OPPOSITION.

But this, saith Eusebius, this attempt of Victor, pleased not all the Bishops: as if he E had said, That he did this rather of his owne head and fancie, than by authoritie of the Synod: wherein it was decreed, nay rather they exhorted him (Ruffinus translateth it inhibebant, they commaunded) him to seeke the peace, loue, and vnitie of his brethren. The sayings of sundrie Bishops, vttered vpon this occasion, saith Eusebi­us, are yet rife in mens remembrance, whereby they sharpely reproued Victor. Among the rest that of Ireneus, writing to him in the name of the Churches which he go­uerned in France, to this effect: That true it was, the mysterie of our Lords resurre­ction ought not to be celebrated but on the Sunday: and so are they at a point with [Page 9] A him about the thing in question: but that, for the obseruance of a tradition, or aunci­ent custome, Victor in duetie ought not to cut off whole Churches: condemning there­by the abuse of his authoritie. And note here, that the interpreter of Eusebius, maketh Ireneus to say, That Victor should not cut off whole Churches from the bo­die of Christs vniuersall Church: as if Ireneus had held the Church of Rome for such: Whereas in Eusebius it is onely thus: [...], i. whole Churches of God. And his drift herein is cleere, by the whole tenor of that Epistle: The Priests, saith he vnto Victor, which before Soter presided in that Church which you now gouerne, namely, Anicetus, Pius, Higinus, Telesphorus, and Xystus, neither obserued that day themselues, nor suffered others to obserue it: yet maintained B they peace with those which came vnto them from the Parishes and Churches where it was obserued, neither did they euer reiect anie by occasion of this formalitie: [...]. But the Priests which were before you, sent vnto them the Eucharist, and communicated with them in Sacrament: So fared it betweene Polycarpus and Anicetus Priest, (i. Bishop of Rome) whom though Anicetus could not persuade to depart from that which he had euer before obserued, as being a disciple of S. Iohn, yet parted they in peace, and all the Church continued in good accord, as well they which did obserue the foureteenth day, as they which obserued it not. And in this manner wrote Ireneus, not onely to Victor, but also to sundrie Bishops of other Churches. Yet Bellarmine telleth vs,Bellarm. lib. 2. cap. 19. de Rom. Pontif. that Victor did well and wisely in so doing, to preuent Iudaisme: but Ireneus, by his C leaue, shall weigh heauier in the scales with vs than he; so also shall our Churches of France, who concurring with Victor in the matter, yet condemned the manner of his proceedings; so shall Eusebius, who hauing no part in the brawle, yet affir­meth that Ireneus justly reproued Victor. And Wicelius in our time sayth boldly,See Wicelius. That in the Bishops before Victor the spirit abounded, but in those which came after him the flesh began to haue the vpper hand: and Ireneus himselfe seemeth to touch vpon this string, where he speaketh of those, Qui Principalis consessionis tumore elati sunt, Lib. 4. cap. 4. i. who swell with the pride of the Principall, or Prime See: from whom we ought to seperate our selues.

But here Baronius maketh himselfe ridiculous in his Historie, whiles he would D persuade vs,Baronius tom. 2. An. 198. art. 2, 3, 4, 5, 9. that Theophilus bishop of Caesarea assembled the Councell in Pale­stina (which was held vpon this occasion) by commission from Victor Bishop of Rome; alledging for his author, Beda in his booke of the Vernall Equinox, writ­ten seuen hundred yeres after. Iudge the reader what credit this ought to haue in prejudice of Ireneus, Polycarpus, and Eusebius himselfe,Euseb. li. 5. c. 25. Histor. Eccles. who sayth plainely in this manner, speaking of that Synod, At this day there is extant a certaine writing of the Bishops then called together in Palestina, among whom Theophilus presided; [...]. as also ano­ther writing of those of Rome, mentioning Victor their Bishop: where we find no trace of anie prerogatiue at all. Neither sticketh he to tell vs as much of the Sy­nod of Asia; as if Polycrates had held it in qualitie of Pope Victors Legat; because E forsooth he telleth him in his Epistle, that he had called together those Bishops, Euseb. lib. 5. ca. 21. & 22. [...]. Baron. to. 2. an. 198. art. 2, 3, 4. which he entreated him to assemble; as if Popes prayers and requests were to be construed and interpreted for commaunds absolute, and proceeding from a soueraigne au­thoritie. All which is founded vpon an idle supposall, that the bishop of Rome was, euen in those dayes, reputed and generally taken as vniuersall Bishop and Pontifex Maximus, i. High Priest or Pontife.

Let vs therefore now see the grounds of this supposall, and the proofes of this assertion. First then, Baronius alledgeth a certaine Epistle of Sixtus the first, where­in he calleth himselfe the vniuersall Bishop of the Apostolicke Church. But who [Page 10] knoweth not that the most learned euen among themselues, haue euer discarded A these Epistles, as false and counterfeit? But aboue all, this hath the markes of the forge where it was hammered, bad Latine, not answerable to the puritie of those times, and ill befitting a Bishop of the Latines, with a false date of the Consuls Adrianus and Verus, who raigned long after, in the yeare 137: which might well make this grand Annalist to blush for shame. We could as well crie quittance with him, and for our purpose alledge an Epistle decretall of Pope Eleutherius to the Bishops of France,Onuphrius in Fastis Pontif. where he telleth them, That the vniuersall Church of Christ is committed to their charge; this being an Epistle of as good pistoll proofe as the other, and both alike. And what credit ought in reason to be giuen to Sixtus in a cause so neerely concerning himselfe, especially when in the next precedent Epi­stle,B he contenteth himselfe with the title of Archbishop? Secondly, he produ­ceth a certaine place out of Tertullian in his booke of Chastitie,Lib. de Pudi­cit. c. 1. where he taxeth a certaine Edict of Victor, by which he receiueth adulterers vnto penance; and whereof he baffleth the inscription: I heare talke, saith Tertullian, of an Edict, and that a peremptorie one to: Pontifex Maximus, i. The high Pontife, the Bishop of Bishops saith, I remit sinnes to adulterers and whoremasters which come to penance. True it is, that after that attempt of his vpon all Asia, any thing may seeme credible of that mans insolencie and pride: But who seeth not, that Tertullian frumpeth only and jeasteth at him? as also he doth at that other decree of Pope Zepherin: For where, saith he, shall this liberalitie of his be proposed? if in the Church, how so? seeing she is a C virgine. But a little after, in the same booke, he driueth this naile a little closer: If, saith he, because our Lord said to Saint Peter, Vpon this stone I will build my Church: and, To thee will I giue the keyes of the kingdome of heauen: thou doest therefore presume that the power of binding and loossing is deriued vpon thee: what art thou that crossest the purpose and intention of our Sauiour, who collated it onely vpon Saint Peters person? And consequently not vpon you Victor, nor vpon you Zepherin, farther than you represent Peter; not in shadow onely, as Baronius would haue it, but in truth and veritie. But grant we, that he did call himselfe Vniuersall Bishop, might not eue­rie Bishop haue done the same in regard of his charge? yes verily, and many of them vpon better reason, considering the worth and dignitie of their persons:D But would the Pope, trow you, suffer their successors now to ground any thing thereupon, in prejudice of himselfe? Saint Clement, whom commonly they thrust vpon vs, as next successor vnto Saint Peter, had not, be like, well perused and vn­derstood his euidences,Clement. Consti­tut. lib. 6. c. 14. when in his Constitutions he spake in this manner: Wee haue written to you this Catholike and vniuersall doctrine, to confirme you; you, I say, to whom the Vniuersall Bishopricke is committed. Jgnatius in E­pistola ad Phi­ladelph. And Ignatius speaking of a Bishop of Philadelphia, of his time, saith, That he was called of God to vndertake [...], that is, the ministerie of the common Church; as Baronius himselfe ren­dreth it.Nazianz. in lau­dem Cypriani. And Nazianzene saith of Saint Cyprian, That he presided not onely ouer the Church of Carthage and Africke, but also ouer all the East, all the West, ouer all the E North, Idem in laudem Athanas. and all the South: And of Athanasius, That he presided ouer the Church of Alexandria, nay ouer the whole world. But he expoundeth himselfe in both: of the first he addeth, wheresoeuer the admiration of his name came; and of the other, That he gouerned the Church of Alexandria in such sort, that the Vniuersall Church was bene­fited by him. And would God the Bishops of Rome had done the like, we neuer would haue enuied them the like honourable title.Euseb. in vita Constantin. lib. 5. c. 57. Also the Emperour Constan­tine himselfe writing to Eusebius, vpon the refusall which he made of the Bishop­ricke of Antiochia, when it was offered vnto him: You are, saith he, a most happie [Page 11] A man in this, That you are thought worthie in the opinion of all, to rule the Vniuersall Church: taking this word in that sence, which Saint Cyprian doth, when he saith, That there is but one Bishopricke, of which euerie Bishop holdeth his part in solid. Cyprian. de vni­tat. Eccles. Baron. to. 2. an. 216. artic. 9. & 10.

As for the title of High Priest, or Pontife, Baronius alledgeth no other proofe but onely the imitation of the old Iewish law, where there was a High Priest; and of Paganisme, which had Pontificem Maximum, i. a High Pontife; and groun­deth himselfe especially vpon this later: He, saith he, which was most eminent in iu­diciall authoritie aboue all the rest, was onely Pontifex Maximus, Soueraigne Pontife a­mong the Pagans: Whence Festus saith, that it was he who was reputed Iudge in all mat­ters diuine and humane. And to this purpose alledgeth this Cardinall all that B which is spoken in holie writ of the royall Priesthood of our Lord Iesus. O how weake a foundation is this for so huge a building! Why did he not rather ground himselfe vpon their Rex Sacrificulus? who according to his owne author Festus, see­meth to be the greatest among the Priests: after him Dialis the Priest of Iupiter, then Martialis, of Mars, afterwards Quirinalis, the Priest of Romulus, and last of all Pontifex Maximus, the High Pontife; all which you shall find in Festus in the word Ordo, whence we learne by the way, that this word, Orders, was anciently taken from the Heathen.

OPPOSITION.

But this matter rested not there; for the Churches of Spaine gaue notice of this attempt vnto those of Africke, and presently assembled themselues in Synod. The Synodall Epistle is yet whole to bee read in Cyprian; the summe and effect whereof is,In editio Tur­neb. Epist. 35. & Pamelij 68. That the law of God suffereth them not to readmit such persons to their charge in holie Church: That where the ordinances of God are in question, there ought to be no acceptance of persons, no relaxation in fauour of any man: That their running to Rome, or to Stephen, might not cause the ordination of Sabinus to be reuersed, he be­ing there placed by due course of law, and the other remaining incapable of restituti­on: E That Basilides might deceiue Stephen by wrong information, but God he could not: That they ought to hold themselues to that, which themselues, and all Bishops through­out the world, and Cornelius himselfe their Collegue, had formerly decreed; namely, That such persons might well be receiued vnto penance, but neuer to Priestly dignitie in the Church. In the whole course of which Epistle they euer call Cornelius and Stephen, Bishops of Rome, their Collegues. Not vnlike vnto this, was that attempt of Cornelius, not long before, vpon the Bishops of Afrike, in the case of certaine false Bishops which fled vnto him, against the censures of the Churches:Editio Parisien, Epist. 18. Pa. mel. 55. but Cyprian complained thereof vnto Cornelius as of a wrong, and in barre of such procee­dings, [Page 12] pleaded the lawes and constitutions of holie Church: These fellowes (saith A he) after all this, presume to passe the sea, &c. For seeing (sayth he) that by vs all it hath beene alreadie ordained, according to rules of equitie and iustice, That euerie ones cause should be heard in the place of the fact committed, and that to euerie Pastor should be al­lotted his proper portion of the flocke, which he was to ouersee, and for which he should stand answerable vnto God; it is not fit that those ouer whom we are set, should run from place to place, to make the Bishops, who are at vnitie among themselues, to square and fall foule one of another: (for example, Cornelius and Cyprian) but that euerie one answere for himselfe in the place, where the defendant may haue both accusers and witnesses face to face; vnlesse perhaps these few desperate companions thinke the authoritie of the Bishops of Africa, who haue condemned them, to be lesse: meaning lesse than that of Cornelius, B to whom they fled. By all which it euidently appeares, that it was the least part of Cyprians thought to acknowledge anie right of appeale to the See of Rome.

Bellarm. de Pontif. Rom. lib. 2. cap. 33.Wherefore when Bellarmine sayth, that the constitution alledged by S. Cypri­an, That euerie cause should be heard in the place of the fact committed, is to be vnder­stood onely of the first instance; the words themselues, and those which follow are too too cleere against him: The cause (sayth Cyprian) hath beene heard, sentence is passed, it is not fit that a censure of Priests or Bishops should be retracted, as rash and vn­aduised. And as friuolous is that which he sayth, that the word lesse is not spoken in comparison of the Pope, but of the cause: for those words, vnlesse they thinke the authoritie of the Bishops of Afrike to be Lesse, must necessarily be vnderstood in C comparison of them with other Bishops, of those against whom they complained, with him to whom they sayled, that is, vnto Cornelius. And all this suiteth with the veine of Cyprian, as also doth that in his Treatise of the vnitie of the Church: The other Apostles (sayth he) were the same that S. Peter was, of like honour, of equall authoritie and power, but the beginning proceedeth from vnitie, to shew that the Church is one; where yet, to bolster out this pretended Primacie, one or other hath corrupted the text in sundrie places, contrarie to the truth of manuscripts, acknowledged in the Paris edition by the learned Turnebus.

For betweene these words, Pasce oues meas, and Et quamuis, either Pamelius, or some other before him, hath inserted these, Super vnum illum aedificat ecclesiam suam,D & illi pascendas mandat oues suas, that is, He hath built his Church vpon him alone, (i. S. Peter) and him hath he commaunded to feed his sheepe. And whereas Turnebus rea­deth, Tamen vt vnitatem manifestaret, vnitatis eiusdem originem, ab vno incipientem, sua authoritate disposuit: i. yet that he (meaning Christ) might declare this vnitie, he hath declared by his authoritie, that this vnitie should take her beginning from one a­lone. Pamelius with like honestie as before, betweene these words manifestaret and vnius hath thrust in these, Vnam Cathedram constituit, i. he hath established one Chaire. Likewise after those words before mentioned, The Apostles were all the same that Peter was, &c. after the word proficiscite he addeth, Primatus Petro datur, The Primacie is giuen vnto Peter. And againe, vnto these words, vt vna Christi E ecclesia monstretur, he addeth & Cathedra vna, i. and one Chaire. And to conclude, where S. Cyprian sayth, Qui ecclesiae renititur & resistit, in ecclesia se esse confidit? i. He which resisteth the Church, can he hope that he is in the Church? Pamelius betweene these words, resistit and in ecclesia, foisteth in these, Qui Cathedram Petri super quam ecclesia fundata est deserit, i. he which forsaketh the Chaire of Peter, vp­on which the Church is builded. And the like doth he in manie other places of this Treatise; which additions, how incompatible are they with the sence and scope of the text it selfe? where it is said, The Lord hath giuen, after his resurrection, [Page 13] A equall power to his Apostles: and againe, They were all the same that Peter was: as also with that Nullitie pronounced elsewhere against appeales made ouer the sea,Cyprian. in Con­cil. Carthagin. siue de sentent. Episcop. 73. editio Parisiens. Cyprian. de A­l [...]ator. and diuers other places of the same Author. None of vs (sayth he) hath made him­selfe a Bishop of Bishops, through feare and tyrannie to force his Collegues to his obedi­ence: The heauenlie goodnesse hath bestowed vpon vs the ordering of the Apostleship, and hath by his heauenlie fauour dignified the Vicars seat of the Lord: Christ said to all the Apostles, and in them to all Bishops which should succeed them in their Vicariall ordina­tion, He which heareth you, heareth me: Idem ad Pup­pien. Epist. 66. editio Parisien. so that (sayth he) one of vs may not iudge ano­ther, but we attend (he excepteth none) the iudgement of our Lord Iesus, who alone hath power, Vnus & solus, to ordaine vs to the gouernment of his Church, and to iudge B our doings. Thus farre Cyprian: immediately vpon whose death the Church of Afrike, to cut off all claime of this pretended jurisdiction, decreed, That the Bi­shop of the first See should not be called Prince of Priests, or chiefe Bishop, Idem in Concil. Carthag. siue de sentent. Episcop. epist. 73. Concil. Afric. art. 6. Capitu. Carol. Magn. li 7. c. 17. Bochell. Decret. Ecclesiae Gallic. li. 5. tit. 5. cap. 1. or by any other like name: Which decree our French Church heretofore vnderstood expressely of the See of Rome. And now let the indifferent Reader judge, which edition, that of Pamelius, or this of Turnebus, sorteth and suiteth better with these say­ings of Cyprian, and consequently, whether these are not Harpyes clawes which thus defile the pure foord of the Fathers writings to our hands: and what they haue done in this Epistle, who can warrant vs, that they haue not done in the other writings of the same Father, and of all other Fathers?

C But here may we see as in a glasse, the audaciousnesse of Baronius, Baron. to. 1. an. 33. art. 21 & an. 34. art. 203. & passim. who would make vs beleeue, that the meaning of S. Cyprian was cleane contrarie: for first he sayth, That S. Cyprian acknowledged S. Peters Chaire as supreme Iudge ouer all Churches in the world, grounding himselfe vpon the Epistle before rehearsed, and so notoriously corrupted, which yet he is not ashamed so often to repeat, as if it were as true as Gospell; and who cannot make his owne cause seeme good, if he may be suffered to doe thus? Secondly he sayth, That in that decree against Iudgements giuen beyond the seas, the Church of Rome was still excepted; whereas indeed it was enacted directly against that Church, and against no other: but for proofe, he alledgeth a certaine decretall Epistle of Fabianus, In 1. vol. Concil. Epist. Decret. Fabian. ad Hilar. 3. Bishop of D Rome, written to Hilarius, with these words, Salua in omnibus Apostolica authoritate, i. sauing alwayes the authoritie of the See Apostolike: as if he had said, sauing the case for which the Canon was principally made; than which, what can be more ridiculously absurd? Now as touching all those Epistles which are inserted into the Councels, vntill the time of Syricius, it is agreed of on all hands, that they are of no credit, and though they were, yet were it reason that Fabianus should be credited in his owne cause? But besides the sottishnesse of the stile of this Epistle, the verie date which it beareth,Baron. an. 55. art. 21. Africano & Decio Coss. bewrayeth the stampe; for they can shew vs no such date, either in their Fasti, or in Onuphrius himselfe: And it is noted in the margent of the first volume of the Councels vp­on E this Epistle, that the greatest part thereof is found word for word in the de­cree of Sixtus the third, which was but as yesterday to speake of: a professed Annalist should not so doe. Thirdly, that notwithstanding all this, yet Cyprian did aduow the authoritie of the Church of Rome: For (sayth he) in that Epistle which he wrote to the Clergie of Rome, vpon the death of Fabianus, he tearmeth him Collegue in regard of his function, but Praepositum in respect of his place and dignitie: a meere tricke, not fitting anie simple scholler, much lesse a learned Di­uine and Cardinall: for what? must Praepositus needs signifie a Pope? Doth he not in the same Epistle call him a Bishop, and doth he not tearme him Praepositus, in [Page 14] regard of those to whom he wrote, and not of himselfe? Or doth he not giue the A same style to other Bishops, and to himselfe also, when as in his seuenth Epistle to Rogatian his Deacon in the Church of Carthage,Cyprian. epist. 7. ad Rogatian. editio. Pamel. congratulating him for the firme and stedfast confession of his Clergie, he vseth these words, The glorie of the Church is the glorie Praepositi, i. of him that is set ouer it; meaning himselfe as Bi­shop, as appeareth by the next precedent clause, In this common ioy, the portion of the Bishop is the greatest: Idem epist. 11. ad Marty. & confesso. editio. Pamel. And in the eleuenth Epistle we read, Praepositorum est, i. It is the part of them which are set ouer the Church, to instruct the hastie and ignorant, that of Pastors they become not butchers of the flocke, to wit, in suffering them which had fainted in the confession of Christ to come ouer hastily to the Communion; where he expoundeth this word Praepositos, by Pastors: so likewise in the 13, 15,B 23, & 27 Epistles, as Pamelius himselfe cannot denie: But as you see, a little stuffe will serue this Cardinall to make the Pope a coat. Fourthly, he sayth, That all questions of heresie were referred to the judgement of the Bishops of Rome, exclusiuely to all other, at least that others came but onely to stand as cyphers, al­ledging the example of Origen; who when he was accused of heresie, sent (sayth he) his confession first of all to Fabian Bishop of Rome, as to the Bishop of all the Catholike Church; and to this purpose citeth Eusebius: but Eusebius joyneth Fabian with o­thers: He wrote (sayth he) to Fabian, and to manie other Gouernours of the Church concerning his true profession; and so runs the Latine translation: and who doubts but that among them all, such a man as Fabian, Bishop of the imperiall Citie,C should be respected and written to with the first? Fifthly and lastly, he saith, That Fabian being dead, the Clergie of Rome (he should haue said the Colledge of Cardinals) tooke vpon them the care of all the Churches;Baron. an. 245. ex Euseb. lib. 6. c. 8. Grae. ad. his proofes in this point are like the rest: for (sayth he) The Clergie of Rome aduertised S. Cyprian of the death of Fabian, as appeareth by his third Epistle: and knowing that S. Cyprian had withdrawne himselfe from Carthage, wrote vnto his Clergie, exhorting them to take heed that none went astray: Cyprian. epist. 3. edit. Pamel. And this they did (sayth he) Vice Pastoris, i. doing as Fa­bian should haue done if he had liued; sending vnto all Churches copies of the order ta­ken at Rome in Lapsorum negotio, i. touching their case which had fallen in persecuti­on. And what? must these mutuall offices of care and loue, this interchangeable D aduising one another, be taken for an argument of soueraigntie and power? Can­not one Church consult another but with losse of her libertie, nor take counsaile, but with prejudice to her freedome? or must counsaile serue the giuer for a claime of homage, and the taker for a yoke of thrall and bondage? Those golden Epistles of S. Cyprian, written whether to the Pope, or whether to the Clergie of Rome, vp­on so manie points of great importance, wherein he instructs, exhorts, and some­times sharpely reproues them, shall they serue for so manie presidents to his suc­cessors in the Church of Carthage, of superioritie and vsurpation ouer other Churches, and ouer the Church of Rome it selfe? See here Reader the course of their impostures, and withall remember (which Baronius wittingly suppresseth)E That this third Epistle of the Clergie of Rome to the Clergie of Carthage, on which he grounds himselfe,In notis ad epist. 3. is not to be found either in the edition of Manutius, or in anie manuscript, as Pamelius himselfe acknowledgeth.

OPPOSITION.

But neither Cyprian, nor yet the Churches, suffered themselues to bee so muz­led by these excommunications; for first Cyprian in his Epistle to Pompeius, Cypria. in Epist. ad Pomp. 74. A­mong other things, saith he, which our brother Stephen hath written vnto vs, either insolently, or vnfittingly, or contrarie to himselfe, hee hath also added this; If any man come to vs, for what heresie soeuer (making no difference betweene heresie and here­sie, which yet the Councell of Nice afterward thought fit to make) let him receiue imposition of hands in penance: nay farther, saith he, his obduratnesse of heart and ob­stinacie C is such, as to presume to maintaine, That by the baptisme of Marcion, Valentin, and Appelles, children may be borne vnto God. Thus he spake, and this he maintai­ned in heat of contention, contrarie to what the Church afterward defined, be­cause these retained not the forme of baptisme: But, saith he, a Bishop should not onely teach, but also learne; and he is the best teacher of others, who is himselfe euerie day a learner: As if he had said, That Stephen should doe well to learne religion, by conferring with his Collegues: not to lay his authoritie vpon them, vnder a pre­tence of custome, which not grounded vpon truth, saith he,Cyprian. Epist. 71 is nought else but an aged errour. Saint Peter, saith he, the first chosen of our Lord, vpon whom also hee built his Church, when Saint Paul disputed with him vpon the poynt of circumcision, carried not D himselfe in this manner; neither boasted he, that the Primacie was giuen vnto him: hee told him not, that he was an after commer, and that foremost must take vp hinder most: or disdained him, for that he had beene a persecutor of the Church: but submitted him­selfe with all willingnesse to truth and reason: giuing vs thereby an example of patience, not to be selfe-willed, in louing that which proceedeth from our selues; but rather to ac­count all that as our own, which our brethren shal teach vs for our good, & saluation of our soules. And vpon these and the like tearmes he euer holdeth him. But Stephen stai­ed not here: for he had alreadie written to the Easterne Bishops,Euseb. l. 7. c. 4. who held opini­on with Cyprian, declaring vnto them, That hee could no longer hold communi­on with them, if they persisted in that opinion: as appeareth by that Epistle which E Dionysius Alexandrinus wrot vnto Xystus, who succeeded vnto Stephen: and yet more plainly, by that which he wrot to Firmilianus, Helenus, and others; to whom also Cyprian had alreadie dispatched Rogatian his Deacon. And the Easterne Bi­shops, vpon the intimation giuen them from Cyprian, grew much offended with the insolencie and pride of Stephen, and therefore in their answer vnto Cyprian, We, say they, haue cause indeed to thanke him, for that his inhumanitie hath giuen vs large testimonie of your faith and wisedome; yet deserueth not Stephen any thankes for the good he hath done vnto vs, no more than did Iudas, for that by his treason he became an instrument of saluation vnto all the world. But let this fact of Stephen passe, least the re­membrance [Page 16] of his pride and insolencie put vs farther in mind of his greater impietie. A And a little after, comming to the fact it selfe: Although, say they, in diuers Pro­uinces many things are diuersly obserued, yet no man by occasion thereof euer departed from the vnitie of the Catholike Church; which yet Stephen now presumeth to doe, breaking that league of peace with vs, which his predecessours so inuiolably obserued: He markes not what a flaw he makes in this precious gemme of Christian veritie, when he be­trayeth and forsaketh vnitie: And yet, say they, Stephen all this while vaunteth him­selfe to haue Saint Peters chaire by succession. And this no doubt was that which ani­mated him to presume so farre vpon the Churches: But made they any whit the more reckoning of his excommunications therefore? or did they not rather tell him, That thereby he had excommunicated himselfe? Surely, say they, a man full B of stomacke breedeth strifes, and he that is angrie encreaseth sinnes. How many quarels hast thou, O Stephen, set on foot throughout the Churches? and how much sinne hast thou heaped vp vnto thy selfe, in cutting thy selfe off from so many flockes? For so hast thou done: seeing he is a right scismatike which departeth voluntarily from the vnitie of the Church. Cyprian. Ep. 4. And thou, whilest thou wentest about to seperat others from thee, hast seperated thy selfe from all other Churches, &c. Walke, saith the Apostle, in your voca­tion, in all humilitie of mind, in meekenesse and patience, supporting one another in loue, endeuouring to keepe the vnitie of the spirit in the band of peace, &c. And hath not Ste­phen well obserued this precept, thinke you, when hee breakes off now with all the Chur­ches of the East, and anone with those of the South? Or hath not he with great patience C and meekenesse receiued their embassadours, who vouchsafed not to admit them to ordi­narie talke? giuing order, with great humilitie, that no man should receiue them vnder his roofe: and was so farre from giuing them the Pax, that he forbad any man to affoord them lodging. Can such a man be of one bodie, or of one spirit, who is scarcely of one soule in himselfe? And see whither this grew in the end: He is not, say they, ashamed to call Cyprian false Christ, and false Apostle, and a deceitfull workeman: For, finding his owne conscience surcharged with all these imputations, he wisely began to obiect that to a­nother, which others might farre more iustly haue laid vpon himselfe. Thus then wrot the Churches of the East vnto Saint Cyprian, as much offended with the insolen­cie which Stephen had vsed vpon this occasion; so that Pamelius had reason, I con­fesse,D to say as he did, That he would willingly haue left out this Epistle, as Ma­nutius had done before him, but that Morelius, i. Turnebus himselfe had printed it in his edition. How farre is all this short of that mild and temperat humour of Saint Cyprian? Cyprian. Epist. ad Inbaianum Edit. Paris. 70. in Edit. Pa­melij 73. We, saith he, will not fall at variance with our Collegues and fellow Bi­shops, for the Heretikes sakes: We maintaine in patience and meekenesse the loue of heart, the honour of our societie, the band of faith and Priestlie vnitie: And for this cause at this present, by the inspiration of God, haue we written a treatise of the Benefits of Pati­ence. And at the same time, for a lenitife of this sharpe humour, he wrot another booke of Zeale and Enuie. Such were the essayes of the Bishops of Rome, euen in the heat of persecution: and such were the wiles of Satan to serue his owne E turne, and to set forward his worke, by their ambition and bad carriage of a good cause. But Constantine comming shortly after to restore peace vnto the Churches, and as it were to shed forth the sweet influence of his liberalitie and fauour vpon them; these sparkes of ambition, fostered by his bountie, and no waies restrained by persecution, began to flame out more violently than before.

Baronius in the meane time hunteth on vpon the old sent, and not able to con­tradict the veritie of these proceedings, will yet persuade vs that the Bishops of Rome commaunded absolutely in all the Churches: and so did they, I confesse, [Page 17] A and we haue alreadie seene but too much of their ambition: but as carelesly were they obeyed, as hath alreadie beene declared, and more plainely hereafter shal ap­peare. First therefore, saith he, when as Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria, Baron. vol. 2. an. 263. art. 30. & sequent. in oppug­ning the heresie of Sabellius, was accused by those of Pentapolis vnto Dionysius Bishop of Rome, as hauing spoken some things not so properly concerning the sonne of God, hee purged himselfe to the Bishop of Rome by letters. And what, I pray you, could this good Bishop doe lesse in a slaunder of such importance, especially to those to whom he had beene defamed? But what, of this forwardnesse of his must wee needs erect a Consistorie in the Church? or doth Athanasius report it as a suit at law? These fellowes, saith he, without euer asking him how he would be vnderstood, [...]. B went to Rome, and misreported of him. He saith not, That they accused him in forme of law, but brandeth onely their pretended zeale, with a marke of leuitie and rashnesse. And as touching Dionysius Bishop of Rome, he saith,Athanas. de Sententijs Dio­nysij. That he sent him word what they had said of him, and that thereupon the other wrot him backe presently his apologie. And what, I pray you, is all this, more than a brotherlie communica­tion, and entercourse of kindnesse betweene two good Bishops? Secondly, saith Baronius, in the case of Samosatenus, when he hatched his heresie in Antioch,Baron. an. 265. art. 10. & se­quent. & an. 272. art. 1. & 2. Athanas. lib. de Synod. Euseb. lib. 7. c. 29 30. Graec. c. 23. & 24. Lat. they presently ran to the Bishop of Rome: whereas yet Athanasius joyneth another with him in part of this praise and commendation. Two Dionysius, saith he, the one of Rome, the other of Alexandria, ouerthrew Samosatenus. What difference here be­tweene C these two? And Eusebius, In a Synod, saith he, of verie many Bishops assem­bled in Antioch, he was cōdemned of heresie, & cut off from all the Catholike Churches vn­der heauen. He saith not, that these Bishops sent to Rome for a commission, but wel he saith, That [...] (for this was the proper word) i. assembled together with one accord, they wrot a letter, directed to Dionysius Bishop of Rome, [...]. and to Maximus of Alexandria (who lately had succeeded the other Dionysius in that See) in particular, and to the Bishops of all other Prouinces in generall; to let them vnderstand what care they had taken in the quenching of this heresie: And so goeth the verie inscription of this letter, To Dionysius, and to Maximus, [...]. and to all other Bishops our fellow seruants throughout the world, and to all the Vniuersall Church which is vnder heauen. And what D trace of that pretended Primacie find we in all this? Thirdly,Baron. to. 2. an. 272. art. 18. when as the here­tike would not relinquish the Bishops house to Domnus, elected in his roome by the Synod of the place, he ran to Aurelian the Emperour, not yet engaged in his persecutions against the Church: And he, saith Baronius, as Eusebius reporteth,Euseb. li. 7 c. 24. Lat. c. 30, Graec. verie religiously ordained, that liuerie of the house should be made, and seisin giuen, to whom the Bishops of this doctrine which were in Italie and in the citie of Rome, should assigne it. These are the words of Eusebius: and thence concludeth he, that Aureli­an, Pagan as he was, yet acknowledged the power of the Bishop of Rome, ouer all the world. How so? when as it appeareth that the other Bishops were joy­ned with him, and consequently in this respect are made his equals, this matter E being referred by the Emperour to the Bishops that were neere adjoyning to Rome, rather than to those of Alexandria, because he answered this petition at Rome? But the mysterie is this, the Latine translation of Eusebius hath it thus: To whom the Christians of Italie, and the Bishops of Rome, should assigne it: Which Baronius, to serue his purpose with this place, hath voluntarily followed, though knowing it to be corrupted: because the originall in Greeke make the other Bishops of Italie to enter into concurrencie with him, and in order of nomi­nation, to stand before them. Fourthly, what will you say, if Baronius telleth vs, That euen in those dayes it was the fashion to kisse the Popes feet: for hee durst [Page 18] not say the pantof [...]e.Baro. an. 294. art. 8. & sequēt. For proofe he telleth vs a tale out of a certaine old Legend,A of one Praepedigna, wife vnto one Claudius, who was conuerted to Christianitie by one Susanna his neece, neere of kin to the Emperor Dioclesian: and that Praepedig­na for joy hereof, because she her selfe was long since in heart a Christian, ran to Caius Bishop of Rome, cast her selfe at his feet, and according as the custome was, saith the Legend, kissed them. And hath Baronius no better authors than these, which himselfe, with others of like stuffe, hath in so many places vtterly condem­ned? Where can he shew vs that this Caius Bishop of Rome was nephew to the Emperour Dioclesian, or that Susanna was his grand child? a name not vsed among the Heathen. But grant we all this to be true, doth not he himselfe tell vs in that verie article, That this same Claudius also kissed the feet of Gabinius the Priest? If B so, what greater honour then hath the Pope than a simple Priest? or if this be on­ly an argument of zeale and affection in the one, why should it be interpreted for adoration or fealtie in the other.

OPPOSITION.

This great aboundance and plenty of wealth falling by heaps vpon the Church, caused many deuout and well disposed persons to forecast cruell things. The Le­gend of Syluester saith,Legenda B. Syluest. That there was at that time a voice heard from heauen, say­ing, Hodiè effusum est venenum in Ecclesiā, i. This day is there a poison powred forth vpon the Church. But what euer the wealth of the Roman Church was, this one thing is cleere, as touching their authoritie, That when there was question about Donatus, who stood an heretike condemned by the Churches of Afrike, Constan­tine left him not to be judged by Miltiades Bishop of Rome, but appointed De­legats E for the hearing of his cause, namely, Maternus, Rheticus, & Marinus, Bishops of Collen,Optat. cont. Parmen. li. 1. August. Epist. 162. & 166. Authun, and Arles, as Optatus & Augustine report: with whom he joy­ned afterwards in commission for the same cause, the said Miltiades. And when Do­natus refused to stand vnto their judgement, he assigned him the Councel of Arles (which himselfe had formerly assembled) to judge of his appeale; and at last gaue sentence vpon him, himselfe in person at Milan: so that the Bishops of Rome, of Authun, and the rest, were all equall in this commission, without any colour of prioritie. Neither needed Constantine any great intreatie, vpon the difference and [Page 21] A controuersie of Arrius, himselfe to call the Nicene Councell,Theodor. lib. 1. Histor. Eccles. cap. 7. and there to pre­side in person, witnesse Eusebius, Socrates, Theodoret, Sozomene, Gelasius, and the whole companie of Fathers, assembled in that Councell by their Synodall Epi­stles: which Fathers tooke vpon them to order the Bishop of Rome, and did or­der him by speciall Canon; which Canon, because it is cauilled, and contradicted by some, deserueth more narrowly to be scanned, and more particularly to be considered.

The sixt Canon therefore of the first Nicene Councell, about the yeare 325,An. 325. concerning the ranking and ordering of Bishops euerie one in his place,Canones Graec. Concil. Nicen. 1. can. 6. 7. [...]. is read in these words, Let the auncient customes be obserued, which are in Aegypt, Lybia, and B Pentapolis, so that the Bishop which is in Alexandria haue authoritie ouer all these, be­cause such also is the manner or custome of the Bishop of Rome: where the Greeke word is [...], that is, a thing vsed by custome; by which appeareth, that it was a matter onely of custome, not of law, much lesse an ordinance or decree of God: Likewise in Antioch and in other Prouinces, let euerie Church retaine her due honour. And in the seuenth Canon is like prouision made for the Church of Hierusalem, and the same reason added: Because such hath beene the custome, and the ancient tradition, to honour the Church of Aelia (for so was Hierusalem called, after that Adrian had re­built it in another place) let her also haue her honour next after the other, with reser­uation alwayes of due honour to the Metropolitane Church. And so is this Canon C read in Gelasius Cyzicenus in the Acts of this Councell taken out of the Vatican:Gelas. Cyzicen. in Act. Syno. Nice. 1. pag. 61. where we may obserue, that this Councell foundeth them all alike vpon custome, which it calleth [...], a manner, wont, or custome, placing the Bi­shop of Rome betweene those of Alexandria and of Antioch, vnto whom it as­signeth their proper portions, in euerie respect equall to him of Rome. Of this custome we read in Epiphanius in expresse tearmes: The custome (sayth he) is such, Epiphan. her. 68. in princi. that the Bishop of Alexandria hath ecclesiasticall cure and charge ouer all Aegypt, The­baida, Mareotis, Lybia, Ammonia, Mareotida, and Pentapolis. And Ruffinus, Ruffin. lib. 1. cap. 6. who li­ued in the same time with S. Ierome, about 60. yeares after this Councell, citeth the Canons thereof, and among the rest this sixt Canon, to the effect of the Ca­non D before rehearsed: In Alexandria (sayth he) and in the Citie of Rome, let the an­cient custome be obserued: to wit, that the one should take care of the Churches of Aegypt, and the other suburbicariarum, that is, of the Churches neere vnto the Citie, meaning Rome. And the truth is, that at this time, doe he what he could, he could not extend the limits of his jurisdiction, so farre as vnto Milan or Ra­uenna; whereof there is a type and figure remaining at this day at Rome, which witnesseth as much: wherein the Church of Lateran is expressed to be a Patriar­chall Church, vnto which there are seuen Bishops assigned to celebrate before the Pope vpon high daies, or to assist the Pope, if he pleased to celebrate himselfe,Onuphri. de Episcop. titulis & Diacon. Cardinal. to wit, the Bishops, as saith Onuphrius, of the adioyning Cities, namely, Ostia, Porto, E Sylua candida, Sabini, Praeneste, Tusculum, and Alba: which Ruffin here seemeth to call Suburbicarias, which yet perhaps comprised somewhat more, as the countries of Marca and Tuscanie, as we may collect out of the Theodosian Code. True it is, that Balsamon expounding the Greeke Canon, extendeth the authoritie of the Bishop of Rome ouer all the West, because that in his time, which was about the yeare 800, he had stretched his wings a little farther;Balsamon in Ca. Nice. Synod. cap. 6. & 7. and Balsamon thought it ynough to exempt the East from his authoritie, not caring in the meane time what became of our Churches of the West. But this one thing is euident, that Gratian long since entred this Canon in his collection of decrees, in the same [Page 22] sence which we alledge it, and in more forcible tearmes than we doe cite them,A namely thus:Distinct. 65. Can. 6. Nichola. in Ep. ad Michael. Imperator. Let the old custome continue in Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis, since the Bi­shop of Rome hath the like custome: For to interprete this Canon after Nicholas the first, who liued fiue hundred yeares since that Councell, as Gregorie the thirteenth and Bellarmine doe, saying, That the Councell of Nice knew well ynough, that our Lord had giuen all to the Church of Rome, and therefore could haue no meaning to order her, but others by her example, were first to make him judge in his owne cause, and se­condly to presuppose the thing in question, which is an apparant fallax. But Bel­larmine hath yet one crochet farther of his owne braine, he telleth vs, That in the vulgar copies there are wanting in the beginning of this Canon, these words, The Church of Rome hath euer had the Primacie, yet let the old custome stand &c. But I B wonder which are those which he calleth the vulgar copies, or whence is it that he would haue these Canons taken, if not out of the Greeke Councels, out of Ruffin, Balsamon Patriarch of Antioch, out of Gratians decrees, canonized by them­selues, or out of Cyzicenus, who tooke them out of their owne Librarie, and lastly, if not out of the old Romane Code it selfe,Codex canonem vetus ecclesiae Roman. edit. Paris. An. 1609. where this Canon beginneth with these words, Antiquae consuetudines seruentur &c. Let old customes be kept; hauing this summarie ouer head, Of priuiledges belonging to certaine Cities, joyning Rome as you see with other cities. What copie can Bellarmine produce vnto vs more authenticall than these?Concil. Chalced. Can. 16. Peraduenture he will say, the Councell of Chalcedon, where it is so read as he alledgeth, Action 16. But what if we reply, that the C Greeke copie of this Councell hath no such matter? That Balsamon neuer heard thereof? What will he rejoyne, especially seeing that this Councell was held in the Greeke Church? And put case it were not, must we seeke the Canons of the Nicene Councell among those of Chalcedon, rather than in the Nicene Coun­cell it selfe? Moreouer, seeing that Bellarmine sticketh not to tell vs, that it was Paschasin, Legate of Pope Leo, which proposed it in this manner in the Councell of Chalcedon, what securitie will he giue vs, that this Paschasin dealt more honest­ly now, than did he, which afterwards falsified this verie Canon in the open face of the Councell of Carthage? But this is not all: for Bellarmine himselfe corrup­teth Paschasin: for whereas he proposeth those words, Quod ecclesia Romana &c. as D a title onely or summarie to the Canon, Bellarmine alledgeth them as part of the text and decision it selfe, saying, Ecclesia Romana semper habuit Principatum, inuer­ting quite the sence and meaning of the Fathers. Moreouer, true it is, that Pas­chasin alledged those words in manner as we haue said; but Bellarmine concealeth, that when Aetius Archdeacon of Constantinople had deliuered the booke of Canons to Constantine, Secretarie to the Synode, Constantine read the sayd sixt Canon as we now doe, beginning with those words, Antiquae consuetudines ser­uentur, Can. 3. and not with those other, Quod ecclesia Romana &c. And the decree of the Councell thereupon followed,Can. 28. That the Bishop of Constantinople should hold the first place or primacie after the Bishop of Rome, because she was new Rome. Neither is it the E quarrell betweene vs, which of these two hath the prioritie, but we say that it was so decreed, Propter principalitatem vrbis, [...], not by ordinance from Christ, not by anie authoritie deriued from S. Peter, neither yet by anie graunt from Constantine, or act of the Nicene Councell, but that it was here so or­dered, Propter primatum vrbis, i. because Rome was the chiefe citie; and so as, that Constantinople, which had none of these fond claimes to make, ijsdem primatibus honoris, & ijsdem priuilegijs vtatur, should enjoy the same primacie of honour, and equall priuiledges, for no other reason but because she was Nona Roma, new [Page 23] A Rome. Now, if those pretended priuiledges of the Church of Rome came from the Gospell, or from the prerogatiue of S. Peter, how could these be made equall with them? And if these be equall, then is it euident that those other came not from the Gospell, or prerogatiue of S. Peter: and why then should these men so abuse the name of the Gospell? Truth it is, that the morrow after Lucentius the Popes Legate protested against this decree, requiring it to be retracted, and an Act to be made of such his Protestation: But his Protestation was rejected by the Emperours Delegates themselues, who pronounced in this manner, as is there expressed: The honourable Iudges said, what we haue pronounced, all the Synod hath ap­proued, namely, touching the Canon against which they protested. So farre was it from B that which Bellarmine would haue,Bellarm. de Roman. Pontif. lib. 2. cap. 13. That the Fathers of that Councell held them­selues satisfied with the remonstrations of Paschasin: and this is the truth and sin­ceritie which they euer vse in alledging Councels. As for his finall answere, to which he holds himselfe, it is more than ridiculous: The true exposition and mea­ning of that Canon (sayth he) is, that the Bishop of Alexandria should gouerne those Prouinces, because the Bishop of Rome was so wont to doe, that is, was wont before anie definition of the Councels, to suffer the Bishop of Alexandria to gouerne them. But let him tell me in conscience, can these words, [...], i. Quia Romanus Episcopus ita consueuit, alias, Quia Romano Episcopo pardis mos est, that is, Because this is the manner or custome of the Bishop of Rome; can, I say, these C words be thus vnderstood, without violencing and wresting all sort of languages? Or can this exposition anie wayes suit with the opinion of Ruffinus? Or can Bel­larmine but blush at the remembrance of this, euen in his secret chamber? Adde we hereunto, that in that celebrious and renowmed Councell of Nice, the depu­ties of the Bishop of Rome presided not, but contented themselues with the fourth roome. So that Cardinall Cusanus hauing expounded this sixt Canon as we now doe, had reason to say as he doth:De concordant. Cathol. lib. 2. cap. 12. Hence we may see (saith he) how much the Bishop of Rome hath at this time gotten, onely by vse and custome of subiectionall obedi­ence, beyond that which the old customes of the Church afforded him.

