the proudest,
mightiest, subtlest domination that ever was over Christ-
jans¢.

8. The union of the whole church in one body, under one

z One crown doth serve an emperor,
but he must have a triple: to kiss the
hands of a king is a sufficient respect,
but you cannot salute him without kiss-
ing his blessed feet.

® That which Seneca did take for a
piece of enormous pride in Caligula.
De Benef. ii. 12.

» Sub mortali. He imposes rigorous
oaths of fealty and obedience.

c Exaltatio, et inflatio, et arrogans
ac superba jactatio, non de Christi ma-
gisterio, qui humilitatem docet, sed de
Antichristi spiritu nascitur. Cypr. Ep.
ss. (ad IP. Corne?/.)

Tit. ii. 12.

460 A Discourse concerning

government or sovereign authority, would be inconvenient
and hurtful ; prejudicial to the main designs of Christianity ;
destructive to the welfare and peace of mankind in many
respects.

This we have shewed particularly concerning the pretence
of the papacy ; and those discourses being applicable to any
like universal authority, (perhaps with more advantage, mon-
archy being less subject to abuse than other ways of govern-
ment,) I shall forbear to say more.

9. Such an union is of no need, would be of small use, or
would do little good, in balance to the great mischiefs and
inconveniences which it would produce.

This point also we have declared in regard to the papacy ;
and we might say the same concerning any other like authority
substituted thereto.

10. Such a connection of churches is not anywise needful
or expedient to the design of Christianity; which is to reduce
mankind to the knowledge, love, and reverence of God ; to a
just and loving conversation together; to the practice of so-
briety, temperance, purity, meekness, and all other virtues ;
all which things may be compassed without forming men into
such a policy.

It is expedient there should be particular societies, in which
men may concur in worshipping God, and promoting that de-
sign by instructing and provoking one another to good prac-
tice, in a regular, decent, and orderly way.

It is convenient that the subjects of each temporal sove-
reignty should live, as in a civil, so in a spiritual uniformity,
in order to the preservation of good-will and peace among
them, (for that neighbours differing in opinion and fashions
of practice will be apt to contend each for his way, and
thence to disatfect one another,) for the beauty and pleasant
harmony of agreement in divine things, for the more commo-
dious succour and defence of truth and piety by unanimous
concurrence.

But that all the world should be so joined is needless; and
will be apt to produce more mischief than benefit.

11. The church, in the scripture sense, hath ever continued
one; and will ever continue so; notwithstanding that it hath
not had this political unity.

the Unity of the Church. 461

12. It is in fact apparent that churches have not been thus
united, which yet have continued catholic and Christian.

It were great no less folly than uncharitableness to say
that the Greek church hath been none.

There is no church that hath in effect less reason than that
of Rome to prescribe to others.

13. The reasons alleged in proof of such an unity are in-
sufficient and inconcluding ; the which (with great diligence,
although not with like perspicuity) advanced by a late divine
of great repute, and collected out of his writings with some
eare, are those which briefly proposed do follow; together
with answers declaring their invalidity.

Arg. 1. The name church is attributed to the whole body of Epil. p. 38.

Christians: which implieth unity.

Answ. This indeed doth imply an unity of the church, but
determineth not the kind or ground thereof: there being se-
veral kinds of unity; one of those which we have touched, or
several, or all of them, may suffice to ground that compre-
hensive appellation.

Lat. p. 114.

Arg. II. Our creeds do import the belief of such an unity ; Epil. Lat.
for in the apostolical we profess to believe the holy catholic '++

church ; in the Constantinopolitan, the holy catholic and apo-
stolic church.
Answ.1. The most ancient summaries of Christian faith,

extant in the first fathers, (Irenzeus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Wc.) Iren. Tert.

do not contain this point.

The word catholic was not originally in the Apostolical (or
Roman) Creed, but was added after Ruffin and St. Austin’s
time.

This article was inserted into the creeds upon the rise of
heresies and schisms, to discountenance and disengage from
them.

Answ. 2. We do avow a catholic church in many respects
one; wherefore not the unity of the church, but the kind and
manner of unity being in question, the Creed doth not oppose
what we say, nor can with reason be alleged for the special
kind of unity which is pretended.

Answ. 3. That the unity mentioned in the Constantinopoli-
tan Creed is such as our adversaries contend for, of external

Cypr. Conc.
Nic.

462 A Discourse concerning

policy, is precariously assumed, and relieth only upon their
iterpretation obtruded on us.

Answ. 4. The genuine meaning of that article may reason-
ably be deemed this; That we profess our adhering to the
body of Christians, which diffused over the world doth retain
the faith taught, the discipline settled, the practices appointed
by our Lord and his apostles; that we maintain general cha-
rity toward all good Christians, that we are ready to entertain
communion in holy offices with all sueh ; that we are willing
to observe the laws and orders established by authority or
consent of the churches, for maintenance of truth, order, and
peace ; that we renounce all heretical doctrines, all disor-

Mapasvva- derly practices, all conspiracy with any factious combinations
wr of people.

Answ. 5. That this is the meaning of the article may suffi-
ciently appear from the reason and occasion of introducing it;
which was to secure the truth of Christian doctrine, the au-
thority of ecclesiastical discipline, and the common peace of
the church; according to the discourses and arguments of the
fathers, (Irenzeus, Tertullian, St.Austin, Vincentius Lirinensis,)
the which do plainly countenance our interpretation. _

Answ. 6. It is not reasonable to interpret the article so as
will not consist with the state of the church in the apostolical
and most primitive ages, when evidently there was no such a
political conjunction of Christians.

Ep. p.40. Arg. III. The apostles delivered one rule of faith to all

aa P-'4 churches, the embracing and professing whereof, celebrated
in baptism, was a necessary condition to the admission into
the church, and to continuance therein; therefore Christians
are combined together in one political body.

Answ.1.The consequence is very weak; for from the
antecedent it can only be inferred, that (according to the
sentiment of the ancients) all Christians should consent in
one faith ; which unity we avow; and who denieth?

Answ. 2. By like reason all mankind must be united in one
political body ; because all men are bound to agree in what
the light of nature discovereth to be true and good; or be-
cause the principles of natural religion, justice, and humanity
are common to all.

the Unity of the Church. 463

Arg. 1V. God hath granted to the church certain powers a p- 37;
and rights as jura majestatis ; namely, the power of the keys, 49 pelt 2
(to admit into, to exclude from the kingdom of heaven;) ais.
power to enact laws, (for maintenance of its order and peace, ra eee
for its edification and welfare;) a power to correct and excom-
municate offenders ; a power to hold assemblies for God’s ser-
vice ; a power to ordain governors and pastors. Lat. p. 54.

Answ. 1. These powers are granted to the church, because
granted to each particular church, or distinct society of Christ-
ians ; not to the whole, as such, or as distinct from the parts.

Answ. 2. It is evident, that by virtue of such grants par-
ticular churches do exercise those powers; and it is impossible
to infer more from them than a justification of their practice.

Answ. 3. St. Cyprian often from that common grant doth
infer the right of exercising discipline in each particular church;
which inference would not be good but upon our supposition ;
nor indeed otherwise would = particular church have ground
for its authority.

Answ. 4. God hath granted the like rights to all princes and
states; but doth it thence follow that all kingdoms and states
must be united in one single regiment? The consequence is
just the same as in our case.

Arg. V. All churches were tied to observe the same laws or gp, p. 42
rules of practice, the same orders of discipline and customs ; 4%

p- ISI,
therefore all do make one corporation.

Answ. 1. That all churches are bound to observe the same * aes =
divine institutions, doth argue only an unity of relation to the
same heavenly King, or a specifical unity and similitude of
policy, the which we do avow.

Answ. 2. We do also acknowledge it convenient and decent,
that all churches in principal observances, introduced by hu-
man prudence, should agree so near as may be; an uniformity
in such things representing and preserving unity of faith, of
charity, of peace.

Whence the governors of the primitive church did endeavour
such an uniformity; °as the fathers of Nice profess in the canon

forbidding of genuflexion on Lord’s days, and in the days of
Pentecost.

464 A Discourse concerning

Answ. 3. Yet doth not such an agreement, or attempt at it,
infer a political unity ; no more than when all men, by virtue
of a primitive general tradition, were tied to offer sacrifices and
oblations to God, that consideration might argue all men to
have been under the same government; or no more than the
usual agreement of neighbour nations in divers fashions doth
conclude such an unity.

Answ. 4, In divers customs and observances several churches
did vary, with allowance; which doth rather infer a difference
of polity, than agreement in other observances doth argue an
unity thereof¢,

Answ. 5. St.Cyprian doth affirm, that in such matters every
bishop had a power to use his own discretion, without being
obliged to comply with others.

Ep. p. 39. Arg. VI. The Jewish church was one corporation; and in
Lat. P-159 correspondence thereto the Christian church should be’such.

Answ. 1. As the Christian church doth in some things cor-
respond to that of the Jews, so it differeth in others, being
designed to excel it: wherefore this argumentation cannot
be valid; and may as well be employed for our opinion as
against it.

Answ. 2. In like manner it may be argued, that all Christ-
ians should annually meet in one place; that all Christians
should have one archpriest on earth; that we should all be
subject to one temporal jurisdiction ; that we should all speak
one language, &e.

Answ. 3. There is a great difference in the case; for the
Israelites were one small nation, which conveniently might
be embodied; but the Christian church should consist of all
nations, which rendereth correspondence in this particular
unpracticable, at least without great inconvenience.

Answ. 4. “Before the law, Christian religion, and conse-

Cypr. Ep.
73:

Eus. Hist.
i. 4.

a Vide Aug. Epist. lxxxvi. (ad Casul.)
Ep. cxviii. ad Jan. Cypr. Ep. Ixxv. p.
198. Iren. apud Euseb. v. 24. Socr. v.
22. vii. 19. Cetera jam discipline et
conversationis admittunt novitatem cor-
rectionis, hac lege manente, &c. Ter.
de Virg. vel. Thorn. Lat. p. 219. P.
Greg. I. In una fide nihil officit sanctee
ecclesiz consuetudo diversa. P. Greg. I.
Epist. i.41. P. Leo LX. Epist. i. cap.
29. Nil obsunt saluti credentium di-

verse pro loco et tempore consuetudi-
nes, quando una fides per dilectionem
operans bona que potest uni Deo com-
mendat omnes. P. Nic. J. Ep.6. De
consuetudinibus quidem, quem nobis
opponere visi estis, scribentes per di-
versas ecclesias diversas esse consuetu-
dines, si illis canonica non resistit aucto-
ritas, pro qua eis obviare debeamus, nil
judicamus vel eis resistimus, &c.

the Unity of the Church. 465

quently a Christian church, did in substance subsist ; but Baron.
what unity of government was there then? aia

Answ. 5. The temporal union of the Jews might only
figure the spiritual unity of Christians in faith, charity, and
peace.

Arg. VII. All ecclesiastical power was derived from the Ep. p-5:—
same fountains, by succession from the apostles; therefore ol p.157.
the church was one political body.

Answ.1. Thence we may rather infer that churches are Iren. iii. 3.
not so united, because the founders of them were several per- ine bipe
sons endowed with coordinate and equal power.

Answ. 2. The apostles did in several churches constitute
bishops, independent from each other; and the like may be
now, either by succession from those, or by the constitutions
of human prudence, according to emergencies of occasion and
circumstances of things.

Answ. 3. Divers churches were aitévoyot’ and all were so
according to St. Cyprian.

Answ. 4. All temporal power is derived from Adam and
the patriarchs, ancient fathers of families: doth it thence
follow that all the world must be under one secular govern-
ment !

Arg. VIII. All churches did exercise a power of excommu- Ep. p. 59,

nication, or of excluding heretics, schismatics, disorderly and }*>

Lat. p. 185,
scandalous people. 195.
Answ. 1. Each church was vested with this power: this
doth therefore only infer a resemblance of several churches in

discipline; which we avow.

Answ. 2. This argueth that all churches took themselves
to be obliged to preserve the same faith, to exercise charity
and peace, to maintain the like holiness of conversation: what
then! do we deny this?

Answ. 3. All kingdoms and states do punish offenders
against reason and justice, do banish seditious and disorderly
persons, do uphold the principles and practice of common
honesty and morality: doth it thence follow that all nations
must come under one civil government® ?

¢ Excommunication of other churches tuitur demonstranti causas, quibus id
is only a declaration against the de- acciderat, jam esse detersas, et profi-
viation from Christian truth, or piety, tenti conditiones pacis impletas. ?. Jan.
or charity. Communio suspensa resti- /. Ep. 16. (de Attico Constant. Ep.)

nuh

Ep. p. 69.
Lat. p. 222.

Ep. p. 64.
Lat. p. 221.

466 A Discourse concerning

Arg. 1X. All churches did maintain. intercourse and com-
merce with each other by formed, communicatory, pacificatory,
commendatory, synodical epistlest.

Answ.1. This doth signify, that the churches did by ad-
monition, advice, &c. help one another in maintenance of the
common faith; did endeavour to preserve charity, friendship,
and peace: this is all which thence may be concluded.

Answ. 2. Secular princes are wont to send ambassadors
and envoys with letters and instructions for settlement of cor-
respondence and preserving peace; they sometimes do re-
commend their subjects to other princes; they expect offices
of humanity toward their subjects travelling or trading any
where in the world ; common reason doth require such things ;
but may common union of polity from hence be inferred ?

Arg. X. The effectual preservation of unity in the primitive
church is alleged as a strong argument of its being united in
one government.

Answ. 1. That unity of faith and charity and discipline,
which we admit, was indeed preserved, not by influence of any
one sovereign authority, (whereof there is no mention,) but by
the concurrent vigilance of bishops, declaring and disputing
against any novelty in doctrine or practice which did start up ;
by their adherence to the doctrine asserted in scripture, and
confirmed by tradition; by their aiding and abetting one an-
other as confederates against errors and disorders creeping in.

Answ. 2. The many differences which arose concerning the
observation of Easter, the rebaptization of heretics, the re-
conciliation of revolters and scandalous criminals ; concerning
the decision of causes and controversies, &c., do more clearly
shew that there was no standing common jurisdiction in the

f Litere formate. Optat. 2. Conc.
Milev. Can.20. Communicatorie. Aug.
Ep. 162,163. Kal ra mapa tobrou kol-
vwvikd. Euseb. vii. 30. Cypr. Ep. 55,
67. Vpdypara cvorarind. Apost. Can.
12. Eipnyvinat. Conc. Chald. Can. 11.
Svvodinal. Soz. vii. 11. Cone. VI, Act.
11. (p. 158, 198, 223.) Greg. M. (Ep.
) P. Zach. Baron. ann. 743. sect. 29.
Significa plane nobis quis in locum Mar-
ciani Arelate fuerit substitutus, ut scia-
mus ad quem fratres nostros dirigere, et
cui scribere debeamus . Cypr. Ep.
42, 67. ad P. Steph. (p. 161.) Ep. 55.

(N.B. p.113.) ‘Evds cdparos dytos rijs
KaboAuKhs exkAnolas, évtToAns Te ovons
év Tais Oelas ypapais Tnpeivy obySecnov
THs duovolas Kai eiphyns, axddrovOdy éort
ypdpew judas, Kal onualvery GAAHAUS TH
map éxaoros yryvoueva, &c. Alexandri
Epist. Socr. i.6. The catholic church
being one body, there being moreover a
command in the holy scriptures to pre-
serve the bond of peace and concord ;
hence it follows, that what things (hap-
pen to, or) are done by any of us, we
ought to write, and signify to each
other.

the Unity of the Church. 467

church: for had there been such an one, recourse would have
been had thereto; and such differences by its authority would
easily have been quashed.

Arg. XI. Another argument is grounded on the relief which Ep. p. 119.
one church did yield to another, which supposeth all churches ee
under one government, imposing such tribute.

Answ. 1. This is a strange fetch: as if all who were under
obligation to relieve one another in need were to be under
one government! Then all mankind must be so.

Answ. 2. It appeareth by St. Paul, that these succours were
of free charity, favour, and liberality; and not by constraints.

Arg. XII. The use of councils is also alleged as an argu- Ep. p. 51.
ment of this unity. edt

Answ. 1. General councils (in case truth is disowned, that Avg.
peace is disturbed, that discipline is loosed or perverted) are
wholesome expedients to clear truth and heal breaches: but
the holding them is no more an argument of political unity
in the church, than the treaty of Munster was a sign of all
Europe being under one civil government.

Answ. 2. They are extraordinary, arbitrary, prudential
means of restoring truth, peace, order, discipline; but from
them nothing can be gathered concerning the continual ordi-
nary state of the church.

Answ. 3. For during a long time the church wanted them ;
and afterwards had them but rarely; " For the first three hun-
dred years, saith Bellarmine, there was no general assembly ;
afterwards scarce one in a hundred years.

And since the breach between the oriental and western
churches, for many centenaries there hath been none.

Yet was the church from the beginning one, till Constan-
tine, and long afterwards.

Answ. 4. The first general councils (indeed all that have
been with any probable show capable of that denomination)
were congregated by emperors, to cure the dissensions of
bishops: what therefore can be argued from them, but that
the emperors did find it good to settle peace and truth, and
took this for a good mean thereto ‘

& 2 Cor. viii. 3. Ad@alperor. Ver. 8. oivas roijour.
Ob Kar’ éxiraryhy. 2 Cor. ix.7. “Exacros h Primis trecentis annis nulla fuit
xabos poaperrar. Rom. xv. 26. Ev3d- congregatio generalis; postea vero vix
knoay. Acts xi. 29. xxiv. 17. "EAenuo- centesimo anno. De Rom. P. i. 8.

uhe@

Bell. de
Cone. i. 13.

List. Trid.
p- 67.

A free
council.

P. Leo I.
Ep.

468 A Discourse concerning

Alb. Pighius said that general councils were an invention
of Constantine; and who can confute him ?

Answ. 5. They do shew rather the unity of the empire than
of the church ; or of the church as national under one empire,
than as catholic; for it was the state which did call and
moderate them to its purposes.

Answ. 6. It is manifest that the congregation of them
dependeth on the permission and pleasure of secular powers ;
and in all equity should do so, (as otherwhere is shewed.)

Answ. 7. It is not expedient that there should be any of
them, now that Christendom standeth divided under divers
temporal sovereignties ; for their resolutions may intrench on
the interests of some princes; and hardly can they be accom-
modated to the civil laws and customs of every state.

Whence we see that France will not admit the decrees of
their Tridentine synod.

Answ. 8. There was no such inconvenience in them while
Christendom was in a manner confined within one empire ;
for then nothing could be decreed or executed without the
emperor’s leave, or to his prejudice.

Answ. 9. Yea, (as things now stand,) it is impossible there
should be a free council; most of the bishops being sworn
vassals and clients to the pope; and by their own interests
concerned to maintain his exorbitant grandeur and domi-
nation.

Answ.10. In the opinion of St. Athanasius‘, there was no
reasonable cause of synods, except in case of new heresies
springing up, which may be confuted by the joint consent of
bishops.

Answ. 11. As for particular synods, they do only signify
that it was useful for neighbour bishops to conspire in promot-
ing truth, order, and peace, as we have otherwhere shewedl.

Councils have often been convened for bad designs, and

i The validity of synodical decrees (as
spiritual) doth proceed from the obliga-
tion to each singular bishop; as if princes
in confederacy do make any sanction,
the subjects of each are bound to ob-
serve them, not from any relation to the
body confederating, but because of their
obligation to their own prince consent-
ing:

k Al 6¢ viv kiwotpeva wap abtav oby-

050: molay €xovow ebAoyor aitiav, &c.
Athan. de Syn. p. 873.

1 Subrependi enim occasiones non pree-
termittit ambitio, et quoties ob intercur-
rentes causas generalis congregatio facta
fuerit sacerdotum, difficile est ut cupi-
ditas improborum non aliquid supra
mensuram suam non moliatur appetere.
Leo M. Ep. 62. (ad Maximum Ant.
Ep.

the Unity of the Church. 469

been made engines to oppress truth and enslave Christen-
dom.

That of Antioch against Athanasius: of Ariminum for
Arianism. The second Ephesine, to restore Eutyches and re-
ject Flavianus. The second of Nice, to impose the worship of
babies. The synod of Ariminum, to countenance Arians. So
the fourth synod of Lateran, (sub Inn. IIT.) to settle the pro-
digious doctrine of transubstantiation, and the wicked doctrine
of papal authority over princes. The first synod of Lyons, to
practise that hellish doctrine of deposing kings. The synod of
Constance, to establish the maim of the eucharist ; against the
Calistines of Bohemia. The Lateran (under Leo X.) was
called (as the archbishop of Patras affirmed) for the exaltation Pro aposto-

of the apostolical see. The synod of Trent, to settle a raff of 2% Sus |
errors and superstitions. —_ _

Obj. 11. It may further be objected, that this doctrine doth}; p. yee
favour the conceits of the independents concerning ecclesi-
astical discipline.

I answer, No. For,

1. We do assert, that every church is bound to observe the
institutions of Christ, and that sort of government which the
apostles did ordain, consisting of bishops, priests, and people.

2. We avow it expedient (in conformity to the primitive
churches, and in order to the maintenance of truth, order,
peace) for several particular churches or parishes to be com-
bined in political corporations; as shall be found convenient
by those who have just authority to frame such corporations:
for that otherwise Christianity, being shattered into number-
less shreds, could hardly subsist; and that great confusions
must arise.

3. We affirm that, such bodies having been established and
being maintained by just authority, every man is bound to
endeavour the upholding of them by obedience, by peaceable
and compliant demeanour.

4.™We acknowledge it a great crime, by factious behaviour Jude 19-
Oi arodiop!-
(ovres.

m We allow the Apost. Can. 31. EY spising his own bishop, shall set up a

Tis Katappovicas tov idlov émoxdérov
xwpls cuvuwydyn, kal Qvoiarrhpioy erepov
whiny, undiy Kareyywkds Tov émioxdmov
év ebocBela wal dixasorivy, xabaipelobw
&s plidapyos, &e. If any person, de-

separate meeting, and build another
altar, having nothing to condemn in his
bishop, either for his piety or upright-
ness, let him be deposed as one that am-
bitiously affects to be a governor, &c.

470 A Discourse concerning

in them, or by needless separation from them, to disturb them,
to divide them, to dissolve or subvert them.

5. "We conceive it fit that every people under one prince
(or at least of one nation, using the same language, civil law,
and fashions) should be united in the bands of ecclesiastical
polity; for that such a unity apparently is conducible to the
peace and welfare both of church and state ; to the furtherance
of God’s worship and service; to the edification of people in
charity and piety; by the encouragement of secular powers,
by the concurrent advice and aid of ecclesiastical pastors; by
many advantages hence arising.

6. We suppose all churches obliged to observe friendly com-
munion; and, when occasion doth invite, to aid each other
by assistance and advice, in synods of bishops, or otherwise.

7. We do affirm, that all churches are obliged to comply
with lawful decrees and orders, appointed in synods with con-
sent of their bishops, and allowed by the civil authorities under
which they live: as if the bishops of Spain and France assem-
bling should agree upon constitutions of discipline which the
kings of both those countries should approve; and which
should not thwart God’s laws; both those churches, and every
man in them, were bound to comply in observance of them.

From the premises divers corollaries may be deduced.

1. Hence it appeareth, that all those clamours of the pre-
tended catholics against other churches for not submitting to
the Roman chair are groundless; they depending on the sup-
position, that all churches must necessarily be united under
one government.

2. The injustice of the adherents to that see; in claiming an
empire (or jurisdiction) over all, which never was designed by
our Lord; heavily censuring and fiercely persecuting those
who will not acknowledge it.

3. All churches, which have a fair settlement in several
countries are coordinate ; neither can one challenge a jurisdic-
tion over the other.

4. The nature of schism is hence declared; viz. that it con-
sisteth in disturbing the order and peace of any single church ;

D Alkoov oty éori wdytas Tovs ev TS dpois BidacKkaArlas Thy mlorw palveww.
‘Pwopatwy kboum dibacKxddovs Tod vduov Syn. Rom. apud Theod. ii. 22.
aie mep Tov véuov ppoveiv, Kal wi dia-

the Unity of the Church. 471

in withdrawing from it obedience and compliance with it; in
obstructing good correspondence, charity, peace, between
several churches ; in condemning or censuring other churches
without just cause, or beyond due measure.

In refusing to maintain communion with other churches
without reasonable cause; whence Firmilian did challenge
pope Stephanus with schism?°.

5. Hence the right way of reconciling dissensions among
Christians is not affecting to set up a political union of several
churches, or subordination of all to one power; not for one
church to enterprise upon the liberty of others, or to bring
others under it, (as is the practice of the Roman church and
its abettors,) but for each church to let the others alone, quietly
enjoying its freedom in ecclesiastical administrations ; only
declaring against apparently hurtful errors and factions; shew-
ing good will, yielding succour, advice, comfort, upon needful
oceasion: according to that excellent advice of the Constanti-
nopolitan fathers to the pope and western bishops (after
having acquainted them with their proceedings) towards the
conclusion they thus exhort them:

P We, having in a legal and canonical way determined these
controversies, do beseech your reverence to congratulate with us,
your charity spiritually interceding, the fear of the Lord also
compressing all human affection, so as to make us to prefer
the edification of the churches to all private respect and favour
toward each other; for by this means the word of faith being
consonant among us, and Christian charity bearing sway over
us, we shall cease from speaking after that manner which the
apostle condemns, I am of Paul, and I am of Apollos, but I am
of Cephas; for if we all do appear to be of Christ, who is not
divided amongst us, we shall then through God’s grace preserve

© Excidisti enim teipsum ; noli te fal-
lere; siquidem ille est vere schismaticus,
qui se a communione ecclesiastice uni-
tatis apostatam fecerit. Firmil. apud
Cypr. Ep. 75.

P Ols eb@éouws Kal Kavovixas map’
tly Kexparynkdar Kal rhy buerépay avy-
xalpew wapaxarotuey ebAdBeiay, Tijs
mvevparixhs pecrrevotons aydrns, Kal
Tov Kupiaxod @déBou wdoay wey KaTaoTdA-
Aovros(compressing )dvOpwalyny rpormd-
Berav, Thy Be éxxAnoidy olxodouhy epori-

porépay rowwivros Tis mpds Toy Kal? iva
ovuprabelas }} xdpiros: obrw yap TovTe Tijs
mlarews cuugowynbévtos Adyou, Kal Tijs
Xpiotiavixis Kupwlelons ev july d&ydrns
mwavodueba A€yorres TO wWapa Tay aro-
oréAwy Kateyywoudvoy, "Eye péy elus
TlavAov, ey 52 "AwoAAd, dyad 3 Knpa:
mdyres 38 Xpiorod pavévres, bs dv tuiv
ob pepépiora: boxiortoy T) caua Tis éx-
kAnolas thphoouey, Kal r@ Bhuars Tov
Kuplov ueta wappnolas rapartnaducba.
Theod. v. 9.

Syn. Sard.
Can.13. Gr.

Thornd.
Lat. p.220.

Avroxard-
KptTos.
ai. Ui, 11.

472 A Discourse concerning

the body of the church from schism, and present ourselves before
the throne of Christ with boldness.

6. All that withdraw their communion or obeisance from
particular churches fairly established, (unto which they do be-
long, or where they reside,) do incur the guilt of schism: 4 for
such persons being de jure subject to those particular churches,
and excommunicating themselves, do consequentially sever
themselves from the catholic church ; they commit great wrong
toward that particular church, and toward the whole church
of Christ.