This then is the naked truth, according to that which we find in Histories, D which yet Baronius would faine disguise, either beleeuing it himselfe, or willing to put the gull vpon other men, to make them beleeue, that from the verie cradle and infancie of Christianitie there hath euer beene a Pope, wrapt in such clouts as now we see him in: and that Constantine, because among others he gaue largely also to the Church of Rome, therefore deuested himselfe of his imperiall robe and dignitie, to clad him withall. And obserue by what degrees he commeth to it: First (saith he) To the end that the soueraigne Bishop of Christian religion should no longer dwell in a priuate house, Baron. to. 3. an. 312. art. 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85. he gaue vnto Miltiades for him and his successors after him one of his palaces, to wit, that of Lateran in Rome. And whence had Baronius this report? He is ashamed to alledge that Epistle of Isidore the Collector; but E whence had he it? After much trash, We haue it (saith he) from an approued Author, Can. 12. q. 1. c. 15. § denique. namely, from Optatus Mileuitanus, who telleth vs, that Miltiades Bishop of Rome held the Councell of Rome in the house of Fausta in the Lateran: he should haue added,Optat. Mileuit. aduers. Parm. lib. 1. That he kept the Iubilie there also. But what can he argue or proue out of these words? That that was the Bishops house? or if it were, that it was giuen him by Constantine? We read, that not long after Syluester held another Councell, Intra Thermas Domitianas: was that house therefore his also? or if that stately palace of Lateran was his before, what needed he now to borrow another mans? Yet this were a small matter if he stayed there: but taking this as granted, he wisely groun­deth [Page 24] thereupon, and inferreth, That seeing the Emperour bestowed his Palace on him,A reason it selfe would, that we beleeue, that he gaue him his imperiall robes also: which conjecture of his vanisheth like smoake, so soone as it is denied. Secondly, he telleth vs,Baron. to. 3. an. 324. art. 78. & sequ. that Constantine in the 24 yere of his reigne ordained, That the Bishops of the Christian law should from that time forward haue the same priuiledges which the idolatrous Priests had and enioyed in times past: not seeing, at least not considering, what prejudice he doth to his owne cause, whilest he maketh it to appeare vnto vs, that what euer they haue of this sort, they haue it all from thence. But yet, what author hath he?Baron. an. 311. & an. 315. art. 10. None, but the Acts of Pope Syluester in Latin, which him­selfe in so manie places vilifieth, as being full of enormous falsities. And yet from this sinke raketh he all those priuiledges of idoll Priests and Pontifes, to settle B them vpon the Christians: They had (sayth he) as chiefe among them, Rex Sacrifi­culus, who in their solemne feast was wont to watch, and haue an eye ouer all the rest: They had also their soueraigne Pontife, An. 324. art. 79. Pontifex Maximus, arbitrator of all questions ari­sing about matters diuine or humane among them: And who can thinke, that Constan­tine would long endure, that these should exceed the Christians in pompe and glorie? the Christians, I say, to whom himselfe was contented to bow his necke? Such are the proofes of this absolute authoritie and power of the Bishop of Rome: yet may we learne from him those proud and pompous obseruances vsed by the Popes, wherein if he erre somewhat in the times, yet he maketh amends for it in the matter. The Idoll Priests (sayth he) as Tacitus reporteth, Tacit. lib. 12. had this priuiledge, to enter the Capitoll in C their Litter; Plutarch. q. 9. & 10. Cic. ad Attic. lib. 2. ep. 24. Prudent. Hym. 10. so may you see the Pope alwayes carried through the Citie. Whomsoeuer they met (saith Plutarch) they neuer vncouered vnto him; no more doth the Pope at this day. They were clad (sayth Tullie) with scarlet of the deepest dye: so are the Pope and his Cardinals. To conclude, the High Priest, as Prudentius reporteth, at the time of his consecration, had his labels, and his crowne of gold. O how much are we beholding to Baronius, who presenteth vnto vs their Pope, attyred from top to toe, in habit of a Pagan? But to say the truth, the Popes were no such jollie fellowes in those dayes, neither can anie proofe be made thereof. As for the name of High Priest, Pontifex Maximus, it had beene no lesse than flat treason to haue vsurped it, see­ing that,Histor. lib. 4. as Zosimus reporteth, as well Constantine himselfe, as other Emperours D after him, by the space of one hundred yeares, vntill the time of Gratian, both re­tained the name, and vsed the pontificall robes and ornaments, presented vnto them by the Priests at the time of their coronation: Which Baronius himselfe elsewhere not onely affirmeth,Baron. to. 3. an. 312. art. 94. & sequ. but also proueth by sundrie old inscriptions which he produceth, and giueth the reason thereof himselfe, namely, that therefore the High Priesthood was ioyned with the imperiall dignitie, that the Senat and people of Rome, those which were yet of the Heathenish faction, might not so easily be drawne to conspire against the Christian Emperours, as being of a foreine and different religion. And who can then imagine, that anie other durst vsurpe that name in Rome, and in their presence? Thirdly, Baronius maintaineth, That if the Pope had not per­haps E the title, yet he had in effect the power of a supreame Iudge in all causes of Religion and Heresie, and that he was so commonly reputed and taken in the world: much troubled in mind, as it seemeth, that Constantine himselfe tooke knowledge of the cause of the Donatists, receiued their Appeale, appointed De­legates, and in the end sentenced and decided the cause himselfe in person; where­of to doubt, were to call all Historie into question. The truth of the Historie is this: The Donatists being moued by Anulinus the Proconsull, by order from the Emperor, to reconcile themselues to Caecilian Bishop of Carthage, had there­upon [Page 25] A recourse vnto the Emperour: And because they held the Bishops of Af [...]ike as suspect, preferred a petition vnto him, That he would be pleased to appoint them Iudges out of Fraunce: And Optatus sayth, That the Emperour hereupon grew verie wroth, and said, You craue iudgement of me in my secular Courts, Optat. Mileui. cont. Parm. lib. 1. which am my selfe to attend my doome from the hands of Christ: as being justly incensed with the brawles and wranglings of these Bishops, who in Christian dutie should haue fallen to an accord, without an vmpire. And yet as Optatus sayth, at their suit Iudges were appointed, namely, Maternus Bishop of Cullen, Rheticus of Authun, and Marinus of Arles. Here Baronius telleth vs,Baron. to. 3. an. 313. That Constantine was as yet a [...]ce in the Faith, not skilled in the courses and proceedings of the Church; but that after­ward B he reformed this error, being giuen to vnderstand, that this belonged onely to the Bishop of Rome: which (saith he) the Emperour testifieth by that Epistle which he wrote vnto him thereupon: by which letter, at the solicitation of Anulinus, he joyned him in commission with those other three, for the hearing and determining of that cause in the Synod. Seeing therefore that he groundeth the reformation of the Emperours judgement vpon this Epistle, it shall not be amisse to examine the contents thereof; First the title of it is this: [...]. Euseb. lib. 10. cap. 5. A copie of the Emperour Constantine his letter, by which he commaundeth to call a Synod at Rome, for the vnitie and concord of the Churches; The superscription, this: [...], i. To Mil­tiades Bishop of Rome, and to Marcus. Where Baronius, impatient to see a compa­nion C joyned with the Pope, to make him all in all, in stead of [...], readeth [...], by what authoritie I know not, nor what copie he hath to follow: [...]. But graunt we that it is so, what doth I pray you [...] signifie in all auncient Wri­ters, and euen in Dionysius himselfe, whom they falsely surname the Areopagite, but onely a Bishop, that is, a man hauing charge and ouersight of diuine Seruice? But to the purpose: it is farre more likely, if we will stand vpon conjectures, that that word Marcus was written short, to stand for Maternus or Marinus, with an ab­breuiation in the end, in this manner, Materno or Marino &c. a thing vsuall in those Patents, which they called Formatas or Sacras, when they were directed to manie at once; of whom, in the exemplifications, they named onely some few of the D first, and then added, [...], i. and to the rest: And such might that copie of Eu­sebius be. But what sayth the Patent it selfe? [...] (a word vsuall in their so­lemne decrees) that is, It hath seemed good vnto me, that Caecilian, with ten other Bishops, should repaire to Rome, there to haue hearing before you, and before Rheticus, Maternus and Marinus your Collegues, whom I haue commanded to hasten thither for this purpose (according to that of S. Augustine, where he sayth,August. in breu. Collat. That then and th [...]e were read the letters of the Emperour before them, by which he enioyned them to heare the cause of Caecilian:) Also, I haue caused to be deliuered into their hands the copies sent vnto me by Anulinus the Proconsall, [...]. to the end that your Grauitie (a great inciui­litie of the Emperour, not to say your Holinesse) may the better aduise of some E course to be held in the proceedings and finall determination of this cause. And now let the reader judge, where the authoritie then rested, and what omnipotencie the Pope then had. But so eagre are they in this matter, that of a simple voice and suffrage of the Pope they will needs make a definitiue sentence: By the sentence of Miltiades (sayth Baronius) this cause was ended and controuersie decided: Baron. an. eod. art. 26. hauing no colour for his assertion, but onely this that Miltiades spake last; whereas the Au­thor speaketh onely in this manner: Caecilian was pronounced innocent by all the aboue named Bishops, and by the sentence of Miltiades himselfe, with which the iudge­ment was concluded; and reason good: for he presided, as was fit he should, being [Page 26] Bishop of Rome, in a Synod held at Rome: Yet would not the Donatists here A rest;Optat. cont. Parmen. lib. 1. and Optatus thereupon sayth, That Donatus thought fit to appeale from the Bi­shops (he sayth not from Miltiades, or from the Bishop of Rome) and that Con­stantine grew highly offended with this course, and cried out, O the boldnesse of these mad fellowes! they haue entred their appeale as the Gentiles vse to doe in their suites at law: so distastfull and vnpleasing to him was this bangling of the Clergie. Yet for all this (though Baronius should burst for anger) the Emperour in the end ad­mitted of their appeale, and gaue order that a Councell should be called at Arles, for the oyer and terminer of this cause, writing to sundrie Bishops and Metropo­litanes, to be present at it: And we find in Eusebius a copie of his Letters Patents, directed to Chrestus Bishop of Syracuse; the title whereof is, as of that other to B Miltiades: by which he commaundeth a Councell to be called &c. and the tenor as followeth;Euseb. lib. 10. cap. 5. edit. Lat. Hauing declared the first judgement which was giuen in this cause, by expresse order from himselfe, by certaine Bishops of France and Afrike, the Bi­shop of Rome also being there present (he saith not President) in the end, Wee (sayth he) haue commaunded certaine Bishops to assemble in Synod vpon such a day at Arles; giuing him likewise straitly in charge to be there in person, to the end (saith he) that [...], i. by thy Grauitie (which qualitie and no other he vsed be­fore vnto Miltiades) and by the wisedome of the rest this controuersie may be compo­sed. Episto. Constant. ad Abla. ab ipso Baron. citat. ex Biblioth. Pet. Pyth. August. ep. 68. August. cont. Parmen. lib. 1. cap. 5. To which purpose also he wrote vnto Ablauius, Grand Master of the house­hold, willing him to follow this businesse, and euer with these tearmes, Preceperam C venire, iniungendum duxi, facias nauigare, and the like. So that S. Augustine speaketh verie properly when he sayth, Alterum Episcopale iudicium dedit haben­dum &c. that is, He appointed another hearing of this cause, to be had by the Bi­shops at Arles, leauing it a cleare case, to whom it appertained of right to call a Councell. And this Emperour caused at length (as S. Augustine reporteth) two hundred Bishops out of France, Italie, and Spaine to assemble at Arles; himselfe also was there present,Baron. an. 314. art. 53. he presided, and in the end gaue sentence himselfe in fa­uour of the Catholiques: whereupon Baronius citeth that vnto vs which we find in Eusebius his first booke;Euseb. de vita Constant. lib. 1. cap. 37, 38. namely, that Constantine taking a particular care of the Churches of God, by reason of sundrie dissentions which he saw daily to arise betweene D the Bishops; himselfe in person, as a generall Bishop appointed by God, [...], i. assembled Synods of the Ministers; and consequently, did that which the Pope now claimeth as properly belonging to himselfe. Well (saith Baronius) yet at least this appeareth, That the Fathers of this Councell wrote their Syno­dall Epistle to the Bishop of Rome, entreating him thereby to ratifie and con­firme their Acts: and thence inferreth, that the custome and manner of the Church at that time was, whensoeuer anie decrees of Councels were agreed vp­on and enacted, to send them first to the Bishop of Rome, as not to be published without his approbation first had and obtained thereunto: Let vs therefore briefely examine this Epistle also, whether according as we find it in the Coun­cels,Baron. an. 314. art. 67, 68, 69. E or whether as he alledgeth it out of Pytheus. The title it selfe in the first is worth the noting, Domino & fanctissimo fratri Syluestro Episcopo, i. To our most holie brother Syluester Bishop: The exordium followeth in this manner: The things which we haue with one consent decreed, we here make knowne charitati tuae, to your cha­ritie, to the end that all may know what they ought to doe hereafter. Now, this word Decree importeth no suspension of authoritie in them, nor yet implieth, that they were to learne of him, but rather that the Pope, as well as all others, should learne of them; neither doth that other copie much differ in sence: Communi co­pula [Page 27] A charitatis, &c. We, say they, knit together in one, and vnited, by that common bond of loue and charitie, and met together in this citie of Arles, by the good pleasure of the most godlie Emperour, greet thee most religious Father with all due reuerence. Religiosissime Papa. Would God, beloued brother, you had beene present with vs at the hearing of this cause; so should a more seuere decree haue passed against the Donatists, and we all, finding your iudgement to concurre with ours, should haue had the greater ioy. And comming a little after to signifie vnto him what had passed in the Councell: It seemed good vnto vs, say they, the holie Ghost and the Angels being present with vs, &c. I would know whether this be to craue confirmation, or to fetch the holie Ghost from Rome in a budget? or is it not rather to determine of the cause absolutely without the Pope? And B againe, Placuit, &c. It seemed good to vs, say they, because you hold the greater Diocesse, (therefore not all, as if all the world were but one Diocesse, and that subiect to his jurisdiction) to make knowne vnto all men what we haue done, and principally by you. And who seeth not, that to make knowne is one thing, and to craue confirmation is another? To conclude, the Donatists finding themselues to haue the worse, ap­peale to Constantine in person, who, though all wearie of their contentions and debates, yet assigned the parties a day to appeare before him at Milan, and there confirmed he by his decree all the former sentences giuen against them; witnesse Saint Augustine in many places: The Emperour, saith he, being constrained to iudge this cause after the Bishops, caused the parties to appeare before him, and with all care, August. Epist. 168. di­ligence, C and wisedome, entring into the knowledge of the cause, pronounced Cecilian in­nocent, and his aduersaries a companie of vngodlie persons. And againe, Post Episcopa­lia Iudicia, saith he, i. After the iudgements of the Bishops, &c. (meaning as well that at Rome, as that at Arles) what King or Emperour in these our dayes, attempting to doe the like, should not be excommunicated, and cut off from the Church? yet Syluester at that time neuer grudged or repined at it. And thus they still abuse the world.

Fourthly he alledgeth the case of Arrius: let vs see therefore whether his successe be like to proue better in this than in the former. Arrius therefore ha­uing disgorged his poyson in Alexandria, and afterwards by his ballad-like let­ters D dispersed it into all corners of the world, [...]. Ep [...]phan. Haer. 69. Alexander Bishop of Alexandria opposed himselfe against him, and sent likewise his Epistles general into all parts, to the number of seuentie, as Epiphanius reporteth. Here Baronius, without any authoritie or reason, groweth verie peremptorie: It is apparent, saith he, that A­lexander, before all others, wrot first concerning this matter to Syluester Bishop of the first See. But why should we take his bare word for proofe? Proofe ynough, Baron. an. 318. art. 59. Epist. Liber. to. 9 Biblioth. Socrat. lib. 1. c. 3. sayth Baronius; for haue we not a certaine Epistle of Liberius, wherein it is thus written, We haue euen at this day the letters of Alexander vnto Syluester? And what of that? for haue not we likewise euen at this day another of his Epistles generall in Socra­tes, with this inscription: To our most honored fellow Ministers throughout the Church E wheresoeuer? And haue not we another of the same in Theodoret, written in particu­lar to the B. of Constantinople? Were we disposed to take such aduantage, what might not we conclude out of this? But we say farther, That Alexander Bishop of Alexandria, without attending any aduise from Rome,Ibidem. excommunicated Arri­us, and cut him off from the Church; as appeareth by his owne letters: and moreo­uer, published an orthodoxall confession, for an antidote against the poyson of his doctrine, and raised both East and West against him: in all which we heare no newes of Syluester. Here againe Baronius runneth to his likelihoods:Baron. an. 318. art. 88.89. All other Bishops of the East, saith he, rising as it were in armes to ioyne with Alexander, Haud [Page 28] par est credere, we may not thinke that Syluester Bishop of Rome stood all the while idle:A But seeing it was heretofore said vnto him, Feed my sheepe; we may well imagine, nay ra­ther constantly affirme, That he bestirred himselfe in the businesse as well as the best. And hath Baronius indeed no better proofes than these?Euseb. de vita constantin. l. 2. c. 63. Socrat. l. 1. c. 4. Sozom. l. 1. c. 15. Yes, saith he, for Syluester sent Hosius Bishop of Corduba, his Legat, into Aegypt. This, I confesse, is somewhat to the purpose, if it were true: True it is, that the Emperour, to quench that fire, dispatched his letters both to Alexander and Arrius, by Hosius, a man of note, and one whom the Emperour honoured verie highly.Euseb. de vita Constant. l. 2. c. 63. And Eusebius speaking of the same man, saith, That he was one much honoured among good men, for his vertue, and whom the Emperour had neere about him. And the title of that chapter in Eusebius, is, Legatum de Pace componenda mittit: i. He sendeth a Legate or Embassadour to B make peace betweene them.Theodor. l. 1. c. 7. Theodoret hath the like, and withall a copie of that letter, wherein the Emperour admonisheth them to handle such questions with discretion, reuerence, and good agreement. As for Syluester, or what hee did herein, there is not in all these either word or sillable to be found. And must Ba­ronius his conjecture goe for currant, That sure it was so, but that Eusebius would not report it? But to proceed: This fire beginning now to flame out, it was thought fit to assemble that first generall Councell in the citie of Nice: But who then called it? or by whose authoritie and commaund was it assembled? All hi­stories agree in one:Euseb. de vita Constant. Edit. Lat. c. 6. l. 3. Eusebius saith, The Emperour Constantine assembled the gene­rall Councell of Nice, calling thither the Bishops out of all parts: and he calleth this dis­patch C of the Emperor, [...], a precept, or commaund: and in the title it is said,Theodoret. l. 1. c. 7. Sozom. l. 1. c. 16. That he enioyned. And Theodoret, The Emperour, saith he, not able to compose matters in Alexandria, [...], assembled that great Councell. And Sozomen vseth the word [...], i. he called them together. Also the Synod it selfe writing to the Churches,Acta Concil. Ni­caen. vol. 1. We, say they, here assembled, by the grace of God, and fauour of Constantine our Prince, beloued of God, &c. And likewise writing to the Churches of Aegypt, they vse these words, By the grace of God, and commaunde­ment of the Emperour. Socrat. l. 1. c. 5. Gelaz. Cyzicen. l. 1. Likewise Socrates and Cyzicenus vse the word [...], i. he gathered, or assembled them together; as Eusebius had done before them: Neither is there any Father or Historian of the Church, which speaketh in D other manner.Baron. an. 324. art. 131. to. 3. Concil. Rom. 2. c. 1. And all this done by Constantine, after the time that Baronius ac­knowledgeth him to haue beene a good and a perfect Christian, and withall most forward to aduance the Church, to wit, after his baptisme, and a whole yeare af­ter that supposed donation of his. What now will he say to this, seeing the whole Church hath euer held this for a most holie and lawfull Councell? backe againe to his old ward, and to his conjectures: The Councell of Rome, saith he, was held one yeare before, vnder Syluester, ad Traiani Thermas: (and why not at Lateran, if that had beene his owne palace, as he said before) Constantine and Helena his mo­ther were there present. (But will this Cardinall stand to this Councell, where the Priests of Rome, now called Cardinals, stood behind the place where the Bi­shops E sat?Baron. an. 324.) But to the matter: Who dareth to doubt, saith he, but that Syluester and Constantine, at this Councell concluded, to call that other afterward at Nice? And we aske againe, Who dareth to affirme it, seeing there is no such thing mentioned in the Councell, nor the Arrians there so much as named? A silly ghesse as euer was. But if Baronius will needs stand to ghesses, why may not wee doe the like, and say, Who doubteth but that it was there accorded, that Constantine himselfe should call it, seeing that indeed he did call it, as all histories record, and that with­out contradiction of any, for aught that yet appeareth to the contrarie? Yet is [Page 29] A not Baronius ashamed to build hereupon, as vpon an vndoubted veritie:Baron. an. 325. art. 13. & se­quent. And if all faile, at least, saith he, this is sure, that Hosius presided there as Legat of the Bishop of Rome. Let vs therefore see if he proue his embassage here any better than hee did that other at Alexandria before mentioned.Euseb. de vita Constant. lib. 3. Edi [...]. Lat. c. 7. Ib. c. 11. Eusebius in the life of Constantine speaketh in this manner: He which presided ouer the Imperiall citie (meaning the Bi­shop of Rome) was not in this assemblie, by reason of his age; but his Priests there pre­sent supplied his roome: Now Victor and Vincentius are named for such, in the acts of the Councell; but of Hosius, who should least of all haue been forgotten, there is no mention made to any such effect. Why then, saith he,Athanas. Apo­leget. 1. did Hosius first subscribe before all the rest? I answer, Because he was principally imployed by the Empe­rour B for the composing of this difference; in regard whereof he did the like also in the Councell of Sardica. And seeing that Victor and Vincentius wrot in this manner, We haue subscribed for the reuerend Syluester our Pope and Bishop; Acta Concil. Nicaen. why did not Hosius the like, if he were also his Legat? Why subscribed hee in his owne name, I Hosius Bishop of Corduba, of the Prouince of Spaine, doe so beleeue: for so we find it euen in the old Roman Code it selfe. Baronius replieth out of the title of a certaine Epistle, written, as he saith, from the Councell vnto Syluester by his Legats; Baron. an. 325. art. 2. which is nothing else, but to presuppose the thing in question: the title therefore is this, To Syluester the most blessed Pope of old Rome, Hosius Bishop of Corduba, a Prouince in Spaine, and Macarius Bishop of Constantinople, and Victor and Vincenti­us C Priests of Rome, appointed or ordained by your direction. Not to say that this Epi­stle with that which followeth, are both noted in the verie acts of this Councell to be of little credit, I aske onely, Whether he will haue Macarius also to be one of the Popes Legats? and whether that word Direction ought not to be restrained to Victor and Vincentius, as Eusebius would haue it? But the truth is,Baron. an. 325. art. 54. that Baroni­us when he alledgeth this title, leaueth out Macarius, to blind his reader, and to saue himselfe from this absurditie. Last of all, if Hosius had been his Legat, should not he also haue opened the Councell? which yet he did not: The Bishop, Theodor. l. 1. c. 7. sayth Eusebius, which sat vppermost vpon the right hand, standing vp, made a short speech to the Emperour, and rehearsed a certaine hymne, to giue thankes to Almightie God: and D this was Eustathius Bishop of Antioch, because the Bishop of Alexandria stood now as a partie against Arrius.

Fiftly, Baronius groweth verie cholericke, to see the Bishop of Rome ordered by the sixt Canon of this Councell, as the other Bishops of Alexandria, Antioch, and Ierusalem were; he saith, That these Canons are mangled, and must be corre­cted by those of Chalcedon: And if they were so, yet might Baronius put all that he should gaine thereby in his eye, and doe himselfe no harme, as we haue alrea­die shewed against Bellarmine. Ruffinus, of all the rest, sticketh most in his sto­macke, for bounding the Popes jurisdiction, with these words,Ruffin. l. 1. c. 6. Suburbicariarum Ecclesiarum curam gerat: i. That he should take care of the Churches neere about E the citie: And Baronius telleth vs, that Regiones Suburbicariae, and Vrbicariae, Baron. an. 324. art. 54. in the Imperiall lawes of those times, were all one: And that Regiones Vrbicariae comprised, besides Italie, the isle of Sicilie, Afrike, Aegypt, and many other countries: Forgetting in his choler, that the verie Canon it selfe now in question, assigneth Aegypt to the Bishop of Alexandria, and consequently not to him of Rome. Author for this assertion he hath none, nor reason, more than this,Lib. 14. Cod. Theodos. l. 6. tit. de Canon. fru­mentar. vrbis Roma. that these Prouinces were called Vrbicariae, which we denie not: and the reason may be, because they yeel­ded a yearely reuenew of corne, Vrbi, to the citie of Rome, according to the rate set downe in the Code of Theodosius. But grant we, that Regiones Suburbicariae, [Page 30] and Vrbicariae, were all one, what getteth hee? for Constantine in the third law A de Annona & Tributo, sheweth plainely, that by Regiones Suburbicariae, were meant onely those which lay within Italie, and were neere adjoyning vnto Rome; where he speaketh in this manner: Anatolius, late Consul, certified vs, that he hath taken away the frauds of the Tabulariorum Lib. 8. de Annon. & Tribut. l. 3. & 11. in Cod. Theodos. Collectors per suburbicarias Regiones. Which course, saith he, we commaund also to be held throughout all the other Regions of Italie: so that the more remote regions of Italie it selfe, are not comprised vnder this name of Sub­urbicariae Regiones, but commaund giuen, that these should be ordered after their example. So likewise would Baronius faine comprise Sicilie and Afrike vnder the appellation of Vrbicariae Regiones. Lib. 11. de Ex­traord. & sord. muner. But the words of Constantine and Constantius, in the same Code, giue him the lye; where it is said, That lands of inheritance and B fee farme, throughout Italie, shall be free from all extraordinarie taxes, paying only their customarie rates, as the lands in Afrike doe: The reason followeth: For not onely in Italie, but also, in vrbicarijs Regionibus, and in Sicilie, lands of inheritance, and lands held in fee farme, must be rated according to their abilities. Whereby it appeareth, that Italie was to be eased after the example of Afrike, and both Italie and Afrike, and Sicilie it selfe, distinguished from those which were properly called Vrbicariae Regiones. So likewise in that law of Gratian, Valentinian, and Theodosius, it is said by the Emperours vnto Probus Grand Master of the houshould, in this manner; Let thy sinceritie and vprightnesse obserue an equalitie throughout Italie, Tit. Si per ob­reptionē l. vnic. Cod. Theodos. as likewise in the Regions of Afrike, and those which are called Vrbicariae, and throughout all Illyria: C where again he distinguisheth them both from Italie, and also from Afrike. Now if he will aske, what those Suburbe cities were; that law of Gratian & Theodosius tea­cheth vs:L. 1. de Indul­gent. debit. in Cod. Theodos. We commaund, say they, that Picenum and Thuscia, now called La Marca d'Ancona, and Tuscanie (and yet not all Tuscanie neither) being the suburbe Regi­ons, shall beare the seuenth part of the tribute: not comprising therein so much as Campania (now a parcell of the kingdome of Naples) nor other Regions of like distance. And now let Baronius cast vp his reckonings, and see what hee hath gotten by quarelling that place of Ruffinus. But be this what he will, can he de­nie that the Bishop of Rome was here ordered and confined as well as the rest? As for that Canon which he would put vpon vs,Art. 57. & se­quent. That from all Churches a man might D appeale vnto Rome: besides that there is no historie that reporteth it, no not Gelasius Cyzicenus himselfe, I would aske, Whether this sixt Canon be not vtterly repug­nant thereunto? And farther let him say, when men were long after this time sent of purpose to search the Archiues of the Churches of Constantinople, Alexan­dria, and Antioch, to decide the controuersie betweene the Churches of Car­thage and of Rome, whether there were any such Canon there found? or can he produce any one appeale made to Rome in all that time? As for that goodlie Ca­non of the Councell of Rome, which he would thrust vpon vs, in these words; The first See let no man iudge, Baron. to 3. an. 324. art. 130. because all other Sees seeke for equitie at her hands, as of the chiefe: neither may the Iudge be iudged by any Clergie, Emperour, or King, or people E whatsoeuer: who is so ill aduised as to beleeue them in their owne cause? or who seeth not that this is a meere tricke and g [...]llerie put vpon the reader? For what kings could they meane? if Pagans, what can be more ridiculous? if Christians, where were any in those dayes? and consequently, what more vaine? moreouer, doe we not see the contrarie practised in the Nicene Councell, immediatly ensu­ing? And why is he not then ashamed to cousen the world with a false coyne, so apparently discouered, and bored thorough by all Historians and writers? It is said in the acts of that Synod, That there were 139 Bishops, ex vrbe Roma, aut non [Page 31] A longè ab illa, i. out of the citie of Rome, or not farre from thence: What, were there more Bishops than one at Rome? and where, I pray you, should a man find so many Bishops so neere to Rome? It is also there said, That Helena the mother of Constantine was there, and subscribed to the acts. And what, had they so soone for­gotten the saying of the Apostle, That it is not permitted to a woman to speake in the Church? Constantine also is there called Domnus, which is meerely Gothish, and joyned in Consulship with Priscus, which was neuer heard of. He should not for shame haue alledged this Synod, seeing that the verie barbarousnesse of the stile is ynough to conuince it of open forgerie. Last of all he saith, That the Fa­thers of the Nicene Councell wrot to Syluester, to craue his confirmation of their B acts and decrees: alledging for proofe hereof the acts of Pope Syluester, and not remembring how oft himselfe in other places hath condemned them as false and counterfeit. The truth is this, that vpon any question arising about religion, the Fathers assembled in Councel were wont to send their Synodal Epistle through­out all parts of Christendome,Ruffin. l. 1. c. 13. and some particulars among them to write their priuat letters to some chiefe and principal Bishops of other countries, to acquaint them with the tenor of their acts, and to request them, [...], i. to giue their suffrage and approbation thereunto: [...]. So also were they wont to addresse ano­ther Epistle to the Emperour, to entreat him to confirme and ratifie their acts, and to cause them to be receiued: of both which sorts we haue examples in this very C Synod; of the one in that Synodall Epistle which they wrot to the Church of Alexandria, and the rest in Aegypt; in which manner they wrot also another Epi­stle to all Churches in generall, without attending any leaue from the Bishop of Rome: of the other, among the patents of Constantine, who was present at this Councell; which Epistle we haue in Eusebius, Socrates, Gelasius, Theodoret, Euseb. de vita Constant. lib. 13. Socrat. lib. 1. and o­thers: whereby he ordained, That Easter day should be kept vpon the day which they appointed; and that the bookes of Arrius should bee burnt in all places. Which decree was published onely to authorise, and to put in execution the Ca­nons agreed vpon and enacted in the Councell. And those patents of the Em­perour were directed sometimes to the Bishops and people, and sometimes to the D Churches: as for any confirmation sought for at Syluesters hands, there is no mention at all made therein. And farther, that Epistle which we haue in the first tome of the Councels, besides that it is most foolishly written, is not Synodical, but written, as it is expressed in the title, by Hosius Bishop of Corduba, Macarius of Constantinople, Vitus and Vincentius Priests of Rome: whereas the Synodals carried alwayes the title Of the Sacred Councell, and withall, the names of some of the most famous Bishops; and to what purpose the name of Macarius Bishop of Constantinople, which was at that time scarce built? Neither doth it mend the matter, that Baronius in stead of Constantinople readeth Ierusalem: Baron. an. 325. art. 171. for why then should Hosias subscribe before him, contrary to the order established in the Coun­cell? E or why before Victor and Vincentius, Lieutenants at that time for the Bi­shop of Rome? and lastly, why was not Eustathius Bishop of Antioch first na­med? As for the confirmation it selfe of Syluester, Baronius acknowledgeth that whole Epistle to be forged, and proueth the falsitie thereof by the date. Neither is there any greater reckoning to be made of the testimonie of Pope Felix, as be­ing a witnesse in his owne cause, and liuing one hundred and sixtie yeares after this Councell; and either abused himselfe or abusing others with that said coun­terfeit Epistle.Euseb. lib. 4. de vita Constant. c. 41. Now there were sundrie nationall Synods held shortly after vn­der the same Constantine, for the confirmation of that first Nicene Councell; as [Page 32] that of Tyre in the yeare 334, at Ierusalem An. 335, at Constantinople An. 336:A Baronius quarels vs concerning the issues of them, and of their confirmation. But what can he say for the calling and assembling of them? or can he shew that either Syluester or Marcus complained, that the Emperour had done them wrong as encroaching vpon their liberties, and medling with that which appertained not vnto him.

OPPOSITION.

First therefore as touching the Epistle of Marc, Athanas. in Orat. Vnum esse Christum, col. 104. Athanasius himselfe might well haue answered him, as he sometime spake in a treatise of his: Thou art Peter, and vpon this stone will I build my Church: This is a faithfull saying, and varieth not: The B Church is a thing inuincible. And if perhaps Marc would haue gone to restraine this answere to himselfe and to his See, Athanasius might haue replyed, that though indeed he defended him, yet his successor Liberius did openly condemne him, namely, when he wrote vnto the Bishops of the East in this manner:Epist. Liberij ad Oriental. apud Hilar. in frag­ment. I cast off Athanasius from our Communion, not daining so much as to receiue his letters: I maintaine peace with you, embracing the confession of the Syrmian Councell: which is all one in effect, as if he had in expresse words renounced the Councell of Nice. Wherefore S. Hilarie, who liued at that time, cryed out,Ibid. This is an Arrian treche­rie: Anathema to thee O Liberius, and to all thy companions; Athanas. in epist. ad solitar. vitam agentes, col. 470. Hiero. in Catal. in Fortunatian. Bellar. de Rom. Pontif. li. 4. c. 9. Anathema againe and againe vnto thee, thou false hearted double dealing Liberius. And this is that accur­sed C and wretched testimonie which Athanasius also and Ierome giue of him. And Bellarmine himselfe acknowledgeth as much, by reason of certaine letters which he wrote to Constantius the Emperour, and others; all which were found in the Popes Librarie.

Now therefore let vs see what answere the Bishops of the East made to those letters of Pope Iulius: They tooke (sayth Socrates) his reproofes in scorne, Socrat. lib. 2. c. 11. edit. lat. Greca, cap. 13. and calling a Synod at Antioch, by common aduise and consent they returned his imputations backe vpon himselfe with all bitternesse, telling him, That he was no more to controll them, if they thought fit to depriue anie man in their Churches, than they intermedled, at what time Nouatus was cast out of the Church at Rome. Sozomene addeth,Sozom. edit. lat. l. 3. c. 7. Graec. c. 8. That their an­swere D was full of scoffes and threats: For (sayth he) they attributed indeed verie much to the Church of Rome, as the mother Citie, and schole of pietie and of religion (though so it were, that their first instructors in Christian religion came vnto them out of the East) yet for all this disdained they to be reckoned their inferiors, as they who made it not their glorie to excell in pompe and riches, but in vertue, pietie, Socrat. l. 2. edit. lat. c. 13. Graec. c. 17. and Christian resolu­tion &c. offering peace and communion vnto Iulius, but still vpon condition, that he should put out of his protection those Bishops of theirs which were fled vnto him. This answere (sayth Socrates) much offended Iulius: and it seemeth that it wrought vp­on him; for in his next letter he complaineth onely, That they called him not to their Synod; whereas before he pretended, that they might not call a Councell E without his authoritie: he alledgeth now, [...]. That the Canon of the Church forbad to impose anie Law vpon the Churches without the aduise of the Bishop of Rome; whereas before he pretended a right, absolutely to dispose of all: which was the thing which moued them to replie, that they would not be ordered nor concluded by him. [...]. By which it appeareth, that that answere of Iulius to the Easterne Bishops, which we find in the Councels, is meerely counterfeit, seeing he is there made to speake worse than in the former, euen to alledge, That in the Councell of Nice there is a Canon, which forbiddeth to call a Councell, or to condemne anie man, without the aduice of the Bishop of Rome, though there be there no such word to be found; witnesse [Page 34] the Glosse vpon that verie Epistle, where he confesseth, that there is no such thing A there said apertè, sed reducibilitèr, i. not in plaine tearmes, but onely by collection. And thus we see, how vnder colour of protecting Athanasius, the Pope made way to his owne ambition.

Neither is Baronius his cause anie jot furthered and aduanced all this while: He brought in Syluester, who, good man as he was, neuer dreamt of anie such gay clothes, attyred like an Emperour, as we saw before; and now he telleth vs, that his successor Marcus began first to giue the Pall to other Bishops:Pallium. We read (sayth he) in the life of Marcus,Baron. an. 336. art. 62. to. 3. that he ordained, that the Bishop of Ostia, whose office it was to consecrate the Bishop of Rome, should at the time of consecration vse a Pall: where­upon (sayth he) non inficias imus, we denie not that he gaue him the Pall. Had Baro­nius B beleeued it himselfe, he would no doubt haue spoken it more roundly: But let that passe; this I aske, when he sayth, That this is the first place where the Pall is mentioned, doth he not thereby acknowledge it to be a noueltie? When he giueth it to the Bishop of Ostia at Rome gates, is it not an argument that he sent it not at that time to the Metropolitans and Archbishops of farther countries? Neither indeed is there anie mention made of this weed in all this age, nor in manie succeeding ages after; neither in the East, neither in the West, nor yet in Italie it selfe; and must we then stand vnto a Legend, as to a sufficient proofe? For whereas he would proue it out of Isidore Pelusiota, Baron. an. 216. vol. 2. art. 15. & 16. Isidor. Pelusio. l. 1. ep. 136. a scholer of Chrysostomes, it maketh cleane against him: for it is there said, that [...], which Baronius C interpreteth to be Pallium, was worne by euerie Bishop in time of celebration, and consequently no priuiledge of Metropolitanes, or prerogatiue of certaine Bi­shops; much lesse a present to be receiued, or a commoditie to be bought for rea­die money at the Bishop of Rome his warehouse: [...]. his words are these, The gar­ment which the Bishop weareth vpon his shoulders, made of wooll and not of linnen, sig­nifieth vnto vs the skin of the lost sheepe, which the Lord sought, and hauing found him, layed him vpon his shoulders: For the Bishop, bearing a type and figure of Christ, must also performe his office: So farre is he from deriuing it from the High Priests of the Iewes, to appropriat it to the Pope, and to such as he for a fauour is pleased to impart it.D

We haue alreadie shewed what maine opposition was made against the at­tempts of Pope Iulius, yet doth Baronius vpon that attempt onely, without effect, ground an absolute and soueraigne power of the Bishops of Rome in generall: He called (saith he) a Councell at Rome, Baron. an. 340. art. 1. & sequ. requested thereunto by the Arrians themselues, who being cast out of the East, hoped to find reliefe and succour in the West: For answer we say, that this was no Generall, but a Nationall Councell, such as euery Metro­politan might, and the Bishops of Alexandria, Antioch, Hierusalem, and Con­stantinople often did call in their seuerall dioces; such as did Athanasius himselfe in this verie cause of Arrius: Athanas. Apolo­ges. 2. But this we affirme, that no one of the generall Coun­cels was euer called by other than the Emperour himselfe, though at the request E of Bishops, so oft as cause required. An euident argument, that there was not at that time anie one Bishop acknowledged as soueraigne ouer all the rest; by oc­casion whereof they were forced to haue recourse to a supreme secular power, whensoeuer there was cause, for Metropolitans, and Patriarchs, for the Clergie of sundrie Prouinces, for the Bishops of the East and West Churches, to assem­ble and meet together for the ordering of matters in the Church: whence also it came to passe, that during the space of three hundred yeares, vntill the reigne of Constantine, we neuer read of any Generall Councell, and but of few Nationall; [Page 35] A yet were there in all that time Bishops of Rome: neither during that eclipse of Christian Emperours in the reigne of Iulian could anie Councell be assembled, how great soeuer the necessitie of the Church at that time was; and yet the Bi­shops of Rome were at that time growne to some jolitie, and began to looke somewhat big vpon the matter, and to affect a soueraignetie ouer the Church of God: But be it Iulius assembled a Synod at Rome, at the request as well of Atha­nasius as of the Eusebians, his Antagonists: what then? Was it to judge of the difference betweene them by way of Appeale, or was it rather to compose mat­ters betweene them as an indifferent friend? The verie words of Athanasius are these: The Eusebians (sayth he) write vnto Iulius, and thinking to affray vs, request B him to call a Synod, and himselfe to be Iudge if he would; where the Latine Interpre­ter rendreth it Arbitrator, and Baronius vseth the same word. Now I would know whether men vse to speake in this manner, of a soueraigne Iudge: And indeed the Eusebians seeing Athanasius come to Rome, drew backe, and made Athanasius wait there a whole yeare and a halfe, vntill in the end, vpon their non apparance, Iulius examined the cause of Athanasius, and finding him innocent, receiued him to the Communion of the Church. Neither did Iulius himselfe in the carriage of this businesse vse anie of this absolute, or as they tearme it, of this coactiue power; neither did his proceedings anie whit at all sauor either of the pretended authoritie of a Pope, or of the lawfull power of a generall Councell; his words C are these: Though (sayth he) I haue written alone, yet is not this my opinion onely, but of all the Italians, and Bishops hereabout. Whereby it appeareth, that this was no generall Councell, but onely a Synode within Italie; and therefore hath Baronius no colour to conclude from hence, a Power in the Pope to call generall Coun­cels. Moreouer, in his letters to the Easterne Churches he pretendeth nothing but loue vnto them: He that wrote vnto you out of loue (sayth he) should haue beene answered againe in loue. But a little after, when he attempted to restore the Bi­shops, whom they had deposed, they presently assembled in Synod at Antioch; where, being there present a farre greater number of Orthodox Fathers, than of Arrians, as Baronius himselfe confesseth, by common voice and consent they re­proued D his insolencie, scoffing at him, and bidding him to meddle with what he had to doe. Here againe Baronius, as his manner is, beginneth to juggle with vs,Baron. to. 3. an. 341. art. 56. and to dazzle our eyes, by telling vs, that this Epistle was written by the Eusebi­ans; when as yet it appeareth to haue beene written and sent by the generall con­sent of all; this being no point of faith and doctrine to distract them, but onely of Church gouernment. Socrates speaking of this Epistle,Socrat. l. 2. c. 11. They wrote (saith he) all by common consent. Now of ninetie Bishops there assembled, there were not in all a­boue thirtie six Eusebians or Arrians, and they not willing to acknowledge that name neither. So likewise speaketh Sozomen of this Epistle;Sozom. l. 3. c. 7. the points whereof what they are, alreadie hath beene declared. But what saith Iulius to all this? doth E he alledge for himselfe, that either by vertue of his succession to S. Peter, or of the Nicene Councell, they ought to appeale to Rome? no such matter; his words are onely these, The Fathers of Nice ordained, and that not without the counsell of God, that the Acts of one Councell should be examined in another: whereby there ap­peareth no greater power giuen to the Bishop of Rome ouer Alexandria, than to the Bishop of Alexandria ouer Rome. As for the grieuance whereof he complai­neth, it is onely this, that contrarie to the custome, they had not written first of all vnto him, concerning the difference fallen out in Alexandria, to haue his aduice for the composing thereof, as being Bishop of the first See: as also, that manie Synods [Page 36] had beene held in the East, concerning points of faith and doctrine, without gi­uing A him notice thereof, [...]. contrarie to the Rule and Canon of the Church; wherein is contained, that none might impose anie law vpon the Churches, without the aduice of the Bishop of Rome: which was but reason, considering the place he held. But it fol­loweth not therefore, either that he alone might make Canons, or that they, his aduice once heard, might not otherwise determine, if they saw cause. As for those Epistles of Iulius, which we find inserted in the bodie of the Councels, they speake in a higher straine: nothing there, but of Appeales to the See of Rome, and of reseruations of all greater causes; all founded vpon Scriptures, Traditi­ons, and the Councell of Nice; in all which no one word is to be found, tending to that purpose: But the verie date of Felicianus and Maximianus Consuls, giueth B them the lye, there being no such Consuls names, or anie like vnto them to be found in all that age, no not in Onuphrius himselfe; and, which is the greater won­der, Baronius himselfe, our grand Annalist, is ashamed of them.