7. Neither doth their pretence of joining themselves to the
Roman church excuse them from schism: for the Roman
church hath no reason or right to admit or to avow them; it
hath no power to exempt or excuse them from their duty ; it
thereby abetteth their crime, and involveth itself therein; it
wrongeth other churches. As no man is freed from his alle-
giance by pretending to put himself under the protection of
another prince; neither can another prince justly receive such
disloyal revolters into his patronage.

It is a rule grounded upon apparent equity, and frequently
declared by ecclesiastical canons, that no church shall admit
into its protection or communion any persons who are excom-
municated by another church, or who do withdraw themselves
from it: (‘for self-excommunication, or spiritual felony de se,
doth involve the church’s excommunication, deserving it, and
preventing it.)

Which canon, as the African fathers do allege and expound
it, doth prohibit the pope himself from receiving persons re-
jected by any other church’,

g Aug. contra Jul. Ep. 2. Te certe received in another city without letters

occidentalis terra generavit, occidentalis
regeneravit ecclesia: quid ei queris in-
ferre quod in ea non invenisti, quando
in ejus membra venisti? imo quid, &c.
r EY tis KAnpixds h Aaikds adwpi-
opevos, Aro. Bextos awedOwy, ev ErEpa
méAct dex OH Gvev ypappdTwy cvoTaTiKav,
apopilecOw Kal 6 Sekdevos, cal 6 dex Gels.
Apost. Can. 12. Kpareitw 7 yveun kata
Tov Kavdéva Tov Siaryopevovta Tovs id’
érépwy amoBaAnbévtas, bp érépwv wh
mpoclec@a. Conc, Nic. Can. 5. If any
clerk, or laic, who hath been excommu-
nicated, and not yet readmitted, (by his
own church, ) shall depart thence, and be

commendatory, both he who doth receive
him, and he that is received, let them
be excommunicated. Let the sentence
be ratified which is according to that
canon which commands others not to
admit those whom others have ejected.

8 Mnde Tobs wap’ judy &moxowwvhrovs
eis KoLWwviav Tod Aovmod OéANTE SéEacOan,
émeidayv TovTo Kal TH év Nixala cvvddw
dpiaOev edxepas etipor h oh oeBacpidrns.
Syn. Afr. Epist. ad P. Celest. 1. EY Tis
id Tov idtov emiokdrov axowdynrtos yé-
yovev, un mpdrepoy abtoy map érépwv
5exOjvar, ei wh bw abrod mwapadexOeln
Tov idiov emaKkdmov Cone. Ant.

the Unity of the Church. 473

So when Marcion, having been excommunicated by his own
father, coming to Rome, did sue to be received by that church
into communion, they refused, telling him, that tthey could not
do it without the consent of his reverend father, between whom
and them there being one faith and one agreement of mind, they
could not do it in opposition to their worthy fellow-labourer, who
was also his father.
St. Cyprian refused to admit Maximus (sent from the Nova- kp. wv. p.
tian party) to communion. sti
So did pope Cornelius reject Felicissimus, condemned by St. Ep. lv. init.
Cyprian, without further inquiry. ad a‘
It was charged upon Dioscorus as a heinous misdemeanour, hea ) Vid.
that “he had, against the holy canons, by his proper authority, at a
received into communion persons excommunicated by others.
The African synod (at the suggestion of St. Austin) decreed,
that *if it happened that any for their evil deeds were deservedly
expelled out of the church, and taken again into communion by
any bishop or priest whosoever, that he also who received him
should incur the same penalty of excommunication.
The same is by latter papal synods decreed’.
The words of Synesius are remarkable: he, having excom-
municated some cruel oppressors, doth thus recommend the
case to all Christians’.

Can. 6. Idemin Concil. Sard. Can. 13, noxius Cod. Afr. Can

14. (Grec.)

t “EAeye, tl uh eOeAfoaré ye inro-
détacOa ; Tay dt AcydvTwr, St: ob Suvd-
peda bvev ris éxitporis Tov Tiulov ma-
tpdés gov TovTo moihoa’ ula ydp éorw h
miaris, kal ula 7 dudvoia, wal ob duvd-
peba dvavTiwbijvas TE KaA@ oTvAAEiTOUp-
7@, warpl 3¢o¢. Epiph. Her. 42.

u quosdam a diversis conciliis
rite damnatos, in communionem, pro-
pria auctoritate, suscepit, sanctis regulis
precipientibus excommunicatos ab aliis,
in communionem alios non debere sus-
cipere. Epist. Syn. Chalced. ad Imper.
Act. iv. pag. 286. KabaipebévTa Ka-
vovik@s mapa Tov idlov erixdrov abder-
thoas axavoviorws eis kowwviay édé¢taro.
Evagr. ii. 4.

x Augustinus episcopus, legatus pro-
vinci Numidie, dixit ; Hoc statuere
dignamini, ut si qui forte merito faci-
norum suorum ab ecclesia pulsi sunt, et
sive ab aliquo episcopo vel presbytero
fuerint in communionem suscepti, etiam
ipse pari cum eis crimine teneatur ob-

Y Sanctorum quippe canonum sanxit
auctoritas, et ea passim ecclesiz consue-
tudo servat, ut a quolibet juste excom-
municatum episcopo, alius absolvere
non presumat. P. Urb. II. Epist. 20.
(apud Bin.) A suis episcSpis excom-
municatos, ab aliis episcopis, abbatibus
et clericis in communionem recipi pro-
culdubio prohibemus. Cone. Lat. I.
(sub FP. Calixto II.) cap. 9. Qui
vero excommunicato antequam ab eo
qui eum excommunicaverit absolvatur,
scienter communicare presumpserit,
pari sententie teneatur obnoxius. Cone.
Lat. I. (sub Innoe. II.) Can. 3.

%°Em) rovrois 7 MroAcudidos éxxAnola
Tdde mpds ras araytayot yiis éavrijs
adeApas Siardrreraa ——. El 8¢ tis
@s miKpowoArrw aroaxuBanioes Thy éx-
KxAnolay, cal 5éfera: robs dwoxnpixrous
airijs (proscribed by it) &s ob« dvd-yep TH
wévynta: weiderGa:, torw oxloas Thy éx-
xAnclay, hw uwiav db Xpiords elvar BodAc-
Tra, &c. Epist. 58. pag. 203. edit. Petav.

P. Leo, Ep.
Ixxxiv. cap.

474 A Discourse concerning the Unity of the Church.

Upon which grounds I do not scruple to affirm the recu-
sants in England to be no less schismatics than any other
separatists. They are indeed somewhat worse; for most
others do only forbear communion, these do rudely condemn
the church to which they owe obedience; yea, strive to de-
stroy it: they are most desperate rebels against it.

8. It is the duty and interest of all churches to disclaim the
pretences of the Roman court ; maintaining their liberties and
rights against its usurpations: for compliance therewith, as it
doth greatly prejudice truth and piety, (leaving them to be

corrupted by the ambitious, covetous, and voluptuous designs

of those men,) so it doth remove the genuine unity of the
church and peace of Christians; unless to be tied by com-
pulsory chains (as slaves) be deemed unity or peace.

9. Yet those churches which, by the voluntary consent or
command of princes, do adhere in confederation to the Roman
church, we are not, merely upon that score, to condemn or
reject from communion of charity or peace; (for in that they
do but use their liberty.)

10. But if such churches do maintain impious errors; if
they do prescribe naughty practices; if they do reject commu-
nion and peace upon reasonable terms ; if they vent unjust and
uncharitable censures ; if they are turbulent and violent, striv-
ing by all means to subdue and enslave other churches to
their will or their dictates; if they damn and persecute all
who refuse to be their subjects—in such cases we may reject
such churches as heretical or schismatical, or wickedly uncha-
ritable ahd unjust in their proceedings ®.

a Cuicunque heresi communicans An communicare, non est consentire

merito judicatur a nostra societate re- cum talibus? P. Sym. I. Ep. 7.
movendus. Gelas. Ep.1. ad Euphem.

THE END.

|
|
BOOKS |
|

THE CLARENDON PRESS, OXFORD,
|
|

and Published for the University by

Macmillan and Co. |

29, 30, Bedford Street, Covent Garden, London ;

also to be had at

The Clarendon Press Depository,

116, High Street, Oxford.

GENERAL CONTENTS

PAGE
Lexicons, Grammars, &c. ; : 2 ; ‘ ‘ : 3,4
Greek and Latin Classics ; " : , ; ‘ : 5-7
The Holy Scriptures, &c. _ ‘ ‘ . E L ‘ 8,9
Fathers of the Church, &c. : . : ; : . »S, 20
Ecclesiastical History, Biography, Be. : : : ; ; <a ae
English Theology . : ; . - 13-15
English Historical and Tabpuiienary W ihe . 7 , :* Bee ee |
Chronology, Geography, &c. . ; j : ‘ ‘ 17 :
Philosophical Works and General lioatun ; 4 : : 17
Mathematics, Physical Science, &c. . : : , . é 18
Bibliography . A , : : . : : 19
Bodleian Library Catalogues fe. ‘ : : ‘ : . 19, 20

CLARENDON PRESS SERIES.

Greek and Latin Classics, etc. . ; : * : ; . 21-24
Mental and Moral Philosophy . , ; : : ; : 24
Mathematics, &c. . ; : : ‘ . ‘ : ; 25
History . ‘ > ‘ , : ‘ : . : : 25
Law , ‘ ; ; : . , : ‘ 26
Physical Sdeme ; ' . , ' ; ; 27
English Language and Literarine : , : ‘ : ‘ 28
French Language and Literature. : ; $ , . 29
German Language and Literature. ‘ ! ; ‘ , 30
An, he.> . ‘ : . ; * : - ‘ ‘ 30
Miscellaneous . . . . . > |
English Classics—PRoFESSOR aie! S ree ; ‘ : . Bt, ge

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

A CATALOGUE

CLARENDON PRESS BOOKS.

LEXICONS, GRAMMARS, ce.

A Greek-English Lexicof, by Henry George Liddell, D.D.,
and Robert Scott, D.D. Sixth Edition, Revised and Augmented.
1870. 4to. cloth, 11. 16s.

A Greek-English Lexicon, abridged from the above, chiefly
for the use of Schools. Fifteenth Edition. Carefully Revised
throughout. 1872. square 12mo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

A copious Greek-English Vocabulary, compiled from the
best authorities. 1850. 24mo. bound, 3s.

Graecae Grammaticae Rudimenta in usum Scholarum. Auctore
Carolo Wordsworth, D.C.L. Seventeenth Edition, 1870. 12mo. bound, 4s.

A Greek Primer, in English, for the use of beginners. By the
Right Rev. Charles Wordsworth, D.C.L., Bishop of St. Andrews.
Fourth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 1s. 6d.

A Practical Introduction to Greek Accentuation, by H. W.
Chandler, M.A. 1862. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Etymologicon Magnum. Ad Codd. MSS. recensuit et notis
variorum instruxit Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P. 1848. fol. cloth, 11. 12s.

Suidae Lexicon. Ad Codd. MSS. recensuit Thomas Gaisford,
S.T.P. Tomi III. 1834. fol. cloth, 21. 2s.

Scheller’s Lexicon of the Latin Tongue, with the German ex-
planations translated into English by J. E. Riddle, M.A. 1835. fol.
cloth, 11. 1s.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.
B 2

4 Clarendon Press Books.

Scriptores Rei Metricae. Edidit Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P.
Tomi Ill. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Sold separately:
Hephaestion, Terentianus Maurus, Proclus, cum annotationibus, etc.
Tomill. 1855. 8vo. cloth, 10s.

Scriptores Latini. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

The Book of Hebrew Roots, by Abu ’L-Walid Marwan ibn
Janah, otherwise called Rabbi Yénah. Now first edited, with an
Appendix, by Ad. Neubauer Fasc. I. 4to. 21s.

A Treatise on the use of the Tenses in Hebrew. By S. R.
Driver, M.A. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 6s.6d. ust Published.

Thesaurus Syriacus: collegerunt Quatremére, Bernstein, Lors-
bach, Arnoldi, Field: edidit R. Payne Smith, S.T.P.R.

Fasc. I-III. 1868-73. sm. fol. each, 11. Is.

Lexicon Aegyptiaco-Latinum ex veteribus Linguae Aegyp-
tiacae Monumentis, etc., cum Indice Vocum Latinarum ab H. Tattam,
A.M. 1835. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

A Practical Grammar of the Sanskrit Language, arranged
with reference to the Classical Languages of Europe, for the use of
English Students, by Monier Williams, M.A. Third Edition, 1864.
8vo. cloth, 15s.

Nalopdkhydnam. Story of Nala, an Episode of the Maha-
Bharata: the Sanskrit text, with a copious Vocabulary, Grammatical
Analysis, and Introduction, by Monier Williams, M.A. The Metrical
Translation by the Very Rev. H. H. Milman, D.D. 1860. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, by Monier Williams, M.A..,
Boden Professor of Sanskrit. 4to. cloth, 4l. 14s. 6d.

An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, by Joseph Bosworth, D.D., Pro-

fessor of Anglo-Saxon, Oxford. New edition. In the Press.

An Icelandic-English Dictionary. Based on the MS. col-
lections of the late Richard Cleasby. Enlarged and completed by
G. Vigfusson.
Parts I and II. 1869-71. 4to. each, 11. Is.

Part III. With an Introduction and Life of Richard Cleasby, by G.
Webbe Dasent. 4to. 11. 5s.

The work may now be had complete, in cloth, price 31. 7s.
A Handbook of the Chinese Language. Parts I and II,

Grammar and Chrestomathy. By James Summers. 1863. 8vo. half
bound, 11. 8s.

Cornish Drama (The Ancient). Edited and translated by E.
Norris, Esq., with a Sketch of Cornish Grammar, an Ancient Cornish
Vocabulary, etc. 2 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 11. Is.

The Sketch of Cornish Grammar separately, stitched, 2s. 6d.
Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. 5

GREEK AND LATIN CLASSICS.

Aeschylus: quae supersunt in Codice Laurentiano typis descripta.
Edidit R. Merkel. 1861. Small folio, cloth, 11. 1s.

Aeschylus: Tragoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil.
Dindorfii. Second Edition, 1851. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Aeschylus: Annotationes Guil. Dindorfii, Partes II. 1841.
8vo. cloth, 10s.

Aeschylus: Scholia Graeca, ex Codicibus aucta et emendata a
Guil. Dindorfio. 1851. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

Sophocles: Tragoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione et cum
commentariis Guil. Dindorfii. Tbird Edition, 2 vols. 1860. fcap. 8vo.
cloth, il. Is.

Each Play separately, limp, 2s. 6d.

The Text alone, printed on writing paper, with large
margin, royal 16mo. cloth, 8s.
The Text alone, square 16mo. cloth, 35. 6d.
Each Play separately, limp, 6d.
Sophocles: Tragoediae et Fragmenta cum Annotatt. Guil.
Dindorfii. Tomi ll. 1849. 8vo. cloth, Los.
The Text, Vol. I. 5s.6d. The Notes, Vol. II. 4s. 6d.

Sophocles: Scholia Graeca:
Vol. I. ed. P. Elmsley, A.M. 1825. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.
Vol. Il. ed. Guil. Dindorfius. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Euripides: Tragoediae et fragmenta, ex recensione Guil. Din-
dorfii. Tomill. 1834. 8vo. cloth, 10s.

Euripides: Annotationes Guil. Dindorfii. Partes II. 1840.
8vo. cloth, 10s.

Euripides: Scholia Graeca, ex Codicibus aucta et emendata a
Guil. Dindorfio. TomilV. 1863. 8vo. cloth, 11. 16s.

Euripides: Alcestis,ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. 1834. 8vo.
sewed, 2s. 6d.

Aristophanes: Comoediae et Fragmenta, ex recensione Guil.
Dindorfii. Tomill. 1835. 8vo. cloth, 11s.

Aristophanes: Annotationes Guil. Dindorfii. Partes II. 1837.
8vo. cloth, 11s.

Aristophanes: Scholia Graeca, ex Codicibus aucta et emendata
a Guil. Dindorfio. Partes III. 1839. 8vo. clotb, 11.

Aristophanem, Index in: J. Caravellae. 1822. 8vo. cloth, 3s.

Metra Aeschyli Sophoclis Euripidis et Aristophanis. De-
scripta a Guil. Dindorfio, Accedit Chronologia Scenica. 1842. 8vo.
cloth, 5s.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

—

6 Clarendon Press Books.

Anecdota Graeca Oxoniensia. Edidit J. A. Cramer, S.T.P.
TomilV. 1834-1837. 8vo. cloth, 11. 2s.

Anecdota Graeca e Codd. MSS. Bibliothecae Regiae Parisien-
sis. Edidit J. A. Cramer, S.T.P. TomilV. 1839-1841. 8vo. clotb,
11. 2s.

Apsinis et Longini Rhetorica. E Codicibus MSS. recensuit
Joh. Bakius. 1849. 8vo. clotb, 3s.

Aristoteles; ex recensione Immanuelis Bekkeri. Accedunt In-
dices Sylburgiani. Tomi XI. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 2l. 10s.
Each volume separately, 5s. 6d.
Catulli Veronensis Liber. Recognovit, apparatum criticum

prolegomena appendices addidit, Robinson Ellis, A.M. 1867. 8vo.
cloth, 16s.

Catulli Veronensis Carmina Selecta, secundum recogni-
tionem Robinson Ellis, A.M. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Choerobosci Dictata in Theodosii Canones, necnon Epimerismi
in Psalmos. E Codicibus MSS. edidit Thomas Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi
III. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Demosthenes: ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii. Tomi I. II. If.
IV. 1846. 8vo. cloth, 11. Is.

Demosthenes: Tomi V. VI. VII. Annotationes Interpretum.
1849. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Demosthenes: Tomi VIII. IX. Scholia. 1851. 8vo. cloth, 10s.

Harpocrationis Lexicon, ex recensione G. Dindorfii. Tomi
II. 1854. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Herculanensium Voluminum Partes II. 1824, 1825. 8vo.
cloth, 10s.

Homerus: Llias, cum brevi Annotatione C. G. Heynii. Acce-
dunt Scholia minora. Tomill. 1834. 8vo. cloth, 155.

Homerus: Jlias, ex rec. Guil. Dindorfii. 1856. 8vo. cloth, 55. 6d.

Homerus: Odyssea, ex rec. Guil. Dindorfii. 1855. 8vo. cloth,
5s. 6d.

Homerus: Scholia Graeca in Odysseam. Edidit Guil. Dindorfius.
Tomi Il. 1855. 8vo. cloth, 15s. 6d.

Homerum, Index in: Seberi. 1780. 8vo. cloth, 65. 6d.

Oratores Attici ex recensione Bekkeri:
i, Antiphon, Andocides, et Lysias. 1822. 8vo. cloth, 7s.
II. Isocrates, 1822. 8vo. cloth, 7s.
Ill. Isaeus, Aeschines, Lycurgus, Dinarchus, etc. 1823. 8vo.
cloth, 7s.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. 7

Scholia Graeca in Aeschinem et Isocratem. Edidit G. Dindor-
fius. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 4s.

Paroemiographi Graeci, quorum pars nunc primum ex Codd.
MSS, vulgatur. Edidit T. Gaisford,S.T.P. 1836. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Plato: The Apology, with a revised Text and English Notes,
and a Digest of Platonic Idioms, by James Riddell, M.A. 1867. 8vo.
cloth, 8s. 6d.

Plato: Philebus, with a revised Text and English Notes, by
Edward Poste, M.A. 1860. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Plato: Sophistes and Politicus, with a revised Text and Eng-
lish Notes, by L. Campbell, M.A. 1866. 8vo. cloth, 18s.

Plato: Theaetetus, with a revised Text and English Notes, by
L. Campbell, M.A. 1861. 8vo. cloth, gs.

Plato: The Dialogues, translated into English, with Analyses
and Introductions, by B. Jowett, M.A., Master of Balliol College and
Regius Professor of Greek. 4 vols. 1871. 8vo. cloth, 31.6s.

Plato: The Republic, with a revised Text and English Notes,
by B. Jowett, M.A., Master of Balliol College and Regius Professor of
Greek. Demy 8vo. Preparing.

Plotinus. Edidit F. Creuzer. Tomi III. 1835. 4to. cloth,
11. 8s.

Stobaei Florilegium. Ad MSS. fidem emendavit et supplevit
T. Gaisford, S.T.P. TomilV. 1822. 8vo. clotb, 1.

Stobaei Eclogarum Physicarum et Ethicarum libri duo. Ac-
cedit Hieroclis Commentarius in aurea carmina Pythagoreorum. Ad
MSS. Codd. recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. Tomi Il. 1850. 8vo.
cloth, 11s.

Xenophon: Historia Graeca, ex recensione et cum annotatio-
nibus L. Dindorfii. Second Edition, 1852. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Xenophon: Expeditio Cyri, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L. Din-
dorfii. Second Edition, 1855. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Xenophon: Institutio Cyri, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L. Din-
dorfii. 1857. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Xenophon: Memorabilia Socratis, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L.
Dindorfii. 1862. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Xenophon: Opuscula Politica Equestria et Venatica cum Arri-
ani Libello de Venatione, ex rec. et cum annotatt. L. Dindorfii. 1866.
8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

8 Clarendon Press Books.

THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, Xe.

The Holy Bible in the earliest English Versions, made from the
Latin Vulgate by John Wycliffe and his followers: edited by the Rev.
J. Forshall and Sir F. Madden. 4 vols. 1850. royal 4to. cloth, 31. 3s.

The Holy Bible: an exact reprint, page for page, of the Author-
ized Version published in the year 1611. Demy 4to. balf bound, 11. 1s.

Vetus Testamentum Graece cum Variis Lectionibus. Edi-
tionem a R. Holmes, S.T.P. inchoatam continuavit J. Parsons, $.T.B.
Tomi V. 1798-1827. folio, 7/.

Vetus Testamentum Graece secundum exemplar Vaticanum
Romae editum. Accedit potior varietas Codicis Alexandrini. Tomi III.
1848. 12mo. cloth, 14s.

Origenis Hexaplorum quae supersunt; sive, Veterum Inter-
pretum Graecorum in totum Vetus Testamentum Fragmenta. Edidit
Fridericus Field, A.M.

Tom. II. Fasc. I-III. 1867-1870. 4to. 21. gs.

Tom. I. Fasc.I. 1871. 4to. 16s.

Pentateuchus Hebraeo-Samaritanus Charactere Hebraeo-Chal-
daico. Edidit B. Blayney. 1790. 8vo. cloth, 3s.

Libri Psalmorum Versio antiqua Latina, cum Paraphrasi
Anglo-Saxonica. Edidit B. Thorpe, F.A.S. 1835. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Libri Psalmorum Versio antiqua Gallica e Cod. MS. in Bibl.
Bodleiana adservato, una cum Versione Metrica aliisque Monumentis
pervetustis. Nunc primum descripsit et edidit Franciscus Michel, Phil.
Doct. 1860. 8vo. cloth, tos. 6d.

Libri Prophetarum Majorum, cum Lamentationibus Jere-
miae, in Dialecto Linguae Aegyptiacae Memphitica seu Coptica. Edidit
cum Versione Latina H. Tattam,S.T.P. Tomi II. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 17s.

Libri duodecim Prophetarum Minorum in Ling. Aegypt.
vulgo Coptica. Edidit H. Tattam, A.M. 1836. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

Novum Testamentum Graece. Antiquissimorum Codicum
Textus in ordine parallelo dispositi. Accedit collatio Codicis Sinaitici.
Edidit E. H. Hansell, $.T.B. Tomi III. 1864. 8vo. balf morocco,
2l. 12s. 6d.

Novum Testamentum Graece. Accedunt parallela S. Scrip-
turae loca, necnon vetus capitulorum notatio et canones Eusebii. Edidit
Carolus Lloyd, S.T.P.R., necnon Episcopus Oxoniensis. 1869. 18mo.
cloth, 35.

The same on writing paper, with large margin, small 4to.
cloth, 10s. 6d.

Novum Testamentum Graece juxta Exemplar Millianum.
1868. 18mo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

The same on writing paper, with large margin, small 4to.
cloth, 6s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. 9

Evangelia Sacra Graecae. The Text of Mill. 1870. fcap. 8vo.
limp, 1s. 6d.

The New Testament in Greek and English, on opposite
pages, arranged and edited by E. Cardwell, D.D, 2 vols. 1837. crown
8vo. cloth, 6s.

Novi Testamenti Versio Syriaca Philoxeniana. Edidit Jos.
White, S.T.P. TomilV. 1778-1803. 4to. cloth, 11. 8s.

Novum Testamentum.Coptice, cura D. Wilkins. 1716, 4to.
cloth, 12s. 6d.

Appendix ad edit. N. T. Gr. e Cod. MS. Alexandrino a C. G.
Woide descripti. Subjicitur Codicis Vaticani collatio. 1799. fol. 21. 2s.

Evangeliorum Versio Gothica, cum Interpr. et Annott. E.
Benzelii. Edidit, et Gram. Goth. praemisit, E. Lye, A.M. 1759. 4to.
cloth, 12s. 6d.

Diatessaron ; sive Historia Jesu Christi ex ipsis Evangelistarum
verbis apte dispositis confecta. Ed. J. White. 1856. 12mo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Canon Muratorianus. The earliest Catalogue of the Books of
the New Testament. Edited with Notes and a Facsimile of the MS. in
the Ambrosian Library at Milan, by S.P. Tregelles, LL.D. 1868. 4to.
cloth, tos. 6d.

The Five Books of Maccabees, in English, with Notes and
Illustrations by Henry Cotton, D.C.L. 1833. 8vo. cloth, tos. 6d.

The Ormulum, now first edited from the original Manuscript
in the Bodleian Library (Anglo-Saxon and English), by R. M. White,
D.D. 2 vols. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 11. Is.

Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae, a J. Lightfoot. A new
edition, by R. Gandell, M.A. 4 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 11. Is,

FATHERS OF THE CHURCH, &c.

Athanasius: The Orations of St. Athanasius against the Arians.
With an Account of his Life. By William Bright, D.D., Regius Professor
of Ecclesiastical History, Oxford, Crown 8vo. cloth, gs.

Catenae Graecorum Patrum in Novum Testamentum. Edidit
J. A. Cramer, S.T.P. Tomi VIII. 1838-1844. 8vo. cloth, al. 4s.

Clementis Alexandrini Opera, ex recensione Guil. Dindorfii.
Tomi IV. . 1869. 8vo. cloth, 3).

Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexandrini in XII Prophetas, Edidit
P.E. Pusey, ALM. Tomill. 1868. 8vo. cloth, 2l. 2s.

Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexandrini Commentarii in Lucae Evan-
gelium quae supersunt Syriace. E MSS. apud Mus. Britan. edidit R,
Payne Smith, A.M. 1858. 4to. cloth, 11. 2s.

The same, translated by R, Payne Smith, M.A. 2 vols. 1859.
8vo. cloth, 14s.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.
B5

10 Clavenaon Press Books.

Ephraemi Syri, Rabulae Episcopi Edesseni, Balaei, aliorumque,
Opera Selecta. E Codd. Syriacis MSS. in Museo Britannico et Biblio-
theca Bodleiana asservatis primus edidit J. J. Overbeck. 1865. 8vo.
cloth, 11. Is.

A Latin translation of the above, by the same Editor. Pre-

; paring.