Now come we to examine that famous Councell of Sardica; which as Baro­nius and his fellowes thinke (and not without some colour and shew of reason) much aduanceth the cause of the Bishop of Rome:Baron. to. 3. an. 346. art. 5. To begin therefore, first I aske, who called it? That Iulius Bishop of Rome (sayth Baronius) was the first Au­thor thereof, appeareth partly by that which hath beene alreadie spoken, and partly by So­zomene, who seemeth plainely to insinuate as much. But what is this to the purpose? The question is, Who called it; and he for answere telleth vs, That the Bishop of C Rome was the first Author and aduiser of it: whereas the one argueth an autho­ritie, the other onely a care, which had beene verie little, if in that great combusti­on he would not haue sought some meanes of pacification. But how doth Sozo­mene seeme to insinuate as much?Sozom. l. 3. c. 10. his words are these: It seemed good in the minds of the Emperours, that the Bishops of either part should at a day appointed meet at Sardi­ca, a Citie in Illyria, now called Triadizza. These are the words of solemnitie, and absolute authoritie of the Emperours. And Socrates speaking of the same Councell sayth,Socrat. l. 2. c. 16. & Graec. edit. c. 20. That the one Emperour requested it by his letters, and the other readily accorded thereunto. Also the Synodall Epistle of the Fathers there assembled, re­ported by Theodoret, speaketh in this manner: The Emperours, beloued of God, haue D assembled vs out of diuers prouinces and countries, Theodoret. l. 2. c. 8. and haue giuen vs leaue to hold this holie Synod in this Citie of Sardica. And Athanasius, a man of all others most in­teressed in this Councell,Athanas. Apo­log. 2. Balsamon in praefat. Synod. Sardicens. By the commaund (sayth he) of the most religious Empe­rours, Constans and Constantius &c. And Balsamon in his preface to this Councell, By the commaundement (sayth he) of these two brothers, were assembled 341 Bishops at Sardica. And now tell me what are become of Baronius his ghesses? Likewise Liberius himselfe, successor vnto Iulius, sent Lucifer a Bishop, Hilarie a Priest, and Pancrace a Deacon,Epist. Liberij ad Constantium. to the Emperour Constans; who as we hope (sayth he) shall easily obtaine of thy clemencie, that a Councell may be called for the peace of the Churches Ca­tholike: meaning whether there should happily be occasion to assemble the Bi­shops E of the East and West, as in a Generall Councell, or onely of sundrie pro­uinces, as in that of Sardica: of which Councell Athanasius speaking, saith, That there were there present from Iulius, Athanas. Apolog. 2. Archidamus and Philoxenus Priests: whom Ba­ronius would faine put into scarlet, onely to make Legats of them. And a mar­uell is it, that because Hosius is there a chiefe speaker, he maketh him not chiefe Legat also:Baron. to. 3. an. 347. art. 10. But hauing no author for that, After the Legats of Iulius (sayth he) Hosius Bishop of Corduba, and Protogenes Bishop of Sardica, tooke the chiefe place in this Synod, as Sozomene reporteth. How manie lyes is poore Baronius faine to coyne, [Page 37] A onely to colour one? For Athanasius, who was there present, and had good cause to know, reciteth their names which subscribed, in order following: Hosius of Spaine, Iulius of Rome, by Archidamus and Philoxenus Priests, Protogenes of Sardica, &c. Neither is it probable, that he would not haue named Hosius for a Legat, if he had beene such; but it is cleare, that this prerogatiue was giuen him for the worthinesse of his person. As for Sozomene, whom he alledgeth, he speaketh plaine in this manner: Hosius and Protogenes, who were the chiefe and principall of those which met at Sardica, out of the West, &c. And therefore, that reseruation of our Annalist, Post Legatos, i. after the Legats, where is it to be found? And far­ther, if those Priests had beene receiued in this pretended qualitie, should Hosius B haue opened the Councell, and proposed all matters as he did? And if Hosius did this, in what qualitie did he it, if not in his owne priuat qualitie, and in regard of that great sufficiencie which the world tooke notice to be in him? Which made Athanasius, and after him Theodoret to say, Where is that Synod, Theodor. l. 2. c. 15. ex Atha­nas. wherein Hosius hath not presided? and where is that Church which hath not the memorials of his presiden­cie? Whence it is also that Theodoret himselfe calleth him, The great and venera­ble Sire, iustly called Hosius, which is by interpretation Holie, [...]. and excellent aboue all o­ther men. Well (sayth Baronius) yet this is euident, Baron. an. 341. art. 18. That if anie found himselfe wrong­fully condemned by the Bishops of his owne Prouince, the partie grieued might appeale to Rome. The words verily of the Canon are these: Hosius the Bishop said, Concil. Sardic. c. 3. & 4. If any Bi­shop C be condemned in anie cause, if the partie condemned thinke he haue iust cause not to stand to the sentence, if it please you let vs yeeld this honour to S. Peter: let the matter be signified by letter to Iulius Bishop of Rome, to the end that he, with other Bishops of his dioces, may enter againe into the knowledge of the cause. And Balsamon vpon this place affirmeth, That the like priuiledge was graunted to the Bishop of Con­stantinople. But come we to the point: And first, it was Hosius which proposed it; and he proposed it as a new and extraordinarie antidot against a poyson, con­sidering that the Bishops of the East were for the greatest part at that present infected with Arrianisme: and his purpose was, that if anie found himselfe op­pressed and aggrieued by the Arrians, he might by vertue of this Canon haue re­course D to Rome, and to the Bishops of Italie, who continued at that time sound in the Orthodox profession, restraining it to the person of Iulius, and would no doubt haue done otherwise in the person of Liberius, successor vnto Iulius, and a professed Arrian, notwithstanding that pretended chaire of S. Peter. And second­ly note these words, If it please you, let vs honour the memorie of S. Peter: For had this beene an auncient right, should he not rather haue said, Let vs obserue the commaundement of the Lord, or the auncient order of the Church, or the Ca­non of the Nicene Councell, whereby it is ordained, That men might appeale to Rome? In stead whereof he speaketh as of a new proposall, extraordinarie and arbitrarie, at their pleasures. Thirdly, is it reason, that a Canon of a Nationall E Councell should conclude and bind the Church in generall? Or can Baronius reckon this for a Generall Councell, without ouerthrowing all Histories, and in­uerting the whole order of the Councels, as they are alreadie placed? For if we number this for one, where then shall those of Constantinople, of Ephesus, and of Chalcedon stand? Or because Athanasius calleth it a Great Councell, is it there­fore a Generall one? Is not the first Councell of Arles called a Great one, because there met in it the Bishops of sundrie Prouinces, which yet was neuer numbred among the Generall Councels? And doth not the Decrete it selfe,D. 16. can. 10. & 11. authorized by the Popes, ranke it with the Nationals? And to conclude, seeing that his reasons [Page 38] whereon he groundeth his assertion, namely, because it was called by the Bishop A of Rome, and because his Legats were there present, are found to be false, what credit can the assertion it selfe deserue? Fourthly, this Canon so made vpon the present occasion, was neuer practised, and was afterwards in expresse tearmes re­uoked: Neither can it be denied, but that at that instant, and shortly after, there were manie Bishops deposed in the East Churches as well as before. But did euer anie claime the benefit of this Canon? Or is it likely that they would haue omitted such a meane of their restitution, if anie such had beene of force? And re­uoked it was, as I haue said, in expresse tearmes, namely, in the Councell of Con­stantinople, Can. 3. and in that of Chalcedon, Can. 28. both of them being Coun­cels Generall, as Baronius himselfe acknowledgeth, and both of them graunting B equall priuiledges to the two Churches of Constantinople and of Rome, in all respects, sauing alwaies to the Bishop of Rome his precedencie: which could not haue beene, had the Easterne Churches beene alwaies tyed to answer to appeales at Rome; and we shall see hereafter how the Churches of Africa would neuer be drawne to yeeld thereunto. Whence it appeareth, that that Canon was neuer meant but onely in case of destitution or restitution of certaine Bishops then be­ing, who were by this Canon ordered to referre their differences to the Bishop of Rome, who was not tainted with Arrianisme, as some of the Easterne Bishops were. And this is the first place, in all Antiquitie, where mention is made in pro­per tearmes of an Appeale: [...]. which word yet is vsed onely in the narratiue part of C the Canon, proposed by Hosius, not in the decision of the Fathers, in fauor of Iu­lius, [...]. which onely permitteth him to take knowledge of the cause anew: which in the fift Canon is qualified with this Particle, as: if (say they) the Bishop deposed, As appealing, [...]. shall flie for refuge to the Bishop of Rome: and as the third Canon, so this in the decision concludeth onely for a reuiew of the former sentence: so little was this matter of formall Appeales meant or vnderstood in this Councell. And this fel­low, which standeth so much vpon his knowledge of Antiquitie, and hath writ­ten so manie volumes of it, should in all reason haue produced some Canon of the Apostles, some Constitution of Clement, or of some precedent Councell, or some example out of the Historie of the Church, and not haue grounded himselfe D wholly vpon a certaine Appeale made de facto by Martian, Valentinian, Fortuna­tus, or some such like heretike, and make that his onely title to claime by; especially considering that the Councell of Nice setteth downe another order in expresse tearmes, [...]. Concil. Nicen. can. 4. Concil. Antioch. can. 4. & sequ. namely this, that the power of ratifying (for so doth the word [...], there vsed, signifie in good Greeke) should belong to the Metropolitan in euerie Prouince: where there is no superiour appointed ouer the Metropolitan, no not the Patri­arch himselfe at that time; and yet was the question at that time properly concer­ning the ordination of Bishops. And the Councell of Antioch, which was held but a little before that of Sardica, giueth to a Bishop deposed by his own Synod, no other remedie, but onely a reuiew in another Synod. And farther, all Antiqui­tie E forbiddeth euerie Bishop or Metropolitan to receiue anie Bishop or Priest de­posed, without those solemne letters certificatorie, called Formatae, from his owne Metropolitan or Bishop: which absolute and generall Law were to little purpose if this Law of Appeales did stand in force. And hence came the vse of those For­mata, which were of so great weight and moment, and were neuer granted forth, but vpon mature aduise and long deliberation. Fifthly, here may we see how Ba­ronius abuseth a certaine place of Theodoret, Theodor. l. 5. c. 9. where he sayth, That Iulius hauing re­ceiued letters from Eusebius the Arrian of Nicomedia, who made him Iudge, following [Page 39] A the Law or Ordinance of the Church, commaunded him to come to Rome, [...]. and cited Atha­nasius to appeare there also: that is (saith Baronius) a Canon of the Nicene Councell, now lost, whereby it was enacted, that men might from all parts appeale to Rome: so small a piece of ground will serue their turne to found the tyrannie of the Pope vpon; for what likelyhood thereof doe they find in anie Historie? Wherefore it is more probable to say, that seeing this was before that Canon of the Councell of Sardica, it was meant rather of the common practise of the Church in those dayes, when one Bishop oppressed, was wont to flie for reliefe to some other of greater dignitie, to cleare himselfe before him; who thereupon vsed to call his ad­uersarie, and to heare the cause betweene them, according to that vniuersall Bi­shopricke, B whereof, as sayth S. Cyprian, euerie one did administer his portion by him­selfe, yet so, as that no man neglected the whole Bodie, or any particular member thereof, the Church being a Bodie [...],Sozom. l. 8. c. 13. i. which liued but by one and the selfesame breath. As appeareth in the example of Ammonius and Isidore, who fin­ding themselues wronged by Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria, fled to Chrysostome, who receiued them, and examined their cause; and finding them to haue a right and Orthodox opinion concerning the Deitie, wrote to Theophilus, to receiue them to Communion; if not, and that he would yet draw the cause to a farther hearing, that then he should send some one or other to make himselfe a partie in it. The like was in Athanasius, flying to Pope Iulius. And yet did not Chrysostome C hereupon ground anie pretence, either ouer Theophilus in person, or ouer the dio­ces of Alexandria. The like was also in Liberius, whom, the Churches of the East assembled in the Syrmian Councell, recommended to Pope Felix, and to the Clergie of Rome, requiring them to admit him as Collegue in that See: which also they obtained. And thus you see what that pretended Appeale was,Baron. an. 349. art. 6. vnlesse yet perhaps some man may thinke that foolerie of Baronius worth the answering, where he sayth, that Athanasius calleth the Church of Rome, The Church, Athanas. Apo­log. 2. idem ad solitarios. by excel­lencie, without addition: The words of Athanasius are these, The Emperour (sayth he) sent me letters; hauing receiued them, I went vp to Rome, with purpose to visit the Bishop and Church there. Who seeth not that this word Rome was omitted in this D last place, onely to auoid an vnnecessarie repetition of what was necessarily im­plied? Now if we would vrge a saying of the same Father, where he calleth Milan the Metropolis of all Italie, what rejoinder would he make? Nay, we may say far­ther, that this Councell had beene ill aduised to draw all to one mans authoritie, seeing that Hosius, the proposer of this Canon, a while after fell away from the true and Orthodox doctrine, and that Liberius, next successor to Iulius, fell vnto Arrianisme, excommunicating Athanasius, and being therefore himselfe, without regard to his pretended supremacie, excommunicated by our S. Hilarie. Baron. an. 347. art. 25. & an. 352. art. 14. to. 3. Baronius seeing the consequence which this Historie draweth with it, would faine make it trauersable, and sometimes flatly denieth it to be true; and which is more, enrol­leth E him in the Catalogue of Saints, as he did afterwards the good Hildebrand, called Gregorie the seuenth. But leaue we him to debate this question with Atha­nasius and Hilarie, with Liberius himselfe (whose Epistles Nicholas Faber his trustie friend lately published, with the fragments of Hilarie) with Bellarmine, who, as hath beene alreadie shewed, so clearely condemneth him; and lastly with himselfe, for as much as he vseth these fragments of Hilarie so farre forth as they serue his own turne: for from thence taketh he a Synodicall Epistle,Baron. an. 357. art. 26. written to Iulius from the Councell of Sardica, and therefore ought in reason to admit also of that Epistle of Liberius, found in the same volume: but we need no argument in a thing which [Page 38] [...] [Page 39] [...] [Page 40] himselfe affirmeth so plainely as he doth:Baron. vol. 4. an. 365. art. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, & se­quent. By all these things, saith he, taken partly A out of histories, partly out of the writing of the Fathers, partly out of his owne letters, it is impossible to free Liberius from that imputation of communicating with Arrius, and of ratifying the sentence by them giuen against Athanasius: And if, saith he, there were no other proofe, his owne letters are sufficient to put it out of question: But shall wee there­fore call him heretike? minimè gentium. And why not, good sir, since many a man hath beene so called vpon farre lesse occasion? vnlesse a Pope holding opinion with Arrius, by vertue of his Popedome, be neither Arrian nor heretike.

An. 362.Now Athanasius, in the yeare 362, held a verie famous Councell in Alexan­dria, whither he inuited the Bishops out of all parts, to helpe reestablish the true doctrine of the Church. Our Annalist would needs persuade vs that hee did it B by order from Liberius; and that Liberius confirmed the acts of this Councell: Which, Baron. to. 4. an. 362. art. 208. saith he, he plainely expresseth in his Epistle to Ruffinian. But let who will read this Epistle, and then say, whether there be in it any one word tending to that purpose:Nazianz. in Athanas. At least Gregorie Nazianzene vnderstood it otherwise, when as al­luding to this Synod assembled by Athanasius, he speaketh in this maner: He pre­scribed lawes to all the world, and drew euerie mans eyes vpon himselfe. And vpon that question, Whether and how farre forth such as had fallen were to bee restored, he saith, That the same courses were taken in all the Synods which had beene assembled: In the presence, saith he, of the Bishops of all forreine Prouinces, as al­so of Greece, and of Spaine: but of Italie or Rome no one word spoken. Likewise in C the yeare 364,Sozom. lib. 5. c. 7. [...]. there was another Synod held in Lampsacus, where the Orthodoxe of Bythinia and Hellespont, saith Sozomene, sent Hypatianus Bishop of Heraclea, to Va­lentinian the Emperour, to intreat leaue to assemble themselues in councell. The Empe­rour wearied with so many Councels called in the time of his predecessor Con­stans, [...]. to so little good purpose, made answer, That it was not lawfull for him, being a lay man, to meddle with the matters of the Church. Whence Baronius concludeth, That he thereby resigned all authoritie he had or could pretend in Church causes. But the Emperour addeth farther, Let the Church-men assemble themselues where they will: [...]. Which words they tooke for leaue, and thereupon assembled them­selues. And in the end that fell out which the Emperour foresaw, which was, that D being ouerborne by the aduerse faction, they could not hold themselues to the Nicene Creed. Here againe Baronius taketh aduantage, because they sent three Legats to Liberius Bishop of Rome, with a Synodall Epistle. True, but these Le­gats comming to him, salute him onely by the name of Collegue and brother; and to begin withall, tell him, That they had brought letters to his Benignitie, and to all the other Bishops of Italie, and of all the regions of the West: Who consequently were as­sociated with him in the same letter. And what, I pray you, hath Baronius now gotten? Last of all, and for an vpshot, let vs not forget a good saying of Baronius, who,Optat. lib. 3. con­tra Parmen. to shew the pride of Donatus, alledgeth a saying of Optatus: Seeing, saith he, that there is none aboue the Emperour but God which made him, hee therein passed the E state of men, esteeming himselfe now no longer a man, but a God. Which was onely for that he refused to accept the almes and offerings of the Emperour, with whom he held not communion. Let Baronius lay his hand vpon his heart, and tell me true­ly what Optatus would haue said of our Pope of Rome now adayes, seeing that he so much lifteth himselfe vp aboue the Emperour, both in his decrees and in his actions, but onely this, That of a trueth he is that man of sinne foretold vnto vs, which lifteth himselfe vp aboue God, and causeth himselfe to be adored in the Temple of God.

OPPOSITION.

Hieron. ad Marcell. vi­duam. Hierosme maketh Paula and Eustochium to write vnto Marcella in these words: Read, say they, the Apocalyps of Saint Iohn, and marke what is there said of the woman clothed in scarlet, of blasphemies written in her forhead, of the seuen mountaines, &c. There no doubt is the holie Church, there are the trophies of the Apostles and Martyrs, there is the confession of Iesus Christ: But there is also, saith he, ambition and tyrannie, which keepe men backe from doing good. And in another place, Luxurie of the bellie and of the throat, seeke to ouerthrow the power of the Crosse. And to the end that no man may say that he spake this of the Citie, not of the Church of Rome, in his Preface to that booke of Dydimus, of the Holie Ghost, hee expoundeth himselfe:B When I liued, saith he, in Babylon an inhabitant of that purple Whore, liuing after the lawes and customes of the citizens of Rome, I had a determination to write somewhat of the Holie Ghost, and to dedicate the treatise to the Bishop of that Diocesse: And behold, that seething pot which Ieremie saw looking out of the North after the rod of the Almond tree, began to boyle, and the Senat of the Pharisies to crie out together; neither was there so meane ascribe of that whole faction of ignorance, who did not eagrely conspire against me. As soone therefore as I was returned to Ierusalem as out of banishment, and after that cottage of Romulus and those Lupercall sports, saw againe that Inne of Ma­rie, and the caue of our Lord and Sauiour, &c. In these words therefore what doth he call Babel, but the Clergie it selfe of Rome? That Senat growne alreadie Pha­rasaicall,C and a verie faction and league of ignorance. And now tell me whether he goeth not farther in this testimonie than Marcellinus doth? As for the prehe­minence of Bishops, according to the greatnesse of the cities: If there be question, saith he to Euagrius, Orbis maior est vrbe. Hieron. in Epist. ad Euagr. of authoritie, the world is greater than the citie (so called they Rome) why doest thou then enthrall the whole Church to a few men? And whence com­meth this presumption? For wheresoeuer there is a Bishop, whether at Rome, or at Eugu­bium, whether at Constantinople, or at Rhegium (marke how he confoundeth the grea­ter cities with the lesser) he is of the same dignitie and Priesthood. Riches and pouertie make not one lesse or greater than another: for they are all successors of the Apostles. And so are these words inserted into the decree. And speaking in another place D of Bishops in generall,Hieron. in Epist. ad Heliodo. to. 1 It is no easie matter, saith he, to stand in the place of Paul, and to maintaine the dignitie of Peter; that is, to be a Bishop: reckoning all Bishops to be successors of Paul and Peter: Basil. Epist. 55. speaking in the same sence in which Saint Basil spake, when he said, That Ambrose was called to the Apostolicall gouernement, when hee was made Bishop of Milan.

And doe you thinke that this holie Father Basil can passe ouer with silence the pride of Rome? or if he happily let flie some words, shall we therefore condemne him as a Pagan? So it was, that in those lamentable combustions of the East, he thought to haue found some comfort in the West; but he quickly found himselfe in an errour: For if the anger of God, saith he, continue still vpon vs, what comfort will E the pride of the West affoord vs? who neither doe know, neither yet will haue the patience to be rightly informed of the truth of things, as lately appeared in the case of Marcellus; being euer prepossessed with vaine surmises and idle iealousies. For my owne part, I was once minded to haue written a priuat letter to their Captaine (meaning Damasus) not concerning any Church affaires, Coryphaeo. Basil. Epist. 10. but onely to let him vnderstand, That they neither right­ly vnderstood the state of our cause, nor tooke the course to bee duely informed of it. In briefe, That they ought not to bruise a broken reed, nor oppresse those who were alreadie humbled by affliction: nor yet reckon their pompe for honour, seeing that, that verie sinne [Page 43] A is ynough alone to set a man at enmitie with God. And this he wrot to that great per­sonage Eusebius Samosatenus, who carried on with an incredible zeale, ran from countrey to countrey, seeking to repaire the decayes and ruines of the Church; whilest Athanasius and Basil trauelled in the East, opposing themselues against the Arrians, and praying in aid from the Churches of the West, and from Dama­sus himselfe, who, hand in bosome, lightly regarded them, conceiting out of hare­brained humor which proceeded from his pride, that Basil himselfe was an here­tike, and therefore would not, forsooth, vouchsafe him an answer. Whereup­on Basil and his fellowes sent letters to the Bishops of the West, by name, to those of Italie and France: It being impossible, say they,Basil. Epist. 70. that they should be ignorant B of our miserable estate, so well knowne throughout the world: and yet they receiued no comfort from them. And farther they requested them (not Damasus) to joyne with them, for the procuring of a lawfull and free Synod. After this they redou­bled their letters,Idem Epist. 78. coniuring them to informe the Emperour of these troubles in the East: from whom, and not from Damasus, they hoped for redresse. And by a third dispatch sent by Dorotheus a Priest, Basil reproacheth them for their want of charitie, in not daining to visit and to comfort them in their afflictions; offering, if any imputation lay vpon him, to cleere himselfe, when and wheresoeuer they should appoint him. At last in a fourth letter he breaketh forth into these tearmes: We haue, saith he, venerable brethren, set our eyes vpon you, Basil. Epist. in Addition. Ep. 1. but our hope hath proued C vaine: so that we may now sing, I haue looked for one that would sorrow with me, but no man came vnto me; for one to comfort me, but I found none: for our afflictions are such, as that they which dwell euen in the vtmost borders of the West should in duetie ere this haue come to visit vs: And yet thirteene yeres long do we continue in this war. So dead a sleepe was Damasus layed in, being drowned in that wealth and luxury wherof we speake. Yet Baronius would persuade vs, That these Epistles were all written joynt­ly to Damasus and the other Bishops; but the inscriptions are too cleere against him: To the Italian and French, to the Westerne men, and to the Bishops beyond the sea: and the stile it selfe sheweth the contrary. And Marcelline telleth vs, That the Bi­shop of Rome was rich with the oblations and offerings of Gentlewomen and Ladies. And D Saint Hierosme taxeth the Clergie of Rome in worse tearmes than he: The Clerks, Hierom. ad Eu­stoch. Epist. 22. Ad Nepotian. 2. saith he, who in duetie should serue for an ensample, and he an awe vnto them, kisse the Ladies heads, and reaching out their hands as if they would blesse, receiue the reward of their salutation. And the women finding that the Priests expect maintenance from them, wax proud thereupon: and hauing once tried what it is to be subiect to a husband, chuse rather to continue in free widowhood: and others there are who spend their whole liues in learning the names, the houses, and qualities of these Ladies: and thereupon nameth some of them, as Anthimus and Sophronius, and some others; and describeth the trickes which they vsed to draw oblations and offerings from the Ladies which came vnto them. And in another place he reproueth them in this manner:Ierem. 12. In this E spirituall warfare of Christ, saith hee, seeke not the riches of the world, neither craue to possesse more now than when thou first camest into the Clergie; that it may not be sayd vnto thee, Cleri eorum non proderuntijs: For there are Monkes richer now than they were when they liued in the world, and Clerks which possesse more vnder poore Christ, than erst they did vnder the rich diuell: so that the Church now sigheth to see them rich whom the world before saw poore and beggarly. And it plainely appeareth to what a loosse­nesse and lewdnesse about women their wealth had carried them, by those re­proofes which he giueth them in this Epistle,Hieron. ad Ne­potian. 2. as also in that other which he wrot vnto Nepotian, wherein he sheweth by what infamous seruices they lay at catch [Page 44] for legacies, and inheritances, from oldfolkes, both men and women; which I A had rather the reader should looke in Hierosme, Idem ad Helio. Epist. 2. Baron. vol. 4. an. 385. art. 8. Paulin. Ep. 2. because I am ashamed to repeat them. And Baronius denieth not, that for his free speaking and writing, the Cler­gie of Rome tooke him for their enemie: insomuch that hee was thereby forced to returne vnto Ierusalem; and Paulinus Bishop of Nola was for the same cause serued with the same sauce; as appeareth by his first Epistle, where hee sheweth, That he could by no other meanes be safe and free from the contagions of that citie, but by getting himselfe away farre off from it. Neither doth he spare the Bishop of Rome himselfe: Thou knowest, saith he, what losse we suffer of the grace of God, by the proud discretion and wisedome of the Bishop of that citie, meaning Syricius, successour vnto Damasus. B

And this contagion spread it selfe so farre, that the Christian Emperours, Va­lentinian, Valens, and Gratian, were faine to take order by expresse law against it: which law was directed and sent to Damasus; L. 20. de E­pisc. & Cler. in Cod. Theodos. and therein were all Clergie men, and such as made profession of chastitie and continencie, prohibited, once to set foot within wi­dowes doores, or orphanes, or to receiue any gift by testament or other deuise whatsoeuer, of any woman, with whom, vnder pretence and colour of religion, they had acquaintance or familiaritie; confiscating whatsoeuer had beene so giuen, or should from thence forward be so deuised, granted, and made ouer to them. This ordinance, saith the text, published and read in the Church of Rome. And this is that which Saint Hierosme saith in one of his Epistles before alledged: I am ashamed, saith he, to speake it: But the Priests C of Idols, common Stage Players, Carremen, and Whores, are capable of legacies and of in­heritances, onely Clergie men and Monkes are forbidden to receiue legacies, or to inherit, and that not by persecuting Tyrans, but by Christian Princes: neither doe I complaine of the law, but grieue to see that we should deserue it. This cautere is good, but why would we be so wounded as to stand in need thereof? The disposition of the law is wise and pro­uident, and yet is not our auarice restrained: Wee may not any longer admit of legacies in our owne persons, therefore we take a course to circumuent the law, by procuring legacies and inheritances to be made ouer in trust to others, to our vses: And as if the lawes of the Empe­rour were greater than the lawes of Christ, we feare them, and neglect the precepts of the Gospell. And much after this manner speaketh also Saint Ambrose in his thirteenth D Epistle.Baron. vol. 4. an. 370. art. 123. But Baronius would here persuade vs, That the Emperours made this law at the motion of Damasus himselfe: as also, that Constantine long before that time passed another Edict at the instance of Pope Syluester, and of the Bishops; by which he inhibited the gentrie of the Empire to make themselues of the Cler­gie; because that by reason of the large priuiledges and immunities belonging to that Order, the richer sort put themselues into the ministrie, and so left the Commonwealth vnserued: And this he saith to no other end, but that Princes and States in these dayes should not offer, by their examples, out of their owne regall authoritie, to order and reforme the Churches. But the truth is, that those Emperours ordered and limited the jurisdiction of the Clergie (which euen in E those dayes began to encroach vpon the temporall Courts) by an expresse law and ordinance directed vnto them:L. 23. de E­pisc. & Cler. in Cod. Theodos. If there happen, say they, any small contentions or offences to arise, touching questions of religion, let them be heard in the place where they arise, and by the Synods of the Diccesse. Where note, that they say, small offen­ces, and, about religion: excepting alwayes all sorts of crimes which belong to the audi­ence of the Iudges, ordinarie or extraordinarie, or gouernours of the place. Adde wee hereunto, That about the yeare 390, vnder Syricius Bishop of Rome, this disor­der of the Clergie still continued; and that the Emperors, Valentinian, Theodosius, [Page 45] A and Arcadius, renewed this law in more strict tearmes than before; ordaining, That no widow might giue to any Church or Church-man, Lib. 27. de E­pisc. & Cler. in Cod. Theodos. vnder what title or colour soe­uer, either mouables or immouables, in preiudice of children, or of other lawfull heires, no not to make so much as either Church or Church-man, or the poore, his heire and successor, by last Will and Testament: Which Law Ambrose caused shortly after to bee some­what mitigated. Such a doe they had euen in those dayes to intrench and fortifie themselues against their greedie auarice.

OPPOSITION.

But the practise of the Church was cleere against the vsurpation of Damasus, seeing that all the greater offices and dignities of the Church haue in all times and places beene bestowed by those which were of the same place, without asking the Popes aduise or leaue therein. And seeing that the Fathers assembled at Con­stantinople, openly declared vnto him,Theodor. l. 5. c. 9 That there was an ancient law and decision of D the Nicene Councell, that the Bishops of euerie Prouince, with those which dwelt neere vnto them, should ordaine their owne ministers: That by vertue of this decision Ne­ctarius was ordained at Constantinople, Flauianus at Antioch, and Cyril at Ierusa­lem, which they there tearme the mother of all other Churches: Requesting him to re­ioyce for companie, as for a thing rightly and canonically done: And that he would not suffer any humane affection to carrie him beyond the bounds of reason. Nei­ther doe they addresse their letters to him alone, but also to Ambrose, to Britto, to Valerian, to Acholius, and others, assembled in the Synod of Rome. And seeing also that Ambrose himselfe was elected Bishop of Milan by the suffrages of the people, and that the Emperour Valentinian, immediatly vpon the newes receiued,Ruffin. l. 2. c. 11. E gaue order for his installation without sending to Rome.

And which is more, about the yeare 381, Damasus then sitting Pope,An. 381. Socrat. lib. 4. c. 24. & 25. this se­cond generall Councell of Constantinople was held, and two yeares after was receiued and acknowledged by the Synod of Rome: which Councell Theodosius the elder called, and Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople ordered,Onuphr. in Fast. without any Legat from the Bishop of Rome: and there also these Fathers trod the path of the Nicene Councell, diuiding the Prouinces, for the auoidance of confusion, in such sort, That the Bishops of one Diocesse should not offer to goe, vnrequested, into the Diocesse of another, there to giue orders vnto any: which yet, saith Socrates, was in for­mer [Page 46] times tolerated in the Church because of persecutions: Concil. Constant. can. 5. & 7. can. Graec. 3. And that if in anie Pro­uince A a matter of difference happened to arise, it should be decided by the Synod of the same Prouince. As for the Bishop of Constantinople, it was ordained, that he should haue his prerogatiue of Precedencie next to the Bishop of Rome: all which to stand for good, if the Emperor were so pleased, without anie reference at all vnto the Pope. And both So­crates and Sozomen giue the reason of this equallising of them,Socrat. Histor. Eccles. l. 5. c. 8. Sozom. l. 7. c. 9. because that Constan­tinople had not onely the name of Rome, with like Senat, and other magistrats, but bare also the same Armes, and held all other Rights and Honors which belonged to old Rome: which reason is apparantly grounded vpon a ciuile respect and policie, not vpon any pre­cept of the Gospell.Bellarm. in Recognit. p. 46. Yet must Bellarmine needs tell vs, that these Fathers writing to Damasus, acknowledged that they were assembled by his appointment, intimated to B them by the Emperor: and he citeth to this purpose Theodoret, lib. 5. cap. 9. where the words themselues make cleane against him, shewing, That they had bin formerly inuited to come to Rome by the Emperor, and were after that called to Constantinople by letters which the Synod of Rome, after that of Aquileia, sent to Theodosius; not that Damasus gaue forth anie summons for their assembling. And Bellarmine himselfe in his Recognitions acknowledgeth, That this Epistle was neuer written by the Fa­thers of Constantinople; and so it maketh not to the question now in hand. But yet he addeth farther,Bellarm. de Roman. Pontif. l. 2. c. 13. That they acknowledged the Pope for their Head, and themselues as members of that Head. Here againe is a bundle of manifest vntruths: for first the letter was not directed to Damasus, neither yet to the Church of Rome, but to the C Synod of the Bishops of the West, assembled that time at Rome, to whom they vse indeed these words following, You haue inuited vs thither, as members of your Bodie, shewing thereby your brotherlie affection: whereby they acknowledge not anie Head, but onely declare, that all Christian Congregations are each others mem­bers; and therefore hauing signified vnto them, That according to the ancient Ca­nons, especially that of the Nicene Councell, they had prouided their own Chur­ches, they conclude in maner following: Wherefore we thus agreeing, and being esta­blished in one faith, and mutuall loue, will now no longer vse that saying, condemned by the Apostle; I am of Paule, I am of Apollo, and I am of Peter: but knowing that we are all of Christ, who is not diuided in vs, will by the grace of God keepe that Bodie of the Church vn­rent,D and so appeare with confidence before the Iudgement seat of Christ: not to say, that it is found written in some copies at the foot of this Epistle, Reuerend sonnes, we pray God to preserue you. In these dayes who durst speake so vnto the Pope? In the meane time Pope Leo the Great,Leo. ep. 55. Theodor. l. 5. c. 10. a strong maintainer of this Primacie, quarrelleth the au­thoritie of this Councell, making the world to beleeue, that he would hold him­selfe wholly to the Councell of Nice; which, as we haue alreadie proued, maketh as little for his purpose as the other. But he cannot denie, that his predecessor Dama­sus rested satisfied therewith, and wrot backe vnto the Fathers in that Councell his kind and louing letters, without euer calling the authoritie thereof into questi­on; though yet to retaine a respect and reuerence to his owne person, or happily to E crie quittance with them, he also calleth them in his letter, His much honored sonnes: and telleth them in the verie beginning of his letters, that indeed they had yeelded all due reuerence to the See Apostolike. Onuphr. in Fast. an. 382. And lastly Onuphrius obserueth, That two yeares after he approued it in open Synod at Rome, as an Oicumenicall or Generall Councell, though neither the Pope in person, nor anie for or from him, assisted at it; whereas that other at Rome, where Damasus himselfe presided, is scarcely ac­counted in the number of prouinciall Synods. And now let the reader judge where this pretended Primacie of the Popes was in those dayes.

[Page 47] A But now let vs see what newes with Baronius: First he sayth, That this Coun­cell of Constantinople was called jointly by Theodosius and Damasus Bishops of Rome; and who (saith he) can doubt hereof? May it please him,Baron. vol. 4. an. 381. art. 20. it should seeme that Socrates and Sozomene doubted of it, when they tell vs,Socrat. l. 5. c. 10. Sozom. l. 7. c. 7. That the Emperour without delay laboured as much as in him was to assemble a Councell of all sorts. So also, as it see­meth, did the Fathers themselues of that Councell, who in their Synodall Epistle say in this manner: Wee, here assembled by his commaundement, Epist. Synod. in to. 1. Concil. &c. meaning the Em­perour. And in that other Epistle of theirs, which they wrote the Summer fol­lowing to Damasus, Britto, Ambrose, and other Bishops of the West, where they shew, that they of the East were not called to the Synod of Rome it selfe (which B was at the same time readie to meet) by letters from Damasus, Theodor. l. 5. c. 8. & 9. Socrat. l. 5. c. 10. Sozom l. 7. c. 12. but from the Empe­rour. So likewise doe all the Church Histories, which tell vs, that the Emperour hauing heard the resolution of the Orthodox Fathers in the Synod of Rome, much desired to assemble another of all sects, hoping by that means to make them fall to some agreement; not borrowing anie authoritie from Rome. And to con­clude, the practise of all auncient times seemeth to doubt hereof, seeing that in that verie yeare a Councell was called at Aquileia by the Emperor Gratian, Concil. Aquil. in ep. ad Gratian. Valent. & Theodos. in 1. Ʋol. Concil. Theodor. l. 5. c. 9. Sozom. l. 7. c. 9. where Ambrose himselfe was present, and the deputies of the Churches of France and A­frike, as he affirmeth; and seeing also that Damasus himselfe became an humble sui­ter to the Emperours Theodosius and Gratian, to graunt a warrant for the calling of C a Councell the yeare following at Rome, being much offended that Flauianus had succeeded Paulinus in the Church of Antioch: for how could he grant leaue to others, who asked for himselfe? And of this verie Councell it is, that S. Hierosme speaketh in his Epistle to Eustochium, When the imperiall letters (sayth he) had as­sembled at Rome the Bishops of the East and West, Hieron. ad Eu­stoch. ep. 27. she then saw verie admirable persona­ges, Bishops of Christ, Paulinus Bishop of Antioch, and Epiphanius Bishop of Salamis. And now let Baronius tell me whether a man may not haue reason to doubt there­of. Well, sayth Baronius, yet the best is,To. 1. Concil. that Damasus did at least confirme this Councell. And we must see whether he did or no, and how he confirmed it, whe­ther to authorise it, or else to submit himselfe vnto it. For the first, we haue a Sy­nodall D Epistle directed to Theodosius, with the Acts of that Synod annexed there­unto; wherein as called together by his commaund, they jointly yeelded him an account of what they had there enacted, requesting him by his seale and sentence to confirme and ratifie their decrees. Baronius telleth vs,Baron. to. 4. an. 381. art. 38. that this they did onely in policie, to engage Theodosius in the maintenance of their profession: And what need, seeing the world taketh notice, that he was as zealous for religion, as was the best of them? And for Damasus, that he approued indeed this Councell, but that he did it likewise for a purpose, which was to make the Greeke Church sure a­gainst the heresie of Macedonius: and I would faine know where it is that he fin­deth it. All a matter, sayth Baronius, but so it is, that he did confirme it: for Photius E hath it in his booke of seuen Synods. Surely this man did well and wisely, not to quote the place, for feare his jugling should be discouered: The words of Photius are these: And a little after (saith he) they vnderstood, that Damasus also, Bishop of Rome had confirmed them, as being of the same opinion with them, meaning with the Fathers of Constantinople. And doth this proue that they required his authori­tie to confirme their Acts? or rather that he confirmed them onely by yeelding assent, and submitting himselfe vnto them? And yet such is his madnesse as to say, that he confirmed it fraudulently and for a purpose onely not to auow the Ca­non, there made, for the place and dignitie of the Bishop and Church of Constan­tinople, [Page 48] making his dreames and idle fancies to stand in ballance against the soli­ditie A and weight of all Histories by vs alledged; and going to persuade vs, that by vertue of a Councell shortly after assembled at Rome, Paulinus borne out by Da­masus was restored to his See, and Flauian, who was there placed by the Councell of Constantinople, dispossessed, and all this without either argument or Author, other than his owne fantasticall assertion. Thirdly, Baronius verie stiffely maintai­neth,Baron. to. 4. an. 382. art. 18. that notwithstanding this Canon of the Councell of Constantinople, yet still causes of weight and importance were reserued to the See of Rome, such as were Heresie and Schisme, deposing of Bishops, and the like, and that these cau­ses were brought to him by way of Appeale. And surely for heresie and schisme we cannot denie, that scarcely euer was there anie heretike or schismatike con­demned B by his owne Church, which presently had not recourse to Rome, and that manie of them haue beene fostered and supported there: That the Popes themselues, through an vsuall & natiue greedinesse of drawing moulture to their mill, and causes to their Consistorie, were oftentimes deceiued herein. But this we denie, that these causes went to him by Appeale, which is alwayes made from the sentence of an inferior judge to the finall decree of a superior: and that not so much as the name of an Appeale, much lesse the thing it selfe is to be found either in the Historie, or in the Practise of the Church, no not in this age, which we now speake of, though this pretended Monarchie at this time aduanced her selfe the most she could. Bellarmine yet deriueth it from verie farre, and from the time of C Marcion the heretike, who being excommunicated in Pontus, came to Rome. But this I aske, whether Ireneus or Tertullian doth affirme, that he came by way of Appeale? or doth not Epiphanius say, that they sent him backe againe with these tearmes,Epiph. cont. Marcion. here. 42. We may not receiue thee without the permission of thy venerable Father, mea­ning the Bishop: There is but one faith and consent of all; we may not oppose against thy Father, our Collegue and fellow Minister. Bellarmine yet instanceth againe in the case of Felix and Fortunatus, a couple of schismatikes of Afrike, who would haue had their cause new hammered before Cornelius Bishop of Rome: But we haue alreadie declared what was the opinion of S. Cyprian thereupon,Cyprian. edit. Pamel. epist. 55. & 68. protesting, that if such courses taken may be allowed, all discipline would come to naught. And D Stephen, who succeeded Cornelius, when he attempted to vndertake the patronage of Basilides and Martialis, Basil. in Epist. ad Occident. whom the Churches of Spaine had deposed from their Chaires, preuailed as little as his predecessor had done before him. As for Libe­rius, his bad hap was to take vpon him the protection of that hypocrit Eustathius, Bishop of Sebasta,Nazian. in ep. ad Caledon. and Damasus of Vitalis, a Bishop of the East, whom afterwards vpon better aduise he excommunicated: neither doth Baronius denie, but that Sy­ricius himselfe,Baron. to. 5. an. 397. art. 17. & sequ. an. 399. had he not beene forewarned by Marcella, had beene, as almost he was, ouertaken by the Origenists; so easie a matter was it by faire words and low crouchings to come ouer these men, blinded with ambition and with desire of so­ueraigne authoritie.E

But to come to this age and matter now in hand, we read, that Theophilus Bi­shop of Alexandria assembled a Synod, and therein absolutely condemned the Origenists, wherein he neuer expected either authoritie or aduice from Rome: nay Rome her selfe was content to follow his example, namely Anastasius the yere following,Hieron. ep. 78. ad Pammach. & Marcell. witnesse S. Hierosme, who writing of this subject sayth, Him whom De­metrius chased out of Alexandria, Theophilus vanquished ouer all the world &c. He boldly proclaimed Origen for an heretike: Let the Chaire of S. Peter by her preaching confirme what the Chaire of Marc the Euangelist hath taught: adding afterwards, [Page 49] A That indeed Anastasius had now condemned in the West what formerly had been condemned in the East: not that Theophilus had need of confirmation from him, for his sentence was absolute, and carried execution with it: But as Hierosme saith, They both did it with the same zeale, as led by the same spirit, because they had both drunke out of the same fountaine of the Scriptures.

But there arose at this time a certaine difference betweene Chrysostome Bishop of Constantinople, and this Theophilus of Alexandria, whereof they would sucke no small aduantage; the case was this: Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople being dead, question arose about the choice of a successor: The Bishops of the prouince assembled in Synod, by common consent of Clergie and People, elected Chrysostome, Socrat. l. 6. c. 2. Sozom. l. 8. c. 2. [...]. and B called him from Antioch to be their Bishop. Here Baronius groundeth his argu­ment: for (sayth he) it is euident, that Theophilus opposed himselfe against his election, and would haue brought in one Isidorus, a Priest of his dioces: if there­fore (sayth he) that Canon of the Councell of Constantinople had bin of force,Baron. to. 5. an. 397. art. 63. which equalleth Constantinople with Rome, how could Theophilus haue medled in this election; and thence concludeth, that it is a forged Canon, in despight of all Histories whatsoeuer. But let this Annalist read the Historie once more: To giue the greater credit and lustre to this election (sayth Socrates) there were also manie other Bishops there assembled by order from the Emperour, and among the rest Theophilus of Alexandria, who did what he could to staine the credit and reputation of Chryso­stome. C Whence it appeareth, that he was not there but by speciall order from the Emperor Arcadius; and therefore his argument concludeth not. And here began the quarrell betweene these two: Theophilus a man of an implacable spirit, tooke the other to taske; the reason was, for that Theophilus had not long before ex­communicated certaine Origenists, who presently fled to Chrysostome, whom yet Chrysostome would not receiue to his Communion, vntill he might heare the rea­sons of Theophilus, either by himselfe, or by some others from him, concerning their excommunication: Theophilus also had this aduantage ouer him, that through his libertie of speech in pulpit, he had drawne the hatred of the great ones of the Court, and of the Emperour himselfe, but aboue all, of the Empresse D vpon his head: Wherefore Theophilus was sent for, to sit vpon him; who com­ming to Constantinople, assembled a Synod, but for feare of the people held it without the citie; the Synod consisting for the most part of those Bishops whom Chrysostome for their demerits had formerly deposed.Pallad. in vita Chrysost. an. 403 Thither he cited Chrysostome to appeare before him and them, who had to the open view of all men combined themselues against him. Chrysostome on the contrarie held another Synod within the walls, whither he also cited Theophilus to appeare before him: and farther, by three Bishops and two Priests admonished him and his adherents, not to peruert or trouble the orders of the Church, especially not to violate the Canon of Nice, by medling in other mens iurisdictions; Pallad. in vita Chrysost. Socrat. l. 2. c. 4. Sozom. l. 8. c. 17. [...]. that he in his Synod had the greater num­ber E of Bishops, and assembled out of diuers Prouinces; that yet he refused not to put himselfe vpon the triall of him and of his Synod, prouided that his profes­sed enemies were first remoued; if not, that then he appealed to a Generall Councell. These are the words of Palladius in the life of Chrysostome: likewise of Socrates and Sozomene in their Histories. And why then did he not appeale to Rome? or can they shew anie such authoritie as this, for the maintenance of Appeales to the See of Rome? Which notwithstanding, they proceeded to his deposition, and cast him into exile, hauing no other cause against him, but that he refused to ap­peare before them. But why then (sayth Baronius) had not be rather relieued him­selfe [Page 50] vpon that third Canon of Constantinople, if anie such had beene in force?A I answere, because the Canon of the Nicene Councell was more proper for his purpose, the question not being properly of jurisdiction, but of the integritie of his person. By which Canon of Nice Theophilus, who was set ouer the Churches of Egypt, had nothing to doe with the Churches of Thracia. But hereupon the people began to repine and mutinie, till in the end Chrysostome was restored to his Chaire. Shortly after he drew more anger vpon him by like Pulpit libertie as be­fore, and his aduersaries taking hold of this occasion, condemned him a second time, alledging, that he had returned to his Chaire, without restitution first had and obtained from them. And thereupon, the displeasure of the Empresse, joy­ned with the implacable hatred of Theophilus, they cast him into banishment,B more grieuous than before: which while some of his friends sought to mitigate, they made it worse, till in the end he died in exile, through griefe of heart. True it is, that in this second conflict he tryed all his friends; whereupon Baronius is bold,Baron. to. 5. an. 404. art. 20. & seq. and sayth, That he had recourse by way of Appeale to the Church of Rome as vn­to her, which was onely able to correct all other Churches, and that he appealed to Inno­cent Bishop of Rome in person. Which he reporteth with that confidence, as a man would thinke himselfe almost bound in conscience to beleeue him: adding far­ther, That all this fell out by the wonderful prouidence of God, to shew men how they ought vpon like occasions to flie to the Pope of Rome. But let vs see what proofes: for our part we are content to stand to his owne allegations, and name­ly C to that Epistle of Chrysostome vnto Innocent: which Epistle, by his leaue, is not directed to Innocent alone, but jointly to all the Bishops of the West, as appea­reth, in that the whole Epistle runneth in tearmes of the plurall number; neither in six whole pages, which that Epistle taketh vp, is the word of Appeale so much as once named: but we find there manie other things which make against them; as first, that he declareth vnto them the cause of his exile to haue beene onely, that he would haue appealed to a Councell, meaning a Generall Councell, as we said before; and consequently not to the Bishop of Rome. Secondly, that he pray­eth their charitie to awake, and to helpe to put some end to these his miseries, and there­fore not their pretended omnipotencie. Thirdly, I humbly beseech you (sayth he)D my most reuerend Lords, to preuent this ruine; and therefore not Innocent, or his See alone: and what ruine was it? For if (saith he) this custome take place, and it may be lawfull for one to enterprise vpon anothers Prouince, all is lost. His meaning was, that they should helpe to order this matter by a Councell, in execution of that Canon of Nice, and therefore he entreateth them to retract and to disannull all that which had beene practised or attempted against him: so farre was he from requesting In­nocent, who dwelt farther off than the other, to interpose his authoritie in the cause. Fourthly, in that he telleth them, That he had written the same things to Ve­nerius Bishop of Milan, and to Chromatius Bishop of Aquileia: and so indeed had he also written to Aurelius Bishop of Carthage. By which appeareth, that he wrote E to sundrie other Bishops which then were of esteeme and authoritie in the Church, as well as to Innocentius; whom he could not omit, in regard that he was Bishop of the first See: but he appealed not to one more than to another. The like also may appeare by the resolution which Innocentius tooke in this businesse: for hauing receiued the letters, and heard the embassages of both parties, in good discretion he admitted them both to his Communion, thereby declaring, that the sentence which was giuen against Chrysostome was vnjust:Theodor. Romā. apud Pallad. in Dialog. adding farther, That it was fit in this case to call a sincere Synod, as well of the Easterne as of the Westerne Bishops, [Page 51] A where neither opposites nor partisans of either of them should be present, and there giue iudgement according to the Canons of Nice: which was nothing else in effect, but on­ly to giue way to the Appeale, which Chrysostome had from the beginning put in, to a Generall Councell: which he requested Innocentius and others, according to the practise of the Church in those times, to procure from the Emperors Arcadius and Honorius; especially from Arcadius, who being offended with Chrysostome, would neuer haue graunted it, but at their intreatie. Which plainely appeareth in Sozomene by the letters of Innocent sent to the Clergie of Constantinople.Sozom. l. 8. c. 28. It is needfull (sayth he) that a Synod haue the hearing of this matter, for it onely is able to re­presse these troubles, and in the meane time it is meet to referre the cure of this maladie to B the will of God, and of Iesus Christ our Lord. And a little after, We are verie carefull (saith he) to find the meanes to assemble a Generall Councell: which he needed not to haue beene, had things beene in his owne disposition. Now that which ensued hereupon was, that the yere following, which was the yere 405,An. 405. there was assem­bled a Synod of the Westerne Bishops at Rome, where they entreated the Emperor Honorius to write to his brother Arcadius, requesting him, that he would cause a Synod to be assembled at Thessalonica, to the end that the Bishops both of the East and also of the West might there meet, as in a more conuenient place, for the finall hearing and senten­cing of this cause. Whereupon Honorius sent vnto him, and the more to shew him the good opinion which the Bishops of the West had of Chrysostome, of manie let­ters C which he had in his hands to that effect, he sent him principally two, the one of Innocentius Bishop of Rome, the other of Chromatius Bishop of Aquileia: And the author himselfe noteth, that the embassadors sent vnto Arcadius from his bro­ther Honorius, deliuered him letters from the Emperour his brother, from Innocentius of Rome, from Chromatius of Aquileia, from Venerius of Milan, and from sundrie others; all which joyned in this embassage: the end whereof was, to reestablish Chrysostome in his place for the present, vntill a Generall Councell might be assembled. In the meane time Chrysostome died in banishment, and the rest of this Historie concer­neth not this matter. What reason therefore hath Baronius so confidently to re­port, that Chrysostome did appeale to Rome? For when a Prince oppressed by one D neighbour, flyeth for helpe and succour to another, doth he thereby make him his Lord, and himselfe his vassall? To flie to his courtesie or fauour, is it to be interpre­ted for an acknowledgement of his jurisdiction, or that he confesseth himselfe his tributarie? One lye more of Baronius, and so an end of this discourse. This grand Annalist telleth vs,Baron. to. 5. an. 407. art. 20. & an. 408. art. 33. Theodor. l. 5. c. 33. & 34. that Innocent would neuer communicat with the Easterne Churches, no not after the death of Chrysostome, till his name was restored to the catalogue of the Bishops of that See, and thereupon voucheth Theodoret, lib. 5. cap. 33. Whosoeuer will take the paine to read that place, shall find no mention there made of Innocentius. It is said there I confesse, that the Doctor of this Vniuerse being dead, the Bishops of the West would not communicat with the Bishops of the East, of E Egypt and of Thrace, vntill they had enrolled him among the Bishops deceased of Con­stantinople, not vouchsafing so much as to congratulat his successor Arsacius. Why then should he appropriat that to one, which the Author himselfe attributeth vnto all? The like care (sayth he) did Alexander the Bishop take in Antioch, being the first which caused his name to be registred in the writings of the Church; which is true: But Baronius addeth, that he did it at the instance and request of In­nocentius, hauing no other argument for this assertion but this, that Innocent wrote a letter to him; for as touching anie such matter Theodoret speaketh not a word.

OPPOSITION.