Eusebii Pamphili Eclogae Propheticae. E Cod. MS. nunc
primum edidit T. Gaisford,S.T.P. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Eusebii Pamphili Evangelicae Praeparationis Libri XV. Ad
Codd. MSS. recensuit T. Gaisford, §8.T.P. Tomi IV. 1843. 8vo.
cloth, 11. 10s.

Eusebii Pamphili Evangelicae Demonstrationis Libri X. Re-
censuit T. Gaisford,S.T.P. Tomill. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Eusebii Pamphili contra Hieroclem et Marcellum Libri. Re-
censuit T. Gaisford, $.T.P. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Eusebii Pamphili Historia Ecclesiastica: Annotationes Vari-
orum. Tomi ll. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 17s.

Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History, according to the text of
Burton. With an Introduction by William Bright, D.D. Crown 8vo.
cloth, 8s. 6d.

.Evagrii Historia Ecclesiastica, ex recensione H. Valesii. 1844.
Svo. cloth, 4s.

Irenaeus: The Third Book of St. Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons,
against Heresies. With short Notes, and a Glossary. By H. Deane,
B.D., Fellow of St. John’s College, Oxford. Crown 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Origenis Philosophumena; sive omnium Haeresium Refutatio.
E Codice Parisino nunc primum edidit Emmanuel Miller. 1851. 8vo.
cloth, 10s.

Patrum Apostolicorum, S. Clementis Romani, S. Ignatii, S.
Polycarpi, quae supersunt. Edidit Guil. Jacobson, S.T.P.R. Tomi II.
Fourth Edition, 1863. 8vo. cloth, 11. Is.

Reliquiae Sacrae secundi tertiique saeculi. Recensuit M. J. |
Routh, $.T.P. TomiV. Second Edition, 1846-1848. 8vo. cloth, 11. 5s. |

Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Opuscula. Recensuit M. J. :
Routh, $.T.P. Tomill. bird Edition, 1858. 8vo. cloth, tos. :

Socratis Scholastici Historia Ecclesiastica. Gr. et Lat. Edidit
R. Hussey, S.T.B. Tomi lIII. 1853. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Sozomeni Historia Ecclesiastica. Edidit R. Hussey, S.T.B.
Tomi lII. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 11. Is.

Theodoreti Ecclesiasticae Historiae Libri V. Recensuit T.
Gaisford,S.T.P. 1854. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Theodoreti Graecarum Affectionum Curatio. Ad Codices MSS.
recensuit T. Gaisford, S.T.P. 1839. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Dowling (J.G.) Notitia Scriptorum SS. Patrum aliorumque vet.
Eccles. Mon. quae in Collectionibus Anecdotorum post annum Christi
mDCc. in lucem editis continentur. 1839. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. II

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY, BIOGRAPHY, &c.

Baedae Historia Ecclesiastica. Edited, with English Notes,
by George H. Moberly, M.A., Fellow of C.C.C., Oxford. 1869.
crown 8vo. cloth, tos. 6d.

Bingham’s Antiquities of the Christian Church, and other
Works. 1o vols. 1855. 8vo. cloth, 3]. 3s.

Burnet’s History of the Reformation of the Church of Eng-
land. A new Edition. Carefully revised, and the Records collated
with the originals, by N. Pocock, M.A. With a Preface by the Editor.
7 vols. 1865. 8vo. 4/. 4s.

Burnet’s Life of Sir M. Hale, and Fell’s Life of Dr. Hammond.
1856. small 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Cardwell’s Two Books of Common Prayer, set forth by
authority in the Reign of King Edward VI, compared with each other.
Third Edition, 1852. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Cardwell’s Documentary Annals of the Reformed Church of
England; being a Collection of Injunctions, Declarations, Orders, Arti-
cles of Inquiry, &c. from 1546 to 1716. 2 vols. 1843. 8vo. cloth, 18s.

Cardwell’s History of Conferences on the Book of Common
Prayer from 1551 to 1690. Third Edition, 1849. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Cardwell’s Synodalia. A Collection of Articles of Religion,
Canons, and Proceedings of Convocations in the Province of Canterbury,
from 1547 to 1717. 2 vols. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 19s.

Councils and Ecclesiastical Documents relating to Great
Britain and Ireland. Edited, after Spelman and Wilkins, by A. W.
Haddan, B.D., and William Stubbs, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern
History, Oxford. Vol. I. 1869. Medium 8vo. cloth, 11. Is.

Vol. II. Part I. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.
Vol. III, Medium 8vo. cloth, 11. Is.

Formularies of Faith set forth by the King’s Authority during
the Reign of Henry VIII. 1856. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Fuller's Church History of Britain. Edited by J. S. Brewer,
M.A. 6 vols. 1845. 8vo. cloth, 11. 19s.

Gibson’s Synodus Anglicana. Edited by E. Cardwell, D.D.
1854. 8vo. cloth, 6s.

Hussey’s Rise of the Papal Power traced in three Lectures.
Second Edition, 1863. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Inett’s Origines Anglicanae (in continuation of Stillingfleet).
Edited by J. Griffiths, M.A. 3 vols. 1855. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

John, Bishop of Ephesus. The Third Part of his Ecclesias-
tical History. [In Syriac.} Now first edited by William Cureton,
M.A. 1853. 4to. cloth, 11. 12s.

The same, translated by R. Payne Smith, M.A. 1860, 8vo.
cloth, 10s.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

12 Clarendon Press Books.

Knight's Life of Dean Colet. 1823. 8vo. cloth, 75. 6d.

Le Neve’s Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae. Corrected and continued
from 1715 to 1853 by T. Duffus Hardy. 3 vols. 1854. 8vo. cloth,
i. is.

Noelli (A.) Catechismus sive prima institutio disciplinaque
Pietatis Christianae Latine explicata. Editio nova cura Guil. Jacobson,
A.M. 1844. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Prideaux’s Connection of Sacred and Profane History. 2 vols.
1851. 8vo. cloth, Ios.

Primers put forth in the Reign of Henry VIII. 1848. 8vo.
cloth, 5s.

Records of the Reformation. The Divorce, 1527—1533.
Mostly now for the first time printed from MSS. in the British Museum
and other Libraries. Collected and arranged by N. Pocock, M.A.
2 vols. 8vo. cloth, 11. 16s.

Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum. The Reformation of
Ecclesiastical Laws, as attempted in the reigns of Henry VIII, Edward
VI, and Elizabeth. Edited by E. Cardwell, D.D. 1850. 8vo. cloth,
6s. 6d,

Shirley’s (W. W.) Some Account of the Church in the Apostolic
Age. 1867. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Shuckford’s Sacred and Profane History connected (in con-
tinuation of Prideaux), 2 vols. 1848, 8vo. cloth, 10s.

Stillingfleet’s Origines Britannicae, with Lloyd’s Historical
Account of Church Government. Edited by T. P. Pantin, M.A. 2 vols.
1842. 8vo. cloth, 10s.

Strype’s Works Complete, with a General Index. 27 vols.
1821-1843. 8vo. cloth, 71. 13s. 6d. Sold separately as follows :—

Memorials of Cranmer. 2 vols. 1840. 8vo. cloth, 115.
Life of Parker. 3 vols. 1828. 8vo. cloth, 165. 6d.

Life of Grindal. 1821. 8vo. cloth, 55. 6d.

Life of Whitgift. 3 vols. 1822. 8vo. cloth, 165. 6d.

Life of Aylmer, 1820. 8vo. cloth, 55. 6d.

Life of Cheke. 1821. 8vo. cloth, 55. 6d.

Life of Smith. 1820. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Ecclesiastical Memorials, 6 vols. 1822. 8vo. cloth, 1/. 135.

Annals of the Reformation. 7 vols, 1824. 8vo. cloth,
2l. 3s. 6d.

General Index. 2 vols. 1828. 8vo. cloth, 115.
Stubbs’s (W.) Registrum Sacrum Anglicanum. An stint

to exhibit the course of Episcopal Succession in England. 1858. small
4to. cloth, 8s. 6d.

Sylloge Confessionum sub tempus Reformandae Ecclesiae edi-
tarum. Subjiciuntur Catechismus Heidelbergensis et Canones Synodi
Dordrechtanae. 1827. 8vo. cloth, 8s.

Walton’s Lives of Donne, Wotton, Hooker, &c. 1824, 8vo.
cloth, 6s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. 13

ENGLISH THEOLOGY.

Beveridge’s Discourse upon the XX XIX Articles. The third
complete Edition, 1847. 8vo. cloth, 8s.

Bilson on the Perpetual Government of Christ’s Church, with a
Biographical Notice by R.Eden, M.A. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 4s.

Biscoe’s Boyle Lectures on the Acts of the Apostles. 1840. 8vo.
cloth, gs. 6d.

Bull’s Works, with Nelson’s Life. By E. Burton, D.D. aA
new Edition, 1846. 8 vols. 8vo. cloth, 2l. gs.

Burnet’s Exposition of the XXXIX Articles. 1846. 8vo.
cloth, "7s.

Burton’s (Edward) Testimonies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers to
the Divinity of Christ. Second Edition, 1829. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Burton's (Edward) Testimonies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers to
the Doctrine of the Trinity and of the Divinity of the Holy Ghost.
1831. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Butler’s Works, with an Index to the Analogy. 2 vols. 1849.
8vo. cloth, 11s.

Butler’s Analogy of Religion. 1833. r2mo. cloth, 25. 6d.

Chandler's Critical History of the Life of David. 1853. 8yo.
cloth, 8s. 6d.

Chillingworth’s Works. 3 vols. 1838. 8vo. cloth, 1/. 15. 6d.

Clergyman’s Instructor. Sixth Edition, 1855. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

Comber’s Companion to the Temple; or a Help to Devotion in
the use of the Common Prayer. 7 vols. 1841. 8vo. cloth, 11. 11s. 6d.

Cranmer’s Works. Collected and arranged by H. Jenkyns,
M.A., Fellow of Oriel College. 4 vols. 1834. 8vo. cloth, 11. tos.

Enchiridion Theologicum Anti-Romanum.

Vol. I. Jeremy Taylor’s Dissuasive from Popery, and Treatise on
the Real Presence. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 8s.

Vol. II. Barrow on the Supremacy of the Pope, with his Discourse
on the Unity of the Church. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Vol. III. Tracts selected from Wake, Patrick, Stillingfleet, Clagett,
and others. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 11s.

[Fell’s] Paraphrase and Annotations on the Epistles of St. Paul.
1852. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Greswell’s Harmonia Evangelica. Fifth Edition, 1856. 8vo.
cloth, gs. 6d.

Greswell’s Prolegomena ad Harmoniam Evangelicam. 1840.
8vo. cloth, gs. 6d.

Greswell’s Dissertations on the Principles and Arrangement
of a Harmony of the Gospels. § vols. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 31. 3s.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

14 Clarendon Press Books.

Hall’s (Bp.) Works. 4 new Edition, by Philip Wynter, D.D.
10 vols. 1863. 8vo. cloth, 31. 35.

Hammond’s Paraphrase and Annotations on the New Testa-
ment. 4 vols..1845. 8vo. cloth, il.

Hammond’s Paraphrase on the Book of Psalms. 2 vols. 1850.
8vo. cloth, 10s.

Heurtley’s Collection of Creeds. 1858. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

Homilies appointed to be read in Churches. Edited by J.
Griffiths, M.A. 1859. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Hooker’s Works, with his Life by Walton, arranged by John
Keble, M.A. Fifth Edition, 1865. 3 vols, 8vo. cloth, 11. 11s. 6d.

Hooker’s Works; the text as arranged by John Keble, M.A.
2 vols. 1865. 8vo. cloth, IIs.

Hooper's (Bp. George) Works. 2 vols. 1855. 8vo. cloth, 8s.

Jackson’s (Dr. Thomas) Works. 12 vols. 1844. 8vo. cloth,
31. 6s.

Jewel’s Works. Edited by R. W. Jelf, D.D. 8 vols. 1847.
8vo. cloth, ti. 10s.

Patrick’s Theological Works. 9 vols. 1859. 8vo. cloth, t/. 15.

Pearson’s Exposition of the Creed. Revised and corrected by
E. Burton, D.D. Fifth Edition, 1864. 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

Pearson’s Minor Theological Works. Now first collected, with
a Memoir of the Author, Notes, and Index, by Edward Churton, M.A.
2 vols. 1844. 8vo. cloth, los.

Sanderson’s Works. Edited by W. Jacobson, D.D. 6 vols.

1854. 8vo. cloth, il. Ios.
South’s Sermons. 5 vols. 1842. 8vo. cloth, 1/. ros.

Stanhope’s Paraphrase and Comment upon the Epistles and
Gospels. A new Edition. 2 vols. 1851. 8vo. cloth, 10s.

Stillingfleet’s Origines Sacrae. 2 vols. 1837. 8vo. cloth, 9s.

Stillingfleet’s Rational Account of the Grounds of Protestant
Religion; being a vindication of Abp. Laud’s Relation of a Conference,
&c. 2 vols. 1844. 8vo. cloth, Ios.

Wall’s History of Infant Baptism, with Gale’s Reflections, and
Wall’s Defence. A new Edition, by Henry Cotton, D.C.L. 2 vols.
1862. 8vo. cloth, 11. Is.

Waterland’s Works, with Life, by Bp. Van Mildert. 4 new
Edition, with copious Indexes. 6 vols. 1857. 8vo. cloth, 2l. 11s.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. 15

Waterland’s Review of the Doctrine of the Eucharist, with a
age by the present Bishop of London. 1868. crown 8vo. cloth,
s. 6d.

Wheatly’s Illustration of the Book of Common Prayer. 4
new Edition, 1846. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

Wyclif. A Catalogue of the Original Works of John Wyclif, by
W.W. Shirley, D.D. 1865. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Wyclif. Select English Works. By T. Arnold, M.A. 3 vols.
1871. 8vo. cloth, 21. 2s.

Wyclif. Trialogus. With the Supplement now first edited. By
Gotthardus Lechler. 1869. 8vo. cloth, 14s.