Concil. Carth. 2. ca. 12.The Africanes therefore assembled vpon this occasion a second Councell at Carthage, in the time of this Syricius, where they decreed in this manner: It seemed good vnto all, that without the leaue of the Primat of euerie Prouince, no man hereafter presume, in what place soeuer, to ordaine any Bishop: without any reference at all to the Bishop of Rome. But, say they, if necessitie so require, any three Bi­shops, by order from the Primat, may consecrate a Bishop. And it is to be noted, That in this verie Canon they call the chaire of the Metropolitan, the First Chaire, or [Page 53] A Chiefe See: and that Gratian inserting this Canon in his booke of Decrees,Distinct. 64. C. extra. conscien­tiam 5. follow­ed the intent of this Councell of Carthage, and not of Syricius; referring it to the Metropolitan Bishop, not to the Apostolike See, though he falsely report it vnder the name of Innocent. And in the yeare 397,An. 397. the third Councell of Car­thage went a little farther, Syricius at that time also sitting Pope, and decreed, That the Bishop of the first See should not be called the Prince, or Chiefe of Priests, Concil. Carthag. 3. ca. 26. or High Priest, or by any other such name, but onely, The Bishop of the first See. As for the name of Vniuersall Bishop, that the Bishop of Rome it selfe should not bee called by that name. Which last words are also in Gratian, though now,Distinct. 99. ca. primae se­dis 3. through the good order which of later times hath beene taken in these matters, they are no longer to be found B in the Councell it selfe: A thing not to be forgotten; for it was fit that all these things should meet, and march together, Corruption of doctrine as well as of dis­cipline; and that Syricius should be the man who should first establish the forbid­dance of Priests mariages, though by generall consent reiected in the Councell of Nice, and not receiued for six hundred yeares after in the West, doe what his successors could doe: Bringing in also the the commemoration of Saints into the Liturgie and daily seruice of the Church, in imitation perhaps, of that Carmen Saliare, vsed heretofore among the Romans, wherein the names of all their gods werewith much solemnitie rehearsed: For that was the disease of that age, to fa­shion themselues in all points after the rites and ceremonies of the Heathen.

OPPOSITION.

The question then is, as you see, about great causes.An. 402. In the yeare 402 was held the Mileuitan Councell, and after that in the yere 413 another at Carthage,An. 413. where no petie causes were in handling, but the maine doctrine of the Church, the schisme of Donatus, and the heresie of Pelagius: where both were condem­ned, E and Pelagius (concerning whose doctrine Pope Innocent thought fit to suspend his judgement) was excommunicated. And all this done without consulting the Bishop of Rome, onely sentence being alreadie passed, he was entreated to joyne his authoritie and voyce with theirs; for so goe the words of those Fathers in a letter which they sent vnto him, reported by S. Augustine: We haue, say they,Concil. Carth. ad Innocent. to. 1. pa. 469. August. Epist. 90 by common consent pronounced Pelagius and Caelestius to be excommunicated, &c. for the amendment, if not of them, yet of those whom they haue seduced: Which done, we haue thought good, deere brother, to signifie so much vnto thee, to the end that vnto this ordi­nance of our mediocritie thou shouldest ioyne the authoritie of the See Apostolike. So that [Page 54] here we see a sentence plainely and absolutely giuen; and yet vnder these tearmes A of humilitie, there is no disparagement or inequalitie to be obserued. In like sort the Fathers of the Mileuitan Councell:Concil. Mileuit. in Epist. ad In­nocent. to 1. Con­cil. & apud Au­gust. Epist. 92. Concil. Mileuit. c. 3. Seeing, say they, that the Lord of his speci­all grace hath placed thee in that Apostolike See, being such a one, as that our negligence would be condemned, if we should conceale anything from thee which maketh for the good of the Church, rather than our feare excused, as if we doubted of thy good acceptance; we therefore entreat thee to vse thy Pastorall care and diligence in these so great perils and dangers of the members of Christ, &c. Their meaning was, that hee should doe in these cases of heresie within the limits of his jurisdiction in the West, as they had alreadie done in the East. But when they saw that vpon their round dealing with them in the East, he was the rather inclined to absolue them in the West, they B made short worke, and passed this decree in full Synod: Whosoeuer shall say, that the grace of God, in which we are iustified by Iesus Christ, is auailable onely for the remis­sion of sinnes past, and that it is no helpe to vs against sinne hereafter, let him bee Ana­thema. And thereupon adde they farther: This errour and impietie, which hath eue­rie where so many followers and abettors, ought also to be Anathematised and condemned by the See Apostolike. As if they should haue said, It is high time, Innocent, that now you shew your selfe, and doe your duetie. All which Innocent, as one not wil­ling to breake with them, passed ouer, and seemed not to vnderstand; but as if they had fled to him as to their superiour, frameth them an answer onely to futher his owne ambition:Apud August. Epist. 90. & to. 1 Concil. apud August. Epist. 91 You haue, saith he, well obserued the ordinances of the ancient Fa­thers,C and not troden vnder foot that which they (not in humane wisedome, but by diuine order) haue established; namely, that whatsoeuer is done in places, though neuer so remote, should, for finall conclusion, be referred to the audience of the See of Rome. And againe, You haue, Apud August. Epist. 92. saith he, had due regard of the Apostolike honour, I say, of him which hath the charge and care of all other Churches, in asking aduise of him in these perplexities, and intricate causes: Following herein the ancient Canon, which you, as well as my selfe, know to haue beene obserued in all the world. And where, I pray you good Innocent? and when was it so obserued? for saw you not the contrarie in Afrike it selfe, and in these two last Councels, practised?

But let vs see whether they vse him any better in his matter of Appeales. The D Fathers of the Mileuitan Councell spake plainely:Concil. Mileuit. Can. 22. It hath beene, say they, thought fit in the case of Priests, Deacons, and other inferiour Clergie men, if in their causes they complaine of the wrongfull iudgement of the Bishop, that then the next adioyning Bi­shops shall heare and end their cause, by the consent of their owne Bishop: And if they thinke fit to appeale from them also, yet that they appeale not but onely to the Councels of Afrike, or to the Primate of the Prouince: But if any shall presume to appeale beyond the seas, that no man presume to receiue that man to his communion. And it is verie pro­bable, that the like decrees were made in other Churches of the West, howsoe­uer Gratian, 2. q. 6. c. 35. to saue the Popes jurisdiction, addeth these words, Vnlesse, saith he, they appeale to the See of Rome: whereas it was properly against that See that they E raised this countermure and bulwarke of defence. Bellarmine yet goeth more finely to worke, and saith, That this Canon concerneth only the inferior Orders. But the Canon next precedent, which properly prouideth for the cases of Bi­shops, is linked with this as wel in reason as in order, & the conclusion is general, Whosoeuer shall offer to appeale beyond the sea, &c. without any distinction betweene Priest and Bishop:Concil. Carthag. apud Balsam. Can. 31. ex Con­cil. African. and in the margent there is noted this diuers lection; Aliàs, That they appeale not beyond the sea, but to the Primates of their Prouinces, as it hath of­ten beene ordained in case of Bishops: and so are all sorts of Clergie men comprised. [Page 55] A And in like manner is this Canon read in the Greeke copies. [...]. And to conclude this point, we may not forget that Saint Augustine himselfe was present at this Councell.

All these things standing as they doe, let vs now see what arguments Baroni­us hence draweth, to the preiudice of the Churches of Spaine and Afrike, in fa­uour of the Pope. And first, saith he, in the third Councell of Carthage,Baron. to. 5. an. 497. art. 55. can. 48. it is decreed, That concerning the baptisme of the Donatists, Syricius Bishop of Rome, and Simplicianus of Milan, should be consulted: The one, saith he, as head of the Church, the other for the worthinesse of his person: whereas the Fathers them­selues make no such difference; but, say they, we haue thought good to consult our bre­thren B and fellow Priests, Syricius and Simplicianus: and no maruell, seeing that Au­relius Bishop of Carthage wanting fit ministers to furnish his Churches, wrot ioyntly to Anastasius Bishop of Rome and to Venerius Bishop of Milan, to sup­plie his want; calling them Holie Brethren. Secondly,Concil. Carthag. 3. ca. 26. Distinct. 99. ca. primae sedis. he taketh on because we al­ledge the Canon, Primae sedis, That the Bishop of the first See should not be called Prince, or the Chiefe of Priests, or High Priest, or by any such like name. And I would know, whether these are not the verie words of the Canon it selfe? or are they not so re­ported by Gratian in the Decrees? Yea, but he wil not that we should extend them to Rome, especially those last words, viz. Baron. an. 397. to. 5. art. 48. That the Bishop of Rome himselfe shall not be called the Vniuersall Bishop: For what likelihood, saith he, that Afrike would presume C to prescribe titles to the Bishop of Rome? adding farther, That out of doubt they are Gra­tians owne words, and that they are not found in the Canon it selfe which he alled­geth. Nay rather, say we, seeing that they are in Gratian, Concil. Carthag. prouincial. 4 in Praesat. Concil. African. who will warrant vs their honestie, and that they themselues are not the men which haue torne it out of the Councels? And why is it vnlikely that those poore Africans should vse those words more than these, which they cannot denie, That no man should appeale beyond the sea: that is, to Rome. For though it be true,Concil. Carthag. can. 33. that these Africans could not, as Baronius saith, dispose of what was done at Rome, yet might they wel take order against his vsurpation, and encroaching vpon their Church and liberties at home; and cause that no man there should attribute to him those titles of insolen­cie D and ambition. Thirdly, because Aurelius Bishop of Carthage,Baron. to. 5. an. 401. art. 9. at the opening of the Councell of Carthage, caused a certaine letter of Anastasius to be there o­penly read, wherein he forewarned them to beware of the cunning sleights of the Donatists; he therefore concludeth, That this Councell was assembled and held by order from Anastasius; and that Aurelius acknowledgeth him for no lesse than a Father, and consequently for a Head. But why did he not rather obserue, that he calleth him also, Brother, and fellow Priest? must his aduise giuen, be induced to proue his mastership? The Synod of Afrike, in the yeare 407, seeing a fell con­tention risen betweene Innocentius of Rome and Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria, made a decree in manner following: It seemeth good to vs, Concil. Afric. 68. that as touching the dissen­tion E now fallen betweene the two Churches of Rome and Alexandria, we write to the holie Father Innocentius, to admonish him, that either Church keepe that peace which the Lord commaunded. Shall now this brotherlie admonition of theirs be interpreted to pro­ceed from a right of jurisdiction, or of soueraigne commaund? Fourthly, in the cause of the Priscillianists of Spaine: Such as were fallen, saith the Councell of Toledo, if they come to penance, shall not be receiued vnlesse the See Apostolike write in their behalfe. And thereby, saith he, you may plainely perceiue, Acta Concil. 1. Tolet. Baron. an. 405. art. 52. vol. 5. that no man might communicat with one which had fallen, vnlesse the See of Rome had first approued of his reduction, and communicated with him. But why should he put [Page 56] vs to read the acts of this Councell, seeing that he himselfe in other cases refuseth A to admit of them. They tell vs indeed, That the Churches of Spaine, much infe­sted with this heresie, sent to be aduised by Saint Ambrose, and that they gouerned themselues by his directions: which he denieth not; but saith that Ambrose him­selfe medled not, but by expresse order from Syricius: for, saith he, the words are, We had great patience, hoping that according to the letters of Saint Ambrose, of blessed memorie, if we condemned that which they had done amisse, and observed the condition specified in his letters, they would returne to peace. (Added hereunto, what Syricius of blessed memorie had aduised vs to doe.) And must then this accessarie carrie with it the principal? or this Parenthesis, be interpreted for a Commission directed to S. Ambrose? Let them rather take the paines and read a little farther, where they B shall find it said in this manner:Concil. Taurin. can. 5. We expect, say they, what the Pope and Simplician Bishop of Milan, and other Bishops of the Churches, will write in answer to our letters: much after the manner of the Councell of Turin in the same cause:Aut Romanae Ecclesiae Sacer­dotis. According, say they, to the letters of the venerable Bishop Ambrose, or of the Priest of the Church of Rome. What would, or rather, what would not Baronius say, if he had the like aduantage?

OPPOSITION.

Ibid.This matter so proposed by the Legats, Alyppius Bishop of Theagast protesting openly, That he intended to hold himselfe in all poynts to the Nicene Councell, began to make question of this pretended Canon: We haue, saith he, alreadie pro­mised to maintaine the Canons of the Nicene Councell: but this is that which troubleth me, that when we come to consult the Greeke copies, I know not how it should come to passe, but we find no such Canon there. In Can. 135. sub fin. And againe, We haue seene diuers copies, and yet could neuer find this Canon in any of them, no not in the Roman copies, neither yet in the Greeke [Page 57] A copies sent vnto vs from the Apostolicall Sees. Whereupon Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, and President of that Councell, notwithstanding that the Popes Le­gats were there present, pronounced, That they would forthwith dispatch mes­sengers and letters to the Bishops of Constantinople, Alexandria, and Antioch; with request, That they would be pleased to transmit vnto them the acts of the Nicene Councell, fast closed and sealed vp, thereby to take away all cause of doubt; Because, said he,In Commonit. ad Can. 1. pa. 306. we cannot find that Canon which is alledged by Faustus in the behalfe of Boniface Bishop of Rome: which Boniface, during this Councell, had suc­ceeded Zozimus. And farther, they required Boniface himselfe to doe the like, to the end that these things passing in his presence, might be void of suspition, and B so find the greater credit with him. Which copies being after a time sent vnto them in due forme, from Cyril Bishop of Alexandria, and from Atticus of Con­stantinople, together with their letters, which we find recited in the Councell, followed that decree which we there read; and withall a Synodal letter from them to Caelestin Bishop of Rome, who during this pursuit had succeeded Boniface, and this Epistle closeth vp that Councell. Neither is it vnworthie our obseruation, that the copie which Cyril sent, taken out of the Archiues of Alexandria, came from Rome, being long before sent from Marcus Bishop of Rome to Athanasi­us, and to the other Bishops of Aegypt, vpon complaint which they had made vn­to him, That the Arrians had burned all the copies of the Nicene Councel which C were to be found in Alexandria:In to. 1. Cōcil. pa. 299. & pa. 300. Epist. Aegypt. ad Marcum, & Marci ad Ae­gyptios. and we haue the letters of Marcus to testifie as much. The decree therefore of that Councell, made in confirmation of the Ca­non of the Mileuitan Councell, passed there by generall consent, in manner and forme following: That Priests, Deacons, and other inferiour Clerkes, appeale not be­yond the sea, but to the Primats of their Prouince, as it hath often beene decided, and commaunded in case of Bishops. As for those which shall appeale beyond the sea (that is, as Balsamon expoundeth it, to Rome) that no man in Africke receiue them to commu­nion. Which clause is set downe in as generall tearmes as could be deuised: and the letter sent to Caelestin maketh their meaning yet more plaine; which letter we find registred in the Councell of Africke, according to the old Roman copie it D selfe: We earnestly intreat you, say they,Concil. African. Can. 105. Codex Canonum Vetus Ecclesiae Romanae in Con­cil. African. 105. that hereafter you giue no care to those which flie vnto you from hence, and that you admit not to your communion such as we haue ex­communicated: for your Venerablenesse knoweth well, that it is so ordered by the Coun­cell of Nice; which though it seeme to dispose onely in case of inferiour Clerkes, and lay persons, yet in reason their mind was, that it should be so obserued much more in case of Bishops; that those which had beene iustly censured, and put from the communion of their owne Church, should not ouer hastily be restored by your Holinesse. And farther we re­quest your Holinesse, that you would repell those Priests, and other Clerkes, which make you their refuge; both because there is no constitution of the Fathers, which hath at any time so much derogated from the authoritie of our Churches, as also because the Councell E of Nice hath apparently left the ordering of all inferiours, whether Priests or Bi­shops, to the iudgement of their Metropolitan: and with great wisedome and equitie haue they prouided, that all matters of controuersie should receiue their finall determina­tion in the place where they began: and that the grace of the holie Spirit would not bee so wanting to any Prouince, but that the Priests of Christ (which word compriseth al­so Bishops) by the helpe thereof, wil be able at all times wisely and discreetly to enter in­to the full knowledge and vnderstanding of causes, and according to right and equitie to iudge of them; especially considering that euerie man which findeth himselfe aggrieued with the sentence of his Diocesan, may, if he will, forthwith appeale to the Synods of his [Page 58] owne Prouince, or if him list, to a Generall Councell, vnlesse peraduenture anie thinke,A that God will inspire with this gift of examining causes some one particular man, Vni cuilibet. and that he will denie the same to an infinite number of Bishops and Priests assembled in a Councell: Innumerabili­bus sacerdoti­bus. and how can a iudgement giuen beyond the seas be good, where witnesses ne­cessarily required in such cases, cannot be present, either in regard of their sex, or of their age, or by reason of some other impediment. As for your sending of a Legat à La­tere,A tuae sanctita­tis latere. we find no such ordinance in anie Councell, neither yet in the writings of the Fa­thers. And as touching that which you sent vs by Faustinus our fellow Bishop, as a Ca­non of the Nicene Councell, we let you to vnderstand, that there is no such Canon to be found in the true and vncorrupt copies of that Councell, which haue beene sent vnto vs, taken out of the Originals by Cyrill our fellow Bishop of Alexandria, and by the reue­rend B Atticus of Constantinople: which copies we also heretofore sent vnto Boniface your predecessor of worthie memorie, by Innocentius the Priest, and Marcellus a Subdeacon, wherein there was no such Canon to be found.

Now in the whole narration of this Epistle there are manie things worthie our obseruation: as first the inscription, To our louing and venerable brother Caelestin. Secondly, that the Popes Legat brought back againe and presented before them Apiarias a Priest (whom Vrban Bishop of Sicea had condemned) to purge himselfe before the Councell, notwithstanding he had fled to Rome. Thirdly, that it is said, [...]. your Holinesse beleeued that he had appealed vnto you, that is, your Holinesse was made to beleeue, that he had right to appeale vnto you, which yet you were not able C to proue, and therefore his appeale auailed him not, as one which was conuicted by his owne confession, notwithstanding the sleights and practises of the Legat. Fourthly, that Celestin here is fairely entreated no more to protect or receiue their Priests or Bishops, as you (say they) shall find ordained in the Councell of Nice, where­as that which you pretend is not there to be found: so that the lie was put vpon those three Popes as plainely, and as mannerly withall, as possibly could be de­uised. Fifthly, that whereas they talke so much of that fountaine of Gods spirit, flowing so plentifully at Rome, in the person of their Bishop; by farre greater reason it is to be presumed, that it will not wax drie and faile among so manie holie persons assembled in their owne Prouince. Sixtly, that they will not heare D of anie Legats à Latere, that they know not what they meane, nor found they anie such officer mentioned in the Canons of the Church, as also that they neuer heard of anie such clerkes, as lately came by strong hand to put his decrees in execution: by which attempts of theirs it appeareth how much ground their am­bitious violence had alreadie gotten, through the breach which was made in their liberties by those rebell Bishops which fled vnto them for protection. And this is that which the Fathers call Typhum seculi in Ecclesiam Christi inducere, Typho isto. to bring in worldlie pride and arrogancie into the Church of Christ: which they doubted not to speake vnto Boniface himselfe, saying, We beleeue, that seeing thou sittest in the Ro­mane Church, we shall no longer be oppressed with this vaine pride, calling him alwaies E Domine frater. For whereas they triumph in this word Sanctitati vestrae, i. your Ho­linesse, they must vnderstand, that the Popes themselues vsed the same stile, and gaue the same title to them, and to all other Bishops; as Zozimus writing to these verie Africans, We are persuaded (sayth he) that your Holinesse hath beene informed touching the proofe and triall which we haue made of Caelestius his absolute and sound faith: and so likewise to others.

Against this maine wall of truth and veritie, Baronius opposeth the brittle glasse of his owne fancie, seeking to darken this cleare light with the smoake of [Page 59] A his vaine discourse: howbeit, like a bird in a net, the more he striueth, the more he is intangled, and the reader may easily obserue, that he spendeth himselfe in vaine talke and sophistrie. And first, it much offendeth his patience, that we say, that those three Popes produced the Canon of Sardica, vnder the name of the Coun­cell of Nice: for if it were done by error, where is their infallibilitie? if of malice, where is then their sanctitie? But (saith he) it may be that the text was corrupted, Baron. vol. 5. an. 419. art. 70. & sequ. and this word Nicene put for Sardican, and I am forced to beleeue, that these acts are not reported truly and as they ought to be. Tell me reader, whosoeuer thou art, will such a shift serue in a matter of this importance?Idem ib. art. 87. Secondly (saith he) what aduantage was there to be gotten, in alledging the one for the other? for was not the Sardi­can B Councell as good as the Nicene? or are they not both Generall Councels? and we haue alreadie proued, that the Sardican Synod was neuer reckoned a­mong the Generall: neither did Innocent euer plead for himselfe other than the Canon of Nice, vnder colour of this glorious name to dazzle the eyes of men, and to abuse the world. Thirdly (saith he) what likelihood that the Africans would withstand these Appeales, seeing they had beene vsed from all antiquitie? the onely thing which they misliked was the forme. What need of answere to this argument, more than the bare recitall of the argument it selfe? and who doubteth of their presumption and arrogancie? Or who knoweth not, that euill manners giue com­monly occasion of good lawes, that vsurpations cause orderings, and that if in­justice C were not, we should not need the knowledge of the lawes? Thou tellest vs, that Celestius, a companion and an abettor of the heretike Pelagius, was con­demned in Afrike;August. contra duas Pelagij, ep. l. 2. c. 3. Epistola Zosim. ad Aurel. Car­thag. episcop. that he appealed from this sentence to Zozimus Bishop of Rome; that he admitted of the appeale, and that this was but the yeare before: true; and Baronius, you may perceiue that this proceeded of that Papall humor, to admit of all plaintifes, suffering themselues with flatterie and faire words to be abused oft times by the most dangerous heretikes. But say, I pray you, what fol­loweth? Is it not, that the Africanes complained of these wrongs? that Zozimus carried it not farre? that he was regulated and ordered the next yere following?Augustin. epist. 261. edit. Plan­tin. Yea, but (saith he) Doe you not see so and so manie examples of these Appeales mentio­ned D in S. Augustine? and thereupon alledgeth his 261 Epistle all at large. Annalist would be, as he is: Doth he not see, that all these examples were before the law was made, and that they were the proper occasion and cause of this Decree? and doe men in Commonwealths matters ground themselues vpon abuses, or rather vpon Lawes? vpon that which, de facto, is done, or rather vpon that which of right ought to be done? The truth of the cause is this: Anthonie Bishop of Foussall in Afrike being deposed by the Bishops of his owne Prouince, got letters of com­mendation from the Primat of Nicomedia to Zozimus Bishop of Rome, by meanes whereof he found accesse to Zozimus, and after him to his successor Cele­stin; who, bad man as he was, went about to restore him by force of armes. E Whereupon S. Augustine, who was present at his condemnation, wrote to Cele­stin in this manner: We are threatened (saith he) with a Posse comitatus, and force of armes, to put the sentence of the Apostolike See in execution, and so shall we, poore Chri­stians, stand in greater feare of a Catholike Bishop, than the heretikes themselues doe of a Catholike Emperour: Let not these things so be, I doe coniure thee by the blood of Christ, and by the memorie of the Apostle S. Peter, who warneth those which are set ouer the Christian assemblies, not to dominiere with violence ouer their brethren. What could this holie Bishop doe more, to stay the course of his rage and mad­nesse? but in that great Synod of Carthage, he with a multitude of other worthie [Page 60] persons layed the axe to the verie root of his pretended soueraignetie, by their A sentence there pronounced against him. Now tell me, whereas Baronius in this cause of Antonie Bishop of Foussall crieth out, O admirabilem Dei prouidentiam, &c. O the wonderfull prouidence of God, Ib. art. 76. in matters concerning the Catholike Church! at that verie time when controuersie was betweene the Fathers of Afrike concerning the Canon of Nice, God would haue it, that a cause should fall out, by occasion whereof Saint Augustine himselfe, who was present at that Councell, was euen compelled to record vnto posteritie so manie examples of those who had recourse and did appeale to the Church of Rome. Tell me, I say, whether we haue not farre greater cause to prayse his goodnesse, in that out of these enormities and abuses he was pleased to direct this Councell, to set downe a rule, and a certaine order, by which the Churches B of Afrike might from that time forward for euer be directed?Baron. vol. 5. an. 419. art. 92. Fourthly, will you see (saith he) how much they attribute and yeeld to the Church of Rome? When they went about to set downe a certaine Canon of the Bible, they consulted Bo­niface thereupon, requesting him to confirme it: and what likelyhood, that they would not vse the like submission in the rest of their Canons? But the verie rea­ding of that Canon is a refuting of this assertion:Concil. Carthag. Can. 47. It seemeth good vnto vs (say the Fathers in that Canon) that nothing be read in the Churches but onely the holie Scrip­tures; which are these, Genesis, Exodus, Leuiticus, &c. Wherefore their resolution and decree was absolute without anie reseruation, both that the Scriptures onely should be read, and also which bookes they are which ought to be accounted for C Canonicall: onely for correspondencies sake they adde farther in these words, We will also that this be signified to our companion in Priesthood Bonifacius, and others, to the end that they may confirme it; for so haue we receiued from the Fathers, that these onely ought to be read in Churches. Now if the Popes authoritie alone had beene necessarie to the validitie of this Canon, what needed they to signifie it vnto o­thers? This therefore was nought else but a testimonie of their mutuall loue and charitie. Baronius here stormeth because we say, That by occasion of that forena­med Canon the whole Church of Afrike was cut off from the Communion of the Church of Rome; because it thence followeth, that S. Augustine, and such a multitude of other holie Fathers died out of the Communion of the Church of D Rome, and excommunicated by the Pope: and thereupon seeketh by all meanes to discredit that Epistle of Bonifacius the second, which testifieth, that they were not reunited till a full hundred yeares after. I confesse, that whereas it is there said, Vnder the reigne of Iustin; the mistake was easier of Iustin for Iustinian, than that of Nicene for Sardican, and the inconuenience thence arising is verie great: for what then shall become of so manie Martyrs, put to death during those hun­dred yeares, vnder the persecution and tyrannie of the Vandales? But they them­selues must looke to that: Sure I am, that this is none of their greatest cares, wit­nesse the poore Grecians in these dayes, who haue now lyen groning vnder the yoke of the Turks so manie yeares. And if this Epistle was not written by Boni­facius, E they may thanke themselues, who haue inserted it in the bodie of the Councels.

Bellarm. de Bontif. Rom. l. 2. c. 24.Let the reader now judge what reason Bellarmine had to say, that those Fa­thers neuer intended to forbid their Bishops to appeale to Rome; seeing they name Bishops in expresse tearmes, and ordaine that all causes should be determi­ned within the same Prouince: Or what conscience, when he saith, that S. Augu­stine vnderstood that Councell otherwise in his 262 Epistle,August. ep. 262. because he there saith, that Caecilian needed not to care for the conspiracie of his aduersaries, seeing him­selfe [Page 61] A ioyned in Communion with the Church of Rome, and with all other countries whence the Gospell first came into Afrike, where he would be alwayes readie to plead his cause, if his aduersaries should seeke to alienate those Churches from him. For what can he gather from thence but onely this, that it was no hard matter for him to purge himselfe vnto those Churches, in case he had been traduced: for if he thence con­clude, That therefore he might appeale to Rome; as much may be said and con­cluded of all other places: But he was wise not to quote the place, for there is nothing (and he knew it well ynough) which maketh for his purpose. And far­ther here obserue, that S. Augustine was present at this Councell, as appeareth by his 207 Epistle.

B Also we read,An. 431. that about the yeare 431 the Generall Councell of Ephesus was assembled against Nestorius, where we find not this pretended Primacie in anie sort acknowledged. For as touching the calling thereof,Socrat. l. 7. c. 3. the Bishops (saith So­crates) assembled themselues together out of all quarters vnto Ephesus, by order from the Emperour. And Euagrius and Nicephorus say,Euagr. l. 1. c. 3. Nicephor. l. 14. c. 34. that they were assembled by the letters of the Emperour directed to the Bishops of all places. And the Synod it selfe in more than twentie seuerall places vseth these words, By the will of the most religious Kings; meaning Theodosius and Valentinian. Acta Concil. Ephesin. in 1. to. Concil. [...], c. 1. to. 2. & cap. 17, 18, 19. & passim. Ib. pa. 99. 177. 201, 202. Bellarm. l. 1. de Concil. c. 19. Acta Concil. Ephes. c. 17. And the Acts all along speake in this and the like manner, Whom your Maiesties commaunded to come to Ephesus &c. and, Their letters commanded vs so &c. and, By vertue of the Edict of the most religious C Emperors &c. And so likewise wrote Theodosius vnto Cyrill, that he had appointed the Bishops to assemble at Ephesus out of all parts, at Easter. And Caelestin Bishop of Rome writing to Theodosius: Wee yeeld (saith he) our presence in the Synod which you haue commaunded, by those whom we haue sent. As for the Presidencie in that Sy­nod, it is a matter questionlesse, and not denied by our aduersaries, That Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria presided; onely they say, that he was Vicegerent to Pope Caelestin: hauing no other colour for their assertion but this, That the Pope re­quested him to execute his sentence giuen in the Synod at Rome against Nesto­rius. But the Synodall Epistle to the Emperour euidently sheweth, that that was done long before this Counsell at Ephesus was called. And the truth is, that the D Popes Legats there present were neuer called to preside, which yet they should haue beene, had they beene collegues with Cyrill: but at a pinch a forgerie must helpe. A certaine moderne Writer, in his abridgement of the Councels sayth, That in this Councell presided the blessed Cyrill, Bishop of Alexandria. Isidor. Decret. Paris. impres. an. 1524. pa. 79. To. 1. Concil. in Concil. Ephes. Colon. an. 1551. Which sen­tence he tooke out of Isidore; but he addeth of his owne head these words, In the place of Pope Calestin; which are not to be found in Isidore: and Bellarmine him­selfe is more than halfe ashamed of it.

Now let vs see what aduantages Baronius here taketh; and first,Nestor. epist. ad Caelestin. ex Co. Anto. August. apud Baron. to. 5. an. 430. art. 3. [...]. Epist. Cyrilli. ad Calest. in Act. Graec. pa. 141. Baron. vol. 5. an. 430. art. 11. When Nestorius Bishop of Constantinople had broached his heresie, against the vnion of two na­tures in Christ: Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria tooke him to taske; and then they E went each of them to make his partie the strongest, and to haue a Bishop of Rome on his side, was thought no small aduantage; therefore they both wrote vnto him: Nestorius was the first; Fraternas nobis inuicem debemus colloquutiones &c. We owe (saith he) each to other brotherlie communications: and Cyrill much after the same manner, The auncient customes of the Church aduise and counsell vs to take in­struction one of another &c. And hence it is that Baronius concludeth, That no matter of Faith could be questioned without the Bishop of Rome; yet how ma­nie heretikes haue we alreadie seene condemned, sometimes without him, and sometimes in despight of him? Secondly, Caelestin vpon this alarme giuen him by [Page 62] Cyrill, called a Synod at Rome, and from thence wrot a long Epistle to Nestorius, A willing him to hold fast the faith of the Church of Rome, of Alexandria, of Constan­tinople, and of the whole Catholike Church; not as now the fashion is, of the Romane Catholike Church; Epist. Caelest. ad Cyrill. in 4. to. Cyrill. & in ep. Pontif. numer. 3. extat Graec. [...] Pag. 85. if not, he declareth him excommunicate: and withall he sent a letter, in nature of a Proxie vnto Cyrill, whereby he requested him to denounce and put in execution this sentence of his: a thing done euerie day betweene friends and equals. And whether tended all this, but onely to joyne his authoritie with that of Cyrils, to kill this cockatrice in the egge? The words themselues are plaine and cleare: The authoritie of our See (saith he) being ioyned vnto thine, that is to say, vsing thine owne authoritie together with ours; and vsing the power of our succession, that is, vsing our power, as if we ourselues were there present, thou B shalt put in execution this our sentence with all seueritie; [...]. and if he abiure not his per­uerse opinions within ten dayes, your Holinesse shall presently put another in his roome. This they did, and all was little ynough to depose a Patriarch: and yet the questi­on remaineth still,Ib. art. 26. whether Cyrill did euer accept of that Proxie or no, though he might well haue done it, without anie prejudice at all to his authoritie? As for the Phrygium and Mitre, and the name of Pope, and Iudge of all the world, which Caelestin is said to haue sent to Cyrill, he should haue done well first to haue proued, that Caelestin euer vsed such names and weeds himselfe; and euerie man knoweth, that the name of Pope was aunciently giuen to Priests and Bishops without his leaue: neither is it probable,Balsamon. in Nomocan. Phocij, tit. 8. c. 1. Nicephor. l. 14. c. 34. that he which was so forward to chalenge to himselfe the C jurisdiction of the whole world, would so liberally cast this title vpon another: neither is there anie author thereof but only Balsamon and Nicephorus, who liued the one fiue, the other six hundred yeares after; and euen they report it, not as a matter certaine, onely they say Fama est, the report is, &c. as of a thing that hath no ground of truth.

Thirdly, this Proxie of Caelestin vnto Cyrill, which was onely for the execution of this sentence,Baron. an. 431. Baronius would faine extend to a facultie of Legatship, by vertue whereof Cyrill should preside ouer the Ephesin Councell, as representing the person of the Pope. But we would know where this title of Legat is so much as once giuen him: for seeing that we haue the Acts of this Synod more at large D than of anie other, or rather, and to speake more properly, seeing we haue the Acts of no other Councell but onely of this, how commeth it to passe, that we find among them no such Commission directed to him? nor recited in the Synod, as so manie other writings of lesse moment were? Peraduenture, because that du­ring the first eight hundred yeares there was neuer anie Pope present at a Gene­rall Councell, Caelestin hauing no purpose to be there himselfe, and Nestorius by reason of his heresie being made incapable, the Pope could be content that the world should thinke, that Cyrill was there to supplie his roome, as doubting that his owne Legats would not be able to preuaile for the presidencie, no more than they had done in former Councels; and Cyrill himselfe perhaps might be glad to E vse the name and authoritie of Caelestin, for the easier suppressing of so great and so potent an aduersarie as Nestorius was. And indeed Euagrius speaketh of Cyrill as of one [...], [...], pag. 197. i. which exercised the roome of Caelestin: And the Councell it selfe vseth these words, Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria, who exercised also the place of Caelestin, Cyrill. in Apolog. ad Theodos. to. 4. [...]. speaking of him as of one which executed the sentence of Caelestin, as appeareth more plainely in his letter vnto Theodosius. But let Baronius tell me, whether in all that Councell he be once stiled by the name of Lieutenant or Legat of Caelestin? or doe not all the proceedings euict the contrarie? Caelestin [Page 63] A saith, That he sent thither Arcadius and Patroclus Bishops, and Philippicus a Priest,Ex collect. Creseo. ib. art. 9. [...], i. his Legats: and Baronius himselfe produceth their letters of Cre­dence, which they had vnto the Fathers of the Councell. Now I would know, what need of anie Legat at all, at least of so manie, if Cyrill had beene his Lieu­tenant? Or is it likely that he would haue made no mention of Cyrill in them, not so much as to say, We haue sent these to supplie our roome together with Cyrill? Now these Legats came thither a day after the fayre, when all was done, and when sentence was alreadie solemnely pronounced against Nestorius: and yet Ba­ronius telleth vs, that they were sent to put the sentence giuen against him at Rome, in execution: and whence then was it, that the Fathers, as Cyrill testifieth, B placed Christ as President of that Councell: for (saith he) the Synod placed the ve­nerable Gospell in the holie Throne, as crying in the eares of the Fathers, Iudge rightly you that are Iudges, betweene the holie Gospels and the words of Nestorius. Was the Gospell, trow you, placed there onely to execute the sentence giuen by the Pope? or doe you call this the holie Ghost, comming from Rome in a budget? And why also doth the Councell in the preamble to that their sentence vse these words, [...] We haue thought it necessarie for vs to proceed to the examination of his impie­ties? as taking no notice of what had passed in the Romane Synod, vnlesse you will say, that because when sentence was now readie to be giuen, there is menti­on made of Caelestin, and of his letter, (so dangerous a thing is it to our Libertie to C attribute neuer so little to the Pope) therefore it was his sentence and not the sentence of the Synod. But let vs obserue the order and manner of their subscri­bing to this Synod, which Baronius hath here omitted, and is as followeth: [...], Pag. 130. Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria hath subscribed, pronouncing with the Councell: Iuuenal Bishop of Ierusalem hath subscribed, and so the rest each one according to the order of the Patriarchs; and Cyrill assumeth no other qualitie or title but his owne: in which qualitie, and in no other,Epist. Synod. ad Theodos. apud Cyrill. to. 4. the Synodall Epistle written to the Emperour sti­leth him, by the name of the Head of the Congregation of Bishops: and when the Popes Legats came afterward in the fourth Session (before which time sentence was alreadie giuen and signified to Nestorius) they tooke their place, and sat with D the manie, without anie mention of prerogatiue or prioritie of place. Yea, but when Caelestins letters were read, the Synod cried out, To Caelestin a second Paule: I confesse; and did they not the like of Cyrill, crying out, To Cyrill a second Paule: there is but one Caelestin, but one Cyrill. And what other demaund, I pray you, did those Legats make, but onely that they might haue the Acts, to subscribe vn­to them? a thing not to haue beene denied to anie ordinarie Bishop, which had come late as they did. And yet Baronius would faine haue it,Iterata damna­tio. that this subscripti­on of theirs was a second sentence, confirmatorie of that which had beene giuen by the Councell; whereas they themselues writing to the Emperours, signifie on­ly this, that they are of the same beleefe and opinion with the Synod. [...]. Now if Cyrill E had beene Legat, what need of this? Or if this were needfull, then it followeth that Cyrill was not Legat for the Pope, but was onely requested to passe his word vnto the Councell for the Orthodox beleefe of Caelestin. Fourthly, Philippicus a Priest of Rome, and one of the Legats, in his speech said, that he rejoyced to see that the members did so well agree with their holie Head. [...], Pag. 195. And hereupon Baronius maketh a flourish, and because these Fathers had the patience to heare him, Doest thou see Reader (saith he) how all these Fathers were content to heare him without re­pining? For my owne part I know not what he would haue had them to doe in this case, vnlesse it be that they should haue made an vprore in the Synod, and [Page 64] haue fallen by the eares about it. He should rather haue considered, how at the A ouerture of this Councell they placed Christ in his Gospell, for Head of this Councell: or if the doubt be of the ministeriall Head, that then in their Synodal Epistle they call Cyril the Head of the Congregation of Bishops: but of euerie such insolent pranke which the Popes or their Legats play, Baronius is euer readie to make a Title. But will you now know who was Soueraigne in this Councel? The Synod by their letters to the Emperours, in all humilitie aske leaue to depart eue­rie man to his owne home, seeing that all controuersies were now decided: And the Emperour vpon relation of what they had done, gaue his confirmation in this manner: [...] pa. 273. [...]. The Emperour [...]. duely informed, hath pronounced, That the holie Oecumenicall Councell hath done all things according to the Canons, and therefore hath displaced and B banished Nestorius, commaunding the Bishops of the Synod to enter vpon the Church, and to elect and consecrate a Bishop of Constantinople: and thereupon the Fathers or­dained Maximinus. And farther the Emperor commaunded them to returne euerie man to his owne home.

Consider we also, that the Fathers of those times speak of this Primacie by ver­tue of Saint Peters chaire, in farre other tearmes than now men vse to doe. Saint Ambrose expounding those words of Saint Paul to the Galathians,Ambros. ad Ga­la. ca. 2. where hee compareth himselfe to Peter: He nameth, saith he, onely Peter, and compareth him­selfe to him, because he had receiued the Primacie, to lay the foundation of the Church a­mong the Gentiles. Now I would know whether Rome were not of the Gentiles? if C so, to what purpose then serueth the Primacie of Saint Peter? But hee addeth yet farther: Yet we see ful and absolute authoritie giuen to Saint Peter, for the preaching to the Iewes; and so likewise full and absolute authoritie was giuen to Paul, to preach vn­to the Gentiles: For which cause also hee tearmeth himselfe the Teacher of the Gentiles in truth and veritie; and yet was he neuer Bishop of Rome. For, saith he, euerie man according to his abilitie tooke vnto him, as by lot, the dispensation: And a harder matter it was to draw those vnto the faith which were a farre off, than those which were neere at hand: as if he meant to preferre Paul before Peter, as one which vnder­tooke the harder taske.August. in Io­han. Tract. 124. & in Epist. Io­han. Tract. 10. And Saint Augustine, The Church, saith he, is founded vp­on the rocke; from which rocke Saint Peter tooke his name: vpon this stone, saith our Sa­uiour:D that is, vpon this stone which thou hast confessed will I build my Church; meaning, vpon this faith. Those which would build vpon men, said, I am of Cephas, i. of Peter: but those who would not build vpon Peter, but vpon that stone, said, I am of Christ. Saint Basil doubtlesse neuer dreamed of this Primacie: he saw indeed, and grieued to see the pride and hautinesse of the Bishop of Rome: for with what indignation speaketh he of him in his tenth Epistle? Yea, but, say they, in his 52 Epistle to A­thanasius, speaking of the combustions in the East, he saith, That hee purposed to write to the Bishop of Rome. I confesse, but to what purpose would hee write? onely for this,Basil. Epist. 10.50.52. To request him to giue them his aduise, and that hee would admonish such as were peruerse. How much more gloriously doth he speake of Athanasius E Bishop of Alexandria? saying, That it was he which vnderwent the care of all the Churches; and calling him the shelter and refuge of them all. And speaking of the Church of Antioch, Miletius, saith he, presideth there, as ouer the bodie of the Catho­like Church, Chrysost. in Math. c. 16. & in serm. de Pentecost. Euseb. Emiss. in serm. de Natiui. Chrysost. Homil. 43. in Math. and of which all other Churches are but as parcels. And Chrysostome, Vpon this stone: he saith not vpon Peter, for he hath not built his Church vpon a man, but vp­on that faith, and confession, and words of pietie. And in like manner speaketh Eusebi­us Emissenus. And Chrysostome hauing laid this doctrine for a ground, goeth on, and speaketh plainely: Whosoeuer, saith he, among the Bishops (he excepteth none) [Page 65] A shall desire this Primacie here on earth, shall vndoubtedly find confusion in heauen: and be which affecteth to be the first, shall not be numbred among the seruants of Christ. And vp­on the Epistle to the Galathians, speaking of Saint Paul, He had, saith he,Idem in Epist. ad Galat. c. 2. before declared, that he was equall to the rest in honour, but now he compareth himselfe to the greatest, that is, to Saint Peter; shewing that euerie of them had receiued equall digni­tie. Now if the Apostles themselues were equall, how commeth there one supe­riour among their successors? And yet this was spoken at what time the Pope began apparently to exalt himselfe aboue his fellowes; for of this verie age it was that Socrates speaking of Innocentius, Zozimus, Boniface, and Caelestin, Socrat. li. 7. c. 10 [...]. Bishops of Rome, vnder the Emperor Theodosius the yonger, testifieth, That the See of Rome, like B vnto that of Alexandria, passing the bounds and borders of the Priesthood, had long since aspired vnto a secular kind of soueraigntie and power: where the Latine interpreter hath put in Quasi, which word is not in the Greeke it selfe.

Adde hereunto, That in those dayes all the Patriarchall Churches were equal­ly called Apostolicall, and not the Church of Rome alone:Sozom. l. 1. c. 16. edit. Graec. 17. [...]. For Sozomene spea­king of the first generall Councell of Nice, In this Synod, saith he, were present for Apostolicall Sees, Macarius Bishop of Ierusalem, Eustachius of Antioch, Alexander of Alexandria; but Iulius Bishop of Rome was absent by reason of his age: ranking Iuli­us in the same order and degree with the rest. In which sence the Bishops of the East, as Theodoret reporteth, writing to Pope Damasus, Theodoret. li. 5. ca. 9. call Antioch the most ancient C and truely Apostolicall Church; and that of Ierusalem they tearme the Mother of all Churches. So likewise Ruffine, Ruffin. li. 2. c. 1. though himselfe a member of the Westerne Church, as being a Priest in Aquileia: In the citie of Rome, saith he, Syricius succee­ding vnto Damasus, and Timotheus in Alexandria vnto Peter, and after Timotheus came Theophilus, and Iohn in Ierusalem after Cyril, restored the Apostolicall Churches: And therefore this vsurpation of the Bishop of Rome proceedeth from the diuell, and from none other.

Neither doe wee in all this age find any trace of that pretended donation of Constantine, but rather we light vpon many arguments to proue the contrarie; wit­nesse the verie production of the Instrument, and the Vatican it selfe. And for fur­ther D proofe; when (by reason of the schisme between Boniface the first, and Eulali­us, contending together for the Popedome) Symmachus gouernour of the citie wrot vnto the Emperour Honorius, he saith in this manner;Baron. vol. 5. an. 418. art. 81. & sequent. Absoluta iussi­one. Idem an. 419. art. 2. & 3. That since the know­ledge of these matters belonged to him, he thought fit to consult his Maiestie out of hand: who thereupon (rightly informed or not, I will not say) by his absolute command gaue order, That Boniface should presently voyd the place; and if hee obeyed not, that forthwith he should be cast forth by force. And when a little after, for his more due in­formation, he had assembled a Synod out of diuers Prouinces, To the end, saith he, that the cause being debated to the full in our presence, Ib. art. 10. & se­quent. may receiue a finall and absolute decision. And thereupon he sent for Paulinus Bishop of Nola (a man at that time E much respected for his sanctitie of life) and wrot to Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, and sent for Italians, French, Africans, and others;Ib. art. 15. and in the meane time proui­ded the Church of Rome of a Bishop, namely, Achillaeus Bishop of Spoleto, to the end the people of Rome might not be vnprouided of a Bishop at the feast of Easter: Commanding the Church of Lateran to be set open to him, and to none other. And when Eulalius offered, contrary to the Emperors command, to intrude himselfe into the citie, the Emperour, by the aduise of the Bishops there assem­bled, gaue sentence in fauour of Boniface, commanding Symmachus the Gouernor to receiue him into the citie; which he did accordingly, with these words: Your Ma­iestie [Page 66] hath confirmed his Priesthood, Statutis coelesti­bus per me pub­licatis & edictis de more positis. &c. And when I published your Edict euerie man re­ioyced A thereat. And to conclude, Boniface falling sicke, to preuent the like incon­uenience against hereafter, wrot to Honorius, to prouide by his authoritie, that the Popedome might no more be carried by plots and canuasses: The Epistle it selfe in the Councels bearing this Title, Supplicatio Papae Bonifacij; and being ful of these and the like clauses, God hath giuen you the regiment of worldlie things, and the Priest­hood vnto me: You haue the gouernment of worldlie matters: and therefore wee were worthie to be blamed, if what was heretofore obserued vnder Heathen Princes, should not now be obserued vnder your glorie, &c. Vnder your raigne my people hath beene much encreased, which now is yours. Neither doth the Emperour put this from him, as a thing not properly belonging to him: But let the Clergie, saith he, know, that if God B shall otherwise dispose of you, they must refraine all secret plots and practises: and if it fall out through their factions, that two be named, let them likewise know, that neither of them shall sit Bishop, but he which in a new election shall be by generall consent chosen. If therefore the Bishop of Rome had beene at that time Temporall Lord of that ci­tie and territorie thereunto adioining, would he haue vsed these kinds of lan­guage? Neither was it farre from this time that Synesius Bishop of Ptolemais in his 57 Epistle,Synes. li. 57. [...]. To couple the ciuile power, saith he, with the Priesthood, is to ioyne those things which will not hold together: they busie themselues in worldlie causes, whereas we were appointed onely for our prayers.

OPPOSITION.