ENGLISH HISTORICAL AND DOCUMENTARY
WORKS.

Two of the Saxon Chronicles parallel, with Supplementary
Extracts from the Others. Edited, with Introduction, Notes, and a
Glossarial Index, by J. Earle, M.A. 1865. 8vo. cloth, 16s.

Magna Carta, a careful Reprint. Edited by W. Stubbs, M.A.,
Regius Professor of Modern History. 1868. 4to. stitched, Is.

Britton, a Treatise upon the Common Law of England, com-
posed by order of King Edward I. The French Text carefully revised,
with an English Translation, Introduction, and Notes, by F. M. Nichols,
M.A. 2 vols. 1865. royal 8vo. cloth, 1l. 16s.

Burnet’s History of His Own Time, with the suppressed Pas-
sages and Notes. 6 vols. 1833. 8vo. cloth, al. tos.

Burnet’s History of James II, with additional Notes. 1852.
8vo. cloth, gs. 6d.

Burnet’s Lives of James and William Dukes of Hamilton. 1852.
8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Carte’s Life of James Duke of Ormond. 4 new Edition, care-
fully compared with the original MSS. 6 vols. 1851. 8vo, cloth. Price
reduced from 2l. 6s. to il. 5s.

Casauboni Ephemerides, cum praefatione et notis J. Russell,
S.T.P. Tomill. 1850. 8vo. cloth, 15s.

Clarendon’s (Edw. Earl of) History of the Rebellion and Civil
Wars in England. To which are subjoined the Notes of Bishop War-
burton. 7 vols. 1849. medium 8vo. clo¢b, al. 10s.

Clarendon’s (Edw. Earl of) History of the Rebellion and Civil
Wars in England. 7 vols. 1839. 18mo. cloth, 1. Is.

Clarendon’s (Edw. Ear! of) History of the Rebellion and Civil
Wars in England. Also His Life, written by Himself, in which is in-
cluded a Continuation of his History of the Grand Rebellion, With
copious Indexes. In one volume, royal 8vo. 1842. cloth, 1. 28.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

16 Clarendon Press Books.

Clarendon’s (Edw. Earl of) Life, including a Continuation of
his History. 2 vols. 1857. medium 8vo. cloth, 1. 2s.

Clarendon’s (Edw. Earl of) Life, and Continuation of his His-
tory. 3 vols. 1827. 8vo. cloth, 16s. 6d.

Calendar of the Clarendon State Papers, preserved in the
Bodleian Library.
Vol. I. From 1523 to January 1649. 1872. 8vo. cloth, 18s.
Vol. II. From the death of Charles I, 1649, to the end of the year
1654. 1869. 8vo. cloth, 16s.

Freeman’s (E. A.) History of the Norman Conquest of England:
its Causes and Results. Vols. I. and II. A new Edition, with Index.
8vo. cloth, 11. 16s.

Vol. III. The Reign of Harold and the Interregnum. 1869. 8vo.
cloth, 11. Is.
Vol. IV. The Reign of William. 8vo. cloth, 11. Is.

Kennett’s Parochial Antiquities. 2 vols. 1818. 4to. cloth, 1/.
Lloyd’s Prices of Corn in Oxford, 1583-1830. 8vo. seaved, Is.

Luttrell’s (Narcissus) Diary. A Brief Historical Relation of
State Affairs, 1678-1714. 6 vols. 1857. 8vo. cloth, 11. 4s.

May’s History of the Long Parliament. 1854. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

Rogers’s History of Agriculture and Prices in England, a.p.
1259-1400. 2 vols. 1866. 8vo. cloth, 2l. 2s.

Sprigg’s England’s Recovery; being the History of the Army
under Sir Thomas Fairfax. A new edition. 1854. 8vo. cloth, 6s.

Whitelock’s Memorials of English Affairs from 1625 to 1660.
4 vols. 1853. 8vo. cloth, 11. 10s.

Enactments in Parliament, specially concerning the Universi-
ties of Oxford and Cambridge. Collected and arranged by J. Griffiths,
M.A. 1869. 8vo. cloth, 12s.

Ordinances and Statutes [for Colleges and Halls] framed or
approved by the Oxford University Commissioners. 1863. 8vo. cloth,
12s.

Sold separately (except for Exeter, All Souls, Brasenose, Corpus, and
Magdalen Hall) at Is. each.

Statuta Universitatis Oxoniensis. 1873. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

The Student’s Handbook to the University and Colleges
of Oxford. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Index to Wills proved in the Court of the Chancellor of the
University of Oxford, &c. Compiled by J. Griffiths, M.A. 1862.
royal 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Catalogue of Oxford Graduates from 1659 to 1850. 1851.
8vo. cloth, 7s, 6d.
Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. 17

CHRONOLOGY, GEOGRAPHY, &c.

Clinton’s Fasti Hellenici. The Civil and Literary Chronology
of Greece, from the LVIth to the CXXIIIrd Olympiad. Third edition,
1841. 4to. cloth, 11. 14s. 6d.

Clinton’s Fasti Hellenici. The Civil and Literary Chronology
of Greece, from the CXXIVth Olympiad to the Death of Augustus.
Second edition, 1851. 4to. cloth, 11. 12s.

Clinton’s Epitome of the Fasti Hellenici. 1851. 8vo. c/oth,
6s. 6d.

Clinton’s Fasti Romani. The Civil and Literary Chronology
of Rome and Constantinople, from the Death of Augustus to the Death-
of Heraclius. 2 vols. 1845, 1850. 4to. cloth, 31. gs.

Clinton’s Epitome of the Fasti Romani. 1854. 8vo. cloth, 7s.

Cramer’s Geographical and Historical Description of Asia
Minor. 2 vols. 1832. 8vo. cloth, 11s.

Cramer’s Map of Asia Minor, 15s.

Cramer’s Map of Ancient and Modern Italy, on two sheets, 155.

Cramer’s Description of Ancient Greece. 3 vols. 1828. 8vo.
cloth, 16s. 6d.

Cramer’s Map of Ancient and Modern Greece, on two sheets, 155.

Greswell’s Fasti Temporis Catholici. 4 vols. 1852. 8vo. cloth,
2l. 10s.

Greswell’s Tables to Fasti, 4to., and Introduction to Tables,
8vo. cloth, 15s.

Greswell’s Origines Kalendarie Italice. 4 vols. 1854. 8vo.
cloth, 2l. 2s.

Greswell’s Origines Kalendarie Hellenice. 6 vols. 1862.
8vo. cloth, 4l. 4s.

PHILOSOPHICAL WORKS, AND GENERAL
LITERATURE.

The Logic of Hegel; translated from the Encyclopaedia of
the Philosophical Sciences. With Prolegomena. By William Wallace,
M.A. 8vo. cloth, 14s.

Bacon’s Novum Organum, edited, with English notes, by G. W.
Kitchin, M.A. 1855. 8vo. clot, gs. 6d.

Bacon’s Novum Organum, translated by G. W. Kitchin, M.A.

' 1855. 8vo. cloth, gs. 6d.

The Works of George Berkeley, D.D., formerly Bishop of
Cloyne; including many of his writings hitherto unpublished. With
Prefaces, Annotations, and an Account of his Life and Philosophy,
by Alexander Campbell Fraser, M.A. 4 vols. 1871. 8vo. cloth,
21. 18s.

Also separately, The Life, Letters, &c. 1 vol. cloth, 16s

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

18 Clarendon Press Books.

Smith’s Wealth of Nations. A new Edition, with Notes,
by J. E. Thorold Rogers, M.A. 2 vols. 1870. cloth, 21s.

A Course of Lectures on Art, delivered before the University
of Oxford in Hilary Term, 1870. By John Ruskin, M.A., Slade
Professor of Fine Art. 8vo. cloth, 6s.

A Critical Account of the Drawings by Michel Angelo
and Raffaello in the University Galleries, Oxford. By J. C. Robinson,
F.S.A. Crown 8vo. cloth, 4s.

MATHEMATICS, PHYSICAL SCIENCE, &c.

Archimedis quae supersunt omnia cum Eutocii commentariis
ex recensione Josephi Torelli, cum nova versione Latina. 1792. folio.
cloth, 11. 5s. ;

Bradley’s Miscellaneous Works and Correspondence. With an
Account of Harriot’s Astronomical Papers. 1832. 4to. cloth, 17s.

Reduction of Bradley’s Observations by Dr. Busch. 1838. 4to.

cloth, 3s.

Treatise on Infinitesimal Calculus. By Bartholomew Price,
M.A., F.R.S., Professor of Natural Philosophy, Oxford.

Vol. I. Differential Calculus. Second Edition, 1858. 8vo. cloth,

14s. 6d.

II. Integral Calculus, Calculus of Variations, and Differential

Equations. Second Edition, 1865. 8vo. cloth, 18s.

Vol. III. Statics, including Attractions; Dynamics of a Material
Particle. Second Edition, 1868. 8vo. cloth, 16s.

Vol. IV. Dynamics of Material Systems; together with a Chapter on
Theoretical Dynamics, by W. F. Donkin, M.A., F.R.S. 1862.
8vo. cloth, 16s.

Rigaud’s Correspondence of Scientific Men of the 17th Century,
with Index by A. de Morgan. 2 vols. 1841-1862. 8vo. cloth, 18s. 6d.

Vol.

_—

Daubeny’s Introduction to the Atomic Theory. Second Edition,
greatly enlarged. 1850, 16mo. cloth, 6s.

Vesuvius. By John Phillips, M.A., F.R.S., Professor of
Geology, Oxford. 1869. Crown 8vo. cloth, tos. 6d.

Geolcgy of Oxford and the Valley of the Thames. By the same
Author. 8vo. cloth, 21s.

Synopsis of the Pathological Series in the Oxford Museum.
By H. W. Acland, M.D., F.R.S., Regius Professor of Medicine, Oxford.
1867. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Thesaurus Entomologicus Hopeianus, or a Description, with
Plates, of the rarest Insects in the Collection given to the University by
the Rey. William Hope. By J. O. Westwood, M.A., Hope Professor of
Zoology. Parts I and II now ready.

The work will be Published in Four Parts, each containing 10 Plates.
Price to Subscribers 1/. 5s. each Part. When complete the work
will be Published at 7/, Los.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. 19

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

Ebert’s Bibliographical Dictionary, translated from the German.
4 vols. 1837. 8vo. cloth, il. Los.

Cotton’s List of Editions of the Bible in English. Second Edition,
corrected and enlarged. 1852. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

Cotton’s Typographical Gazetteer. Second Edition. 1831. 8vo.
cloth, 12s. 6d.

Cotton’s Typographical Gazetteer, Second Series. 1866. 8vo.
cloth, 12s. 6d.

Cotton’s Rhemes and Doway. An attempt to shew what has
been done by Roman Catholics for the diffusion of the Holy Scriptures
in English. 1855. 8vo. cloth, gs.

BODLEIAN LIBRARY CATALOGUES, &c.

Catalogus Codd. MSS. Orientalium Bibliothecae Bodleianae :
Pars I,a J. Uri. 1788. fol. tos.
Partis II Vol. I, ab A. Nicoll, A.M. 1821. fol. ros.
hala ci ba II, Arabicos complectens, ab E. B. Pusey, S.T.B. 1835.
ol. 1.
Catalogus MSS. qui ab E. D. Clarke comparati in Bibl. Bodl.
adservantur :

Pars prior. Inseruntur Scholia inedita in Platonem et in Carmina
Gregorii Naz. 1812. 4to. 5s.

Pars posterior, Orientales complectens, ab A. Nicoll, A.M. 1814.
4to. 2s. 6d.

Catalogus Codd. MSS. et Impressorum cum notis MSS. olim
D’Orvillianorum, qui in Bibl. Bodl, adservantur. 1806. 4to. 2s. 6d.

Catalogus MSS. Borealium praecipue Islandicae Originis, a Finno
Magno Islando. 1832. 4to. 4s.
Catalogus Codd. MSS. Bibliothecae Bodleianae :—
Pars I. Codices Graeci, ab H. O. Coxe, A.M. 1853. 4to. 1.
Partis II. Fasc. I..Codices Laudiani, ab H. O. Coxe, A.M. 1858.
4to. 1,
Pars III. Codices Graeci et Latini Canoniciani, ab H. O. Coxe, A.M.
1854. 4to. 1.
Pars IV. Codices T. Tanneri, ab A. Hackman, A.M. 1860. 4to. 12s.

Pars V. Codicum R. Rawlinson classes duae priores, a Guil. D.
Macray, A.M. 1862. 4to. 12s.

Pars VI. Codices Syriaci, a R. P. Smith, A.M. 1864. 4to. 11.

Pars VII. Codices Aethiopici, ab A. Dillmann, Ph. Doct. 1848. 4to.
6s. 6d.

Pars VIII. Codices Sanscritici, a Th. Aufrecht, A.M. 1859-1864.
4to. il, Los,

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

20 Clarendon Press Books.

Catalogo di Codici MSS. Canoniciani Italici, compilato dal Conte
A. Mortara. 1864. 4to. 10s. 6d.

Catalogus Librorum Impressorum Bibliothecae Bodleianae.
TomilV. 1843 to 1850. fol. 4J.

Catalogus Dissertationum Academicarum quibus nuper aucta est
Bibliotheca Bodleiana. 1834. fol. 7s.

Catalogue of Books bequeathed to the Bodleian Library by
R. Gough, Esq. 1814. 4to. 15s.

Catalogue of Early English Poetry and other Works illustrating
the British Drama, collected by Edmond Malone, Esq. 1835. fol. 4s.

Catalogue of the Printed Books and Manuscripts bequeathed to
the Bodleian Library by Francis Douce, Esq. 1840. fol. 15s.

Catalogue of a Collection of Early Newspapers and Essayists pre-
sented to the Bodleian Library by the late Rev. F.W. Hope. 1865.
8vo. 7s. 6d.

Catalogue of the Manuscripts bequeathed to the University of
Oxford by Elias Ashmole. By W.H. Black. 1845. 4to. 11. Ios.

Index to the above, by W. D. Macray, M.A. 1867. 4to.

Ios.

Catalogus Codd. MSS. qui in Collegiis Aulisque Oxoniensibus
hodie adservantur. Confecit H.O. Coxe, A.M. Tomi II. 1852. 4to.
ai.

Catalogus Codd. MSS. in Bibl. Aed. Christi ap. Oxon. Curavit
G. W. Kitchin, A.M. 1867. 4to. 6s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. 21
Clarendon Press Series.

The Delegates of the Clarendon Press having undertaken
the publication of a series of works, chiefly educational, and

entitled the Clarendon Press Series, have published, or have
in preparation, the following.

Those to which prices are attached are already published ; the others are in
preparation.

I, GREEK AND LATIN CLASSICS, &c.

An Elementary Latin Grammar. By John B. Allen, M.A.,
formerly Scholar of New College, Oxford. Nearly ready.

A Greek Primer in English for the use of beginners.
By the Right Rev. Charles Wordsworth, D.C.L., Bishop of St. Andrews.
Fourth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 1s. 6d.

Greek Verbs, Irregular and Defective; their forms, mean-
ing, and quantity ; embracing all the Tenses used by Greek writers,
with reference to the passages in which they are found. By W. Veitch.
New Edition. Crown 8vo. cloth, 10s. 6d.

The Elements of Greek Accentuation (for Schools): abridged
from his larger work by H. W. Chandler, M.A., Waynflete Professor of
Moral and Metaphysical Philosophy, Oxford. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

The Orations of Demosthenes and Aeschines on the Crown.
With Introductory Essays and Notes. By G. A. Simcox, M.A., and

W. H. Simcox, M.A., Fellows of Queen’s College, Oxford. 8vo. cloth,
12s.

Aristotle’s Politics. By W. L. Newman, M.A., Fellow of
Balliol College, Oxford.

Arrian. Selections (for Schools). With Notes. By J. S. Phill-

potts, B.C.L., Assistant Master in Rugby School; formerly Scholar of
Balliol College, Oxford.

The Golden Treasury of Ancient Greek Poetry; being a Col-
lection of the finest passages in the Greek Classic Poets, with Introduc-
tory Notices and Notes. By R. S. Wright, M.A., Fellow of Oriel
College, Oxford. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

A Golden Treasury of Greek Prose, being a collection of the
finest passages in the principal Greek Prose Writers, with Introductory
Notices and Notes. By R.S. Wright, M.A., Fellow of Oriel College,
Oxford; and J. E. L. Shadwell, M.A., Senior Student of Christ Church.
Ext. feap. 8vo. cloth, 4s, 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford

22 Clarendon Press Books.

Homer. Odyssey, Books I—XII (for Schools). By W. W.
Merry, M.A., Fellow and Lecturer of Lincoln College, Oxford. Fourth
Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Homer. Odyssey, Books I-XII. By W. W. Merry, M.A., Fellow
and Lecturer of Lincoln College, Oxford; and the late James Riddell,
M.A., Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford.

Homer. Odyssey, Books XIII-XXIV. By Robinson Ellis,
M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford.

Homer. Iliad. By D. B. Monro, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of
Oriel College, Oxford.

Also a small edition for Schools.

Plato. Selections (for Schools). With Notes. By B. Jowett,
M.A., Regius Professor of Greek; and J. Purves, M.A., Fellow and
Lecturer of Balliol College, Oxford.

Sophocles. The Plays and Fragments. With English Notes

and Introductions. By Lewis Campbell, M.A., Professor of Greek, St. *

- Andrews, formerly Fellow of Queen’s College, Oxford. 2 vols.

Vol. I. Oedipus Tyrannus. Oedipus Coloneus. Antigone. 8vo.
cloth, 14s.

Sophocles. The Text of the Seven Plays. For the use of
Students in the University of Oxford. By the same Editor. Ext. fcap.
8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Sophocles. In Single Plays, with English Notes, &c. By Lewis
Campbell, M.A., Professor of Greek, St. Andrews, and Evelyn Abbott,
M.A., of Balliol College, Oxford.

Oedipus Rex. Ext. fcap. 8vo. limp, 1s. gd.
Oedipus Coloneus. Ext, fcap. 8vo. limp, 1s. gd.
Antigone. In the Press. }
The others to follow at intervals of six months.
Sophocles. Oedipus Rex: Dindorf’s Text, with Notes by the

Ven. Archdeacon Basil Jones, M.A., formerly Fellow of University
College, Oxford. Second Edition. Ext. fcap. 8vo. limp, 1s. 6d.

Theocritus (for Schools). With Notes. By H. Snow, M.A.,
Assistant Master at Eton College, formerly Fellow of St. John’s College,
Cambridge. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Xenophon. Selections (for Schools). With Notes and Maps.
By J. S. Phillpotts, B.C.L., Assistant Master in Rugby School, formerly
Fellow of New College, Oxford. Part I. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Part Il. By the same Editor. Preparing.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

————

ie Nt ee ee

Clarendon Press Books. 2

Caesar. The Commentaries (for Schools). Part 1. The Gallic
War. With Notes and Maps. By Charles E. Moberly, M.A., Assistant
Master in Rugby School; formerly Scholar of Balliol College,
Oxford. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Part Il. The Civil War, Book I. By the same Editor.
Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s.

Cicero’s Philippic Orations. With Notes. By J. R. King, M.A.,
formerly Fellow and Tutor of Merton College, Oxford. Demy 8vo.
cloth, 10s. 6d.

Cicero pro Cluentio. With Introduction and Notes. By W.
Ramsay, M.A. Edited by G. G. Ramsay, M.A., Professor of Humanity,
Glasgow. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Cicero. Selection of interesting and descriptive passages. With
Notes. By Henry Walford, M.A., Wadham College, Oxford, Assistant
Master at Haileybury College. In three Parts. Second Edition. Extra
fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Each Part separately, limp, 1s. 6d.

Part I. Anecdotes from Grecian and Roman History.
Part II. Omens and Dreams: Beauties of Nature.
Part III. Rome’s Rule of her Provinces.

Cicero. Select Letters. With English Introductions, Notes,
and Appendices. By Albert Watson, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Brase-
nose College, Oxford. Demy 8vo. cloth, 18s.

Cicero. Selected Letters (for Schools). With Notes. By the
late C. E. Prichard, M.A., formerly Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford,
and E. R. Bernard, M.A., Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. Extra
fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s.

Cicero de Oratore. With Introduction and Notes. By
A.S. Wilkins, M.A., Professor of Latin, Owens College, Manchester.

Cornelius Nepos. With Notes. By Oscar Browning, M.A.,
Fellow of King’s College, Cambridge, and Assistant Master at Eton
College. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Horace. With a Commentary. Volume I. The Odes, Carmen

Seculare, and Epodes. By Edward C. Wickham, M.A., Head Master
of Wellington College. 8vo. cloth, 12s.

Also a small edition for Schools.
Livy, Books I-X. By J. R. Seeley, M.A., Fellow of Christ’s

College, and Regius Professor of Modern History, Cambridge. Book I.
Svo. cloth, 6s.

Also a small edition for Schools.
Clarendon Press, Oxford.

24 Clarendon Press Books.

Livy. Selections (for Schools). With Notes and Maps. By
H. Lee-Warner, M.A., Assistant Master in Rugby School. Jn Parts.
Part I. The Caudine Disaster. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 1s. 6d.
Part II. Hannibal’s Campaign in Italy. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth,
Is. 6d. :
To be followed by others,

Ovid. Selections for the use of Schools. With Introductions
and Notes, and an Appendix on the Roman Calendar. By W. Ramsay,
M.A. Edited by G. G. Ramsay, M.A., Professor of Humanity, Glas-
gow. Second Edition. Ext. fcap. 8vo. cloth, 5s. 6d.

Persius. The Satires. With a Translation and Commentary.
By John Conington, M.A., late Corpus Professor of Latin in the Univer-
sity of Oxford. Edited by Henry Nettleship, M.A. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Pliny. Selected Letters (for Schools). With Notes. By
the late C. E. Prichard, M.A., formerly Fellow of Balliol College,
Oxford, and E.R. Bernard, M.A., Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford.
Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 35.

Selections from the less known Latin Poets. By North
Pinder, M.A., formerly Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. Demy 8vo.
cloth, 15s.

Fragments and Specimens of Early Latin. With Intro-
duction, Notes, and Illustrations. By John Wordsworth, M.A., Fellow
of Brasenose College, Oxford. In the Press.

Passages for Translation into Latin. For the use of Pass-
men and others. Selected by J. Y. Sargent, M.A., Tutor and Fellow of
Magdalen College, Oxford. Third Edition. Ext. fcap. 8vo, cloth, 2s. 6d.

II. MENTAL AND MORAL PHILOSOPHY.

The Elements of Deductive Logic, designed mainly for the
use of Junior Students in the Universities. By T. Fowler, M.A.,
Professor of Logic, Oxford. Fifth Edition, with a Collection of Ex-
amples. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

The Elements of Inductive Logic, designed mainly for the
use of Students in the Universities. By the same Author, Second
Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 6s.

The Principles of Morals. By J. M. Wilson, B.D., President
of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, and T. Fowler, M.A., Professor of

Logic, Oxford, Preparing.

A Manual of Political Economy, for the use of Schools. By
J. E. Thorold Rogers, M.A., formerly Professor of Political Economy,
Oxford. Second Edition, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. 25

III. MATHEMATICS, &c.

Figures Made Easy: a first Arithmetic Book. (Introductory
to ‘ The Scholar’s Arithmetic.) By Lewis Hensley, M.A., formerly
Fellow and Assistant Tutor of Trinity College, Cambridge. Crown 8vo.
cloth, 6d.

Answers to the Examples in Figures made Easy, together
with two thousand additional Examples formed from the lables in the
same, with Answers. By the same Author. Crown 8vo. cloth, Is.

The Scholar’s Arithmetic; with Answers to the Examples.
By the same Author. Crown 8vo, cloth, 4s. 6d.

Book-keeping. By R. G. C. Hamilton, Accountant to the
Board of Trade, and John Ball (of the Firm of Messrs. Quilter,
Ball, & Co.), Examiners in Book-keeping for the Society of Arts’
Examination. Second edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. limp cloth, 1s. 6d.

A Course of Lectures on Pure Geometry. By Henry J.
Stephen Smith, M.A., F.R.S., Fellow of Corpus Christi College, and
Savilian Professor of Geometry in the University of Oxford.

An Elementary Treatise on Quaternions. By P. G. Tait,
M.A., Professor of Natural Philosophy in the University of Edinburgh ;
formerly Fellow of St. Peter’s College, Cambridge. Second Edition.
Demy 8vo. cloth, 14s.

Acoustics. By W. F. Donkin, M.A., F.R.S., Savilian Professor
of Astronomy, Oxford. Crown 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism. By J. Clerk
Maxwell, M.A., F.R.S., Professor of Experimental Physics in the Uni-
versity of Cambridge. 2 vols. 8vo. cloth, 11. 11s. 6d.

An Elementary Treatise on the same subject. By the same
Author. Preparing.
A Series of Elementary Works ts being arranged, and will shortly be announced.

IV. HISTORY.

Select Charters and other Illustrations of English Con-
‘stitutional History, from the Earliest Times to the Reign of Edward 1.
Arranged and Edited by W. Stubbs, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern
History in the University of Oxford. Second Edition, Crown 8vo.
cloth, 8s. 6d.

A Constitutional History of England, in its Origin and
Development. By W. Stubbs, M.A., Regius Professor of Modern
History in the University of Oxford. Vol. I. Crown 8vo. cloth, 12s.

A History of England; being a translation of Leopold Von
Ranke’s Englische Geschichte. Translated by Resident Members of
the University of Oxford, under the superintendence of G. W. Kitchin,
M.A., and C. W. Boase, M.A. Jn the Press.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

26 Clarendon Press Books.

Genealogical Tables illustrative of Modern History. By
H. B. George, M.A., Fellow of New College. Small 4to. cloch, 12s.

A History of France, down to the year 1453. With numerous
Maps, Plans, and Tables. By G. W. Kitchin, M.A. Crown 8vo.
cloth, 10s. 6d.

A Manual of Ancient History. By George Rawlinson, M.A.,
Camden Professor of Ancient History, formerly Fellow of Exeter
College, Oxford. Demy 8vo. cloth, 14s.

A History of Germany and of the Empire, down to the close
of the Middle Ages. By J. Bryce, B.C.L., Fellow of Oriel Coll., Oxford.

A History of Germany, from the Reformation. By Adolphus
W. Ward, M.A., Fellow of St. Peter’s College, Cambridge, Professor of
History, Owens College, Manchester.

A History of British India. By S. J. Owen, M.A., Reader in
History, Christ Church, and Teacher of Indian Law aud History in
the University of Oxford.

A History of Greece. By E. A. Freeman, M.A., formerly
Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford.

V. LAW.

Elements of Law considered with reference to Principles of
General Jurisprudence. By William Markby, M.A., Judge of the High
Court of Judicature, Calcutta. Crown 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.

Gaii Institutionum Juris Civilis Commentarii Quatuor ;
or, Elements of Roman Law by Gaius. With a Translation and Com-
mentary by Edward Poste, M.A., Barrister-at-Law, and Fellow of Oriel
College, Oxford. 8vo. cloth, 16s.

The Elements of Jurisprudence. By Thomas Erskine
Holland, B.C.L., Vinerian Reader in Law, and formerly Fellow of Exeter
College, Oxford. Preparing.

The Institutes of Justinian, edited as a recension of the
Institutes of Gaius. By the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 5s.

Select Titles from the Digest of Justinian. By T. E.
Holland, B.C.L., Vinerian Reader in Law, and formerly Fellow of
Exeter College, Oxford, and C. L. Shadwell, B.C.L., Fellow of Oriel
College, Oxford. In Parts.