First therefore Leo himselfe tempereth his stile in many places with sober lan­guage: B Vpon this rocke will I build my Church: that is, saith he,Leo. serm. 2. in Natali Aposto­lor. Petri & Pauli. Vpon the sound foun­dation of this faith my Church shall raise and exalt it selfe; and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against this confession, and the bands of death shall not restraine it. Which con­fession surely was proper to no one man, but common to all the Apostles, and all the Orthodox Churches. And would God he had staied here, and not suffered himselfe to be carried downe the streame of his owne ambitious humors, in clai­ming his pretended priuiledge. Secondly, vpon the complaint which hee made to Flauian Bishop of Constantinople, Flauian gaue him the reasons of his procee­dings, and why he could doe no lesse than excommunicat Eutyches for his here­sie: But, saith he, this I doe to the end that your Holinesse hauing knowledge what hath C passed in this matter, might be pleased to signifie as much to your inferiour Bishops, that they by letters or otherwise, ignorantly admit of no communion with him: Which was nothing else in effect, but to request him to execute his sentence for him, within the limits of his jurisdiction, as in the like case he would haue done for him. And we must farther vnderstand, that Eutyches seeing himselfe condemned, had pre­sently recourse, by way of supplication, vnto Leo: wherein he gaue him to vnder­stand, That he had appealed from Flauian, and from the rest of the Bishops of the East, vnto him; requesting him to take his cause into his own hands: which made Leo to demurre vpon the cause. And thereupon Flauian shewed him, that as in other things, so also in this, Eutyches had abused him with a tale: Flauian. apud Leon. Epist. 9. giuing him there­by D to vnderstand, that in his countrey men scarce knew what these appeals meant; and therefore, saith he, as it becommeth thy Priesthood, and as thy maner is, so make the common cause thine owne, and confirme euen by thy writings his condemnation, so cano­nically pronounced against him. Wherefore though we should grant that Eutyches did appeale, yet it appeareth that Flauian neuer gaue way thereunto, no more than the Fathers of the African Councel did before, in the case of the Pelagians. Third­ly, though we haue nothing concerning this Hilarius, but what we haue from his opposite and aduersarie Leo, yet is it euident, that he bent himselfe against this pre­tended Primacie: For, saith Leo, this man cannot endure to be subiect to Saint Peter: Leo. Epist. 89. ad Episc. per Viennens. pro­uinc. constitut. and why? because, saith he, he presumeth to ordaine Bishops in France. And againe, E He derogateth, saith he, from the reuerence of Saint Peter, &c. whose Primacie whosoe­uer shall denie, that man is filled with the spirit of pride, and hath plunged himselfe into the pit of hell: Whereas indeed the question, as it appeareth, was touching the Primacie either of the Pope in generall, or of Leo in his particular; not at all of the dignitie of Saint Peter. And these demaunds were euer made at the solicita­tion of certaine Bishops, which complained to him of the censures of their owne Prouinces, which they requested might be reuoked at Rome, as appeareth by the Epistle of Leo himselfe, who yet euer vseth this protestation, that he thereby pre­tended no right in himselfe to ordaine Bishops in their Prouinces, as Hilarie would per­suade [Page 68] them, but onely sought to maintaine them in their owne against nouelties, and v­surpations A of others, and that such a presumptuous fellow might no longer continue to breake and violate, saith he, our priuiledges: Which he sought vnder the name of Saint Peter, to extend to all causes whatsoeuer; yet this I find, that all his plot­tings had not much preuailed here in France, about the elections of our Bishops, in the yeare 478:An. 478. Sidon. Apollin. in Concion. quae sequitur Epist. 9. for we find in Sidonius Apollinaris, Bishop of Clermont in Au­vergne, that the choise of the Metropolitan of Bourges being by common con­sent of the Bishops of that Prouince, after the death of Eubodius, referred vnto him, he nominated absolutely Simplicius to succeed in his roome, hauing first made a verie solemne oration to the Bishops, in these words: In the name of the Father, and of the Sonne, and of the holie Ghost, Simplicius is the man whom I nominat to be Me­tropolitan B of our Prouince, Summum Sa­cerdotem. and High Priest of your citie: and therefore was not Simpli­cius to hold his See in fee from the Bishop of Rome, or to doe homage for it. And it is pretie to obserue, how this canting of Rome was not vnderstood in those daies in France, seeing that he himselfe writing to Lupus Bishop of Troies in Cham­pagne, calleth him our Lord the Pope, directing his letter, Domino Papae Lupo; this title being at that time common to all Bishops, not proper to any one: and which is more, he calleth him Father of Fathers, and Bishop of Bishops, which watcheth ouer all the members and parts of Gods Church. What wonder then if we find that Stephen a simple Archdeacon wrot so to Damasus, or Isidore to Hormisda Bishop of Rome?

Fourthly, this question concerning the Primacie was cleerely decided by occa­sion C of the claime which Leo made thereunto in the generall Councell of Chal­cedon, where he thought to haue set the Bishop of Constantinople cleane beside the cushion: and these are the verie words of the Canon, taken out of the Greeke copies of that Councell,Concil. Chalced. can. 28. [...]. Can. 28. The decree of the maior part of voyces of that holie Synod, made concerning the prerogatiues and degree of the See of the most religious Church of Constantinople: Following in all poynts the decrees of the holie Fathers, and acknowledging the Canon of 120 religious Bishops, now read in our hearing; We here as­sembled vnder Theodosius of holie memorie, late Emperour of this royall citie of Canstan­tine, called new Rome, doe ordaine by common consent and assent, for the honour, degree, and prerogatiue of that most holie Church of Constantinople, called new Rome, in all things D as in the said Canon is contained. For those Fathers did well to grant those honours and prerogatiues to the See of old Rome, [...]. because it was the royall or imperiall citie (and not in regard of Saint Peters chaire.) And likewise those other hundred and fiftie Fathers moued with the same reason and consideration, did heretofore impart like priuiledges and honours to the See of new Rome, thinking it fit in their discretions, that the citie which they saw honoured with the name of the Imperiall seat and presence of the Senat, [...]. and equalled in euerie poynt of ciuile honour to the old Rome, should likewise in matters of the Church be equally aduanced, as being next vnto her. By which wee see no preroga­tiue belonging to Rome by vertue of Saint Peters chaire, and Constantinople equalled in all things to her, saue onely in precedencie; which being a matter E which respecteth onely place and order, is no barre to her paritie in power and ju­risdiction. Yet Gratian, to gratifie the Pope, hath corrupted this Canon; and where the Fathers say,Dictinct. 21. c. Renouantes. In matters likewise of the Church, he hath shamelesly altered the words, and saith, Non tamen in rebus Ecclesiasticis, i. But not in matters of the Church; turning vpside downe, by the change of one word, the whole drift and purpose of the Councell: yet he citeth this Canon out of the sixt general Coun­cell, because it is there againe repeated. But see, I pray you, the bounds and li­mits which this Canon prescribeth to him: So that, saith that Canon, the Metro­politans [Page 69] A onely of the Diocesse of Pontus, Asia, and Thrace, together with the Bishops which are among the barbarous nations, shall be ordained by the most holie See of the Church of Constantinople: and the Metropolitan of euerie the said Diocesse, according to the Canons, shall haue power to ordaine the Bishops of his owne Prouince: So that, as you see, the Bishops are to be ordained by the Metropolitans, and the Metropoli­tans onely by the Archbishop of Constantinople; and consequently the Bishop of Rome is likewise restrained in his jurisdiction, which is limited to him no lesse than to the other. This decree pleased Leo but a little, though agreed vpon by the common aduise and consent of 630 Bishops. Neither is that true which Gregorie the Great affirmeth, That this Councell of Chalcedon, in honour of Saint Peter, Gregor. in Regi­stro Epist. 32. & 38. lib. 4. offered B to the Bishop of Rome the title of Vniuersall Bishop, but that none would accept of so in­considerat a name. And that none may say, That howsoeuer the Greeke copie hath it, yet it is otherwise read in the Latine, it is apparent that this 28 Canon is expressed in Latine in the same words: Aequa antiquae Romae priuilegia tribuerunt: i. Aequis antiquae Romae priuilegijs frui, &c. i. They gaue equall priuiledges with those of old Rome. Now the Popes Legats there present opposed against the passing of this Canon; for Lucentius, one of the Legats, seeing them all subscribe, stood vp and said, They haue subscribed before the Canons are written; meaning, before all the acts of that Councell were written. The Bishops thereupon made answer,Concil. Chalced. Act. 16. pa. 930. That no man was compelled thereunto. Lucentius replied, That they stood vpon the Canons C which were made scarce 80 yeres agone, by 150 Bishops (meaning the second Councel of Constantinople, which yet, as we haue shewed, was confirmed and ratified by Pope Damasus) and went from the decrees of 318 Bishops (meaning the Councell of Nice.) Whereupon the Iudges there present, who represented the person of the Emperour, to maintaine peace betweene them, commaunded each partie to al­ledge the Canon for himselfe: and then did Paschasin, another of the Legats, al­ledge that forged fift Canon of the Nicene Councell, with this Preface,Pa. 938. Quod Ro­mana Ecclesia semper habuit Primatum. But Constantine Secretarie to the Councell, taking the booke, which was deliuered to him by Aetius a Deacon of Constanti­nople, recited it as it was indeed, beginning that Canon with these words, An­tiquae D consuetudines teneant, &c. i. Let old customes stand: where there is nothing to be found for the Popes aduantage. Whereupon the Iudges tooke againe the voyces of those which had subscribed, who all and euerie of them answered, That before God they had subscribed of their owne accord, and according to the true intent and meaning of those Fathers: especially Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum,Euagr. de Euseb. Doryl. li. 2. c. 2. a principall a­gent in procuring this Councell to be called against Eutyches: I haue, said he, sub­scribed willingly and of mine owne accord, because I my selfe did read this verie Canon to the Pope, in presence of the Clerkes of Constantinople, and the Pope then acknowledged and receiued it. Where, by the way, there is this marginall note set, Either be ly­eth, or for the present he deceiued Saint Leo. But the Iudges thereupon pronounced E according to the Canon before rehearsed, in fauour of the Bishop of Constanti­nople, all the Bishops applauding their judgement, and crying out, This is a iust sentence, we all say the same thing, it is the opinion of vs all; we all will bide by this: onely Lucentius the Legat protested, That the Apostolike See which had sent him thither, could not giue way to such proceedings: requiring that Canon to bee retracted; if not, at least his protestation to be admitted, and entred in the acts; to the end, saith he, that we may haue what to answer to the Apostolike man, Pope of the Vniuersall Church; and that he may thereupon aduise vpon the iniurie now done vnto his See, and of the meanes to redresse this wrong, and to reuerse this Canon. And when the Bishop of [Page 70] Sebasta had said to the Iudges, We all referre our selues to the verdict of your Magni­ficence; A euerie man approuing of the motion by his silence, the Iudges spake a­gaine and said, What we haue pronounced, the whole Synod hath approued. And this was the resolution of that Councell of Chalcedon. These things standing as they doe,Baron. vol. 6. an. 451. art. 136, 137. tell me Reader, in thy conscience, what reason hath Baronius to affirme, that this Canon was clandestine, and carried by secret practises? But it should seeme that there were good wits at Rome heretofore as well as now: For this whole Action of the Councell was long since expunged out of the old Romane Code, contrarie to the truth and credit of all other copies in the world. And where is the honestie of Bellarmine and Baronius both together,Bellar. l. 2. de Pontif. Rom. c. 13. while they af­firme, that when Paschasin had alledged for himselfe the said fifth Canon of Nice,B according to his copie, the Iudges held themselues content and satisfied there­withall? Seeing that the verie words of the Acts are cleare against them; and see­ing that Liberatus the Archdeacon affirmeth, That the opposition made by the Popes Legats was not regarded neither by the Bishops, Liberat. in Bre­uia. c. 13. nor yet by the Iudges: And although (saith he) that the Apostolike See excepteth against that Canon euen to this day, being supported by the Emperour, yet the decree of the Synod continueth still for firme and good: and seeing also, that we haue the Epistles of Pope Leo himselfe to Anato­lius Bishop of Constantinople, written after this Councell was concluded, wherein he debateth this point with all eagrenesse, and vpon this occasion reje­cteth that second Councell of Constantinople,Leo epist. 53. ad Anatol. Item ep. 54, 55, ad Martian. & Pulcher. Et epist. 62. ad Maximum An­tiochenum. calling it a rotten ruinous Coun­cell C from the beginning, and that it was now too late to set it vp againe: and drawing the Bishop of Antioch into the quarrell, complaineth sometimes to Martian the Emperour, sometimes to Pulcheria the Empresse, not knowing to what Saint first to turne himselfe: and all this partly vnder colour of these words, Tu es Pe­trus (though to me it seemeth a strange matter, that those 630 Bishops should not be able to reach vnto the mysterie of these words) and partly vpon a false supposition of that Canon of the Nicene Councell, which he protesteth that he will euer hold as sacred and inuiolable, and which he will neuer suffer to be infringed; whereas yet there is no one word to be found in all that Councell, which maketh for his pretended Primacie.D

It remaineth now, the better to vnderstand what degree of authoritie and power the Bishop of Rome had at this time aspired to, (for Leo by his good will would not loose one ynch of his heigth) that we consider who it was which cal­led this Councell, and who presided in it. Concerning the former of these two, the first action of this Councell telleth vs.Concil. Chalced. Act. 1. That it was called by the commandement of the most religious and Christian Emperors, Valentinian and Martian. And Mar­tian himselfe in a certaine Constitution of his,Martian. l. 3. Co. de sum. Trinit. saith it was called by his commaunde­ment. And the Fathers themselues, when all things were now ended, asked leaue of the Emperors to returne euerie man to his owne home. But perhaps it were best to heare what Leo himselfe saith concerning this matter: Leo therefore vpon E the first bud of the Eutychian heresie, wrote to the Emperour Theodosius in this manner:Leo. ep. 9. ad Theodos. Iube­atis. If your pietie (saith he) will vouchsafe to yeeld so much to our petition, com­maund, we beseech you, that a Councell of Bishops be assembled in Italie. Where you see, that euen in Italie, where himselfe was all in all, he requested that a Councell might be called by order from the Emperor. And not long after vnderstanding that Theodosius had assigned it to be held at Ephesus,Idem ep. 12. & 17. Constituit. Since so it is (saith he) that your pietie hath appointed a Councell to be held at Ephesus, I haue therefore sent thither my brethren Iulian a Bishop, Reinold a Priest, and my sonne Hilarie a Deacon, to supplie [Page 71] A my roome. And afterward,Vicem praesen­tiae meae. when he was pressed to be present in person at the Councell which Theodosius commaunded to be held, he verie mannerly excused himselfe, vpon the shortnesse of the time, and the troubled estate of Italie. And againe, You haue commaunded it (saith he) to be held at Ephesus: and hauing shewed the inconueniences of holding it at that place, Commaund (saith he) I pray you, Leo epist. 13. ad Pulcher. Au­gustam. Idem ep. 23, 24, 34, 49, 50, 51. that it be held in Italie. Which request he therefore so often made, that he might there­by justifie the Appeale which Eutyches had formerly put in, to the See of Rome, as he affirmed, and which Flauian Bishop of Constantinople had remonstrated to be false. And in the 49 Epistle to the Emperour Martian he vseth the like stile as before: We hoped (saith he) that your clemencie would haue yeelded so much to our en­treatie, B as to haue appointed this Synod at a more conuenient time: but since, out of the zeale which you beare to the Catholike faith you are pleased that a Synod should be at this time assembled, I therefore send my brother Paschasin to supplie my roome. And euen like tearmes and phrase of speech doth he vse in his 50 and 51 Epistles. And we farther obserue, that all these his Epistles beare date according to the Consuls, as the vse and custome of those times was, as an euident marke and argument, that the Pope at that time acknowledged their authoritie, without claiming to him­selfe the dominion and seigniorie of Rome. Neither may we giue credit to Bel­larmine when he affirmeth, that Dioscorus was thrust out of this Councell, for pre­suming to call a Synod without the authoritie of the Pope; quoting these words C as out of the Councell, which was neuer lawfull to be done, nor neuer was done before; for so is he pleased to abuse his reader: for these are the words of Lucentius, one of the Popes Legats, and not of the Fathers of the Councell. To be short,Epist. Synod. ad Leon. in Concil. Chalced. Baron. vol. 6. an. 450. art. 7, 8, 9. [...]. the Epi­stle of the Synod vnto Leo would not suffer him to doubt who they were whom they acknowledged as Authors of that their assemblie, namely, the Grace of God, and the most religious Emperours: and so speaketh that Epistle throughout, and Baronius himselfe doth not denie it.

As for the Presidencie, which we distinguish from the Precedencie or Presean­cie (for we denie not, but that in regard of the honour of that Citie, he held the first place) Leo telleth the Emperours,Leo. ep. 12. & 49. that he sent his Legats to supplie his roome D or presence. And in his Epistle to the Synod he speaketh yet more aduantagiously for himselfe, saying,Idem ep. 47. That in the person of his Legats or Vicegerents they should ima­gine that he himselfe was there to preside among them; whether he meant properly of the Presidencie, or else of the Preseancie, I know not: but this is certaine, that in the Acts of this Councell we find no certaine order obserued. Which disorder grew from hence, because that Leo had drawne Anatolius Bishop of Constantino­ple into suspition, and Dioscorus of Alexandria was alreadie attainted: for not to enuenome their minds, which were alreadie but too much exasperated towards each other, their order in speaking was manie times of set purpose altered: and sometime the Iudges, who represented the person of the Emperor, were faine to E order the proceedings, to propose matters, to take the voices, to pronounce judge­ment, as we haue shewed before. And we haue yet farther a more euident exam­ple hereof in the first Action, where those Iudges ordained,Concil. Chalced. Act. 1. Cognit. 2. That the Patriarche should take each of them one or two of his owne Prouince vnto him, that they might handle the points of faith each of them with their seuerall companies, and so report to the whole Synod what they in particular had agreed vpon. Whereas if the Popes Le­gats had presided, this action should haue belonged to them, and not vnto the Iudges. Yea, but saith Bellarmine, They sat first; Bellar. de Con­cil. & Eccles. l. 1. c. 19. a good argument for their prece­dencie: and they spake first; no good argument for their presidencie: for euerie [Page 72] man knoweth that the argument had beene stronger, if they had spoken last. But A he saith yet farther, That they pronounced in the name of the Pope, and of all the Coun­cell, the definitiue sentence against Dioscorus, and that they degraded him from his Priesthood. But he should remember, that it is one thing for a man to giue his voice, as Paschasin did, and that first before all others, for Leo, and another thing to giue a sentence. In which matter we shall need the lesse proofe, because Pas­chasin himselfe hauing giuen his voice,Concil. Chalced. Action. 3. addeth farther, Let the holie Synod (saith he) now decree; meaning of Dioscorus his cause. Then followeth Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople, and the rest, euerie one in his order, which take vp ten or twelue leaues; and then in the end, and not before, was his condemnation signed. To conclude (saith Bellarmine) the Synodall Epistle it selfe written vnto Leo sayth,B Tu sicut membris caput praeeras, i. Thou wert there ouer the rest as a Head ouer the members, in the person of those who supplied thy roome. I graunt, in order of sitting: as for the Presidencie, read on, and thou shalt find toward the end of the letter, that the Emperours themselues,Imperatores ad ornandum de­centissime prae­sidebant. to grace and honour that assemblie, presided in a comelie order. But graunt we, that the Pope did preside in that Councell in the person of his Legats; what getteth he thereby, more than this, That to his face, and in the middest of all his ruffe, he lost his cause, condemning himselfe by his owne mouth, and pronouncing equalitie where he pretended superioritie, and that in so great and so renowmed a Councell as that of Chalcedon was?

Neither may we here forget, how that when as about this time the Bishops C began too licentiously to abuse their authoritie, the Emperour Valentinian thought it fit to meet with this inconueience, by making a law against them: Manie (saith he) complaine of Episcopall iurisdiction, it is fit therefore to make a law for the restraint thereof. Iurgium. If therefore there shall happen to fall anie brawle or debate be­tweene clerkes, and the parties shall be pleased to compromit the matter, let the Bishops heare the cause, and determine of it. Which course is also permitted to lay men, if the parties can so agree vpon it, otherwise we no waies suffer them (meaning the Bishops) to be Iudges. In Cod. Theodos. inter Nouell. Ʋalentinian. lib. 2. tit. 12. For it is apparent, that by the lawes, Bishops and Priests haue no iurisdiction: neither ought they to take knowledge of anie causes by the lawes and ordinances of Hono­rius and Arcadius, contained in the Theodosian Code, saue onely in cases of religion. If D both parties, or either of them, being Clergie, refuse to stand to the iudgement of the Bishop, then let the cause be decided according to the common lawes of the Empire. But if the plaintife be a lay man, and the cause either ciuile or criminall, then it shall be lawfull for him to make the defendant, being Clergie, to answere vnto him by course of law before the publike Magistrate: which course we will and commaund also to be obserued in the person of Bishops. But if an action of Batterie, or other enormous iniu­rie offered, be brought against a Clergie man, then let him answere the plaintife before the publike Magistrat in course of law by their lawfull Atturney. But because this law is long, and extendeth it selfe to so manie particulars, therefore I referre the reader to the place it selfe, where this law is set downe at large. But welfare E Baronius, Baron. vol. 2. an. 452. art. 52, 53. who sayth, That the making of this law incensed the wrath of God, and caused Attila, with the Hunnes, to come downe vpon the Empire. And why should we not rather beleeue the Writers of those times, who impute that cala­mitie to the corruption of the Church and Churchmen? witnesse Saluianus Bi­shop of Marscilles.

Baron. an. 444. vol. 6. art. 30.But to returne from whence we came, Baronius is bold ynough to affirme, were we as forward to beleeue, that the Popedome gat ground exceedingly vnder the reigne of Leo the first. And first he saith, that Dioscorus, that coile-keeper, which [Page 73] A gaue fire to the Eutychian heresie in the East, so soone as he was created Bishop of Alexandria, according to the custome saith he, dispatched away letters vnto Leo; which dispatch of his Baronius interpreteth for no lesse than a plaine homage. But can or will he be ignorant of this custome vsed among them? namely, that Bi­shops, especially those of the greater Sees, so soone as they were elected, were wont to send away their letters generall to all the Churches, at least to the most principall among them, together with a briefe confession of their faith, thereby to aduertise them both of their election, and also of their true profession, for the bet­ter maintenance of that bond of peace and loue which was betweene them? How manie such entercourses and reciprocall letters haue we recorded betweene the B Bishops of Rome and Constantinople?Ep. 42. edit. Pamel. And so likewise did Cornelius Bishop of Rome aduertise those in Afrike of his election; whereupon S. Cyprian and his Collegues congratulate him; and which is more, approue of his election: for the verie Epistle which Cyprian wrote vnto him in answere to his letter, beareth this inscription, Of the election of Cornelius approued by him, the said Cyprian. And yet he neuer demanded Annats, by vertue of such his approbation. Yea but (saith he) Leo reproued Dioscorus for certaine ceremonies vsed in the Church of Alexandria, and calleth him backe to the vsages and customes of the Church of Rome, be­cause that S. Marc was a disciple of S. Peter. Leo. ep. 81. No man can doubt but that Leo was euer harping vpon this string: but tell me,Cyprian. ep. 68. when Cyprian Bishop of Carthage ei­ther C brotherly admonished Cornelius, or sharpely reproued Steuen (both Bishops of Rome) did he thereby pretend or chalenge anie primacie ouer them? if so, by the like reason we may say, that S. Paule chalenged a superioritie ouer S. Peter, Paulus Ep. ad Galat. 1. when he withstood him to the face. Secondly, in the case of Hilarie Bishop of Arles, Baronius would proue vnto vs, that Leo disposed absolutely of all matters in France:Baron. an. 445. art. 9. vol. 6. For (saith he) vpon the difference which fell betweene the two Bishops of Vienna and Arles, by petition made vnto Valentinian the Emperour, he obtained that famous Rescript, directed to Aetius, Lieutenant Generall for the Emperour in Fraunce. It is true, and the Historie saith as much, that the Emperours of that age grow­ing weake in the reines, vsed all meanes possible to hold in with the Bishops of D Rome. But what are the words themselues of that Rescript? namely these:Nouell. Valen­tin. post Codic. Theodos. tit. 24. de Episco. ordin. That no man presume or attempt to doe anie vnlawfull act against the authoritie of this See. Item, that he shall be beleeued concerning this variance now in question. Item, that whatsoeuer the Pope of the eternall Citie of Rome shall decree in this case, shall be taken, reputed, and held as a law. I could wish that this man would but remember a say­ing of his owne, so often reiterated by him, and with so vehement exclamations: O how dangerous a thing is it for Princes to meddle with matters of the Church, Jdem, an. 448. art. 47. for they wrest them to their owne purposes: which words he vseth of this verie Em­perour Valentinian. But I wonder, that he obserueth not in this verie Rescript, that the Emperour there testifieth, that these pretended successors of S. Peter, held E their prerogatiues from the dignitie of their Citie, from the bountie and liberali­tie of the Emperors, from custome, and not from anie ordinance of God, where he saith, That the worthinesse and deserts of S. Peter, the glorie of the Citie, and the authoritie of the Synod, haue established this Primacie of the Popes: Of what Synod, saue onely as they made him to beleeue of that of Nice? Now if the law of God ordained it, what needed the honour and dignitie of the Citie? But his words are plaine, where he willeth them to obserue in all points what the Fathers haue gran­ted to the Church of Rome. But in doubts and questions of this nature, I would know who is most to be credited, Valentinian or Hilarie? Hilarie I say, who (as Ba­ronius [Page 74] confesseth) was the first which subscribed to the Councell of Orange; an A inward companion of Prosper, Gennad. de Script. Eccles. c. 69. and the scourge of the Pelagians which were in France: a man commended in the writings of Antiquitie, for his zeale, charitie, and learning; so much honoured by Prosper, and one which deserued to haue his life written and published by S. Honoratus Bishop of Marseilles, reckoned in the number of Saints,Martyrolog. Roma. 5. Maij. euen in the Martyrologie of Rome it selfe; and to conclude, so much renowmed in the Histories of the Lumbards, for opposing himselfe against this Leo: which yet, in all probabilitie, so good a man would not haue done, had not Leo passed those bounds which the lawes and customes of the Churches had prescribed to him. Thirdly, Baronius extendeth this omnipotencie of Leo as farre as Spaine; for (saith he) he assembled there a Generall Councell of all those pro­uinces.B For the clearing whereof we must obserue, that when Turibius a Bishop of Asturia, who had in times past beene his Notarie, consulted him concerning the Heresie of the Priscillianists, which much infested the Churches in Spaine (as the Popes wits euer serued them to take all occasions at the first bound, if they made for their purpose,) Leo returned him an answere, in all choise and select tearmes of aduantage which could be deuised, interpreting this consultation of theirs for an argument of their subjection; and in stead of counsell, which the other requested, layed his commaundements vpon him,Leo. ep. 93. c. 17. Let there be (saith he) a Synod of Bishops cal­led amongst you: which words may seeme to proceed onely from aduise and coun­sell; but a little lower in that Epistle, We haue written (saith he) to the Bishops of Ar­ragon,C of Cartagena, and of Portugall: ijs (que) Concilium Synodi Generalis indiximus, i. and haue commanded them, or as Baronius rendreth it, haue inioyned them to call a Synod: although a Latinist would peraduenture say, that it should be written Consilium Synodi, and not Concilium: as if he had giuen them aduice and counsell onely to call a Generall Synod; for what can Concilium Synodi be, seeing that these two words signifie one and the selfesame thing? But this is not all: for the first Coun­cell of Bracara (which he alledgeth as held vnder Honorius the first, about some 180 yeares after) teacheth vs, that euen at that time the calling of Synods belon­ged to Kings,Concil. Baraca­ren, ian praefat. and not to Bishops: We (say they) here assembled by the commaunde­ment of King Aremirus, who hath licenced vs by his royall commandement &c. Shall D we thinke, that the Popes would in that meane time haue lost their priuiledge? or may we not rather beleeue, that it was onely a counsell, and not a commaund, for such requested, and for such accepted by them? Fourthly, Flauian Bishop of Constantinople, in a certaine Councell of Bishops of his jurisdiction, degraded Eutyches from his Priesthood,Epist. Flauia. ad Leon. post ep. 8. and depriued him of his Church by occasion of his Heresie: hauing so done, he aduertised Leo thereof, to the end that he should shun him in his Church. This brotherlie office Baronius interpreteth for a seruitude: Knowing well (saith he) that to this first See it appertained of right to take knowledge of such Heresies as should arise: Baron. vol. 6. an. 448. art. 53. whereas the words of Flauian shew sufficiently, that that care was cared for alreadie,Epist. Flauia. post epist. 9. We haue giuen you to vnderstand (saith he) by our let­ters,E that we haue vnpriested him, and haue giuen order, that he be no more receiued in the Monasteries, and haue excluded him from our Communion. Which sheweth, that the blow was alreadie giuen, without expecting anie aduice from Rome. To what purpose then, may some man say, serued his aduertisement? his words declare, That your Holinesse (saith he) knowing what hath beene done in his case, may informe the rest of your Bishops of his impietie, for feare least anie, through ignorance of his opi­nion, should communicate with him, taking him to be Orthodox. As if he should haue said, We haue discouered his venome, and do aduertise you thereof, that you may [Page 75] A take heed. And who can say, that this is to request ratification, or rather to ac­knowledge it as due without contradiction, as Baronius falsely seeketh to persuade vs? Fifthly it is to be noted, that Eutyches, old fox as he was, fell in first with Leo, and knowing his humor, told him, That he had appealed vnto him, but that Flaui­an would not giue way thereunto. Whereupon Baronius inferreth, that such Ap­peales were ordinarie and vsuall in those times; and yet hitherto we find not one. True it is, that in the second Councell of Constantinople, which ensued shortly after, Leo made instant suit for it, and was earnest to see the Acts, where he found it thus written, Constantine a reuerend Deacon sayth, Extant in Con­cil. Chalced. Act. 1. Eutyches when his condemnation was read vnto him, appealed to the Councell of the Bishops of Rome, of Egypt, and of Ieru­salem, B and of Thessalonica. I would aske now, Whether this Appeale seemeth to haue beene made to the Bishop of Rome, or to a Generall Councell? and it fol­loweth, Florens said, The assemblie being broken vp, in the middest of the prease, he told me in my eare, that he appealed to the Councell of Rome, of Egypt, and of Ierusalem. Basil Bishop of Seleucia addeth farther, Eutyches the Abbot, while the companie was yet sitting, said, That if the Fathers of Rome and of Alexandria should tell him, that he ought to confesse that there were two natures in Christ inseperable, though not confoun­ded, no not after the vnion, then he will confesse it: but he spake not these words by way of Appeale. But this is it which I would know, Whether by vertue of this surmised Appeale the Bishop of Alexandria might not also take as much vpon him? and C yet Leo himselfe, as he confesseth in his Epistles, was almost surprised by this stra­tageme. Sixtly, Theodosius the Emperour, by occasion of this trouble in the Church, assembled another Councell at Ephesus: he called thither Leo Bishop of Rome,Vol. 6. an. 449. art. 65, 66, 67, 68. Knowing well (saith Baronius) that a Generall Councell could not be assembled without his authoritie: a thing (saith he) deepely to be grauen in the readers memorie. But now what proofe? Leo (saith he) in the beginning of his Epistle to the Synod of Ephesus telleth them in this manner: The religious Emperour hath yeelded this respect and reuerence to the diuine ordinances, to vse the authoritie of the Apostolike See, for the bringing of his holie intents and purposes to passe. All which I confesse, was fit and re­quisit to be done: but is there no difference whether the Emperour call Leo to the D Councell, or Leo him; or whether the Emperor by his authoritie call a Councell? And he addeth these words, As if the Emperor had beene desirous to have that now de­clared by Peter himselfe, which was once so highly commended in his confession: and thereupon he falleth to ruffling with his Tu es Petrus; as if these words had beene spoken not by Leo, but by the Emperor himselfe. But see the frothinesse and vani­tie of this man, who neuer considereth, that this verie Theodosius wrot in like man­ner to Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria, and to all other Bishops, threatning them, That for default in appearance they should not be held excused either before God or him, In Concil. Chal­ced. art. 1. because no man could now absent himselfe, but such as was wounded with a guiltie con­science. Neither doth he regard, that the Emperor was purposed to make Diosco­rus E himselfe President of that Councell: We (saith the Emperour) according to the Canons of the holie Fathers, do giue and grant vnto him the authoritie and Primacie &c. The reason was, because he thought (as well he might) that the Bishop of Rome would not be there in person, no more than he had beene in the former Synods, and held Flauian Bishop of Constantinople as a partie in this quarrell: Wherein (saith Baronius) the Emperor vsurped the authoritie of the Pope, seeing that Hosius pre­sided in the Councell of Nice, and Cyrill at Ephesus, both of them as Legats from the Pope. All which are meere surmises, and as we call them, demands of Principals,Petitio principij taking those things for granted, which are principally in question, and most contradicted. [Page 76] But where was shame, when he aduentured thus to abuse, vnto his owne purpose,A the graue and religious proceedings of the Emperor in this Councell? Seuenth­ly, in this Councell (which was no doubt packed in fauour of Eutyches) the Popes Legats were by Eutyches chalenged and refused, as partakers with Flauian Bishop of Constantinople. Whereby Leo first began to haue his eyes opened, and to perceiue the tricke that Eutyches had put vpon him. And Flauian himselfe was there condemned, and degraded, as a man set vpon by a companie of rogues and theeues, [...] and therefore was this Councell afterward called an Assemblie of Theeues. [...]. In this extremitie Flauian Appealed from them: and this is the first place where we read this word vsed properly, and as a tearme of law. And hereupon Baronius groundeth himselfe,Liberat. in Bre­uia. c. 12. and saith, That he Appealed to the Bishop of Rome; and B voucheth for his author Liberatus Archdeacon of Carthage, who saith, That hee Appealed in writing to the See Apostolike: an author whose estimation Baronius him­selfe hath cried downe in so many places. Adde hereunto, That the Councell of Chalcedon, wherein the acts of this Synod are repeated, reporteth, That he said onely, Appello à te, i. I Appeale from thee; without specifying to whom. And Hila­rie a Deacon of the Roman Church, saith onely, That vpon the sentence giuen, contradicitur, that is, It was gainsaid: meaning, that he appealed from that roguish companie to a more lawful Synod, which he entreated Leo to obtaine of the Em­perour, for the justifying both of his cause and person. And to speake a troth, there was none other now left to whom he might addresse himselfe, the Bishops C of Alexandria and Ierusalem being his professed enemies, and he of Antioch de­posed. Now what became of this appeale no man can tell: for as one mischiefe lightly commeth not without a fellow, Flauian was outragiously beaten, and shortly after partly of griefe, partly of his wounds, dyed. And euen such was that Ap­peale also of Theodoret, vnheard, and yet condemned; who in his Epistle to Leo, vseth these words, Helpe me, saith he, who do Appeale vnto your Holinesse, and command me to appeare before you, that I may yeeld an account of my faith vnto you. Now whe­ther he spake this properly, and as a tearme of law, or onely by a metaphor, wee should better discerne if we had the Greeke, though the Greeke word it selfe, [...], he not alwayes taken in this rigor: For when the Fathers in the Coun­cel D of Aegypt, vpon the banishment of Athanasius, in their Synodal Epistle request all Bishops to receiue him vnto their communion, they vse these words, [...],Epist. Synod. ad omnes Episcopos. that is, We Appeale you, or call vpon you, as reuen­gers of such iniustice; In which sence this word is found in many other places. Wherefore when it is said, That he Appealed to Leo, the meaning is, that he had re­course vnto him; hoping by his meanes to procure a more lawfull Synod. And in effect the letters of Valentinian the Emperour,Extant in Con­cil. Chalced. act. 1. who at that time resided at Rome, and of Galla Placidia to her sonne Theodosius, testifie the same: In which letters, at the suit of Leo, they request Theodosius, That vpon this Appeale in writing, he would be pleased, that Leo in a Synod of Bishops, assembled out of all quarters of the world, in E some place within Italie, might take knowledge of this matter. And Galla in her letters plainely sheweth, that this was the drift and purpose of Flauian, Who, saith she, hath alreadie sent his libell to the See Apostolike, and to all the Bishops of these quarters, by them whom the Bishop of Rome had sent to the Councell at Ephesus. This Appeale therefore was put in as well to them as to the Bishop of Rome (saue onely that he was the more eminent person) and was to be heard and determined by them all, in the Councell which was to be assembled; as Galla in her Epistle concludeth, That the matter, saith she, may be ended in a Councell, and by the See Apostolike: So that all [Page 77] A this was no legall and formall Appeale, nor made vnto the Pope, otherwise than as to a promoter and furtherer of the calling of this Councell: And it is worth the remembrance, that in these verie Epistles which Baronius maketh so much ac­count of, Valentinian speaking of the Bishop of Rome, saith, as hath beene alrea­die alledged, That Antiquitie was it which gaue him the Primacie, or chiefe place a­mong the Priests. And Galla in her Epistle: It is fit, saith she, that we reserue in all poynts that respect which is due vnto this citie, as to the Ladie of all other cities. And like tearmes vseth she vnto Pulcheria, whence it followeth,An. 451. that this Primacie was taken as founded vpon the positiue law of man, and that the claime from S. Peter commeth but as accessarie to the principall.

B And that Flauian had no other purpose, appeareth by the proceeding of this cause; for the yeare following, at the suit of Leo, Martian the Emperour appoin­ted a generall Councell to be held at Chalcedon; wherein are to bee seene the traces of the former Synod, and the whole cause opened in a second hearing, to the confusion of Eutyches, and shame of all his partakers and abettors, and to the iustifying of Flauian, and of his memoriall after him in the presence of the Popes Legats; who there saw the Church of Constantinople before their face equalled with that of Rome, by an expresse Canon, made in confirmation of that other of Constantinople. And let our aduersaries now shew vs any one Appeale after this made from Constantinople to Rome. Eightly, Baronius is faine to make the best C of a bad cause: He now telleth vs,Baron. vol. 6. an. 451. art. 149. that this Canon was made vnder the correction and good leaue of Leo: Grant it were so: and that the Synod in their Epistle required his confirmation: and thereupon, after his manner, maketh a great flourish: Seest thou, O Reader, saith he, how these six hundred Fathers thought this Canon, though resolued on in two general Councels, yet to be of no force and vertue, without the authoritie of Leo? and indeed a man not acquainted with his trickes might haply suffer himselfe to be lead away with his discourses: but the Canon it selfe is too plaine, and the continuall practise of the Church sheweth, that the validitie of that Canon neuer depended of his confirmation. True it is, that they were willing to draw Leo to some reason by faire words and remonstrances which they made vnto him: and D this was the drift and purpose of that Epistle. But, as we haue often said, tearmes of courtesie and of honour vsed to the Pope, were euer by them drawne to some farther tye of seruice. And yet this verie Epistle determineth and decideth the question in many places, though Baronius, who commonly spareth for no paper to set downe things in the largest size, concealeth one part thereof: but thus run the words of the inscription, The holie Oecumenicall Synod assembled by the grace of God, and by the commaundement of the most religious Emperours, at Chalcedon, to Leo Archbishop of the Romans. Whence it appeareth, that this Synod was not called by his authoritie, neither was he accompted for Vniuersall Bishop by that Synod, as Baronius would make the world to beleeue:Baron. ib. Confirmauimus. and as for the prerogatiue of the E Church of Constantinople, the words vsed in that Canon are precise and for­mall: We haue, say they, confirmed the Canon of 150 Bishops, meaning, of the second generall Councell: and therefore after this confirmation of 600 Bishops, Baroni­us should a little blush to bring such cold coniectures. And againe, We haue so de­fined, say they, thereby to cut off all confusion, and to establish the order of the Church. And in the end they vse these tearmes, Vouchsafe holie Father, to imbrace this our de­cree, as is fit and seemly for the loue that ought to be between vs. And what reason then hath Baronius of a sentence definitiue to make an interlocutorie, especially seeing that they so often repeat the same thing? We beleeue, say they, that the honour of the [Page 78] See of Constantinople was confirmed in a generall Councell, we now intreat you to honour A our iudgement by your Decree, to giue your consent, and to hold your selfe content with that which we haue done. And the cause why they sent him the Acts, was this, That he might thereby perceiue that they were led in all their consultations by diuine instinct; which they neuer expected to be sent from Rome, neither did they looke to haue their doings reformed there.Martianus a­pud Palladium. We read indeed, that the Emperor by whose com­maundement they were there assembled, confirmed their Acts: The things, saith he,Per nostra pre­cepta stabilita sunt. agreed vpon in the Councell of Chalcedon are established by our authoritie: neither shall they goe vnpunished who shall in any point contemne this law. And indeed after this time matters passed according to the tenor of this decree, doe Leo what hee could to the contrarie, who yet did openly beare out the Bishops of Antioch and B Alexandria: but, in the Church, men gouerne themselues by law, not by exam­ple; measuring their actions not after the long elne of one Bishops insolencie and pride, but according to the true rule of order and discipline established in a lawful Synod.Vol. 6. an. 457. art. 23. Ninthly and lastly Baronius saith, That in the Epistle which the Clergie of Alexandria, oppressed by Timotheus, wrot to the Emperour Leo, they request that his impieties might be made knowne to the Roman Pontife, and to others. But why doth he not speake plainely, and say, as indeed it is, As to others; for they make no distinction betweene him and others: The words are these, Vouch­safe, we pray you, to write to the Bishop of Rome, also to the Bishops of Antioch, of Ierusa­lem, of Thessalonica, of Ephesus, and others, as your Mightinesse shall thinke fit: and C they adde, For our cause hath beene alreadie manifested to Anatolius Archbishop of this royall citie, meaning Constantinople: which they did by vertue of that Canon of Chalcedon.Extat inter E­pist. Illustr. Concil. Chalced. And the truth is, that this Anatolius in the Epistle which hee wrot to the Emperour Leo vpon this occasion, brandeth Pope Leo with the marke of an heretike, and censureth him to be vnworthie of the Priesthood.

OPPOSITION.

All these contentions about jurisdiction proceeded from that Canon of Chal­cedon,An. 472. [Page 80] to which the Popes would by no meanes stand; and yet they neuer talke A vnto vs but of Councels, especially of those foure first generall Synods, which they vse commonly to paralell with the holie Scriptures. But in the meane time came forth a certaine Edict from Leo the Emperor,Leo Imperat. li. 16. c. de Sa­ [...]ros. Eccles. in this maner: We decree and or­dain, That the holie Church of this most religious citie, Mother of our pietie, and of all Chri­stians whatsoeuer, of the Orthodox religion, and the most holie See of this royall citie (meaning Constantinople) in regard that she is the royall citie, shall haue all priuiledges and honours, concerning the creation of Bishops, and taking of place before all others, and all other poynts whatsoeuer, which they now haue, or at any time heretofore haue had. Ba­ronius saith,Baron. an. 472. art. 3, 4, 5. That the good Emperour was ouertaken by the wiles and subtilties of Acati­us: and indeed it were hard if he should haue nothing to say. But in vaine did B Simplicius oppose against it, whether before Leo, or before Basiliscus: and there­fore Gelasius, An. 493. which came after, changed his stile, and not alledging for himselfe ei­ther the Nicene Canon, as Leo did, or the ancient obseruation of the Church, as others, held himselfe fast to his Tues Petrus: This goeth not, saith he, by any Synodall constitutions, Gelas. in Epist. ad Dardanos. but by the verie voyce of the Gospell, Tues Petrus, &c. And why then did his predecessors, especially Leo, make their verie throats hoarse with crying out, and alledging alwayes the Nicene Councell? But Gelasius hereupon depri­ued Constantinople of the right of Patriarchship; and hauing so done, pronoun­ced openly, That the See of Rome might without a Synod, of himselfe, either absolue those whom a Synod had wrongfully condemned, or condemne such as had deserued it; and C so setteth his See vp aboue all Councels.Ib. And againe, The Canon, saith he, hath so ordained, that all Churches ought to appeale to this See, and from this See to none; be­cause this See iudgeth of all Churches, and no Church of it, as being without spot or wrin­kle: and yet as much without spot or wrinckle as she was, his verie next successor Anastasius (see, I pray you, whither this pretended prerogatiue caried the Church) was defamed, for the heresie of Acatius, which was oppugned by Gelasius; and he was indeed a meere Acatian, doe Baronius what he can to free him from this impu­tation.Liber Pontifi­calis. For the Pontificall booke, in expresse tearmes saith, That many Priests, and others of the Clergie, withdrew themselues from his communion, for that without the priuitie or knowledge of the Bishops, Priests, and Clergie of the Catholike Church, he had se­cretly D entertained cōmunion with a certaine Deacon of Thessalonica, called Photinus, who was of communion with Acatius; and because he sought meanes vnder hand to call home Acatius: which yet he could not effect, being preuented by God, and stroken by his dreadfull judgement. By these Maximes therefore of Gelasius, it appeareth what a large step he had made into this tyrannie ouer the Church; but yet he for­bore to meddle with the ciuil gouernment: and it seemeth he prophesied to vs, as sometimes Caiphas did,Gelasius de A­nathematis vin­culo. when he gaue vs this rule following: There were, saith he, before the comming of Christ, some in figure appointed ouer temporall affaires, who were both Kings and Priests, as was Melchisedech: which manner the diuell also imitated in some of his seruants (as his custome is euer to attribute to himselfe those things which E properly belong to diuine worship) in that some of the Heathen Kings were also Priests: But since the true Priest and King came into the world, there hath not beene found an Em­perour which hath taken vpon him the Title of a Priest, nor yet a Priest which vsurped the regall dignitie, &c. But Christ remembring well mans frailtie, for his elect sake, hath distinguished these two authorities, by seuerall offices properly appertaining to either of them: so that the Christian Emperours haue need of the Priests, for their soules health, and the Priests of them, for the course of worldlie matters: so that the spirituall profession is seperated from the world, and a souldier of Christ may not busie himselfe in the affaires [Page 81] A of this world; neither he who is busied in earthlie affaires may presume to gouerne in holie things: to the end, that the one supporting the other, they might not rebell the one against the other. I referre me now vnto the Reader, whether Gelasius his successors haue kept themselues within those bounds which hee prescribed; and whether they haue not fallen within the compasse of his condemnation, as followers of the Pa­gans, and guided by the instinct of the diuell,Instinctu dia­bolico. while they thus encroach vpon the temporall estate? For what Bellarmine, or what Baronius can reconcile those max­imes and positions of Gregorie the seuenth, called Hildebrand, with these of Gela­sius? And for conclusion, we may not forget, that because Gelasius wrot once in approbation of certaine writings of Honoratus Bishop of Marseilles, whom Gen­nadius B reporteth onely to haue sent him his bookes; Baronius inferreth, That it be­longeth properly to the Bishop of Rome, to approue and censure bookes. What a little wind will serue to fill the sayles of these mens pride and arrogancie! Be­like so many learned personages as wrot vnto Saint Augustine, Hierosme, and o­thers, for their approbation of their writings, tooke them to be Popes, and so did they take others, when they Imparted their bookes vnto them: which is so ab­surd and friuolous, as nothing can be more. And thus come we now to the yere of our Lord 500.

OPPOSITION.

An. 472. Odoacer therefore, Captaine of the Rugians, hauing made himselfe King of all Italie, about the yeare 472, for preuention of tumults which might ensue, if B Simplicius should happen to die, made a Law, and published it by Basilius in the open Vatican, and before the Bishops there assembled, That in case Simplicius should happen to die, for the auoidance of trouble and hurt, both in Church and Citie, none should be elected without his priuitie. Baron. vol. 6. an. 476. art. 1, 2, 3. Which Odoacer hath at least this com­mendation from Antiquitie, That he was neuer offensiue or troublesome to the Catholike Church, in matters belonging to Religion, though himselfe were a professed Arrian:Cassiodor. in Chron. and farther, is reported to haue beene of so good a temper, that in thirteene yeares space, which he held Italie vnder his commaund, he ne­uer tooke vnto him either the title or the robe of the Emperour; who, all bar­barian as he was, shall yet one day rise in judgement against these mens insolen­cie C and pride. True it is, that Sigonius reporteth, that this law was made by the aduise of Simplicius himselfe,Sigon. de Occi­dent. Imperio, l. 15. & 16. Synod. Roma. 3. sub Symmacho, an. 498. but what author hath he for it? For the third Sy­nod of Rome, which was held vnder Symmachus, sayth no such thing, but tear­meth it in precise tearmes, The Law of Odoacer. And there was good vse to be made of this Law about the yeare 498, at the election of a Bishop after the death of Anastasius the second: For by reason that Anastasius the Emperour had filled the fists of a great part of the Clergie of Rome, to this end, that he might haue alwaies a Pope at his owne deuotion; it came to passe, that one part set vp and named Symmachus, Theodor. Col­lectan. l. 2. and the other Lawrence, and each faction kept quarter apart; vntill in the end some being wiser than some, the matter was referred to D Theodoric King of the Ostrogothes, who at that time reigned in Italie; and he preferred Symmachus, who not long after in a Synod at Rome abrogated this ve­rie law, as Sigonius reporteth: And we doubt not of the mans good will, but yet we find that this Law stood in force vntill the time of Benedict the second; whom the Emperour Constantine P [...]goratus, Synod. Roma. 3. sub Symmach. about the yeare 68 [...], absolued from the obseruance of this Law, as Onuphrius himselfe acknowledgeth. But these matters stayed not here: For foure yeares after this wound began to bleed a­fresh. Lawrence was called home to Rome, where the factions fairely [...]ll to blowes: whereat Theodoric tooke great offence, and deposing them both, he pla­ced Peter, Paul. Diacon. l. 15. Nicephor. l. 16. c. 35. Bishop of Al [...]in, in the roome. Paulus Diaconus and Nicephorus spea­king E of this accident, report, That there were infinit spoiles and murders commit­ted by either partie; the greater part of the Priests, manie Clerkes, and a multitude of the Citizens were there slaine, Sabell. Eun. 8. l. 2. and the holie virgins themselues, as Sabellicus writeth, were not spared in those seditions. Yet must all this passe for zeale towards the Church;Ennod. in Epist. ad Faustum. insomuch, that one Ennodius, a Writer of that time, maketh them all Martyrs, who died in the cause of Symmachus: Their bloud there shed (sayth he) enrolled them in the Register Booke of the Court of Heauen. And Baronius is of the same opinion: and for proofe he voucheth a saying of that great Denis, Bishop [Page 83] A of Alexandria; but see his honestie, for the case standeth thus: Denis wrote to the schismatike Nouatus, who would haue made him beleeue, that he was taken by force, and made Bishop whether he would or no: whereupon Denis told him, That it had beene better for him to haue suffered anie mischiefe, Euseb. Histor. Eccles. l. 6. c. 37. than to haue broken the vnitie of the Church, and that it had beene as glorious a martyrdome vnto him, as if he suffered for not offering vnto Idols. True, if rather than thou wouldest be made a Bishop in a Schisme, thou wouldest suffer thy selfe to be killed: But the case is altered, if thou puttest thy selfe in danger, or causest either thy selfe or o­thers to be slaine, not to auoid, but to obtaine a Bishopricke. And such was the case of those which died in Symmachus his quarrell. And we must remember, that B the fourth Synod, which was held at Rome vnder Symmachus, Iornandes de Robus Gothicis, Synod, Roma 4. sub Symmacho. where the greatest part of the Bishops of all Italie were assembled, was called by Theodoric. True it is, that at the first the Bishops began to remonstrate to him, That the calling of the Synod belonged to the Pope: but Theodoric produced Symmachus his owne let­ters, wherein he requested him to assigne the place, and Symmachus himselfe in open Synod gaue him humbly thankes for so assigning it.

Here Baronius putteth on his brazen face:Vol. 6. an. 501. art. 2. He knew well (saith he) that to assem­ble a Synod of Orthodox Bishops appertained not to him, and therefore treading the steps of his predecessors, he assembled it by the authoritie of Pope Symmachus, and the verie Acts of the Councell testifie as much. And then falleth he to his accustomed accla­mations: C A memorable matter (saith he) that a Prince, a Barbarian, a Goth by nation, a stranger, an heretike, and an Arrian, do the schismatikes what they could by importuning him to the contrarie, should yet yeeld such respect and reuerence to the See Apostolike. But what if the whole proceedings and the Acts themselues of this Synod shew the contrarie? It is therefore to be vnderstood, that the yeare before, Theodoric at the instance of the aduerse part, had sent Peter Bishop of Altin to Rome, in quali­tie of a Visitor, to informe himselfe of the crimes which were layed to Symmachus his charge. And so it seemeth, that Theodoric and Ennodius were not both of the same mind; when Ennodius saith, That the Pope is accountable to none but vnto Hea­uen. Afterward Theodoric gaue order, that this difference should be taken vp,Ennod. in Ape­log. in l. 20. l. Concil. or D ended in a lawfull Synod: which Synod was held the yeare following at Rome, in the Acts whereof we find it thus written.Synod. Roma. 4. Palmaria dicta. The Synod here assembled out of diuers countries, by the commandement of the most religious King Theodorie &c. And againe, The Royall authoritie hauing so commaunded, that the Bishops should assemble here at Rome out of diuers Prouinces &c. The reason is, for that one Metropolitan hath no power ouer another: and therefore when Bishops of diuers Prouinces had oc­casion to assemble themselues in a Synod, it could not be done without the Kings authoritie: and in this Synod were present the Bishops of Liguria, Emilia, and Venice, to decide this cause, wherein the Bishop of Rome was defendant. Yea, but saith Baronius, the Bishops told him, that it belonged not vnto him; true: but E read on, and you shall find that he replied, That the Pope himselfe had by his letters declared his will touching the calling of this Synod: which was, that Theodoric should call it; and thereupon thanketh him for so doing, as hauing thereby giuen him the meanes to justifie and to cleare himselfe. And it followeth afterward, That this Synod presumed not to decree anie thing without making the King first acquainted there­with. And againe it is there said, That Symmachus was forced by the Emperour to enter the lists against his aduersaries, and that before the Fathers assembled in this Sy­nod, as before his lawfull Delegates or Commissioners: Nunquam com­misisset. For (saith he) he would neuer haue committed this cause to them as a new cause, had he held him as alreadie conuict. [Page 84] Then follow the Acts themselues, Whiles they were in deliberation what was fit to be A done, Symmachus came and offered to plead his cause: And hauing expressed the vio­lences which his aduersaries had vsed towards him, the Fathers spake and said, That they must yet againe flie to the iustice of the Prince &c. who declared there o­penly, That the knowledge and ordering of Church matters belonged vnto them: that he brought nothing but reuerence with him when he came to the hearing of such causes: and that he committed it to the power of the Bishops to heare or not to heare it, and to dispose thereof at their discretion, prouided that by the care and wisedome of the Coun­cell the Christians might haue peace within the Citie. By all which it appeareth, that he did not put off his authoritie from himselfe, to conferre it vpon the Bishop of Rome. In the end these Fathers proceeding according to the commaundement B of the Prince, resolued in this intricate cause to arbitrate and to compose the va­riance, rather than as Iudges to decide it; and for the peace of the Church, to cloake offences, rather than to expose them to the view of the world: and there­fore commaunded they the people to receiue Symmachus againe; leauing the judgement to God, of those things which could not sufficiently be proued by men. And let the reader note these words of the Fathers, According to the com­maund of the Prince, which giueth vs this power: But we restore all Ecclesiasticall power to him againe, as well within the Citie as without. And who will say, that by these words they acknowledged the Pope for Bishop of all the world? or that Theodoric called this Councell by the Popes authoritie? especially seeing that we find at C the same time,An. 509. That the Councell at Agda in Languedoc, of Orthodox Bishops, was assembled and held by the authoritie of Alaric, an Arrian by profession, and a Goth by nation: which yet the Fathers themselues acknowledge in the verie be­ginning of that Councell:Acta Concil. Agath. This Synod assembled (say they) in the name of the Lord in this Citie of Agda, by the permission of King Alaric; and therefore they ordained prayers and supplications to be made for his prosperitie. And seeing also we read, that shortly after, whiles the same Symmachus was yet Pope, the first Councell of Orleans was held: whereof Hincmar speaking in the life of S. Rhemigius saith, That by the aduise of S. Rhemigius, An. 512. Acta Concil. Aurelian. 1. in 1. to. Concilior. Clouis called a Synod of Bishops at Orleans, where were manie good things ordained. And the Fathers themselues of that Councell in their D Synodall Epistle to King Clouis speake in this manner: We (say they) whom you haue commaunded to come vnto this Synod, here to treat of necessarie matters &c. Which things they desire afterward to be confirmed by his rightfull iudgement, though in his Patent directed to them he speaketh with as much respect to them, as he could haue done to the Bishop of Rome himselfe. King Clouis (saith he) to our holie Lords, the Bishops most worthie of the Apostolike See &c. and at the foot thereof, Pray ye for me, my holie Lords, Popes most worthie of the Apostolike See. This good King had ne­uer yet learned this lesson, though instructed by S. Rhemigius, that there were no more Popes but one, no other Apostolike See but that of Rome. All which we haue beene faine to deduce at large, to right the Historie of that wrong which E our great Annalist hath done vnto it.

OPPOSITION.

Such were then the proceedings of the Popes: yet when he presumed to passe his bounds too farre, there neuer wanted some one or other to lay a blocke in his way: which we should now more clearely discouer, had the writers of those daies beene as carefull to record vnto posteritie the oppositions of the one part, as they were to set downe the attempts of the other. But this appeareth, that Leo his pre­tencions were euer opposed by the Churches: and we may perceiue by Symma­chus D his owne Epistle, that in Sclauonie, Dardanie, and Dace,Symmach. in ep. ad Presbyt. Il­lyr. Dardaniae, & Daciae. his authoritie was little esteemed. And in Rome itselfe his owne Clergie accused him to Theodoric, at what time he was wiser than to replie, as now they doe, that no man may pre­sume to aske him, Domine cur ita facis? Neither did his predecessor Anastasius the second find the Bishops of France and Germanie ouer gentle in taking their bitt into their mouths, when they wrot vnto him in the time of Clouis the first, and first Christian King of Fraunce, that memorable Epistle, whereof we will here insert some few of the most important clauses. Non putatiuè sed veracitèr affirmant Epis­copi, that is, The Bishops doe constantly and truly affirme, Epist. episc. Gol. & German. ad Anastas. 2. in Collecta. Auen­tin. that a Councell is of greater authoritie than is a Pope Anastasius. Paule the Apostle which crieth out, Be ye followers of E me, resisted Peter who was chiefe of the Apostles, because he was to be reproued &c. This is indeed a verie fountaine and nurserie of scandales to the people, when the Bishops of the Church rise in dissention against each other, among whom there should be a full and a perfect peace &c. And againe, Our weake wit (say they) cannot conceiue what this new kind of compassion meaneth, which these Phisitians of Italie vse in the cure of the disease of France: They who pretend to cure our Bishops, are themselues shaken with a continuall feauer: they who promise sight to vs, are themselues blind: they take vs to be crouchbackes, and haue themselues such a bunch of auarice growing on their backes, that it will not suffer them to enter in at the narrow gate: they let their owne sheepe goe [Page 82] [...] [Page 83] [...] [Page 84] [...] [Page 85] [...] [Page 86] astray, and call our Shepheards into the way of truth, going about to persuade vs, that the A physicke of spirituall diseases, the absolution of soules is at Rome &c. But if they will needs applie their searing yrons to our wounds, they shall quickly feele our French truth, which they without a cause prouoke against themselues &c. And if they say yet farther, That the Bishops of France are spiritually sicke: let them remember the commaundement of our Sauior, and visit vs in our sicknesse; for the sicke must not runne to the Physitian, but the Physitian come vnto the sicke: which if they refuse to doe, then let them know, that we haue of our owne a perfect good Antidot, euen the Gospell of the Sonne of God, to expell all venome from our hearts: that is to say, We haue no need of your Treacle. Let them take this for a warning, not to make shew of too great zeale of iustice, thereby to draw vs into the snare of their King like iudgements, least we answere them as it is in B the Gospell, Let him (of the Bishops of Italie) which is without sinne, cast the first stone at vs. All which we say to this end, that they in the hardnesse of their heart may not offer to lay their pretended authoritie vpon our Bishops: For it is not impossible; that the stone which they cast at vs may flie backe in their owne faces; for our men vse not to be afraid of feathers. Let them rather this day confesse before Christ, that they are a sort of miserable comforters: those properly whom S. Iohn saw in Pathmos, of whom he saith, He sent the Dragon, and he drew the third part of the starres &c. The stinke of their ill name is spred to the vtmost borders of the earth. They which dwell beyond the moun­taine of God (that is, they which will make themselues gods) shoot their arrowes be­yond the stone of saluation, because they are not planted in the house of the Lord, after C the order of Melchisedech &c. that is, are not called by a lawfull vocation. And al­though (say they) by the shaking of our Oxen of France the Arke of our couenant should be like to fall, yet it belongeth to our Bishops to hold it vp, and not to them. But if they by their euill speaking slander the Arke of our Church, the like mischiefe befall them as befell Vzzias the Leuit. To conclude, let them learne this Syllogisme, If there be equall power in all Bishops, then is it equall in euerie one: but it is equall in all, ergo in euerie one. And by this you may see what reckoning the Bishops of France made of the Bishops of Rome in those daies.

OPPOSITION.

These Legats therefore comming to Constantinople, were verie honourably receiued by the Emperour Anastasius: but because they came as minding to com­maund C rather than to conferre about matters of Religion, therefore Iohn the se­cond, Patriarch of Constantinople, as Basilides reporteth, made head against them: I know (saith he) that it is fit for an Emperour to commaund, not for a Bishop: But if there be cause why, and if he which hath charge of spirituall things must needs com­maund, it is fitter a great deale, that in this place I should commaund rather than be commaunded. The Pontificall Booke here addeth, That the Emperour (no doubt offended with both their behauiors) sent them out at ab [...]cke dore, and shipped them in a rotten vessell, commaunding the Master of the Ship not to land them at anie Citie. And so in this businesse we find ill dealing on all bands. After Anastasius succee­ded Iustin in the Empire, an vndoubted Orthodox, who called a Synod at Con­stantinople D vpon the same occasion as before: in the Acts whereof we may ob­serue, that notwithstanding the friuolous conjectures of Baronius, the Bishop of Constantinople, as it were in despight of the Pope, is euer qualified by the name of Vniuersall Patriarch; so farre were the Bishops of the East from yeelding this authoritie to the See of Rome. And yet in the reigne of this [...] Iustine, Baron. an. 518. art. 70. vol. 7. Baronius fisheth for some thing, which he may make to se [...]e for his owne aduantage: he saith therefore, That the Bishops of the East saw that they laboured to no end without the Bishop of Rome, and that therefore they treated with him: That the Emperour Iustin sent an [...]mbassage vnto him: that the Synod and the Patriarch wrote vnto him to send some thither in his behalfe, for the maintenance of the E common peace: That they gaue him to vnderstand of their Orthodox beleefe, to the end that hereafter they might haue Communion each withother. And what of all this? For is this a doing of homage, or is it not rather a preuention of bro­therlie loue and kindnesse. Or doth this proue the Popes superioritie, when they inuite him to come vnto their Synod, when the Patriarch writeth vnto him in this manner, To Hormisda my religious brother, and companion in seruice? when Hormisda himselfe vseth no other stile but this, [...]. The Bishop Hormisda to Iohn Bishop of Constan­tinople? Secondly he saith, That the Emperor sent forth the chiefe of his Court to meet them a great way off: true, but is it fit that they should interpret the reuerend [Page 88] respect which this Prince vsed to them, for an argument of his subiection? But he A addeth farther, That a poore snake, Bishop of Lignida, wrot to Hormisda in this manner,Baron. an 519. vol. 7. Adorando Apostolico Patri: and another of Preuasi and Epirus, To the Fa­ther of Fathers, of equall merit with the Angels. And by this, saith he, you may per­ceiue what respect the Bishops of the East bore vnto the Pope of Rome. And tell me, I pray you, is it reason that of these fooleries, or rather impieties, Baronius should make a rule of law? or should he not rather looke vnto the proceedings of the Councels? It is certaine, that Hormisda had deliuered his Legats their lesson in a booke, to which the Bishops of the East must first subscribe, before they might joyne in communion with them. And the good Emperour Iustin, because he much affected the peace of the Church, and therefore feared to offend him by B any contradiction, seeing nothing in their articles repugnant to the Orthodox re­ligion, did what he could to make his Bishops subscribe vnto them; which yet ca­ried the marke of ambition in their verie front, beginning with their Tues Petrus, together with that which they inferre in consequence of that text; and hauing this for a close, Following in all things the Apostolike See, and preaching as it ordaineth. Which clauses the Bishop of Constantinople shunned as so many rockes, and re­fused to subscribe vnto them; requesting them to content themselues with this, That he was readie to testifie his faith by his letter, which himselfe would write to that purpose. In the end it came to this, That he should begin with a preamble vnto the articles, directed to Hormisda in forme of a letter. Which he did, and C in such sort, as that it might for euer after well serue him for an Antidote. The inscription was according to the vsuall manner, To our most blessed brother and com­panion of seruice; which suteth but ill with the Popes Tu es Petrus. And whereas the Pope magnified the See of Rome, he taketh occasion to say, I hold these two ho­lie Churches of the old Rome and of the new, to be but one and the selfe same Church: where instead of Senior is Romae, they make vs to read, Superioris Romae, by an abreuiation, of set purpose and wittingly corrupted. For who euer heard speake of a superior Rome? [...]. or what is more vsuall, than to say, the elder and the new Rome? And then follow the articles of Hormisda. Thirdly, when this was done, both the Em­perour himselfe, and the Patriarch Iohn, wrot vnto Hormisda; the one in this ma­ner,D The Emperour to Hormisda Archbishop and Patriarch, &c. And perhaps vp­on this ground it is that Isidore in his Chronicle saith, That the Pope receiued this Title first of all from Iusti [...]e the Emperour. The other, with the vsuall tearmes of Brother and fellow Minister. Wherein he letteth him to vnderstand, That this ge­nerall peace proceeded from the pietie and vertuous disposition of the Emperor to the end that he should not offer to arrogat the praise thereof to himselfe; and putteth him oft in mind, that their two Churches were indeed but one & the same Church; and is farre ynough from making the one subordinat to the other. Vn­derstanding alwayes, saith he, That the sed [...] Churches, Senior is & noua Roma (and so by this place we may correct the former) of the old and the new Rome, are but one; E and resolving that there is but one See of both, I now acknowledge with all sinceritie of mind, Indiuisibilem adunationem. out indiuisible vnion, and equall confirmation of both Churches. By which words I wold know, whether he intended to subiect his Church to that of Rome, or rather to make them equall each to other? For whereas the Countie Iustinian tearmeth the Bishop of Rome Arch Pontife, which importeth no more, as Baronius himselfe confesseth, than Archbishop; this argueth not any superioritie, but onely a Pri­macie of this See. Neither doe those words in the letters of Pompeius, Archbi­shop of the Vniuersall Church, make any thing at all for Baronius his cause, as if the [Page 89] A Popes had at that time beene taken for Vniuersall Bishops. [...]. For it is in the Greeke onely, of the Catholike Church: a Title long before giuen (as alreadie hath bin declared) vnto Basil, and to Athanasius, and to sundrie other Bishops: Because, as Saint Cyprian saith, the Church is but one, of which euerie Bishop gouerneth his part or portion alone without a consorts and the Bishop of Rome had at that time a great part vnder him. For I would know, when Pope Agepete consecrated Mennas by the name of Vniuersall Bishop, whether he purposed to make him Pope or no? and Dorotheus Bishop of Thessalonica, though inferiour in degree to the Patri­arches, yet calleth he the Bishop of Rome Father, and fellow Minister, and Com­panion in seruice. Fourthly, wee shall best judge of the cause by casting our eye B vpon the effects. It sell out therefore, that one of Hor [...]isda his Legats had been foulely outraged at Thessalonica Dorotheus, which had euer much fauoured them before, was accused as author of that outrage: Whereupon Hormisda sent vnto his Legats, That they should be instant with the Emperour, that Dorotheus might be deposed, and banished into some farre countrey, or otherwise sent to Rome vnder sure and sufficient gard and withall, that one Aristides, who was supposed to haue had a finger in that businesse, should not succeed him. The Emperour his answer was, That there was no reason why he should be sent to Rome to be heard there, where they might easily acquit themselves for want of an accuser. And so all his punishment was, to be sent for a few dayes to Heraclea, and then was he C restored to his See againe. How farre are these proceedings from that power which the Pope pretendeth? And yet haue we no more of all this matter than we find in an Epistle of one of those Legats to Hormisda. Here Baronius, Baron. vol. 7. an. [...]19. art. 140. as his manner is, crieth out, Is it possible that Iustice vnder an Emperor, who taketh his name from Iustice, should be thus forestalled through money, in the cause of the holie Father for that was the imputation which Iohn, one of the Legats, laied vpon the Empe­rour. But if somewhat staieth Baronius his stomacke, that the Emperour shortly after consulted the Pope vpon certaine points of faith. And what of that? for, his place considered, what more vsuall? or what would he inferre thereupon? More­ouer, he pleaseth himselfe much in a certaine sentences taken out of a certaine let­ter D which he wrot vnto Hormisda; which sentence hee causeth to bee printed in great letters:Ib. art. 98. We beleeue and hold for Catholike, that which was intimated to vs by your religious answer. O how dangerous a thing it is to deale fairely with this kind of people! And what, shall we oppose this faire dealing against all those proceedings formerly by vs declared? And yet he cutteth off this sentence with an &c. where­as commonly he is no niggard in reciting whole Epistles: and therefore we haue reason to suspect that something followeth, which if it were knowne would ma [...]e his cause, especially considering that these Epistles are taken out of the Vatican, and the greater part of them as yet remaine vnprinted. Fiftly and lastly, he ma­keth much of one Possessor a Bishop of Afrike, who sent a certaine commentarie E which he had composed vpon the Epistles of Saint Paul, vnto Hormisda, and com­plaineth that he could receiue no answer: The reason was, saith he,Ib. an. 52 [...]. art. 12, 13, 14. because hee well knew that the Catholike Church admitteth of no interpretation of holie Scriptures; but onely such as were first approued by the Apostolike See. And where, I pray you, can he shew vs, that Saint Cyprian, Hilarie, Ambrose, Augustine, Ierome, Chrysostome, and others, euer sent their bookes to him for his approbation? or what should they haue done, to haue gotten their bookes approued, when Pope Marcellinus sacri­ficed vnto Idols, and when Liberius became an Arrian? and when many of the rest turned Heretikes? To what purpose therefore serueth all this discourse [Page 90] of Baronius, but onely to busie and to abuse mens thoughts with childish vanities.A

OPPOSITION.

Theodoric, though an Arrian, yet much commended for his great moderation, whether it was because he could not endure this pride, or whether he had beene informed, that he had suffered himselfe to be led away by those extraordinarie ho­nours D which Iustine had done vnto him; immediatly vpon his returne to Rauenna, chipt him vp in prison, where he continued to his dying day: Which made the Popes for a while after not to carrie themselues so bri [...]kly as before. Yet persua­ded they the common people,Paul. Diac. l. 25. that a certaine good man had seene the soule of Theo­dorie caried betweene this Iohn and Symmachus the chiefe Senator (whose head he had taken off) into the isle of Lipara by Sicilie, there to be cast headlong into Vulcans boyling [...]. For we now enter into an age wherein the people was not fed but with such fables. Now this Pope Iohn passeth for a Martyr, and was enrolled among the Saints, as hauing suffered for conuerting the Arrian Temples into Christian Churches. But Anast [...]sius Bibliothecarius seemeth to report the contrarie:Anastas. in Iohan. 1. Greg. Turene [...]s. de gloria Mar­tyr. c. 40. and Gregorie of E Yours speaketh too confusedly to be beleeued. It is therefore more probable, that he was so handled vpon a poynt of State; as about the same time Boetius and Symmachus lost their heads, for that they had intelligence with the Emperour against Theodoric. For it is cleere, that Iohn crowned the Emperor at Constanti­nople, though he had bin alreadie Sacred by the Patriarch: which was too much for an embassador to do, who would not voluntarily fall into suspition with him which sent him.

An. 525.So likewise it was a meere matter of State which moued Theodoric, when hee [Page 91] A saw the factions bandings which were vsed in the election of Popes, to put to the hand of his authoritie, and to appoint him to be Pope who was at that time in greatest reputation of honestie among the Orthodox, which was Felix the fourth. Whereupon Athalaric, who succeeded his grandfather Theodoric the same yere,Athalar. Epist. ad Senat. Roma. apud Cassiodo. li. 8. Epist. much reioyced, as appeareth by the letters which he wrot to the Senat of Rome, which had receiued him: You haue, saith he, receiued a personage instituted by God, and approued by the iudgement of the Prince. And had reason, seeing that Baroni­us proueth out of this verie Epistle, that for the space of fiftie eight dayes which the See was vacant, the citizens of Rome had beene in continuall ielousies, readie alwayes to come to blowes; as in the former schisme which was between Symma­chus B and Laurence, had not Theodoric interposed his authoritie. But Baronius can by no meanes be brought to dispence with Theodoric for this grieuous sinne; but whereas he was woont highly to commend his moderation, hee now blazoneth him for a barbarous and a cruell tyran: And see Reader, saith he, who it was which first made the ouerture to Emperours to confirme the Popes, a Barbarian, a Tyran, and an Arrian: Yet should he haue remembred, that for preuention of the like confu­sion Odoacer long before had made the same law: Which they neuer imposed vp­on other places, because they saw no where else the like disorders. And which is more, Athalaric was faine, at the request of the most Orthodox among them, though himselfe and Arrian, by a law made, to represse their vnlawfull simonie: C Whom yet they cannot accuse as ouer hard vnto them, seeing that at the humble suit of the Roman Clergie he released them of the law of Valentinian the second,Athalaricus a­pud Cassiod. l. 8. c. 24. by which they were iusticiable in all causes both ciuile and criminall, before the secular Magistrat, in like sort as any other persons were; and ordained, That in the first instance they should goe onely to the Bishop of Rome, Idem li. 9. Variar. Epist. 15 and not to the secular Iudge but by Appeale: of which more at large hereafter. And likewise in the East, the Emperour Iustinian was faine to meddle in Church gouernement, to rectifie what was amisse therein. And this sticketh sore in the stomacke of Baronius, and of his companions, for that the more to represse the ambition of certaine Bishops which haunted the Court,L. 14. Co. de E­pisc. & Cler. by a law directed to Epiphanius Bishop of Constanti­nople, D he forbad all Bishops to come at Court, vnder what colour or pretence so­euer, saue onely vpon expresse order and commaundement from himselfe; vpon paine and perill not onely of his displeasure, but also of excommunication to be inflicted; if the partie offending were a Metropolitan, by the Bishop of Constan­tinople; if an inferiour Bishop, by his Metropolitan. And it seemeth that this can­ker was farre gone, when he was forced to applie so sharpe a remedie, when by a­nother law directed to Atarbius Grand Master of the houshold, he ordained, That so often as any See fell void, the inhabitants should nominat three men of Ortho­dox religion, and of sound life, of which one to be chosen to the See, whom the Emperour should thinke fit; with many other circumstances there added: forbid­ding E also any Bishop, Visitor, Priest, or other Clergie man, of what dignitie soe­uer, or any Master of an hospitall, to be made for money; vnder paine as well to the giuer, as to the receiuer, of exclusion from all offices and dignities in time to come. Which lawes would neuer haue beene made,L. 42. Co. de E­pisc. & Cler. Nouell. 123. but by occasion of a strange dissolution and corruption of discipline, in suing for dignities in the Church. And farther, he was constrained to proceed to the reformation of the ordinarie Litur­gie, and of the Sacraments, commaunding vnder paines both temporall and spi­rituall throughout the Empire, that both the one and the other should bee cele­brated in a knowne language; and that in such absolute and mandatorie tearmes, [Page 92] as a man may well perceiue that they proceeded not from a borrowed jurisdicti­on:A Which law of his was also to take place, and to stand in full force, within the walls of Rome it selfe.

OPPOSITION.

But that the Emperors meaning was not thereby to acknowledge him as Vni­uersall Bishop, besides that they did the like to other Patriarches,An. 533. appeareth more­ouer D in this, that they speake alwayes with reference to the Councell of Chalce­don, which we haue heretofore spoken of, as it is euident both out of their con­fessions, and also by the Nouell Constitution 131. But to come to the matter,Nouell. 131. no law could be a bridle strong ynough to hold in that head-strong and vnrulie ambi­tion of the Popes. We haue alreadie scene the lawes of Odoacer, and of Theodo­ric; and Athalaric, who succeeded after Theodoric, was faine to doe the like: For when as vpon the death of Boniface there went an open and a violent canuasse throughout the citie, wherein some were neither ashame nor afraid to offer the Senators themselues money for their voyces, the Se [...]at tooke high displeasure at these proceedings: and thereupon they passed a certaine Decree, which wee read E in Cassiodorus in these tearmes: Whosoeuer, for the obtaining of a Bishopricke, Cassiod. li. 9. E­pist. 15. shall ei­ther by himselfe, or by any other person, be found to haue promised any thing, that con­tract shall be deemed and held as execrable: He that shall be found to haue beene parta­ker in this wicked act, shall haue no voyce in the election, but shall be accounted a sacrile­gious person, and shall be forced by course of law to make restitution of it. Moreouer, the Senat complained of this great abuse to the king Athalaric, and the Defendor of the Roman Church joined in petition with them to the king, who ratified their Decree by an ordinance of his owne, directed to Pope Iohn: The Defendor, saith he, of the Roman Church came lately to vs weeping, and shewed vnto vs, that in the late [Page 94] election of a Bishop of Rome, some men making their benefit of the necessitie of the time,A by an vngodlie practise had so surcharged the meanes of the poore by extorted promi­ses, that the verie vessels of the Church was by that occasion set to sale. But the more cruell and vngodlie this act is, the more religious and holie is our purpose to cut it off by due course of law. And a little after, hauing mentioned the aboue named decree, he addeth, For this cause, all that which is contained in that decree, we commaund to be obserued and kept to all effects and purposes, against all persons which either by themselues, or others shall haue anie part or portion in those execrable bargaines. What a pitie was it, that the Defendor of the Church should be constrained to lay open this filthie nakednesse of the Church vnto an Arrian?Baron. vol. 7. an. 533. art. 32. & seq. But Baronius to make the best of a bad cause, sayth, That he did it by the exhortation of Pope B Iohn: but the Reader may obserue, that neither in the Historie, neither yet in the ordinance it selfe, there is anie such mention made. The conclusion is as fol­loweth, Our will and pleasure is, Cassio. lib. 9. va­riar. epist. ep. 16. that this our Ordinance be intimated to the Senat and people by the gouernour of the Citie, to the end that all may know, that we are desirous to find out those who run a course so contrarie and repugnant to the Maiestie of God: and you also (saith he) shall intimate the same to all Bishops, which by the grace of God are vnder your commaund and gouernment. Which words are plainely directed to the person of Iohn: but in that which he wrote to the gouernour of the Citie he ad­deth farther and sayth, To the end that this benefit of ours may continue firme and stedfast in time to come, we ordaine, That as well this our Ordinance as the said De­cree C of the Senat be deepely grauen in tables of Marble, and set vp as a publike te­stimonie before the Porch of S. Peters Church. A great honour, no doubt, vnto the Prince himselfe, but an euerlasting blemish and reproach to the Clergie of tha [...] time.

L. 8. Co. de sum­ma Trinit.But in the vsages of Iustinian the Emperour towards Iohn the second, Baro­nius imagineth, that he findeth much for the Popes aduantage. It is certaine, and we haue often said as much, that the Emperours being now retyred into the East, had need to hold intelligence with the Popes of Rome, by their meanes to find alwaies a dore open into Italie. Wherefore this Emperour be­ing newly come vnto his Crowne, sent an honourable embassage vnto him, to D assure him of his true faith and Orthodox religion. And Baronius obserueth in his Epistle, that he sayth in this manner: We are all carefull to aduertise your Holinesse of all such things as concerne the estate of the Church: with those other words following, To submit and to vnite to your Holinesse all the Bishops of the East &c. Your Holinesse, which is the Head of all the holie Churches. And thence he concludeth, that the Emperour acknowledged this full and absolute autho­ritie of the Pope; and consequently, that all the Churches of the East did the like; not caring how manie pages he filleth with this argument. But to let passe, that the most learned Ciuilians of our time hold this Constitution as neither lawfull nor legitimate, it would trouble his conscience to haue all this Epistle E construed according to the letter: For first the inscription is onely this, To the holie Iohn, Archbishop of Rome and Patriarch, as the Emperour Iustin his prede­cessor had stiled him before. Doth this title, I would know, import an vniuer­sall charge and authoritie ouer all? But what then shall we say, when we see this verie Emperour, writing to Epiphanius Bishops of Constantinople, to vse these tearmes following,L. 7. & 8. Co. de summ. Trinit. To the most holie Archbishop of this royall Citie, and Oe­cumenicall, that is to say, Vniuersall Patriarch? What would Baronius haue said, had the Emperour so written to the Bishop of Rome? And farther, doth he [Page 95] A not vse the same tearmes vnto him which he doth vnto the other? We will (sayth he) that your Holinesse know all matters which belong to the State Ecclesiasticall: and we haue written to the same effect to the Pope of old Rome. And all this we read in an Epistle, which Baronius himselfe acknowledgeth to haue passed in nature of a pub­like Edict. Wherefore Baronius hath nothing to stand vpon but this, that the Em­perour saith, We endeuour to submit and to vnite vnto your Holinesse all the Bishops of the East. Which words Pope Iohn layed hold on with both his hands in his answer to this letter: where he telleth him, that among other his vertues this was most eminent, that he subiected all things to the See of Rome. And tell me I pray you, when he expoundeth this word subijcere by that other word vnire, doth he not B sufficiently explaine his meaning, which was to reduce them, not vnder the same dioces, but vnder the vnion of the same faith and true doctrine which the Church of Rome had kept: and such is the drift of this whole Epistle. Yea, but he calleth it the Head of all the holie Churches; true: but so doth he likewise, and that not by letter onely, but by an expresse law, pronounce the Church of Constantinople the Head of all other Churches: and Zeno the Emperour doth the like.Caput. l. 16. Co. de sacros. eccles. & l. 24. ibid. Baron. vol. 7. an. 534. art. 36. But had either of these therefore anie purpose to subject the Church of Rome to that of Constantinople? And if Baronius replie, that their meaning was of all the Chur­ches of the East, Why may not I as well say, that the other was likewise meant of all the Churches in the West? And because he will needs interpret this place by C the 131 Nouell, I would know what he can thence gather more than this,Nouel. 131. that the Bishop of old Rome should hold the first place, and he of Constantinople the second? which we denie not: but it followeth not that therefore the one is sub­ject to the other. But both of them stand vpon equall ground by the Canons of Constantinople and of Chalcedon, to the which the Emperour from the begin­ning promised to hold himselfe. For whereas he farther alledgeth the ninth No­uell, directed to Iohn the second, wherein he graunteth this priuiledge to the Church of Rome, that she shall not be prescribed but by an hundred yeares, cal­ling that Citie the Foundation of Lawes, and Fountaine of the Priesthood, not to say,Nouel. 10. in ed. Holoan. that this Nouell is not found in the Greeke, he should rather haue obserued, that D he is there called onely, The Patriarch of the Citie of Rome; that he distinguisheth in expresse tearmes betweene the Churches of the East and of the West, and graunteth the same priuiledge to them both, and had graunted into the Church of Constantinople seuen yeares before the other. Likewise, that which he enfor­ceth out of the 42 Nouell, directed to Mennas Patriarch of Constantinople,Nouel. 42. (which he here alledgeth before the time) That Pope Agapete had deposed the Patriarch Antymus, because he agreed not with the Church of Rome, is not truly alledged, and therefore it is that he doth not alledge the text it selfe. The truth is, that Agapete being then at Constantinople, presided in the Councell wherein Antymus was deposed. And this is that which the Emperour meaneth when he saith, That he was put from his See by Agapete, [...]. who then held the first See in the old Rome. But how was he deposed? it is there said, By the common suffrage of him and of the Synod there assembled. And the reason is also added, for that he vsurped the place, contrarie to the holie Canon, and had departed away from the sound do­ctrines of the holie Councels. And this deposition of him was also authorized by the Emperour in his 42 Nouell directed to the said Mennas, who is there againe qualified with the name of Vniuersall Patriarch: which place Holoander, for feare of the Popes displeasure, hath translated, Patriarch of all that quarter; whereas the word there vsed, [...], signifieth all the habitable earth.

[Page 96]Wherefore it is to be vnderstood, that all those Patriarchall Sees are sundrie A times called Oecumenicall, without prejudice of each to other, because the Bishops of those Churches being placed in the middest of the enemies of Christianitie, were alwaies taken as watchmen ouer the whole Church, who were to looke eue­rie man not to his owne peculiar charge onely, but to all in generall, that Sathan by schismes and heresies infected not the bodie of the Church; like vnto fellow tutors, who though by consent they administer euerie one his portion of the pu­pils goods apart, yet is euerie one of them answerable for the whole. Wherefore we see, that sometimes these Patriarchs without blame put their sickles into each others corne, and vpon the first alarme giuen by anie of these, they all sought pre­sently to procure an Oecumenicall Councell; which was then so esteemed and B called, when they all, or the greatest part of them, with their inferior Bishops, met in Synod; and as Rome, for the honour of the Citie, held alwaies the first roome in dignitie, so the Church there, for the grace which God had giuen her to keepe herselfe more cleane from heresies than anie other, was most respected, and the Bishop also of that Citie tooke place before the other Patriarchs, and in causes which arose, was euer consulted with much respect and reuerence; where­of Iustinian yeelded the cause, which was, for that (saith he) we haue sundrie times beene reformed by the Church of old Rome. L. 7. Co. de sum. Trinitat. But so soone as either the Pope, or anie other Patriarch began to abuse this honour, and to encroach thereby vpon the liberties of their fellowes, euerie man began presently to crie out of tyrannie C and oppression.

OPPOSITION.E

We haue seene how farre their ambition would haue gone: let vs now see how farre it went. For the case of Anthymus, Liberatus saith briefely, That Anthymus see­ing himselfe deposed at the suit of Pope Agapete, deliuered vp his Pall vnto the Empe­rour, and went his way; and that Agapete to content the Emperour, ordained and conse­crated Mennas in his place. But reason would, that in this case we should giue more credit to the Emperour Iustinian himselfe, in whose presence these things were done.Nouel. 42. He therefore telleth vs in his 42 Nouell, That Anthymus was cast out, being first condemned and deposed by the common consent and suffrage, [...]. as well of Agapete as [Page 99] A of the Synod. Where Baronius, by occasion of this word First, [...]. will needs shew a tricke of wit, and thence inferreth, that he was first deposed by Agapete, who vsed (saith he) therein the fulnesse of his power. Whereas the Emperours meaning was onely to shew a legall proceeding in the cause, and that nothing was done by vio­lence against him; as the word [...] doth properly signifie, not first, but before, Prius, non primum. with relation to that which followeth: as also those words, By the common suffrage of Agapete, what sence haue they, vnlesse they be joyned with that which follow­eth, and of the Synod? And so hath Holoander himselfe translated it. For how can the suffrage of one alone be tearmed common but onely in relation to some other man? Moreouer, if he by his full and absolute authoritie had deposed him, what B need was there thereof a Synod? And when they had done all, yet was the con­firmation of the Emperour necessarie thereunto, which he expresseth in the 42 Nouell in these words, Though this be a matter vnusuall to the Maiestie of a King, [...]. yet we also now set our hand to the making of this Decree and Ordinance: For so often as the generall suffrage of Priests and Bishops hath depriued anie of their Priestly Sees, as vn­worthie of their place and calling (such as were Nestorius, Eutyches, Arrius, Macedonius, Eunomius, and others not inferior to them in wickednesse and malice) so often hath the Regall dignitie contributed the vigor of her authoritie with the authoritie of sacred per­sons: Which tearmes expresse and declare, that the confirmation depended of him, not of Agapete, which had alreadie passed his sentence of him: [...]. To the end C(saith he) that both the diuine and secular authoritie may concurre, for the establishing of lawfull and iust decrees. But if perhaps the Emperors credit be not good, we can, for a need, produce the testimonie of Agapete himselfe, whose Synodall Epistle we find registred in the Acts of the fifth Generall Councell, written by him to all Bishops in the name of the Synod: where speaking in the name of the companie, he saith, We haue pronounced him vnworthie of all holie function: Concil. vniuers. quintum, act. 1. vbi ep. Synod. Agapeti. and speaking of the placing of Mennas in his roome, Though the Emperour (saith he) elected him, yet the whole Clergie and people gaue also their consent, so that he may well seeme to haue beene elected by all. What therefore doe we find in all this to proue the Popes authoritie, but onely a bare consecration, which anie other Metropolitan or Bi­shop D might haue done as well as he? onely being present,Baron. vol. 7. an. 536. art. 59. he was pleased him­selfe to grace him with that office. Here Baronius alledgeth a certaine writing ta­ken out of the Vatican, as he sayth, and which containeth the Acts of Agapete, during his abode at Constantinople; where he sayth simply, That Agapete thrust Anthymus out of the Church, and enioyned him his penance. But to goe no farther, he might as well haue obserued out of that Script which he alledgeth, that he is there onely called Antistes prima sedis, i. Priest or Bishop of the first See, and not Vniuersall Pope: as also that when Iustinian and he met, it is not there said as in the Pontificall Booke, That the Emperour adored him: but onely thus, The King and the Bishop kissed each other with a holie kisse, Rex & Ponti­fex sancta deli­bans oscula, & alter alterum veneratus. and each did reuerence E to the other; naming the Emperour as first in order. And againe, he might haue obserued, that the See of Constantinople is there called an Apostolike Throne, as well as that other of Rome. And of the ordination of Mennas it is there said, That the Ministers of the Church, to the great reioycing of the Catholike Emperour, tooke counsell to preferre him to that place, and recommended him to the Bishop Aga­pete, Praefuli. to ordaine him their Bishop: That Mennas then deliuered his confession to Pope A­gapete, who meant to present it with his owne hands to S. Peter at Rome: and that, this being done, he then obtained the vniuersall Bishopricke, by the imposition of hands of the Prince of all Bishops; Principe. whom a little before he called only the Bishop of [Page 100] the first See.Subiectarum sibi prouinciarum. Which word of Vniuersalitie, Baronius expoundeth, as meant on­ly A of those Prouinces which belong to his iurisdiction: And why then may not we make the like construction, when any man letteth fall the same, or the like word of the Pope of Rome? But this is much after their ordinarie Grammar, when by saying the Catholike Roman Church, they make a particular Vniuersall. And thus much for Agapete.

Baron. vol. 7. an. 540. art. 6, 7, 8, 9Now followeth Vigilius, whom Baronius immediatly after the murder of Sylue­rius, of an Antichrist, as he tearmed him before, now maketh Christs Vicar, and which is more, a verie Saint. He was no sooner set in his chaire, but presently he became a new man: Whereupon our Annalist crieth out, What a myracle is this from God vpon this chaire, which thus transformeth a bad man into a good▪ B And yet by all the particulars which himselfe deduceth at large in his election, it should seeme that God had no finger in it: All was of pure man, the authoritie of the Empresse, the force and violence of Belisarius, gained before hand by mo­ney, the feare of a present vprore in the citie if they had presumed to elect any o­ther, which made them in this election to leape ouer all Lawes and Canons of the Church: for these are his verie words. But let vs see whether there were any greater myracles wrought vpon him after his election.Anastas. in Vi­gilio. Anastasius Bibliothecari­us, not a flatterer, but a verie Idolater of the Popes, in the life of Vigilius, telleth vs, That he was no sooner established in his See, but the Romans presently accu­sed him before the Emperour: We make it knowne, say they, vnto your Maiestie,C that he dealeth ill with your seruants and people of Rome, and that we here accuse him of murder: He is growne so furious, that he gaue his Notarie a blow on the eare, which made him to fall downe dead at his feet: Also he commaunded a nephew of his, and his owne sisters sonne, to be beaten vnto death. And are these the myracles which this chaire worketh? Now vpon these complaints the Empresse, as it is there reported, sent Anthemius the Scribe to apprehend him by maine force, yea though he found him in the Church; and to bring him by sea sure prisoner to Constantinople: who following his commission, seised on him in Saint Cecils Church, and carried him away forthwith to ship him vpon the Tiber; the people following him with cursings, and casting stones at him, and crying out, Hunger and pestilence goe with D thee: Euill hast thou done vnto vs, and euill mayest thou find where euer thou commest. Baronius beleeueth nothing of all this which Anastasius reporteth; his reason is, because Procopius saith nothing of it:Procop. de bello Gothico. li. 3. And no maruell, seeing that the scope of Pro­copius was to write the warres of the Gothes, not the liues of the Popes. Now whe he was brought to Constantinople the Empresse chalenged him of his pro­mise,Baron. ib. an. 552. art. 11. which was, to restore Anthymus. Whereupon Baronius would faine cano­nize him for a Martyr, and presumeth to affirme, That in this man, when he now sat in Saint Peters chaire, Christ himselfe, not onely as he was man, but also as hee was God and man, sat also with him. Now whether this was the true cause, or onely a co­lour, I cannot say. But Anastasius reporteth, That they reproached him with the E murder of Syluerius, and of his owne Notarie, and of his sisters sonne, haling him along the streets with a rope about his necke. Nicepherus addeth farther, That he had excommunicated the Patriarch Mennas, whom his predecessor Agapete had him­selfe consecrated in the roome of Anthymus the Heretike, who excommunicated him againe, and could not forbeare his wonted violence: So that in the end, to stint these strifes,Ib. an. 553. there was a Councell called at Chalcedon. Baronius here ob­serueth, That Eutychius, who was chosen in the roome of Mennas, tendered the profession of his faith vnto Vigilius: and we on the contrary haue already shewed, [Page 101] A that this was a thing vsually practised among the Bishops. But he should ra­ther haue obserued, That in his letter he calleth him onely by the name of Brother, and Companion of the Priesthood; knowing, as he there saith, how much good procee­deth from the peace of God: And that in the end of the letter hee subscribeth him­selfe, Eutychius by the grace of God Bishop of Constantinople, without any reference to the Pope. Where also Baronius obserueth, That Eutychius requested Vigilius, That the difference which yet remained betweene the Orthodox, De Tribus Capi­tulis, might be referred to a Councell, in which your Beatitude may preside ouer vs, and where the holie Gospels may lye open before vs.