Part I. Introductory Titles. 8vo. sewed, 25. 6d.
Part II. Family Law. 8vo. sewed, 1s.

Authorities Illustrative of the History of the English
Law of Real Property. By Kenelm E. Digby, M.A., formeriy Fe-low
of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. In the Press.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

—- &

Clarendon Press Books. 27

VI. PHYSICAL SCIENCE.

Natural Philosophy. In four volumes. By Sir W. Thomson,
LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.S., Professor of Natural Philosophy, Glasgow; and
P. G. Tait, M.A., Professor of Natural Philosophy, Edinburgh ; formerly
Fellows of St. Peter’s College, Cambridge. Vol. I. New Edition, In
the Press.

Elements of Natural Philosophy. By the same Authors.
Part I. 8vo. cloth, gs.

Descriptive Astronomy. A Handbook for the General Reader,
and also for practical Observatory work. With 224 illustrations and
numerous tables. By G. F. Chambers, F.R.A.S., Barrister-at-Law.
Demy 8vo. 856 pp., cloth, 11. Is.

Chemistry for Students. By A. W. Williamson, Phil. Doc.,
F.R.S., Professor of Chemistry, University College, London. A new
Edition, with Solutions, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 8s. 6d.

A Treatise on Heat, with numerous Woodcuts and Diagrams.
By Balfour Stewart, LL.D., F.R.S., Professor of Natural Philosophy in
Owens College, Manchester. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth,
7s. 6d.

Forms of Animal Life. By G. Rolleston, M.D., F.R.S.,
Linacre Professor of Physiology, Oxford. [Illustrated by Descriptions
and Drawings of Dissections. Demy 8vo. cloth, 16s.

Exercises in Practical Chemistry (Laboratory Practice).
By A. G. Vernon Harcourt, M.A., F.R.S., Senior Student of Christ
Church, and Lee’s Reader in Chemistry; and H. G. Madan, M.A., Fellow
of Queen’s College, Oxford.

Series I. Qualitative Exercises. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. cloth,
7s. 6d.

Series II. Quantitative Exercises.

Geology of Oxford and the Valley of the Thames. By John
Phillips, M.A., F.R.S., Professor of Geology, Oxford. 8vo. cloth, 21s.

Electricity. By W. Esson, M.A., F.R.S., Fellow and Mathe-
matical Lecturer of Merton College, Oxford.

Crystallography. By M. H.N. Story-Maskelyne, M.A., Pro-
fessor of Mineralogy, Oxford; and Deputy Keeper in the Department of
Minerals, British Museum.

Mineralogy. By the same Author.

Physiological Physics. By G. Griffith, M.A., Jesus College,
Oxford, Assistant Secretary to the British Association, and Natural
Science Master at Harrow School.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

28 Clarendon Press Books.

VII. ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE.

A First Reading Book. By Marie Eichens of Berlin; and
edited by Anne J. Clough. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, 4d.

Oxford Reading Book, Part I. For Little Children. Extra
fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, 6d.

Oxford Reading Book, Part II. For Junior Classes. Extra
fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, 6d. °

On the Principles of Grammar. By E. Thring, M.A., Head
Master of Uppingham School. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Grammatical Analysis, designed to serve as an Exercise and
Composition Book in the English Language. By E. Thring, M.A.,
Head Master of Uppingham School. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

An English Grammar and Reading Book, for Lower Forms
in Classical Schools. By O. W. Tancock, M.A., Assistant Master in
Sherborne School. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

The Philology of the English Tongue. By J. Earle, M.A.,
formerly Fellow of Oriel College, and sometime Professor of Anglo-Saxon,
Oxford. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Milton. The Areopagitica. With Notes. By J. W. Hales,
M.A., late Fellow of Christ’s College, Cambridge. Nearly ready.

Specimens of Early English. A New and Revised Edition.
With Introduction, Notes, and Glossarial Index. By R. Morris, LL.D.,
and W. W. Skeat, M.A.

Part I. Jn the Press.

Part II. From Robert of Gloucester to Gower (A.D. 1298 to A.D. 1393).
Second Edition, Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

Specimens of English Literature, from the ‘ Ploughmans
Crede’ to the ‘ Shepheardes Calender’ (a.p. 1394 to A.D. 1579). With
Introduction, Notes, and Glossarial Index. By W. W. Skeat, M.A.
Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 7s. 6d.

The Vision of William concerning Piers the Plowman,
by William Langland. Edited, with Notes, by W. W. Skeat, M.A., for-
merly Fellow of Christ’s College, Cambridge. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

—— sr * \

Clarendon Press Books. 29

Typical Selections from the best English Authors from the
Sixteenth to the Nineteenth Century, (to serve as a higher Reading
Book,) with Introductory Notices and Notes, being a Contribution
towards a History of English Literature. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Specimens of Lowland Scotch and Northern English. By
J. A. H. Murray. Preparing.

See also XIII. below for other English Classics.

VIII. FRENCH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE.

An Etymological Dictionary of the French Language, with
a Preface on the Principles of French Etymology. By A. Brachet.
Translated into English by G. W. Kitchin, M.A., formerly Censor of
Christ Church. Crown 8vo. cloth, 10s, 6d.

Brachet’s Historical Grammar of the French Language.
Translated into English by G. W. Kitchin, M.A., formerly Censor of
Christ Church. Second Edition, with a new Index. Extra fcap. 8vo.
cloth, 3s. 6d.

Corneille’s Cinna, and Moliére’s Les Femmes Savantes. Edited,
with Introduction and Notes, by Gustave Masson. Extra fcap. 8vo.
cloth, 2s. 6d.

Racine’s Andromaque, and Corneille’s Le Menteur. With
Louis Racine’s Life of his Father. By the same Editor. Extra fcap.
8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

Moliere’s Les Fourberies de Scapin, and Racine’s Athalie.
With Voltaire’s Life of Molitre. By the same Editor. Extra fcap, 8vo.
cloth, 2s. 6d.

Selections from the Correspondence of Madame de Sévigné
and her chief Contemporaries. Intended more especially for Girls’
Schools. By the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 35.

Voyage autour de ma Chambre, by Xavier de Maistre ; Ourika,
by Madame de Duras ; La Dot de Suzette, by Fievée ; Les Jumeaux
de I’Hotel Corneille, by Edmond About; Mésaventures d’un Ecolier,
by Rodolphe Topffer. By the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. clotb,
2s. 6d.

IX. ITALIAN LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE.

Dante. Selections from the Inferno. With Introduction and
Notes. By H. B. Cotterill, B.A, Ass’stant Master in Haileybury
College. In the Press.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

30 Clarendon Press Books.

xX. GERMAN LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE.
Goethe’s Egmont. With a Life of Goethe, &c. By Dr. Buch-

heim, Professor of the German Language and Literature in King’s
College, London; and Examiner in German to the University of
London. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s.

Schiller’s Wilhelm Tell. With a Life of Schiller ; an historical
and critical Introduction, Arguments, and a complete Commentary. By
the same Editor. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

Lessing’s Minna von Barnhelm. A Comedy. With a Life of
Lessing, Critical Commentary, &c. By the same Editor. Extra fcap.
8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

XI. ART, &e.

A Handbook of Pictorial Art. By R. St. J. Tyrwhitt, M.A.,
formerly Student and Tutor of Christ Church, Oxford. With coloured
Illustrations, Photographs, and a chapter on Perspective by A. Mac-
donald. 8vo. balf morocco, 18s.

A Music Primer for Schools. By J. Troutbeck, M.A., Minor
Canon of Westminster and Music Master in Westminster School, and
R. F. Dale, M.A., B. Mus., Assistant Master in Westminster School.
Crown 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

A Treatise on Harmony. By Sir F. A. Gore Ouseley, Bart.,
M.A., Mus. Doc., Professor of Music in the University of Oxford. 4to.
cloth, 10s.

A Treatise on Counterpoint, Canon, and Fugue, based upon
that of Cherubini. By the same Author. 4to. cloth, 16s.

A Treatise on Form in Music and General Composition.
By the same Author. Preparing.

The Cultivation of the Speaking Voice. By John Hullah.
Crown 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

XII. MISCELLANEOUS.

A Treatise on the use of the Tenses in Hebrew. By S.R.
Driver, M.A., Fellow of New College. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 6s. 6d.
Just Published.

Outlines of Textual Criticism applied to the New Testament.
By C. E. Hammond, M A., Fellow and Tutor of Exeter College, Oxford.
Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d.

A System of Physical Education: Theoretical and Practical.

By Archibald Maclaren, The Gymnasium, Oxford. Extra fcap. 8vo.
cloth, 7s. 6d.

The Modern Greek Language in its relation to Ancient Greek.
By E. M. Geldart, B.A., formerly Scholar of Balliol College, Oxford.
Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 4s. 6d.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Clarendon Press Books. 31

XIII. A SERIES OF ENGLISH CLASSICS.

Designed to meet the wants of Students in English Literature,
under the superintendence of the Rev. J. S. BREWER, M.A., in

Queen’s College, Oxford, and Professor of English Literature in
King’s College, London.

It is also especially hoped that this Series may prove useful to
Ladies’ Schools and Middle Class Schools ; in which English Litera-
ture must always be a leading subject of instruction.

A General Introduction to the Series. By Professor Brewer,
M.A.

1. Chaucer. The Prologue to the Canterbury Tales; The
Knightes Tale; The Nonne Prestes Tale. Edited by R. Morris,
Editor of Specimens of Early English, &c., &c. Third Edition. Extra
fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

2. Spenser’s Faery Queene. Books I andII. Designed chiefly
for the use of Schools. With Introduction, Notes, and Glossary. By
G. W. Kitchin, M.A., formerly Censor of Christ Church.
Book I. Fifth Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.
Book II. Third Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s. 6d.

3. Hooker Ecclesiastical Polity, Book I. Edited by R. W.
Church, M.A., Dean of St. Paul’s; formeriy Fellow of Oriel College,
Oxford. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo. cloth, 2s.

. Shakespeare. Select Plays. Edited by W.G. Clark, M.A.,
Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge; and W. Aldis Wright, M.A.,
Trinity College, Cambridge.

I. The Merchant of Venice. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, Is.
II. Richard the Second. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, 1s, 6d.
III. Macbeth. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, 1s. 6d.

IV. Hamlet. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, 2s.
V. The Tempest. By W. Aldis Wright, M.A. In the Press.

. Bacon. Advancement of Learning. Edited by W. Aldis
Wright, M.A. Second Edition. Extra fcap. 8vo, cloth, 4s. 6d.

6. Milton. Poems. Edited by R. C. Browne, M.A., and
Associate of King’s College, London. 2 vols. Second Edition. Extra
feap. 8vo. cloth, 63. 6d.

Sold separately, Vol. 1. 4s.; Vol. Il 3s.

Clarendon Press, Oxford.

32 Clarendon Press Books.

7. Dryden. Select Poems. Stanzas on the Death of Oliver
Cromwell; straea Redux; Annus Mirabilis; Absalom and Achitophel ;
Religio Laici; The Hind and the Panther. Edited by W. D. Christie,
M.A., Trinity College, Cambridge. Second Edition. Ext. fcap. 8vo.
cloth, 3s. 6d.

8. Bunyan. Grace Abounding; The Pilgrim’s Progress. Edited
by E. Venables, M.A., Canon of Lincoln.

9. Pope. With Introduction and Notes. By Mark Pattison,
B.D., Rector of Lincoln College, Oxford.

I. Essay on Man. Second Edition, Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers,
1s. 6d.

II. Satires and Epistles. Extra fcap. 8vo. stiff covers, 2s.

io. Johnson. Rasselas; Lives of Pope and Dryden. Edited by
C.H.O. Daniel, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Worcester College, Oxford.

11. Burke. Thoughts on the Present Discontents; the two
Speeches on America; Reflections on the French Revolution. By
E. J. Payne, B.A., Fellow of University College, Oxford. Vol, I.
Extra feap. 8vo. cloth, 4s.6d. ust Published.

Vol. Il. Jn the Press.
12. Cowper. The Task, with Tirocinium, and Selections from

the Minor Poems. Edited by H. T. Griffith, B.A., Pembroke College,
Oxford. Vol. ll. Extra feap. 8vo. cloth, 3s. just Published.

Vol. I. In the Press.

Published for the University by
MACMILLAN AND CO. LONDON.

The DELEGATES OF THE PRESS invite suggestions and advice
from all persons interested in education ; and will be thankful
for hints, &c. addressed to either the Rev. G. W. Kircutin,
St. Giles’s Road East, Oxford, or the SECRETARY TO THE
Devecates, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

»
*

a
ON

,
ns Lube Lay arcane casei alias eee Ty

- ew

Ree“

Sots se, Ho

és — > =o &

ome ie we, Ce hed eee eS Dee ee

Bete p enn Leta er
RSALIFE MZ Sea
ifiegi eeineceistete tinge ti
: hay se ebie ei eet Tefen Linenp
i ‘4 : ° : / esis zs
7 EESG7e at Rete >? ed ce bd oe aE Ope FT ORpL th

iF ire

weaiaeteettoreans

: a a
shot cited ay
ee ee

neitho “Fp anted¥ deer Paqn ice ; vahcapche phe ace sapenaierevenne hank: Satan shh dancubtenelecamyibeos,
" ; nidhos : can oe es vet n neem ; teomaléetteeaonts
ty Hi tein titer sere ae args NAPE NR nerecsnt oat >
ve

os ra licensnslse on a erties Sy Serato re vn ae

1
Shinde ree ; ; ‘ : ‘ nema adeebian! uy
a a aePonayRhens Hone ‘ Nabies wt SETI ss pera nes atpen ga
yeraee a 2 * 1 oa SOP Us ie PUTT Seen peut PLS PIN TT

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Tracts on the points at issue between the Churches of England and Rome"

See other formats