Well then, saith Baronius, by this it appeareth that he acknowledged his Pre­sidencie. B Which poynt deserueth to be handled somewhat more at large: And first we must see who called it. Baronius runneth to his old shifts, and saith, That the Emperour decreed it to be called, by the Pope Vigilius his aduise;Ib. art. 20, 21, 22, 23, 24. Euagr. li. 2. c. 37 being loath to speake plainely, and to confesse that he called it: and thereupon he citeth Eua­grius, where he saith, That Vigilius consented by his letters to the Councell (which he sent from Chalcedon, whither he had withdrawne himselfe at that present) but himselfe would not be at it. And why then will he not as well beleeue him, when he saith, That Iustinian called the fift Councell? or if Vigilius had called it while hee was present at the place, why did he afterward refuse to be present at it? The best is, that the Histories make this matter cleere ynough. Nicephorus saith,Nicephor. li. 17. ca. 27. That the C Emperour Iustinian called the fifth generall Councell, and summoned the Bishops out of all quarters. And the Emperour himselfe vnto the Fathers of the Councell: Wee haue, saith he, assembled you in this regall citie. And the Fathers themselues, We, say they, here assembled, according to the commaundement of the deuout Iustinian. And Baronius in that writing which he alledgeth vnto vs out of the Vatican, teacheth vs, That Vigilius did what lay in him to haue this Councell held in Sicilie, as a more in different place for the Bishops of the East and West to meet in; and yet he could not obtaine it. As for the Presidencie, it is euident, that at the first Mennas Bishop of Constantinople presided in it, and there gaue sentence a­gainst Anthymus and other Heretikes; which sentence is yet to be seene in the D bodie of the Councels. And after Mennas his death, Bellarmine cannot denie,Synod. Constant. quin. vniuersa. actio. 4. Bellar. li. [...]. de Concil. ca. 19. but that Eutychius, who succeeded him in the See, succeeded likewise in the Pre­sidencie: and the whole course of the Acts shew as much. But, saith he, Vigilius might haue presided if it had pleased him. It should seeme, by his leaue, that Ni­cephorus was of another opinion, when he saith, When Eutychius was by the Em­perour put in the roome of Mennas late deceased, Vigilius, though agreeing with him in poynts of doctrine, yet refused to sit by him: which was, no doubt, because he affected a higher seat; and thereupon, though he was at that time in the citie, yet would he not stay at the Councell, pretending that there was but a small number of the Westerne Bishops there: whereas the true cause was, because hee saw his E predominant omnipotencie neglected. Bellarmine replieth out of Zonaras, Zonar. to. 3. pa. 55. & 74. That Vigilius was chiefe of this Synod. How chiefe, if he were not there at all? But that place of Zonaras answereth for it selfe: There were, saith hee, 165 Fathers, [...], quorum princeps fuit, saith the Latine translation, that is, of whom was chiefe Vigilius Pope of Rome, and Eutychius, and Apollinaris of Alexandria: where we see that this word [...] is referred to all three, as Heads of these three Patri­archall Churches. So likewise he speaketh in another place of the sixt generall Councell, [...], i. of which were chiefe, or Captaines and Leaders, the Vicars of Aga­tho Pope of Rome, George of Constantinople, and Theophanes of Antioch: where the [Page 102] translator rendreth the word [...], by Principes fuere, and so are they vsually tear­med A as well the one as the other.Explanatio Sanctor. & ve­nerabil. Concili­orum &c. an. 1553. There is a booke intitled, The Explanation of the Holie Councels, taken out of the kings Librarie: this booke speaking of the Coun­cell of Nice, In that Councell, saith he, were Heads and Presidents, Syluester Bishop of Rome, Alexander of Alexandria, and Macarius of Ierusalem. And againe speaking of the second generall Councell, The Presidents there were Damasus Bishop of Rome, Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople, Timothie of Alexandria, Cyril of Ierusalem, Mile­tius of Antioch; all which were Patriarches: But he addeth afterwards, Great Gre­gorie the Diuine, Gregorie of Nissa, and Amphilochius of Iconium, by reason of their great learning: Zonar. to. 3. pa. 30. where Zonaras vseth a higher straine, and saith, That among all these Gregorie the Great, and Gregorie of Nissa, and the sacred Amphilochius, in all en­counters, B [...], i. were chiefe and principall: which word vsed in the singular num­ber by the Author, is by the Interpreter referred to all three, as was also that o­ther word [...], referred to Vigilius, Eutychius, and Apollinaris. And this same booke speaking of the Councell of Ephesus, saith in like manner, In this Councell presided Calestin Bishop of Rome, Cyril of Alexandria, Iuvenal of Ierusalem, Memnon of Ephesus. And so likewise of other generall Councels of Chalcedon, Constantino­ple, the second Nicene, and the rest; where the Greek words are, [...], and the Latine Interpreter rendreth it, Huic Concillo praefuerunt, i. They were chiefe in this Councell; naming alwayes the Pope for companie among the rest, and that most commonly when himselfe was not there in person, and sometimes no man C for him, as namely in the Councell which we now speake of. Bellarmine yet vr­geth out of that Epistle which Baronius alledgeth, That Eutychius Bishop of Con­stantinople, writing to Vigilius, saith vnto him, We desire to treat and to confer of these poynts together, Praesidente nobis vestra beatitudinè, that is, Vnder your blessed Presidencie. But this is to grate too farre vpon the plaine speaking of these letters, contrarie to all course of historie. And it is not improbable (which a lear­ned man hath obserued) that this place is corrupted,Iuni. Controuers. 4. pa. 186. and Praesidente written in stead of Residente, that is, While you are here abiding with vs; as we find this word vsed vpon like occasion in many other Councels:Concil. Matisco. 2. & passim. Residentibus Prisco Euantio, Praetexta­to, &c. that is, Assisting in the Councell: For at the first sitting of this Synod Vigilius D was in the citie; [...] & [...]. and if we should read Praesidente, yet there is a large difference be­tweene Preseancie, which importeth onely a prioritie of place, and Presidencie, which implieth a superioritie. But more than this, a great part of that acti­on is spent only in requesting him to be present at the Synod; and in the end they protest against him,Concil. Canstant. 5. art. 5. and openly reproach him. That he is an offence and scandall both to the Emperour and also to the Churches; as one which nought regarded the curse pro­nounced by our Sauiour, against those who offend euen little ones. Yet he stirred not, onely he sent them word, That they should receiue his aduise in writing. Now what can a man imagine to haue beene the cause of this his tergiuersation, but onely this, That he saw his pretended Presidencie neglected, and himselfe called E thither not to commaund, but onely to conferre; not to make shew of his om­nipotencie, but of his learning. So that in the end, for such his contempt against the authoritie both of the Emperour and of the Councel, he was cast into banish­ment; and hauing afterward by the meanes of Narses gotten leaue to returne home againe, he died by the way in Sicilie.

And thus we see that the calling of the generall Councels was not as yet de­uolued, nor did belong to the Bishop of Rome, no not so much as the calling of Nationall Synods: seeing that wee find the second Councell of Orleans, which [Page 103] A was held about this time, speaking in this manner: We, say the Fathers, being now to deliberat concerning the obseruation of the Catholike law, by the commaundement of the most glorious King, &c. and that other of Auvergne, That they were there as­sembled by the consent of our most renowmed Lord the King Theodebert: and so of o­thers. And which is more, Iustinian himselfe, whose fauour toward them they do so much magnifie and extoll, made no difficultie to create a Pope by his owne au­thoritie: which appeareth in that which Anastasius reporteth, and Baronius can­not denie it, That he put the citizens of Rome to their choise, Whether they would receiue Vigilius againe, or take Pelagius his Archdeacon to be their Bishop. Neither was this a matter of fact onely, but a lawfull right: For Onuphrius, Onuphr. in Pe­lag. 10.2. a man B of their owne, saith, and groundeth his saying vpon the authoritie of Vigilius, That when the Gothes were turned out of Italie by Narses, and both Italie and Rome were now annexed to the Easterne Empire, vnder the Emperour Iustinian, by the authoritie of Vigi­lius, there was brought in a new fashion to be obserued in the creation of Popes, which was, In Comitijs Pon­tificalibus. That so soone as the Pope was deceased, the Clergie, Senat, and People, should presently fall to the choise of another, after the custome of their forefathers. More maiorum. But the Pope so elected by them, might not be consecrated by the Bishops, vntill his election were first confirmed by the Emperour of Constantinople, and his pleasure herein signified by his letters patents, for the authorising him in the execution of his Pontificall iurisdiction: for which licence the Pope elect was to send the Emperour a certaine summe of money: (How farre is this from C that pretended donation?) which done, he was then consecrated, and took vpon him the administration of that See. Whereas before that time he was euer elected and consecrated all in a day. And it is certaine, that either Iustinian himselfe, or Vigilius by his autho­ritie, brought in this fashion; to the end that the Emperour might stand alwayes assured of the Popes inclination towards him, because his authoritie was growne great in Italie, since the time that the Emperors seated themselues in Greece: and the feare was, least that if a Pope should happen to be chosen either of a factious and turbulent disposition, or perad­uenture ill affected to the Emperour, he might by his authoritie draw Italie from his allea­geance, in fauour of the Gothes; a thing once before attempted by Syluerius, at least the Em­perour was so persuaded. And this custome, as he saith, and citeth many authors for D it, dured till the dayes of Benedict the second.

OPPOSITION.

The Bishops of Italie fearing some attempt against the Councell of Chalce­don, and purposing to be better informed of the matter, refuse to admit of that other of Constantinople at that present, especially those of Liguria, Venetia,Sigon. de Imper. Occident. l. 20. and Istria, and among them Macedonius Bishop of Aquileia, Honoratus of Milan, and Maximinian of Rauenna; all which presently assembled in Synod at Aquileia, to [Page 104] deliberat of the admittance or refusall of that Councell which Pelagius sought to A thrust vpon them: at which time Macedonius Archbishop of Aquileia fell sicke and died, and Honoratus Archbishop of Milan, consecrated Paulinus in his roome: and all with one consent reiected the Councell, vnder colour of certaine chapters therein contained, which pleased them not, and farther drew their neckes from vnder the yoke of the Roman Church. Pelagius then thought it high time to run to Narses, whom he requested by his letters, to send the chiefe of those Bishops prisoners to Constantinople, and to represse the rest by rigour of law, and his own authoritie. Where we may obserue, that he alledgeth not his owne interest, in that Paulinus was ordained Archbishop of Aquileia, without receiuing the Pall from him, but onely the interest of the Emperour: Seeing, saith he, that euen then b when Totilas possessed and held all this countrey in his subiection, he would neuer suffer a Bishop of Milan to be consecrated, vnlesse he had first acquainted the Prince with his ele­ction, and obtained leaue in writing from him: That therefore Narses should make no scruple to vse his authoritie vpon these fellowes, because such persons were by order of the Canons to be excommunicated; to be ordered by rigour if reason could not rule them. Narses hereupon grew so violent, that he drew an excom­munication from the Bishops vpon his owne head. Pelagius egged him on still by his letters, which we find recorded in the Councels, and reported by Sigonius and Baronius; and importuned him againe to send Honoratus and Paulinus prisones to Constantinople: vntill at length Narses apprehended some of them, made others C to flie the countrey; among the rest Vitalis Bishop of Altin fled to Meuce in Ger­manie. And hence it is that some writers hold opinion, That this Pelagius was the first which decreed, to pray in aid of the secular power, against such as stood condemned for schisme or heresie.

An. 556.Neither was he any thing better respected or obeyed in Tuscanie, which yet lieth euen at Rome gates; witnesse his owne letters which he wrot vnto Gaudenti­us, Baron. vol. 7. an. 556. art. 31. Maximilian, Gerontius, Iustus, Terentius, Vitalis, and Laurence, his beloued bre­thren (as he tearmeth them) throughout Tuscanie: where he complaineth, That they had separated themselues from him, and consequently from the communion of all the world, in not mentioning his name in the ordinarie seruice of the Church. All D which Bishops certainely tooke not the See of Rome, much lesse euerie one that should come to sit thereon, as infallible in points of faith; seeing that Pelagius himselfe was faine, for his owne discharge, to send vnto them the confession of his faith: as it appeareth by that Epistle. As for those other Bishops of Venetia and Istria, they proceeded so farre, as to constitute and ordaine the Bishop of A­quileia Ouerseer of their Church, by the name of Patriarch; a knot which the Popes were neuer afterward able to vndoe:Baron. vol. 7. an. 570. art. 11. and Baronius himselfe giueth that Patriarchship no other beginning than this.

As for France, he was as little obeyed there as in any place whatsoeuer: For the second Councell of Tours saith,Iuxta conni­ventiam. That they were there assembled by the sufferance E and permission of the most renowmed king Cheribert: and the fift of Orleans, That they were assembled by Childebert, to learne from the mouth of these Fathers what was holy. Pela. in Epist. ad Childibert. in 2. tom. Concilio. And the like is to be seene in the second Councell of Paris, where Pelagius writing vnto Cheribert then king, What paine, saith he, ought wee to take to free our selues from scandall and suspition, by presenting to you the obedience and dutie of our confession: that is, to giue them an account of their true beliefe and Orthodox pro­fession: adding a reason farre different from the learning of these times, For that, saith he, the holie Scriptures doe commaund, that we also be subiect to higher powers. [Page 105] A Which Epistle is also taken into the Decret. And to conclude, the first Councell of Paris decreed, That so often as Bishoprickes fell void,Synod. Paris. ca. 8. to. 2. Concil. Satisdandum 25. q. 1. prouision should bee made by the joynt election of Clergie and people; and that the Metropolitan, as­sisted by the Bishops of his owne Prouince, or of some Prouince next adjoyning, should consecrate and ordaine him, according to the ancient Canons, without a­ny reference at all to Rome: though we find, that euen at this verie time Iohn the third, successor to Pelagius, pursued the chase of his predecessors, writing not on­ly to the Bishops, but to all in generall in France and Germanie, in manner fol­lowing: We will and commaund, that you and euerie of you, all Bishops also and Priests whatsoeuer, to obserue all the Decretals and ordinances of our predecessors, in matters B belonging to the Church: And if any shall attempt the contrarie, let him know that there is no place for repentance left vnto him. Yet we find,Greg. Turon. l. 8. c. 20. that Vrsicin Bishop of Cahors at that verie time was excommunicated in the Synod of Mascon, which was there called by the commaundement of king Gontran, for entertaining Gombalt, who then stood out in rebellion against him: and that vpon his humble confession, and penitent acknowledgement of his fault, they enjoyned him, not to cut either his haire or his beard, neither yet to drinke wine, nor to eat flesh, nor to celebrate the office, neither yet to minister the Communion, during the space of three yeares. An euident token, that these Bishops assembled in Synod, held still in their owne hands an absolute authoritie ouer their delinquent brethren. And no maruell if C these Bishops which dwelt so farre off made so light of the Popes commands, see­ing that euen vnder his nose the Archbishops of Aquileia, Rauenna, and Milan, held their owne against him; especially he of Rauenna, which citie the Emperor Honorius and his successors had made the seat of the Empire, from thence to looke a little neerer, and to see what was doing in the East: and where, at that time, Iusti­nus the second had commaunded Longinus his Exarcke, or Vicar generall of the Empire in Italie, to reside, with power to commaund ouer all Dukes and other officers of those Prouinces: who vpon the first entrance of the Lombards into Italie, planted strong garrisons in euerie citie of defence, especially in Rome and Rauenna. Whence it ensued, that the Pope could doe nothing in temporal mat­ters, D by reason of the presence of the Exarck, who did all in all: and in spirituall af­faires he was faine to keepe himselfe within his owne bounds, because he saw that his spirituall authoritie, which as a shadow followeth euer the bodie of the tem­porall power, grew towards the wane, and minished as that other of Rauenna, en­creased.

Neither was that his power at all acknowledged at Aquileia and Milan,Sigon. de Regno Italiae li. 1. where the Archbishops pretended, That they held not of the See of Rome: not at A­quileia, because as Rome gloried in Saint Peter, so did she in the Euangelist Saint M [...]ke, as first founder of her Church, which had since that time beene ennobled with sundrie holie Bishops and Martyrs: Not at Milan, because her Church was first founded by Barnabas the Apostle, and after that honoured by the Bishoprick of Saint Ambrose; and had either of them a multitude of Suffragant Bishops vnder them: and peraduenture they thought that tradition of Saint Peters chaire not to be all of the truest, and easier to be said than proued. And this is that which Sigonius reporteth, though a writer of their owne:Guicciard. Hi­stor. li. 4. and which Guic­ciardine also deliuereth in these words, In this time (saith he, meaning of the Ex­archat) the Bishops of Rome had nothing to doe in matters temporal: and because the beau­tie of their ancient manners and pietie was now decayed, men had them not in such admi­ration and reuerence as before; but they liued vnder the commaund and subiection of the [Page 102] [...] [Page 103] [...] [Page 104] [...] [Page 105] [...] [Page 106] Emperours and Exarchs, without whose leaue and licence they might not accept, or pre­sume A to execute the office of the Bishopricke, though chosen by the Clergie and people of the Citie: and which is more, the Bishops of Constantinople and of Rauenna, because the Seat of Religion vsually followeth the Seat of the Empire, began now to contest, and to quar­rell him vpon the point of Primacie. And of this we shall find examples in that which followeth.

OPPOSITION.

This Pelagius therefore, so soone as the siege was broken vp, tooke heart, and wrote his letters,2. To. Concil. in decret. Pelag. 2. directed To all the Bishops who by the vnlawfull calling of Iohn the Patriarch (for so he speaketh of him) were assembled in Synod at Constantinople: wherein hauing flourished a while with his Tu es Petrus, at length he telleth them, That they ought not to assemble themselues without the authoritie of this See:E That their present assemblie, without him, was no Councell, but a verie Conuen­ticle: That therefore they should presently breake vp that meeting, vnlesse they would be excommunicated by the See Apostolike: to conclude, That they ought not to acknowledge Iohn as Vniuersall Bishop, vnlesse they purposed to depart a­way from the Communion of all other Bishops. And let no Patriarch (saith he) vse so prophane a title: for if the chiefe Patriarch (meaning himselfe) should be called Vni­uersall, the name of a Patriarch should thereby be taken from all others. But God forbid that it should euer fall into the heart of a Christian to assume anie thing vnto himselfe, [Page 107] A whereby the honour of his brethren may be debased. For this cause I in my Epistles ne­uer call anie by that name, for feare least by giuing him more than is his due, I might seeme to take away euen that which of right belongeth to him. Which clause is word for word inserted by Gratian into his Decrees, saue only, that in stead of S [...]inus Patriarcha, that is, Chiefe Patriarch, as it is in the Epistle, he hath Vnus. D. 99. c. Nullin 4. And yet the summarie of that verie chapter, euen in the late edition of Gregorie the thirteenth, is this, That the Bishop of Rome himselfe may not be called Vniuersall. But Pelagius goeth on, and giueth the reason of that his saying: For (saith he) the di­uell our aduersarie, goeth about like a roaring Lion, exercising his rage vpon the humble and meeke hearted, and seeking to deuoure not now the Sheepcoats, but the verie princi­pall B members of the Church &c. And, Consider my brethren what is like to ensue &c. For he commeth neere vnto him of whom it is written, This is he which is King ouer all the children of pride: which words I spake with griefe of mind, seeing our brother and fellow Bishop Iohn, in despight of the commaundement of our Sauior, the precepts of the Apostles, and Canons of the Church, by this haughtie name, to make himselfe his forerunner; that is, of Antichrist: alluding manifestly to that place of the Apostle in his Epistle to the Thessalonians, where he calleth him [...], that is to say, Lifted vp, or which lifteth himselfe vp aboue all that is called God, or Deitie. And farther he addeth a second reason, which our best disguisers cannot put off, which is,Vniuersa & omnia quae soli vni capiti cohae­rent videlicet Christo. That hereby Iohn went about to attribute to himselfe all those things which belong C properly to the Head himselfe, that is Christ, and by the vsurpation of this pompous title to bring vnder his subiection all the members of Christ: which, as he saith, procee­ded from the Tempter, who tempted our first father, by casting vnto him the like bait of pride. And now tell me, whether all that which the Bishops of Rome haue since that time attempted in like manner, can proceed from anie other spirit. But he goeth on, willing them to take heed least the poyson of this word proue fatall in the end to the poore members of Christ: for that if this title be once graunted to him, there are no longer anie Patriarchs left in the Church: and so it might come to passe, that if Iohn himselfe should happen to die in this his error, there should not be left a Bishop in the Church, persisting in state of truth &c. That they must beware that this tentation D of Sathan preuaile not ouer them: to conclude, that they neither giue nor take his title of Vniuersall Bishop. And yet euer by the way he putteth them in mind of the Canons of Nice, in fauour of the Primacie of his owne See, to which all matters of importance (saith he) ought to be referred: and yet, as we haue alreadie declared, no such matter. And Gregorie, at that time his Deacon,Gregor. li. 4. ep. 38. & l. 7. ep. 69. and afterwards his succes­sor in the Popedome, in his Epistle which he wrote to Iohn vpon this verie argu­ment, Thou (saith he) which acknowledgest thy selfe vnworthie to haue beene made a Bishop, doest thou in disdaine of thy brethren make thy selfe sale Bishop in the Church? Intimating thereby, that there is no difference whether we call him Sole, or else Vniuersall Bishop. And concerning the Councell held at Constantinople in the E case of Gregorie Bishop of Antioch,Propter nefan­dum elationis vocabulum. Pelagius (saith he) disannulled the Acts of that Synod, because of this execrable name of pride; and forbad the Archdeacon, which accor­ding to the custome he sent Ad vestigia Dominorum, i. to the feet of the Lords, i. the Emperours (let the Reader obserue these words) to celebrate the solemne seruice of Masses with thee. And in like manner wrote he also to the Bishop of Thessaloni­ca. And this is that which passed in those daies betweene the two Bishops of Rome and of Constantinople. Where we obserue, that Pelagius absolutely con­demneth both the name and office of an Vniuersall Bishop; which none offereth to vsurpe and take vnto himselfe, but onely he which is the forerunner of Anti­christ; [Page 108] as being an honour due to Christ, to whom onely and properly it doth ap­pertaine.A

An. 580.Moreouer we may obserue, that about this time, when Chilperic King of France had assembled a Synod of Bishops at Paris, to judge of the cause of Praetextatus, Bishop of Rouen (whom he had formerly exiled, vntill the next Synod which should be called) he declared openly vnto them, that he had cause ynough to con­demne him for the enormitie of his crimes, that yet he brought him forth, there to be heard and judged by them, that he might not seeme to doe anie thing con­trarie to the Canons.Antiquit. de Fauchet, to. 1. fol. 212. & 218. And then Gregorie Bishop of Cahors (though fauouring the person of Praetextatus) stood vp and said, If anie of vs offend, it is in thy power, O King, to punish vs. Whereupon, notwithstanding the ernest suit that was made B for him, they proceeded against him, vpon his confession condemned him, and cast him into banishment. So likewise King Gontran commaunded a Synod to be called at Chaalons,Gregor. Turon. l. 5. c. 18. Aimon. Mo­nach. l. 3. c. 26, 27, 28. vpon the riuer of Saosne (or as Gregorie of Tours reporteth, at Lions) against Salonin Bishop of Ambrum, and Sagittarius of Gap; where there were manie crimes of high nature layed vnto their charge, for which they were degraded and deposed from their charges: in which Synod Nicetius Bishop of Lions presided, whom Gregorie of Tours calleth by the name of a Patriarch. It fell out after a time, that these complained of injustice and wrong done vnto them, and thereupon became petitioners to the King, That the Bishop of Rome might review their cause; which he graunted: and to that effect, at the instance C of their friends in Court, wrot vnto him; yet not as of a matter of right belon­ging to his jurisdiction, but as Constantine long before wrote vnto Miltiades Bi­shop of Rome, and others, in the case of the Donatists. The words of Gregorie of Tours are these, They knowing that the King was fauourably inclined towards them, asked leaue to goe to the Pope of the Citie of Rome, which by his letters he permitted them to doe. Baron. vol. 7. an. 570. art. 23. & 24. An. 589. Now vpon this example Baronius inferreth, that it was belonging to the Popes ordinarie jurisdiction to appeale from the Synods in France to Rome: but had it beene so, they would no doubt, immediatly vpon sentence giuen, haue put in their Appeale to Rome, and not haue gone by way of request vnto the Prince. And as for authoritie of calling Nationall Councels, we find another Sy­nod D called about the same time at Valentia, in the 24 yeare of the reigne of Gon­tran, wherein the Fathers speake in this manner, We (say they) here assembled in the Citie of Valentia, Ex imperio. by the commaundement of the glorious and renowmed King Gon­tran: And the Bishops of those other Synods of Mascon and Chaalons speake in like manner,Ex iussu. saying, That they were assembled by the commaundement of Prince Gontran. And Gregorie of Tours speaketh of them after the same fashion. And in the third Synod of Toledo, When as (say they) the renowmed King Recared had commaunded all the Pontifes or Bishops to assemble themselues &c. And Recared him­selfe in his letter to them, We (sayth he) haue commaunded you to assemble in this Synod. But because this Councell is famous, by reason of the conuersion both of E the King and also of the people of the Gothes, which was there wrought, Baro­nius chalengeth this honour as due vnto Pelagius the second: For this Generall Councell (sayth he) was not held without the priuitie, consent, and authoritie of Pela­gius. And farther he addeth, That Leander Bishop of Seuille was there in qualitie of Legat from the Pope. But when as the Fathers of that Councell, and when Leander himselfe saith, The king hath commaunded vs, what hath he to replie? Seeing also, that we find no mention made of Leander in anie such qualitie, nor yet of the Pope himselfe: and seeing that Leander himselfe in that Oration which [Page 109] A he made, with thanksgiuing vnto God, for the conversion of the King and of his nation, carrieth himselfe in no such qualitie: and that the king himselfe was the first which signed the Councell: and then follow the Metropolitans of Merida in Portugall, and of Toledo, namely, Mausonius and Euphemius; and Leander in the third place, with the addition onely of Metropolitan of the Prouince of Betica. And I would but know of Baronius, whether this be a meet place for a Popes Le­gat to stand in or no; moreouer, in some copies there is no mention at all made of his subscription; and lastly Isidore neither in his Chronicle, nor yet in the life of Leander, speaketh aught of his Legatship: so that a man may well say, that Baronius here speaketh more like a dreamer than an Annalist. The like is of that B Councell, which the same Recared caused to be held at Narbone, a Citie at that time of his dominions; which Councell Baronius produceth for himselfe: and yet there the Fathers say that they were assembled per ordinationem, by the ordi­nance of the most renowmed Recared. Neither may we forget a certaine Canon which was made in that Councell, namely,Baron. vol. 8. an. 598. art. 30. extra locum. That no Clergie man might weare Scar­let, it being a colour more properly belonging to worldlie pompe and ostentation, than to anie dignitie of Religion, whose inward deuotion ought to shew it selfe by the outward habit of the bodie, and because the Scarlet Robe belongeth rather to lay men which are in authoritie, than to professors of Religion. And there also is a certaine punishment inflicted vpon the transgressors of this Canon. Baronius to justifie the vse of Scar­let C in his Clergie, alledgeth the example of the High Priests of the Iewes, which went sometimes clothed with Scarlet, as if he meant to bring vs backe againe to Iudaisme. But to returne to our former matter; the quarrell of the Bishops of Istria and Venetia, who would acknowledge no subjection to the Bishop of Rome, continued as before:Pelag. ep. 1. ad Episcopos Istria. and it appeareth out of the Epistles of Pelagius the second, though we haue not theirs, that they questioned and debated his Title, seeing that he in his Epistles complaineth, that they had sent him an answere in nature of a definitiue sentence: and seeing also that he paineth himselfe so much in telling them, That Leo neuer ratified the Councell of Chalcedon, but onely for points of faith, and that he retracted and disannulled all the rest; meaning espe­cially D that Canon wherein Bishops, as well himselfe as others, are taught to know their places. But all his eloquence would not serue him: whereupon he was faine to practise with Smaragdus the Exarch to force them to obedience. Smaragdus (saith Paulus Diaconus) comming from Rauenna to Grado, Pau. Diaco. l. 3. de gestis Lon­gobard. c. 27. drew Seuerus with his owne hand out of the Temple, and carried him by force to Rauenna, with three other Bishops of Istria, Iohn Parencius, Seuerus, and Vindemius, whom he constrained through feare of banishment and other violence to communicate with Iohn Bishop of Rauenna. But Paulus Diaconus addeth farther, That when at the yeres end they were returned from Rauenna to Grado, hauing, I warrant you, first giuen full contentment to the Pope, the people E refused to communicat with them, and the other Bishops would not receiue them.

OPPOSITION.B

Gregor. li. 4. ep. [...]4. Gregorie much offended with those letters, wrote presently both to the Empe­rour Maurice himselfe, and to Constantia the Empresse: To the Empresse, that Maurice indeed had done like a godlie and religious Prince, in commaunding the obseruance of such Christian duties to men of the Church, But farre be it (saith he) that your time should be thus defiled by the exaltation of one man: [...] alluding manifestly to him which is said to be exalted or lifted vp, in the second Epistle to the Thessa­lonians, cap. 2. neither may it euer be said, that you gaue way to this crooked name of Vni­uersall. And againe, It is an insufferable thing, that he should seeke to be called the Sole Bishop. By which it appeareth, that to be called Vniuersall Bishop and Sole Bishop was all one in his construction. And he addeth farther, By this arrogancie and pride C (saith he) what else is portended, but that the time of Antichrist is now at hand: in that he imitateth him (Lucifer) who making light of that happinesse which he possessed in common with the whole Armie of the Angels, would needs aspire to a singularitie aboue all the rest: saying, as it is in the 14 chapter of Esay, I will exalt my Throne aboue the starres of heauen &c. and will be like to the Almightie. And to the Emperor he wrote much after the same manner,Epist. 32. All those (saith he) which haue read the Gospell know well what the Lord said vnto Peter &c. The Care and Primacie of the whole Church is committed vnto him, yet is he not called the Vniuersall Apostle, and yet behold my fellow Priest Iohn seeketh to be called the Vniuersall Bishop: Consacerdos meus Iohannes. I am now forced to crie out, O the times, and O the manners of men, Europe is now exposed for a prey to the Barbarian, and D yet the Priests, who should lie along in the dost vpon the pauement, weeping and rolling themselues in ashes, seeke after names of vanitie, and boast themselues of their newfound prophane titles. By which words he plainely condemneth this title of Vniuersall, as well in all others as in Iohn, and thereupon in opposition to him, he tooke vnto himselfe first of all the Appellation of the Seruant of Seruants: which title his suc­cessors after him haue vsed vntill this day. But Gregorie proceeded yet farther, and joyned to him Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria, and Anastasius of Antioch, as in a common cause, requiring them to helpe stop this breach against the torrent of this his pride and eleuation. And he would faine haue persuaded them, that the Coun­cell of Chalcedon did offer that title to the Bishop of Rome,Epist. 36. (which yet we haue E formerly shewed out of the whole proceedings of that Councell to be notoriou­sly false) but that none of his predecessors would accept of so prophane a title, And God forbid (saith he) that this should euer enter into the heart of a Christian, requesting them neuer hereafter to call anie man by that name in their Epistles, and repeateth that saying of Pelagius, That he of whom it is written, This is he which is King ouer all the children of pride, is neere at hand. And that Iohn by thus exalting himselfe, maketh himselfe his forerunner, and assumeth to himselfe that which belongeth onely to the Lord Iesus. And vsing no lesse libertie of stile, he wrot vnto Iohn himselfe, When thou wert [Page 111] A called (saith he) to the office of a Bishop, thou saidst, that thou wert not worthie to be called a Bishop, and now thou wouldest haue none a Bishop but thy selfe▪ &c. What wilt thou an­swer vnto Christ, who is the true Head of the Vniuersall Church, in that day of iudgement, seeing that by this name of Vniuersall thou seekest to enthrall all the members of his Bodie vnto thy selfe? whom doest thou imitate herein, saue onely him, who in contempt of those Legions of Angels which were his fellowes, sought to mount aloft to the top of singularitie, where he might be subiect to none, and all others subiect vnto him? that is to say, Lucifer: And he doubteth not to applie vnto him that which is said in the 14 of Esay. Verily (saith he) the Apostle Peter was the principall member of the Vniuersall Church: as for Paule, Andrew, Iohn, and the rest, what were they but onely the chiefe of their particular B assemblies, and yet all they members of the Church vnder one Head &c. yet would none of those presume to call himselfe Vniuersall, neither doth anie other assume that name vnto himselfe, who is truly holie &c. and consequently, neither S. Peter himselfe, nor the Bishop of Rome, who claimeth from him. But heare what followeth, My little children (saith he) this is the later time, which Christ himselfe foretold: the pestilence and the sword now deuoure the earth &c. all prophesies are now fulfilled, the King of Pride is at the gates, and which I dread to speake, Sacerdotum. an armie of Priests or Bishops standeth readie to receiue him: for they who were appointed to chalke out the way of meekenesse and of humi­litie, are now in pay vnder that necke of Pride which lifteth it selfe vp: Ceruici militant elationis. meaning by the King of Pride Antichrist, who relieth vpon the strength of his gard, which are the C Clergie, of whose eleuation S. Paule had spoken in the second to the Thessaloni­ans, cap. 2. and Gregorie in this and sundrie other places speaketh after him, and by warrant from him. And we must here note, that he charged his Deacon Sabinian not to communicate with Iohn, if he renounced not this pretended title of Vniuer­sall Bishop. And when Cyriacus, who succeeded vnto Iohn, persisted in the waies of his predecessor, he wrote againe to Anastasius Bishop of Antioch in this manner: I haue receiued (saith he) his Synodall Epistle, Epist. 34. wherein he requireth vs not to trouble the peace of the Church; and I haue likewise aduertised him of that superstitious and haugh­tie name of Vniuersall Bishop, that he could haue no peace with vs, vnlesse he did reforme the haughtinesse of this word &c. otherwise (saith he) we corrupt the faith of the Vniuer­sall D Church &c. and not to speake of the wrong which he doth vnto vs, Eleuationem. if there be one called Vniuersall Bishop, then must the Vniuersall Church goe to the ground, if he which is Vni­uersall happen to fall: but neuer may such foolerie befall vs, neuer may this weaknesse come vnto my eares. But to Cyriacus himselfe he wrot, requesting him, at his first entrie to abolish that word of pride, by which there was so great scandale giuen in the Church: for whosoeuer (saith he) is desirous of honour contrarie to the honour of God, shall neuer be accounted honourable by me; tearming this title of Vniuersalitie a thing contrarie to God and to his honour: And because Antichrist, that enemie of the Almightie, Epist. 28. is now at hand, my earnest desire (saith he) is, that he may find nothing of his owne, or anie waies appertaining to him, either in the manners, or in the names of the Priests. And E when the Emperour Maurice commanded, that for a friuolous name there should no such scandale arise betweene them, Consider (saith he) vnto the Emperour, that when Antichrist shall call himselfe God, the matter it selfe is but small and friuolous, yet most pernitious: if you looke to the qualitie of the word, it consisteth only of two sillables, but if you regard the weight of iniquitie which dependeth thereon, you shall see an vniuersall ene­mie. Wherefore I speake it boldly, that whosoeuer calleth himselfe, or desireth to be called by others, the Vniuersall Priest or Bishop, is in his elation of mind the forerunner of Antichrist; because that in like pride he preferreth himselfe before others; like, I say, for that as that wic­ked one would seeme as God aboue all men, so will this man exalt himselfe aboue all Bishops. [Page 112] And in like manner writeth he to Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria.Epist. 30. And that no A man may say, That Gregorie went to take away that from another, which he yet re­serued as due vnto himselfe, in his Epistle to the same Eulogius, he thus writeth: You haue beene carefull, saith he, to aduertise me, That you forbeare now to write vnto a­ny, by those proud names which spring meerely from the root of vanitie; and yet speaking to me, you say, Sicut iussistis, i. As you commaunded. Let me, I pray you, heare no more of this word Commaund: for I know well ynough both what I am, and what you are. In de­gree you are my Brethren, and in maners you are my Fathers. Wherefore I commaunded you nothing, onely I aduised you what I thought fittest to be done. And yet I do not find that you haue perfectly obserued that which I desired to leaue deepest grauen in your best remembrance; for I told you, That you should not write in any such manner either to me,B or to any other, and yet in the verie Preface of your Epistle you call me by that name of pride and vanitie, Vniuersall Pope; which I would intreat you to forbeare hereafter, see­ing that your selues lose whatsoeuer you giue vnduely to another. For my owne part, I seeke to encrease in vertue, and not in vanitie of Titles. That addeth nothing to my ho­nour, which I see taken from my brethren; my honour is the honour of the Vniuersall Church, and the sound vigour of my brethren. Then am I truely honoured, when my bre­thren haue euerie man his due. For if you call me Vniuersall Pope, you denie your selues to bee that which indeed you are, in that you call me Vniuersall: but God forbid, let vs rather put farre from vs these words, which puffe vs vp to pride and vanitie, and woun­deth charitie to the death. Distinct. 99. c. Ecce. in praefa­tio. 5. All which part of his Epistle is inserted in the Decret; C which Gregorie the thirteenth, in his Reformation of the Canon Law, knew not how to redresse, but onely by giuing S. Gregorie the flat lye.

Now we may not for all this thinke that Gregorie would lose any thing of his owne, or was carelesse to set foot and to encroach vpon another mans; for it ap­peareth by his Epistles, that he spread his wings as farre, and farther than his neast would giue him leaue, taking all occasions to gaine credit, and to be dealing not onely in Italie, but also in other more remote Prouinces of the West; ma­king himselfe sometimes arbitrator betweene parties, and sometimes Iudge of controuersies betweene Church and Church, and eftsoones a sanctuarie and re­fuge for those who had beene censured and cast out by their own Metropolitans; D whereof we haue but too many examples in his Epistles. And if we will ground our opinion vpon certaine Epistles which goe commonly vnder his name, he was the first which brought in the Pall of the Archbishops, which was a certaine Man­tle or Cloake, which he sent vnto them in honour, thereby to oblige them to the subiection of his See, namely to Virgilius Bishop of Arles, and by vertue thereof conferred vpon him his Vicarship ouer the Churches of king Childebert, with power to watch ouer their doctrine and behauiours. But it hath beene right well obserued, that those Epistles are of another growth, because the whole course of the Historie of Gregorie of Tours, who liued in the same time with Gregorie the Great, sufficiently teacheth vs, That the authoritie of our Prelats and Archbi­shops E depended not of the Popes, neither did they euer heare talke of that Pall: which is more than probable,Greg. li. 4. Epist. 51. & 52. because that in so many changes of Bishops and Metropolitans, as we read of, we find no mention at all made thereof. Where­fore those words,Idem ad Inter­roga. Augustin. ca. 9. Quod iuxta antiquum morem Pallij vsum, ac vices Apostolicae sedis postulasti: And, Cum priscam consuetudinem Fraternitas vestra repetat, by which they say, That Virgilius requested of Gregorie the vse of the Pall, and the Vicarship of the Roman See, according to the ancient custome, were ill deuised. And how vnlike­ly a thing is it, that Childebert should intreat the Pope to commit the ouersight [Page 113] A and charge of the Churches of his kingdome to the Bishop of Arles, who was at that time subiect to king Gontran, with whom hee might in time vpon occasion haue open warre? Adde we hereunto, That notwithstanding this pretended Pall, Gregorie expresly forbad Augustine his Legat, to exercise any jurisdiction ouer the Churches of France: We, saith he, giue you no authoritie in the Churches of France, &c. Thou mayest not presume to iudge them by thine authoritie, but onely by warning and speaking them faire, and by making thy vertues to shine before them: To doe other­wise than this, were to thrust thy sickle into another mans corne. Wherefore what euer is to be done by authoritie leaue vnto the Bishop of Arles, whose iurisdiction reacheth as far as to Lions. The like may be said of that Pall, which, they say, was sent to Siagri­us B Bishop of Authun: and many such forgeries may we find in those Epistles, as we may ghesse by the priuiledge there granted to S. Medard Bishop of Soissons, bearing date the yeare 593, Indictione 2, whereunto Theodoric his hand is set, as if he had beene then raigning in Soissons; who yet was neuer there, and was scarce of age to speake, at what time that priuiledge beareth date: neither did the Popes of that time date after the manner which is there expressed. But this I say, that Gregorie had that name of Vniuersal Bishop in such abhomination, that as he con­demned it in another, so he would neuer accept thereof in himselfe, being verily persuaded, that whensoeuer it came to be accepted, the morrow after Antichrist should set foot into the Church.

C It remaineth now, that we see what Baronius replieth to all this.Baron. vol. 8. an. 595. art. 27. Saint Grego­rie, saith he, imitated our Sauiour, who stroue not with Sathan in his diuine Maiestie, but in the humble and low estate of his flesh. A weake ward to beare off so great a blow: for did Christ, to ouerthrow Sathan, play Sathan himselfe? For what else did Gregorie, when he called euerie man the forerunner of Antichrist, and Sathan himselfe, if in the meane time he reserued this high Title and prerogatiue to him­selfe? Secondly he saith, That Gregorie would not indeed be called Vniuersall,Ib. art. 32, 33, 34 as Father of all the world, because the other Bishops were not his children, but his bre­thren. But in another sence, saith he, he doth not refuse it, namely, that they re­maining his brethren and fellow Bishops, he might yet bee reputed and taken as D superiour vnto all. In which sence he calleth himselfe by that Title in his Epistle Of the Priuiledges of Saint Medard, to all Bishops. But I would learne, where they can find a ground for this distinction in Saint Gregories owne words, seeing that he so often repeateth these and the like words, That none would euer be called by that name: and taketh offence that his brethren the Patriarches call him so, and recko­neth thereof as of a great wrong done vnto him. Me thinke so great an Annalist should haue brought some better proofe than that priuiledge of S. Medard, which who so doth but see it, condemneth presently as a fable, and which himselfe con­fesseth to be subscribed by those Bishops which were not at that time created Bi­shops, namely, by Augustine Bishop of Canterburie, and Mellitus Bishop of E London, whereas they were not yet passed ouer into England. And how came Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria to subscribe this priuiledge? Neither did Theodo­ric at that time raigne in France, as Baronius himselfe confesseth,Ib. art. 81. an. 593. but Childebert and Gontran. And who can warrant vs, that there is more truth in the priuiledge it selfe than there is in the subscription? or is not the falshood of the subscription ynough to ouerthrow the instrument it selfe? And yet is he not ashamed of this false coyne, clipt by himselfe, and rounded at his pleasure, but vseth this forged instrument not onely as a law to bind vs poore men withall, but euen as a defini­tiue sentence against the liues and Crownes of Princes: For, saith hee, Gregorie [Page 112] [...] [Page 113] [...] [Page 114] pronounceth, That Sedes Roma speculationem suam toti orbi indicit: i. The See of Rome A enioyneth her speculation to all the world, and sendeth out her new constitutions vnto all. Perfect good Latine, no doubt: but he goeth on, If any King, Bishop, or Iudge, vi­olate or infringe the Decrees of our Apostolike authoritie, and of this our commaundement, of what degree or estate soeuer he be, let him be depriued of his honour, and cut off from the communion of Christ: that is, saith Baronius, Kings from their kingdomes, for violating the priuiledge of one poore hospitall:Greg. 7. li. 8. Epist. 21. & li. 4. Epist. 2. & 23. And so did Gregorie the seuenth vnderstand and extend these words. And is it then possible, that hauing himselfe cried downe this Epistle, he will now so much enhaunce the price of this base coyne? Thirdly, saith he, when Pelagius, predecessor vnto Gregorie, saith in his first Epistle, That no Patriarch may presume to vse this prophane name, his meaning B was, that none of the foure Patriarches of the East should vse it, to the exclusion of him of Rome; that is in effect, to take it from them, and to appropriat it to himselfe. And for proofe he alledgeth a certaine Epistle of Gregorie to Natalis; where indeed he speaketh of foure Patriarches,Epist. 37. li. 2. but not a word to this purpose. But not to goe farther, a man that readeth the text it selfe, had need to blush for him which cannot blush for himselfe; for these words follow immediatly vpon the former,Pela. 2. Epist. 1. ad vniuers. Epise. If, saith he, the Soueraigne and chiefe Patriarch (such as hee supposeth himselfe to be in all that Epistle) be called Vniuersall, then is the name of Patriarch ta­ken from all others: but farre be this from the thought of a Christian. Which then of these two did he? Did he giue the Title of Soueraigne Patriarch to any one of C the Patriarches of the East? or did he denie himselfe to be a Christian? or when he forbiddeth them to giue this Title of Vniuersall to any man, doth he exclude himselfe out of the number of men? Fourthly he saith, That this verie Iohn of Constantinople,Baron. vol. 8. an. 565. art. 34. who chalenged this Title, yet still acknowledged Gregorie as Head or Chiefe aboue him; as appeareth, saith he, in the case of Iohn of Chalce­don, which stood condemned of Heresie, and yet Iohn of Constantinople suffe­red him to carrie his cause by Appeale to Rome: and for proofe hereof alledgeth the Epistles of Gregorie to Iohn of Constantinople,Greg. Epist. 52. & 64. li. 2. and vnto Narses. It is true, that in the former of those Epistles he complaineth, That whereas hee hauing written to him concerning certaine wrongs done to Iohn of Chalcedon, and to D other Monkes of Isauria, he made him answer, That he knew of no such matter. Wherupon he stormed, and wrot to him againe, That if he had made him a more direct answer, he would haue sent them backe to him againe without more adoe, and would neuer haue spoken of that which of right belongeth to him by the Canons: which also he repeated vnto Narses. Now no man euer doubted of their prote­ctions. But what is all this to an Appeale to Rome, seeing that there is not so much as the name either of an Appeallant or of an Appeale to be found in all those Epi­stles? And as for those 15, 16, 17 Epistles of Gregorie, which he citeth out of his fift booke, they proue nothing but this, That Iohn vpon the wrong which was done vnto him, had recourse to Gregorie, who made his cause to be reuiewed in a Sy­nod; E and his confession being there found Orthodox, Gregorie requested the Pa­triarch of Constantinople to receiue him againe with fauour, as one which had beene abused and wronged by such as he had put in trust with the examination of his cause; and intreated the Emperour to assist him therein: all which sauoureth not of the nature of an Appeale, but onely of that ancient recourse which the oppressed vsed to make to the chiefe Sees; and which the Bishop of Rome vsed commonly to draw to a consequence of Soueraigntie and Dominion. The like is to be said of the case of Adrian Bishop of Thebes, whose processe, as hee saith, [Page 115] A Gregorie read ouer: for the Appeale there spoken of, vpon the accusation which was mixt, and partly Ciuile partly Ecclesiasticall, belonged properly to the Ci­uile Court, in the point for which the Emperour in the first instance commit­ted it to Iohn Bishop of Iustineana Prima; and secondarily to the Ecclesiasticall Court, in that which concerned his deposition. And Gregorie there speaketh in verie proper tearmes, when he saith, That Adrian being wronged by his brethren and fellow Bishop, as by his enemies, fled to the citie of Rome. And againe, He is, saith he,Confugit. come to Rome, to complaine with teares. And in like sort doth Baronius abuse the other examples which he alledgeth. Fiftly he saith, That Gregorie dealt about his Palls, amongst the Archbishops of the East also: making vs beleeue, that this cu­stome B is as ancient as Christianitie is old. And wheresoeuer the Bishop of Rome writing to any Bishop, saith vnto him, Vices tibi meas committo, i. I make you my Vi­car, he inferreth presently, That he sent him the Mantle or Pall withall: which he bringeth in, as if it had now suddenly sprung out of the ground; it being a thing which former ages neuer heard of. But let vs see vpon what credit, though wee now come to enter into an age which was wholly set vpon new fangles and deui­ses. For proofe hereof therefore hee citeth the 55 Epistle of Gregorie, lib. 4. whence he collecteth, That he bestowed this Mantle or Pall vpon Iohn Bishop of Corinth: whereas yet his words are onely these, You know, saith he, that heretofore this Pall was giuen for money, but we haue taken a strict order in a Synod, Pallium pro Commodo. that neither C this, or any other order, shall hereafter be disposed of either by money or by fauour. And I see no reason, but that by the same argument he might haue said, That hee sent him his Orders also. True it is, that the two Bishops of Rome and of Constan­tinople pulled who could pull hardest, to get all jurisdiction into their hands, as if the Church had beene a prey betweene them two: and this was the cause that Gregories letters slew so thicke as they did into Greece. And so much bee said of the power which he chalenged ouer the Church.

As for the Emperour Maurice, Baronius taketh pepper in nose against him; a man otherwise well reported of, and much commended by Historians. His grie­uance is onely this, That according to the law of his predecessors, he tooke vpon D him to confirme Gregorie in his Popedome; and is scarce friends with Gregorie himselfe for suffering it. In the end he saith, That the Emperour was a Tyran,Baron. vol. 8. an. 590. art. 2, 3, 4, & sequent. and Gregorie forced to doe what he did: and that it was of this Maurice that he meant, when vpon the fift Penitentiall Psalme he vsed these words, That he is no King who maketh the Church a Chamber-maid, whom God appointed to be free and Mistresse of the house: if so, then was Gregorie a notorious hypocrite; neither is there any tru­sting of him, seeing that he said one thing and meant another, in all the dealings which he had with Maurice. For doe but read the Epistle which he wrot vnto Maurice, concerning that law which he had made to this effect, That no souldier vntill he were dismissed, no accomptant without his discharge first had and obtai­ned, E should take the Frocke vpon him, and enter into religion: and then tell me whether it be possible for a man to vse greater submission than he there vseth? He is answerable, saith he, for it before Almightie God, whosoeuer is either in word or deed found faultie against his gracious Lords: And so were I your most vnworthie seruant, if in this case I should hold my peace, &c. Greg. li. 2. Epist. 62. & 65. Thou wert my good Lord before such time as thou wert Lord of all, &c. And when I thus presume to speake vnto my Lords, what am I but dust, and a verie worme of the earth, &c. Power is giuen from heauen vnto my Lords ouer all men, &c. and Christ shall one day speake vnto thee, saying, To thee haue I commit­ted my Priests, or Bishops, &c. And in the end, I haue, saith hee,Meos Sacer­dotes. now in euerie poynt [Page 116] fulfilled my duetie, seeing that I haue yeelded my obedience to the Emperour, and haue not A kept silence in that which was of my knowledge. Who can read this, and thinke him a Pope which wrot it? And in like manner speaketh he to Theodore the Emperors Physitian, My tongue, saith he, is vnable to expresse the good which I haue receiued of the Almightie, and of my Lord the Emperour; and what shall I giue againe for all this good, but onely this, Vestigia pure amare, i. To loue the ground he goeth on: in the same sence in which he elsewhere often saith,Greg. li. 2. Epist. 64. ad Dominorum vestigia transmisi, i. I haue sent it to the feet of my Lords. And at the foot of that Epistle he saith, God hath not giuen him power to rule ouer souldiers onely, Idem Epist. 52. but also ouer Bishops: where hee vseth the word Sacerdotibus, meaning thereby, All men of the Church. And shall then Ba­ronius his plea be admitted,Baron. an. 593. art. 15. when he saith, That Gregorie spake as one which liued B vnder a Nero, or a Dioclesian? especially, when he maketh such open protestation, That he speaketh the truth wholly, without all reseruation: and thereupon is so bold in the same Epistle, as to say vnto him, What wilt thou answer before the iudge­ment seat of God, when he shall say vnto thee at that day, Of Notarie I made thee Cap­taine of the gard; of the Captaine of the gard, Caesar; of Caesar, Emperour? Was it feare, or duetie, which drew these words from him? But if you will take a true view of the judgement which this man had of the Emperour, then read the Epi­stle which he wrot without all passion to Anastasius Bishop of Antioch: Whereas, saith he, men which are Orthodox in the faith are daily preferred to holie Orders, wee haue great cause to render all thankes therefore to the Almightie, and daily to pray for the C life of our most religious and Christian Lord the Emperour, and of his gracious consort, and of his courteous progenie, in whose times the mouthes of the Heretikes are stopped: for though their hearts boyle with peruerse and froward thoughts, yet vnder a Catholike Emperor they dare not to vtter their mischieuous imaginations. And in like maner wri­teth he to Isicius Bishop of Ierusalem,Greg. li. 7. Epist. 11. and to sundrie others. But the conclusion of all was this, That the law of Maurice stood still in force, and Gregorie himselfe was faine to publish it, by his letter directed to the Metropolitans and to the Bi­shops of the chiefe Sees; in whiche he calleth him Most religious and most clement Emperour. Baron. to. 8. an. 593. art. 22. & 23. But yet Baronius, like a man that would saile with euerie wind, telleth vs, That Gregorie corrected this law before the publication therof; and that there­by D he declared that his Apostolike power was aboue the Emperours law. But who so shall take the paines to read this Epistle all along,Baron. ib. art. 49 shall find that hee doth nothing therein, but onely declare the intention of the Emperour, to put it in ex­ecution, and to justifie this law, rather than to reproue it.

OPPOSITION.

Suppose we now that Gregorie himselfe had risen againe from the dead, and seene his successor vsing that Title, which hee before hand had so formally con­demned in his Epistles, how could he haue saued him from this so necessarie a conclusion, drawne from the propositions of his owne words, and so oftentimes by him repeated, Whosoeuer will be called Vniuersall Bishop, is the forerunner [Page 118] of Antichrist, Boniface the third willeth and requireth, and ordaineth himselfe to A be so called; therefore it followeth, that he was the forerunner of Antichrist, if not Antichrist himselfe. Bellarmine here findeth out two creepeholes: The one is concerning the fact,Bellar. de Rom. Pontif. l. 2. c. 17. Non instituen­do, sed asseren­do. Lib. 4. de Gest. Longobard. c. 37. where he sayth, That Phocas did not ordaine this by way of a new Institution, but onely of declaration of a thing euer before acknowledged in the Church. But let him read the Historie it selfe: Paulus Diaconus (who liued not farre off from these times) speaketh after another man­ner: Phocas (sayth he) at the suit of Pope Boniface ordained, That the See of the Ro­mane Apostolike Church should be the Head of all other Churches, because the Church of Constantinople wrote her selfe, The first of all other Churches. And so testifie all the Historians which came after him, namely, Freculphus, Rhegino, Anastasius, Her­mannus,B Contractus, Marianus Scotus, Sabellicus, Blondus, Pomponius Laetus, Platina, the Chronologicall Compilation,Otto Frisin­ghens. l. 5. c. 8. Chron. Otho Frisinghensis, and others: All which affirme, That Boniface requested and obtained of Phocas, that the Church of Rome should be called the Head of all other Churches; Ipsius authori­tate. and that, as some doe adde, By his au­thoritie. As for Sigonius, he denieth not, but that Boniface sent an embassadour to Phocas, by whose negotiation he purchased a Decree, That the Church of Rome should be the first of all other Churches: Where also he addeth, According as it was decreed by the auncient Canons. Now if Sigonius meane onely for the Prese­ancie, we denie not; but if of superioritie and jurisdiction, there we differ, and we haue alreadie proued the contrarie. Bellarmine for his purpose objecteth an C Epistle of Saint Gregorie to the Bishop of Syracusa, where it is said, Who doub­teth but that the Church of Constantinople is subiect to this Apostolike See, as our most religious Emperour, and our brother Eusebius, Bishop of that Citie, daily doe acknow­ledge. And this Epistle (saith Bellarmine) was written fiue yeares before Phocas his reigne began. But how should Gregorie father this Epistle, seeing that he him­selfe so often complaineth, that Maurice did beare the other out in his vnjust de­maunds? Or where will he find an Eusebius, who was Bishop of Constantinople at that time? Or where will he place him when he hath found him, seeing that Onuphrius himselfe nameth for Bishops in all this time onely Iohn, surnamed the Faster, Cyriacus, and Thomas Sacellarius? And Gregorie, who runneth them D ouer so often as he doth, had he euer lost either his wits or his memorie, when he should haue thought and spoken of Eusebius? Who seeth not therefore, that this is an Epistle written long after, and hammered vpon the same anuill, on which manie others are? Bellarmine argueth yet farther and saith, That long before that time,Justin. l. in ep. ad Johan. 2. Iustinian called the Church of Rome The Head of all the Chur­ches: True; but still in that sence, in which he calleth also that other of Con­stantinople by the same name,Jdem Co. de sa­cros. eccles. l. 24. saying, that she is The Head of all other Churches: Neither of these sayings being true in strict construction, but onely in a large signification, and as they were Patriarchall Sees; and consequently, Head and Chiefe of those Churches which were vnder them. The other creepehole of Bel­larmine E is this, That Gregorie indeed condemneth this title of Vniuersall, as Iohn meant it; that is, that by vertue thereof all other Bishops should be nothing but his Vicars: Whence it followeth (say we) that he pronounced Anathema against the Councell of Trent, which so manie yeares after made all Bishops no­thing but his Commissaries or Officials. But not (saith he) if this word Vniuer­sall be vnderstood onely to signifie a generall care of the Church, by meanes whereof the other Bishops haue neuerthelesse a particular care euerie of them in his peculiar Church. But for answere hereunto, I would entreat the Reader [Page 119] A onely to peruse the places themselues of Gregorie, and then say, whether they can admit of anie such interpretation. Well (saith Bellarmine) I am sure, that the Pope was called Vniuersall Bishop before Phocas his time, and that therefore it cannot be said, that this title dependeth of his Constitution. And we say againe, That so were the other Patriarchs as well as he, being according to the fashion of those times appointed, as so manie fellow or joint Curators of the Vniuersall Church: but that Phocas was he who appropriated that title to the Bishop of Rome, nei­ther can he deriue this title from anie higher:Justin. Co. de summa Trinit. l. 7. Co. de epis­cop. audientia. L. Certissimè, & Nouel. 3, 5, 7. Jdem Nouel. 2. & seq. Concil. Chalced. act. 1. passim. Concil. Nice. 2. Act. 2. for so Instiman called Epiphanius Bishop of Constantinople, sometimes Oecumenicall, and sometimes, which is all one, Ʋniuersall Patriarch: so doth he Anthemius and Menna in his Nouels. So B likewise doth the Emperour Leo call Stephen: And the Chalcedon Councell it selfe in sundrie places calleth Menna by the name of Oecumenicall Patriarch. So Adrian the first, Bishop of Rome, in the second Councell of Nice calleth Thara­sius, the Generall Patriarch. Lastly, so are the Bishops of Alexandria and Antioch often called, being indeed all and euerie of them an Vniuersall Bishop, in as much as the whole charge of the Vniuersall Church was jointly committed vnto them, and a particular, in regard of the seuerall Churches committed to their tuitions. Wherefore as it hath beene alreadie said, the appropriating of this title to the Bishop of Rome was from Phocas: and from thence came that seperation and rent betweene the Churches of the East and West, which dureth vnto this day, C and serueth for a remarkable period in the Church, for that S. Gregorie so often doth inculcate it in his writings, That this was the time when Antichrist began to set foot into the world. And it is farther to be obserued, that in this meane while sundrie abuses crept into the Church; as prayer for the dead, vsed in the publike Liturgie or Seruice of the Church, brought in by the Decree of Pelugiase the inuocation of Saints inserted in the common Letanies by Gregorie, and by him the whole Bodie of the Liturgie altered, by borrowing part from the Hea­thenish, and part from the Iewish ceremonies; and the language it selfe, by reason of that medley of the Northerne nations, came by little and little to be cleane al­tered, so that no man now vnderstood what was said or done in the Seruice of the D Church: all which we haue elsewhere declared more at large.

But now come we to Baronius, to see what he saith to all this: First therefore he extenuateth that wicked parricide and those other butcheries of Phocas, the more to defame the Emperour Maurice. But what may not be said of a Prince in so tickle a State as he liued in, or what on the contrarie can be added to those praises and commendations which Historians haue giuen of him? Or who can but tremble when he readeth what S. Gregorie in cold bloud writeth of that mur­ther? Phocas (saith he) and Leontia his wife were crowned in the Palace called Secun­dianas, Gregor. epist. 7. indict. 6. and the Emperor Maurice murthered with all his make children, da [...]ely Theo­dosius, who was alreadie crowned, and Theodosius, Tiberius, Paulus, and Iustinian; also E Peter, who was brother vnto Maurice, with other great personages which [...]left vnto him, as Constantine a chiefe Senator, and Placidius, and George, who was [...] him: and all this done in pure treason as could be deuised. Secondly he relleth vs, that Phocas was a good Catholike:Baron. vol. 8. an. 603. art. 3. for (saith he) it is verie likely that he sent his confession to Gregorie out of hand. But if that be not, this is certaine, that he sent his owne and his wiues Images vnto him, which he caused presently to be erected within the Palace, in the Oratorie of S. Caesarius the Martyr. And what? is this the way to expiat so horrible a murther? Or can he, which was so much offended with Gregorie his humble and lowly behauior towards Maurice, be well pleased [Page 120] with this toward Phocas; vnder colour that he complained, that at his comming A he found no Apocrisarius, Gregor. lib. 11. ep. 43. for so they called him, or Responsalis, that is, no Deputie or Solicitor for the Romane Church Lieger and resident at Constantinople? Which were those,Hincmar. Rhe­men. ep. 3. c. 13. as Hincmar describeth them, who after the translation of the Imperiall Seat to Constantinople, solicited the Church causes at the Emperours Court, as well for the Church of Rome, as for the other Prime Sees. And therefore in this the Popes could not chalenge it as due from the Emperours, neither had they in this anie prerogatiue aboue other Bishops. But Gregorie goeth on, What thankes (saith he) owe we to God that we are now come to sit vnder the pleasant shade of your gracious Empire, and are brought from the day of sorrow and sadnesse into this time of libertie and gladnesse? Poore Heathenish creature as thou wert Papinian, O how shalt B thou one day rise in judgement against this holie man? But read a little farther, Those (saith he) who heretofore feared to goe vnto the Court, Ad vestra ve­stigia. now run with ioy vnto thy feet: meaning to reside there in qualitie of Deputie or Solicitor for him. And seeing that Gregorie here vseth the same terme of submission vnto Phocas, which before he vsed to Maurice, will Baronius say (as he did in hatred of Maurice) that it was feare, or that it was respect and reuerence which made him so to speake? And yet this Phocas, for whom this Saint summoneth the holie Angels to rejoice, what was he but a drunkard, a whoremaster, bloudie, cruell, violent, brutish, and here­ticall, Cedren. in Chron. and so was his wife also, as Cedrenas reporteth of them: and which is more, he was the man vnder whom the Romane Empire suffered more calamities than C euer it had done before, The Aire grew pestilent, the Earth became barren, the Sea was frozen with yee, with a generall mortalitie of men, beasts, and fishes. When as there­fore all Elements mourned, and all creatures groaned vnder the burthen of such a monster, was it well done of Gregorie to rejoice alone? Thirdly, Baronius deduceth this Decree of Phocas, made in fauour of the See of Rome, in this manner: Grego­rie (saith he) had done what he could to obtaine this Decree of Maurice, but could not preuaile: afterward vpon summons from Phocas he sent Boniface to reside in qualitie of Solicitor neere vnto the Emperours person. This Boniface continued there vntill the death of Gregorie, and became verie gracious with the Emperour: so that when Sabinian happened also shortly after to die, he thought good to put D him in his place. Now this Boniface made good vse of the hatred which Phocas bare vnto Cyriacus the Patriarch of Constantinople, and made it serue for his owne aduancement to the title of Vniuersall Bishop. But what was the ground of this hatred; Theophanus and Cedrenus (whom Baronius himselfe alledgeth) tell us, That one Scholasticus an Eunuch, in the fourth yeare of the reigne of Phocas, ha­uing saued the old Empresse Constantina and her three daughters, and hid them se­cretly in the Church, at the length Phocas hauing notice thereof, sent some of his gard to make them away: Cyriacus withstood them, and before he would deliuer them, tooke an oath of the Tyran (so speake they) that he should doe no violence to their persons: who indeed for the present thrust them into a Monasterie; but E at the end of one yeare caused them all foure to be murthered. Now what was this in Boniface, but onely to abuse Phocas his tyrannicall passions, to the quen­ching of that greedie thirst of his owne ambition? And what reason then haue they to be offended with vs, when we say, that the first founder of their Vniuersa­litie was a Parricide, or rather a monster of all Parricides that euer were? For whereas he saith, That he gaue not this priuiledge to the Bishop of Rome, but onely decided the controuersie betweene him and the Bishop of Constantinople, when they contended for it; besides that we haue alreadie shewed, that all Histo­rians [Page 121] A say the contrarie, where can be shew either Councell, or other judiciall meeting, where both parties came to hearing? Or what was there in all that busi­nesse to be seene, but onely a practise of Boniface, and an absolute commaund of Phocas?

But let vs now see a little farther, what Baronius alledgeth for the Popes autho­ritie about this time.An. 603. art. 7. Gregor. lib. 11. ep. 10. First he produceth a certaine priuiledge graunted by Grego­rie to the Hospitall of Authun, wherein he deposeth euerie King or Prince which shall offer to infringe that priuiledge: A priuiledge, no doubt, taken out of the same budget that that other of Saint Medard was: For how could he who was so crouching to Kings and Princes all his life time, be so audacious to depose them B after his death? Secondly he pretendeth,Ib. ep. 8. that Queene Brunchaut requested leaue of him to call a Synod in Fraunce: But we haue alreadie shewed, that our Kings of Fraunce knew well ynough how to call Synods of their owne authoritie: and the place it selfe (which he alledgeth out of S. Gregorie) saith onely thus, That she requested him to send some one in his behalfe into Fraunce,Facta Synodo. who in the Synod which should there be held might correct all which should be done contrarie to the Canons: and himselfe sticketh not to tell vs, that she did this onely to claw poll with him, because the French had at that time occasion to vse his fauour to­ward the Emperour; which maketh him to say as he doth, Vtinam serio & non per imaginem &c. Moreouer,Baron. ibid. an. 603. art. 18. Baronius produceth a certaine Appeale made by Ianua­rius C Bishop of Malaga in Spaine, and saith, that Gregorie thereupon sent one Iohn to haue the hearing of the cause vpon the place it selfe: Where by the way we must obserue, that the question was not concerning anie sentence giuen against Ianuarius, but onely of an outrage committed vpon his person by one Comitiolus, a Lord of great authoritie in that countrey; and that therefore this was no Ap­peale, but onely a Refuge. But he had forgotten to tell vs, how in his Instructions Gregorie commaunded Iohn to haue alwaies before his eies the lawes of Iustinian, to gouerne themselues thereby, forthese are his words, Concerning the person of the Bishop Ianuarius, you must remember that this was done contrarie to the Law, in that he pulled him by violence out of his Church: Ib. ep. 54. Which fact he saith ought to haue been D punished as treason, by the Constitution of Arcadius and Honorius, alledging the Law it selfe all at large, with manie others, by which the cognisance of such cau­ses is committed to the Ciuile magistrat. And now what maketh all this for that absolute authoritie of the Pope? Moreouer, the Councell of Toledo, which was held vnder King Gondemar in the time of Pope Boniface the third, and that after that Decree of Phocas, declareth that of Toledo to be the first See,Concil. Tolet. sub Rege Gonde­maro. not so much by vertue of anie new graunt, as by the Synodall Decree of the auncient Fathers, com­manding all Bishops to vaile bonnet vnto him, vnder paine of Anathema. Which Decree of the Synod was also confirmed by the King Gondemar. As for the Pope, in all that long Epistle we find no one word spoken of him,Baron. an. 610. art. 14. and yet Baronius is E not ashamed to auerre, That the Church of Toledo had this priuiledge from Rome; when as yet the Pope was not absolute Monarch in Italie itselfe: for the Bishops of Istria and Venetia, vnder their Patriarchs, stood o [...] against them: so also did the Bishops of Lumbardie, as appeareth by that Epistle of Gregorie to Constantius Bishop of Milan,Brixia, ep. 37. lib. 3. whom a certaine Bishop of Bresse would not ac­knowledge, because it seemed that he as well as the Bishop of Rome derogated from the authoritie of the Chalcedon Councell. But vnder his successor Sabinian the matter went a little farther:Baron. an. 605. art. 2, 3, 4. For we may learne out of a certaine Councell held at Mantua (for which we are beholding to Baronius his Librarie) That when [Page 122] as there was question about the choice of a new Patriarch of Aquileia, and Agi­lulpha [...] A the King of the Lumbards had caused one Iohn to be elected, the Exarch of Rauenna, to gratifie the Pope, set vp against him one Candidian at Grado: and so were there for a long time two Patriarchs; of which, he which sat at Aquileia would neuer acknowledge the Popes authoritie.

OPPOSITION.

If that Decree of Phocas, made in fauour of Boniface the third, found such op­position at home, we may easily conceiue what light regard was had thereof in more remote Prouinces and Churches; especially in that point which Boniface so much enforced, That no prouision of a Bishop was good in law, without his au­thoritie: for the fourth and sixt Councels of Toledo, at also the first and second E of Bracara, which were all held vnder Honorius, make open shew thereof, seeing that the Bishops assembled in these Councels openly professe, that they were as­sembled by the care and industrie of Sisinandus their King,Eius imperijs et iussia commo­niti. Chintillae salu­taribus horta­mentis. who roused them vp by his commands to the due handling of matters concerning the discipline of the Church: as likewise speake the fift and sixt, By the wholesome exhortations of King Chintilla: and the first of Bracara, By the commaundement of King Arimire. Moreouer, we find the Chapter of the Greeke Synods translated by Martin Bishop of Bracara, as we find them in the second Tome of the Councels, authorised in that Synod: [Page 123] A for the Bishops are there prouided in full Synod by their Metropolitan, who yet did nothing without the aduice of the other Bishops. As for running to Rome for Buls or Pals, not a word there to be found: if the Pope sent it to anie, it was his kindnesse, but no man was bound of necessitie to accept it: and if it happened vpon the accusation of anie Bishop that the Synod could not agree, they neuer sent to Rome for a resolution, but for a finall definition (say they) of this dissention, this holie Synod hath thought fit that another Metropolitan of some bordering Prouince should be sent for, to confirme and ratifie that opinion which he should thinke most a­greeable to the Canons. But here is to be noted, that not long after this ordinance of Phocas, made in fauour of the See of Rome, the Church might plainely see, in B the person of this Honorius whom we now speake of, how dangerous a thing it was that she should depend of one man: Which Gregorie well foresaw when he said, That if there should be one Ʋniuersall Bishop, and he should happen to fall, the whole Church must needs vnto the ground. For the heresie of the Monothelites then rising in the Church, Honorius with the first fell into it, and was conuicted thereof by his owne hand writing, which he had sent to Sergius Bishop of Constantino­ple: neither was this a small heresie, or of anie meane consequence, for that not to acknowledge two wils in Christ, is consequently to denie two natures in him also. His letters were produced in the sixt Generall Councell, Action. 12. & 13.2. To. Concil. Act. 12. & 13. Concil. Vni­uers. 6. and were there by generall consent condemned to the fire: the summe of them C was this, That neither Gospell nor Epistle, neither yet the Synods, did euer teach vs these two faculties or powers in Christ; That these were words inuented by some to famble with children, but ought not to be drawne in consequence of do­ctrine in the Church; That in such matters euerie one might abound in his owne sence; and to conclude, That he was just of opinion with Sergius, that is to say, a pure Monothelite. Yet Bellarmine, Onuphrius, and others of that whet, seeke to justifie him: but alas they cannot, vnlesse they will first condemne this Councell. If they say that the copies were corrupted by the Greekes, we answere, that we take them as we find them in the Latine: where we farther find, that the copies of his letter were compared with the Originall it selfe, taken out of the Librarie of D Constantinople: and the sentence passed vpon that letter saith, That it swarued from the doctrines of the Apostles, and holie Synods, and that they contained hereticall positions, and as such are worthie of execration, That they execrated and accursed the authors of all such doctrines, and cast their names out of the Church, and for that cause they there pronounce Anathema against Honorius, as following in euerie point the drifts and purposes of Sergius, Cyrus, and other com­plices in this Heresie: all which is to be seene more at large in the Bodie of that Councell. But which is more, Honorius for this verie Heresie was afterward againe excommunicated in the seuenth Generall Councell and last Action,Synod. Nicen. 2. act. vlt. & 3. Synod. Constant. 8. Ʋniuers. act. 7. & 3. & 6. Beda de sex aetatib. Liber Pontific. in vita Leonis. Psellus de sep­tem Synodis. and in the eight by Pope Adrian the second himselfe, and by diuers others. And of this Beda E and the Pontificall Booke for the Westerne Churches, and for those of the East Psellus, and for these later times Melchier Canus (though our aduersarie) beareth record: and is all this so easily puffed off, by saying, That the Greekes perhaps did corrupt the copies? or that I know not who hath thrust these words into Beda? Had Pope Agatho known the contrarie, or had the least doubt therof, what consci­ence had he had to hold his peace? Is it ynough to say, that he did it to auoid far­ther brable? Or should not the zeale of his See rather haue moued him to speake? For whereas they tell vs a tale of one Maximus, out of the Popes Librarie, we an­swere, That such a domesticke witnesse ought not to be admitted without better [Page 124] caution for his honestie: no more may Nicholas the first, who liued two whole a­ges A after this time, and is a Pope produced for a Pope: neither yet Emanuel Galle­ca, who liued no lesse than 500 yeares after. And, by the way, it is to be obserued, That the Legats of Pope Agatho assisted at the condemnation of Honorius, with 289 other Bishops;Concil. Tolet. 4. Can. 16. as also that at this verie time the fourth Councell of Toledo decreed, That the Apocalyps should be read in time of Masse, that is, of full seruice, be­tweene Easter and Whitsunday, with Anathema to him which should faile herein: as wel perceiuing, that the time now approached, when all men had need to arme them­selues against that Antichrist, who is in that booke plainly foretold, and by many circumstances most graphically described: which gaue life to the Beast which was dead, that is, to the Roman Empire, in that downfall of the temporall Estate, as B S. Gregorie himselfe had mentioned.

An. 633. & 680. art. 17.Here Baronius grindeth his teeth, contesting violently, That Honorius was not an Heretike; he turneth and windeth, new casteth and mouldeth the words, to saue him thereby from this imputation: For what likelihood, saith he, seeing that the Councels held vnder Martin at Rome, make no such mention; and seeing that Pope Agatho himselfe pronounceth so peremptorily, That it was neuer knowne that the See of Rome did erre, &c. But what, shall we hearken to those forced inter­pretations which Baronius maketh of his words, rather than to those which two generall Councels made of them, when all matters were either present to their view, or at least fresh in memorie vnto them? or because the Pope said, That they C neuer erred, must we therefore needs beleeue them, contrarie to the authoritie of generall Councels, and contrarie also to some of themselues? And when Pope Agatho by his Legats condemned him and his memorial after him in the sixt ge­nerall Councell, shall it be ynough for them to say, That the Greekes added this par­cell, and the two Sessions following, and thus to put off whatsoeuer they are not a­ble to defend? or may not we rather thinke, and say, That those other passed it ouer with silence, because they had not what to say in excuse thereof? Giue way to this, and what Councell can stand for good? In the end he telleth vs, That one Theodorus Bishop of Constantinople,Ib. art. 17. an. 680. being himselfe an Heretike, and one of those which should haue beene condemned in the same sentence giuen by the D Synod, caused Honorius his name to be put into the scedule in stead of his owne. Base shift, for where doth he find Theodorus so much as named in all that Session? or must so many authorities, so many pregnant proofes, giue place to his bare coniecture? what printed author, what manuscript doth he alledge? But the truth is,Gratulabor mi­hi tibique. this man desireth not to be releeued but vpon almes: Reader, saith he, if thou wilt accept of this, I shall be glad that I haue not lost my paines; if not, neuerthelesse Hono­rius shall be still a good Catholike. And this is all the fruit of 50 pages, which he had spent vpon this argument.

Now after Honorius succeeded Seuerin the first. At that time, saith Blondus, the manner was,Blond. li. 9. Deca. 1. That the Pope elected was not crowned till the Exarch would come E from Rauenna to confirme him: And Isaac, who was Exarch at that time, deferred his comming to Rome one whole yeare and a halfe: Platina in Se­uerino. and so also saith Platina. Here Beroni­us obserueth, That the decree of Phocas was obserued in certaine places: And we denie not, that this Mysterie had his proceedings; for one Sergius Archbishop of Cyprus, writing vnto Pope Theodore, inscribeth his letter, To Theodorus the Vni­uersall Pope: and so much the rather, because he was at variance with the Bishop of Constantinople.Summo omnium Praesulum Pon­tifici. So likewise a genernll Synod of Afrike writing to Pope Mar­tin, inscribeth their Epistle, To the Soueraigne Pontife ouer all Bishops: though they [Page 125] A might peraduenture meane it onely, as to the chiefe Patriarch, and consequently a Contutor in the gouernement of the Vniuersall Church, as wee haue said be­fore. But Victor Bishop of Carthage, a man much renowmed in that Synod, when vpon his election he sent his confession to Theodorus, kept the old stile, and wrot onely, To the most blessed Lord, and our honourable holie brother, Pope Theo­dore; beginning his Epistle with these words, The good workes of your holie Frater­nitie, &c. and so all along: giuing him fairely to vnderstand, That all the Apostles were endowed with equall authoritie: and certifying him onely,An. 649. That he was conse­crated Bishop of Carthage, without euer asking confirmation at his hands; only he requesteth him to recommend him in his prayers vnto God, that he might wel B discharge his office. After this came Martin, who taking occasion vpon the fame and suspition that was of the Patriarches of the East, that they were Monothe­lites, sent thither certaine Bishops, and made some of those which yet remained Orthodox in the East, his Vicars. This was a faire attempt; but the Emperour Constans hindered him in his walke: for the yeare following he sent and caused him to be apprehended in Rome, and to be brought prisoner to Constantinople, where he died a banished man, hauing beene accused for conspiring with the Sa­rasens against the Emperour, as appeareth by his letters written to Theodorus. Martinus in E­pist. ad Theo­dor. 14. Sanctu [...] Audoe­nus in vita San­cti Eligij. Sacerdotalem Concilium. This Martin was a man of a hautie mind, and a great vndertaker; yet could not he maintaine his pretended authoritie, no not in the West: For when a certaine C Heretike had crept into the Bishopricke of Authun, the Bishop of Noion, who was then in Court, solicited the king, and obtained of him, saith Saint Ouin, That by his commaundement a Councell of Priests or Bishops should be called at Orleans: where the Heretike was condemned, and banished the realme of France, without expecting any higher authoritie. So likewise vnder Pope Eugenius, his next suc­cessor, there was a Councell held at Chaalons, vpon the riuer of Saosne; which, as appeareth in the verie front thereof,Ex euocatione & ordinatione Domini Clodo­uaei Regis. Synod. Epist. ad Theodo. Arelat. was assembled by the conuocation and ordi­nance of king Clouis, as also in the Synodall Epistle to Theodore Archbishop of Ar­les: wherein they presume to declare vnto him, by the authoritie of that Synod, That considering the time of his penance was not yet expired, he might not offer D to meddle with his Bishopricke, nor with the good belonging thereunto. Ordai­ning farther,Ib. can. 10. That vpon a vacancie no successor might be chosen but by the Clergie and people of that Prouince; that otherwise the election should be held as voyd and of none effect: where you shall find no exception or reseruation at all to the Pope of Rome. And in Spaine there were held at that time, the 7, 8, 9, and 10 Councels of Toledo, all which acknowledge their assembling to haue proceeded onely from their owne care, and from the authoritie of the Prince: namely, the seuenth, By our deuotion, say they, and by the care of king Chindasuinda: the eighth, By the commaund of the king Reccesuinda: and the tenth, By his most holie desire: Sanctissim [...] Vote. without a­ny mention of the Pope at all; though in those Synods the highest points of our E religion were in question, as namely in the eight, whose Synodall Epistle hath yet onely this inscription, The Decree of the Vniuersall Councell published in the name of the Prince. And againe, A law published in the same Councell, Imperante Prin­cipe glorioso. by the commandement of the renowmed Prince. In all which, besides those high poynts of Christian religi­on, order was also taken against intrusions, extortions, and other abuses of Bi­shops, proceeding to the punishment of some, and finall deposition of others: insomuch that in the tenth Synod one Pontamius Bishop of Bracara, a thing neuer before heard of, accused himselfe, and was thereupon deposed by the Synod, and Fructuosus Bishop of Duna chosen in his place, with these words: We doe here con­stitute [Page 126] and appoint by a common election, Fructuosus to be Gouernour of the Church of A Bracara, to take vpon him, as Metropolitan, the care of all the Prouince of Galleece, and of all Congregations and Bishops of that countrey. Patrum sen­tentia. And this was done by the Decree of the Fathers, annexed to his letters of Ordination; without binding him to take a journey to Vitalian at Rome for confirmation, who sat not in that pride which Popes now vse to sit in. For as Anastasius reporteth, when the Emperour Constans came to Rome, he with all his Clergie went to meet him six miles off, and there receiued they him with all tokens of submission and reuerence, though he was a sacrilegious and bloudie Emperour, and one which had confined Pope Martin the first to a certaine place in banishment, as Baronius reporteth.

OPPOSITION.E

Wherefore doe they what they could, yet the Churches of the East euer reie­cted that Decree of Phocas, 2. To. Concil. E­pist. Vitalian. 2, 3, 4. Sigo. de Reg. Italiae l. 2. Blond. Deca. 1. li. 9. An. 680. neither would Paule Archbishop of Candia suffer Iohn Bishop of Lampeon, when he had beene condemned by his owne Synod, to ap­peale to Rome; as may appeare out of the letters of Vitalian, by which hee retra­cteth the sentence giuen in that Synod against him, absolueth, and as much as in him lay, restoreth him to his See: and for execution of this his sentence, vsed his credit in the Emperours Court. So likewise at the gates of Rome it selfe, the Archbishop of Rauenna would not acknowledge him; where, after the decease [Page 127] A of Bonus, Maurus being canonically elected and consecrated by his Suffragan Bishops, refused both the Pall and the consecration at the Popes hands, and him­selfe also consecrated his owne Suffragans without him; and when the Pope ex­communicated him, he excommunicated the Pope againe. And in this state continued the Church of Rauenna, vntill the time of Pope Domnus, which was in the yeare 680, all the time of Pope Martin the first, Eugenius the first, Vitalian, and Adeodate. Whereupon they called her Hereticall, and tearmed this her Heresie by the name of Autocephalia, meaning thereby, That she should be her owne Head. And we be sure, that had they knowne worse by her, worse they would haue spoken of her. And Anastasius saith plainely, That it was for the Primacie. Causa primatus. As for B the Pope himselfe, he stood all this while obliged to aske and to receiue confirma­tion of the Emperour, paying therefore a certaine summe of money,Lib. Pontif. in Vitalian. & Domno. in regard of such demaines as he held; without which he could not be reputed as Bishop. But the sixt generall Councell held about this time at Constantinople, can best in­forme vs of the opinion which the Church then held concerning that constituti­on of Phocas, made in fauour of the Pope, and with what limitations they re­ceiued it.

OPPOSITION.

E First then we must vnderstand, that this sixt generall Councell assembled for the rooting out of the Heresie of the Monothelites,Zonar. to. 3. in Const. 4. C. Ha­beo librum. & Can. sexta Synod. Dist. 16. Lib. Pontif. in Agatho. Concil. vniuers. 6. Action. 18. Epist. Leo. 2. ad Constant. was assigned by the Empe­rour: so speaketh Zonaras, The Emperour, saith he, for the vnitie of the Churches, as­signed a Councell at Constantinople. And Gratian in his booke of Decrees, The Empe­rour, saith he, assembled it, and it was held by his care and prouidence, and hee assisted there in person. And the Pontificall booke saith, That Pope Agatho receiued the sacred commandement of the Princes, Constantine, Heraclius, and Tiberius, Emperors: who re­quested and exhorted him to send his deputies to Constantinople. And Pope Leo the second, in his confirmation of the Acts of this Synod, This Councell, saith [Page 128] he, lately assembled by the Emperours commaund in the royall citie, &c. And Agatho A himselfe in his answer to the Emperours letter, I offer, saith he my readie obedience to what is commaunded to me by your sacred Patent: which was, to seeke out persons fit to be sent vnto the Synod which the Emperour had called,Act. 2.4. among all the Bi­shops of his jurisdiction, and others; all which he there calleth by the name of his Fellow seruants: Confamulos suos and that, as he saith, for the discharge of his duetie and seruice; causing them to make all the hast they could to the Emperours feet: as well from Rome, which he tearmeth the seruile citie of the Emperour, as of the places therea­bout. Speaking all along in that Epistle, of the most religious commaunds of their clemencies, and of the duetie which he owed vnto them. And to conclude, hee re­questeth them to accept of such as he had sent vnto the Synod, though small scho­lers,B and little skilled in the Scriptures; not dissembling, that if he had occasion to vse a man which was well seene in knowledge of Diuinitie (so terrible was the desolation which the barbarous people had made among them) he must bee faine to send as farre as England for one.Flexo mentis poplite. And a little after he falleth to such submissi­on, as to say, That he intreated him vpon the knee of his heart. Such was the stile of this Agatho in those dayes: and such also was that of the Synod it selfe of Rome, in their answer to the Emperours letter. Moreouer, the Synodall Epistle it selfe, written to Pope Agatho, alledged by Baronius, declareth, That their assemblie was caused by the religious ordinance of the Emperour, endorsing it, To Agatho Pope of the old Rome, and within calling him onely, The Bishop of the first See of the Vniuersall C Church; not Vniuersall Bishop, or Bishop of the Vniuersall Church. And now tell me, how all this standeth with that pretended superioritie, or rather Monar­chie of the Church of Rome. Secondly, the Emperour sent vnto all the Patri­arches, and amongst the rest to him of Rome; willing them and euerie of them to assemble the Bishops of his Apostolike See and jurisdiction, in a Synod, and to make choise of some of the fittest among them, to deliuer in the Councell at Constantinople, what was done and agreed vpon in euerie one of their Synods: which also the Pope obserued to a haire, sending thither some to represent his owne person, and others in the name of the Synod of the Apostolike Roman See. In which Synod we find none subscribed but onely the Bishops of Italie. By all D which it appereth, that the Emperour called all the Patriarches indifferently, as so many fellow Tutors of the Church, against the Heresie then on foot, though one of them tooke place before another. This we may obserue out of the whole course of this Synod, especially out of the letters of the Emperour to Domnus and Agatho Bishops of Rome, as also to George Bishop of Constantinople, to whom he wrot to the same effect, with the like respect, honour, and Title, as to the other, saue onely that he called the one Vniuersall Patriarch, and the other Vniuer­sall Pope. Likewise out of the Synodicall Suggestion (for so is it called) which Pope Agatho sent vnto the Emperours, where we find this superscription, Agatho Bishop, Seruant of the Seruants of God, with all the Synods which are vnder the Councell of the E See Apostolike: as also out of that Epistle which he wrot to the Emperors vpon the receit of their Patent; where he repeateth againe the Mandat of the Emperour vnto him,De familiari Cler [...]. for the sending of deputies to the Synod assigned, as well of the Synod which was held not far off from the Apostolike See, as of his own particular Cler­gie. And yet we find none subscribed but Italians; and Agatho himselfe signeth in these tearmes,Act. 4. With the generalitie of the Councell of all the Apostolike See, that is, of all his jurisdiction.Act. 17. And in the subscription of the seuenteenth Action, the Legats of Pope Agatho, and of the Bishops of Alexandria, Antioch, and Ierusa­lem, [Page 129] A stile themselues Lieutenants of the Apostolike See, meaning euery one of his own Church. And Abundantius and Iohn both Bishops, subscribe in particular, by the name of Legats of the whole Councel of the holie Apostolike See of Rome. This Councel therefore represented his See, and his See was, according to his owne definition bounded within the precincts of Italie. And in like tearms doth the Emperor Con­stantine make answer to Agatho and to his Synod, in the 18 Action. Thirdly,Act. 18. in all the Actions of this Synod things are generally noted to haue beene done Prae­sidente Constantino, &c. where also all the Nobilitie and Senators, who assisted, are euer named before the Popes Legats, who are there said sometimes to Reside, and sometimes to Preside, as in the sixt and seuenth Actions. And in the Emperours ab­sence B those said Senators Presided in the Councell, gathered the voyces, and gaue direction concerning the Action then in hand, as may appeare by those words which we find in the 12, 13, 15, 16, and 17 Actions, Proposito venerando sessu pijssimi Imperatoris, &c. Ex persona ipsius, secundum iussionem eius, praesidentibus & audientibus: Wherby we see,Lib. Pontif. in Agatho. that the Pontificall went about to abuse the Reader through the likenesse of the word, when he saith in the life of Pope Agatho, That his Legats were receiued Rsidente sub Regali cultu Imperatori, not daring to say Praesidente: with like honestie as before, where he maketh the Bishop of Constantinople writing to Vigilius, in stead of Residente nobiscum, to say, Praesidente nobis vestra Beatitudine; thereby to get an authoritie for the Presidencie of the Pope: the word Residere C being frequently vsed in this sence, and to this purpose, as we may find more than once in one leafe of the life of Pope Agatho, Residere praecepti, vna cum nostris, &c. Residente Synodo cum eius pietate: Residente vna cum principe: and so throughout in this whole Councell. By which we may perceiue with what face Bellarmine af­firmeth, That Agatho his Legats presided; alledging for proofe Zonaras: whereas yet he saith in expresse tearmes, That the Legats of Agatho, [...]. and Gregorie of Constan­tinople, and Theophilus of Antioch, were chiefe Leaders in this Councell: where, as you see, he joyneth them all together. Fourthly, the Synod, contrarie to that which Agatho had formerly boasted of, concerning the infallabilitie of his See, condemned Honorius, one of his predecessors, of Heresie, and that in the face and D presence of his Legats, hauing first seene and compared the copies of his letters with the originall it selfe; and declared him to haue beene Fautorem, concursorem, Action. 12. 13. 17. & 18. & confirmatorem, A fauourer, a concurrent, and an abettor of the Heresie and impietie of the Monothelites, and consequently an instrument of Satan, to whom, with sundrie others, they deliuer him ouer, and damne the memoriall of him for euer. Which sentence was first published in full Councell, and afterwards ratified by expresse letters sent from Leo the second, his successor:Epist. Leo. in 6. Synod. vniuers. D. 19. c. Sicut omnes. Which ouerthroweth that good­lie Canon of Pope Agatho, Sicut omnes, which saith, That all the Decrees of the Bi­shops of Rome ought to be kept and obeyed, as the voyce of Saint Peter himselfe. And as for the ranke and place of the Pope, they bring him backe againe to the ancient E Canons of the second Councell of Constantinople and of Chalcedon, ordai­ning, [...]. Concil. Constant. vniuers. 6. in Trullo. Can. 56. C. Habeo librum & C. Placuit. D. 16. Concil. Nicae. 2. vniuers. 7. Acti­on. 2. & 4. That the See of Constantinople should haue equall priuiledges with that of Rome, and in all Church matters should be honoured as much as the other, as be­ing next in order after her. Neither is it ynough to replie, That this Councell made no Canons, and that therefore this is false: for it hath beene elsewhere suf­ficiently declared, and Gratian himselfe affirmeth as much, That this Synod was assembled at two seuerall times, and that at the second assembling they enacted an hundred and three Canons, as Onuphrius himselfe acknowledgeth; which were afterwards authorised by the second Councell of Nice, being the seuenth Vni­uersall [Page 130] Synod, Act. 14. in the presence of Pope Adrian his Legats, the said Ca­nons A being by the Fathers at their second meeting vnder Iustinian the second (af­ter that he had quieted the troubles of the Empire) taken out of the Records of the first meeting. As for the temporall Estate, Agatho before acknowledged, That Rome was the seruile Citie of the Emperour: Lib. Pontifical. in Agatho. and as a great and high fauour obtai­ned of him a Release or discharge of a certaine summe of money, which the Bishop of Rome was wont to pay into the Emperours coffers for his ordination: yet with conditi­on still,D. 63. c. Agath. 21. That his election should neuer passe vnto ordination without the Emperours pri­uitie and expresse commaund, as the auncient manner was. And this Law hath Gratian himselfe inserted in the Decrete. So that it is no great wonder, if their power reached not altogether so farre as their desire, in the ordination of others: which B we haue heretofore obserued in the Councell of Chaalons, held here in France, and in the 7, 8, 9, and 10 Councels of Toledo; as also we may now obserue in the 12 of Toledo,Concil. Tolet. 12. Ca. 6. which was held in the time of this Agatho, of whom we speake: where we find, that the Prince appointed those for Bishops which were elected by the Prouince; and if they happened to let the See lye void too long, the Archbishop of Toledo furnished the Church, yet so, that he that was elected within a certaine time, might present himselfe to the Metropolitan of the Pro­uince.

Baron. vol. 8. an. 681. art. 47, 48.Yet Baronius will not be satisfied, but saith first, That they which were condem­ned in this Councell appealed to Rome; and secondly, that the Fathers of this C Councell requested confirmation of Agatho: but how may we beleeue him, see­ing that no man, besides himselfe, euer spake of anie Appeale in this case? For the Epistle of the Emperour to Agatho speaketh in this manner, They were thrust out of their Priesthood by the generall voice of the Synod, Actio. 17. sub finem Anast. in Agatho. and left to the approuement of the holie Pope: meaning onely that he should judge of their heartie repentance after­wards, according to their behauiors. And Anastasius maketh this cleere, when he sayth, That they were banished to the Citie of Rome. True (saith Baronius) but yet Con­stantine in his Epistle to Leo the second saith, They haue petitioned to our Grace, that we would send them to your blessed presence; which we haue graunted, and haue sent them vnto you, referring them and their cause vnto your iudgement. I graunt: but how D can this be taken for an Appeale, which proceedeth from the tolleration only, or rather from the Commission of the Emperor? Neither is his second assertion as touching confirmation built vpon anie better ground than is the former; he pro­duceth a certaine new found Epistle,Baron. ib. art. 49. wherein (as he saith) it is thus written, We haue clearely preached vnto you the cleare light of the Orthodox faith, which we entreat your brotherlie Holinesse to confirme by your honourable rescripts or answers: Which words implie not anie suit for ratification, but onely a request for consent: For it is cleare, that the Fathers neuer dreamed that their sentence stood suspended for want of his confirmation: for (say they) we haue driuen them by Anathemaes out of the Courts of the Lord &c. And againe, God moued and God crowned this assemblie. E And againe, All of vs with one heart and tongue and hand haue pronounced this defi­nitiue sentence, void of error, certaine and infallible, by the assistance of the holie Spirit. Is this spoken as if they either expected the Popes pleasure, or attended his lei­sure? But because they tell him, that he by his letters had somewhat holpen them in this businesse, therefore they inferre, That without him they did and could do nothing. By which reason we may as well say, when Leo sent the Acts of his Sy­nod into Spaine, requesting them to receiue and put them in execution, that he requested confirmation of them, making them verier Popes than the Pope him­selfe: [Page 131] A For the 14 Councell of Toledo speaking in more prejudiciall tearmes, Leo the Pope of old Rome (say they) entreated vs by his letters, Concil. Tolet. 14. c. 2. An. 683. that the Acts which he sent vnto vs might stand good, borne vp by the force of our authoritie: and thereupon they made this answere, We (say they) not able at this present to assemble our selues in a Ge­nerall Councell, by reason of the times, haue met at seuerall times and places, and haue read them, approuing what is there ordained touching the doctrine of two natures in Christ &c. And, we haue thought good to confirme these Acts, thereby to satisfie the Bi­shop of Rome, and to declare our consent of faith in plaine and open words. And Baronius himselfe calleth it a Confirmation of the Acts of this Synod. And for a farwell to the time of Agatho, we may remember,An. 681. that in his time was held the 11 Councell of B Toledo, by the commaundement of King Eringus, wherein were handled matters of great importance.