Select Discourses, concerning

  • 1. Councils, the Pope, Schism.
  • 2. The Priviledges of the Isle of Great Britain.
  • 3. The Popes Primacy, and the Su­pream Power of Kings, both in Temporals, and also Spirituals, ac­cordingly as they put on the quali­ty of Temporals, and are means for the hindring, or procuring, the safe­ty of the Republick.

By F. Barnes, of the Order of St. Benedict.

LONDON, Printed by R. I. 1661.

TO THE READER.

Friend,

I Was put upon the in­quiry after the Ma­nuscript of this mo­derate Romanist, our Coun­try-man F. Barnes, by the doublePosit. 4. refe­rence Dr. Basier makes to it in his Marginal Annotations; With some difficulty I at last [Page]recovered a Copy of it; the same, as I remember, the Do­ctour himself used at the com­posure of his Diatribe; which then was, with much secrecy, conveyed from hand to hand, none of us daring to own the having it, upon apprehen­sion of some question, or in­convenience, from the Popes Nuncio in Paris, the Au­thour himself being under his Holinesse's high displeasure, and, as was said, and still is, in the severe Discipline of the Inquisition for it. Though [Page]I presume they will not hold their hand from chastising him, nor with-hold a censure from any other of their own commu­nion; yet I see no reason why they should so much as blame us for improving our advantage by such ingenuous means, as a meer Collection of what hath passed the Press in their pub­lick Writings, which might have been made by any man that had leisure and curiosity enough for the search. Beside, those two Chapters the Doctor sends us to, I have excerpd a [Page]third, which I found significant unto our purpose. The benefit that may arrive to you by all, is this. From the first a satisfa­ction in, or encouragement to, your Communion with that Church which subjects her self to the spiritual Authority of Councils, and Bishops, and Priests; those Powers at first ordained by God, and continu­ed by a succession, uninterrup­ted, among all regular and Catholick Christians in the World. By the second are as­serted to you those Priviledges [Page]of the Britannick Church, so as you will be obliged to justifie her, yea though a Romanist, in the exemption, she pretends to, from the Pope's Jurisdi­ction, with whom yet she de­nies not, but that Christian-Communion might be held, and, why it is not you will un­derstand from the Confessions of his own party. From the third you will collect the reason why the Oath of Supremacy is imposed upon you, and know your indispensable obligation to it; no spiritual person upon [Page]earth, having power to absolve you from it.

My indeavours were not wanting, though successeless, on the other side, to get a Tran­script of that Chapter in Mr. Justell's work, of which the Doctour had great expecta­tion, as you may read in my Let­ter, which I communicated, that you might know the first occasion given of his writing the Diatribe, touching the Li­berty of our Church. The Reverend person, who was pleased to take the trouble of it, [Page]a long time cherished my hopes, relying upon his own interest in, and some promise, I think, from, Mr. Justell's Son, who is possessed of the Books and Papers his Father writ, and, some say, of the learned abili­ties by which he did. At length I was remitted to the Book it self, said to be in the Press, from which the sheets that were for my purpose could not be spared. Whether that re­ference were a mistake or de­lusion, I cannot tell, nor shall make my self so much concer­ned [Page]in it, as to inquire, being more certainly now inform'd, that the foresaid Book is some enlargement upon the Coun­cils Mr. Chr. Justell long since published, and that hee hath left his Geographia Sa­cro-Politica, not half finished, which, so imperfect, the lear­ned Gentleman, his Son, thinks not fit to print; so that I beleeve wee are to hope for lit­tle help from that hand. If what you here have, be not suf­ficient, God be thanked, the Church of England wants not [Page]men highly qualified to accom­plish what ere it was Mr. Ju­stell designed in her behalf; from whom it may be lookt for, when they see cause to intend it. In the mean time accept with gratitude what is already done, and be instructed by it. a Dieu

Yours RI. WATSON.

CHAP. I. Concerning Councils, the Pope, Schism.

WEE must obey and submit our selves to Powers or­dained by God for the Government of his Church, such as are Councils, a Bishops, Priests, to all which obedience prescribed by Canons is to be given; so that wee may not gain-say their decrees, [or opinions] canonically delivered; for hee receiveth damnation to himself, whoso­ever resisteth the Ordinance of God, Roman. 13. And as in the Republick it is Rebel­lion, to oppose the command of the Ci­vil Magistrate, therefore, because he is obnoxious to errour: so is it not void of Schism in the Church, to withdraw from the Ecclesiastical Magistrate under [Page 2]a pretence of errour, b actual, or pos­sible, it being not clearly proved in a le­gitimate sense. Be it therefore, that onely the written Word of God is, of necessity, infallible, and that Bishops and Councils may erre; yet until their errour may be convinced in judgement, they must be obeyed, for avoiding of Schism, no less than the Civil Magi­strate unconvicted of errour; yea obe­dience is yeelded him while hee errs. Now of Catholick Tribunals a Coun­cil is supream, unto which the Pope, all Bishops, and, beside them, all faithful people are obliged to resign themselves in things spiritual; yea, if the Pope should pertinaciously withstand a decree of Faith in an Oecumenick Council, hee would be presumed an Heretick, and separation from him, as from an Heretick, may be made, without the character of Schism, by denying him obedience, fel­lowship and communion, especially after the declaration of the Church, according to prescript and Rule of the Canons.

Paralipomena.

a SEE my Tractate concerning the Su­premacy of Councils, wherein I have proved out of the Scriptures, and per­petual practice of the Church, that Popes are subject to the Canons; That the Dea­cons of Rome, preferring themselves be­fore Priests, against the eighteenth Ca­non of the Council of Nice, the Pope see­ing and consenting, St. Hierom Epist. 85. ad Evagr. calls men without sense or rea­son. Why (saith hee) do yee alledge to mee the custome of one City? why vindicate you a small number, of which this pride is sprung against the Laws of the Church? Augustin in Q. Vet. & Nov. Test. q. 10. styles the same Deacons somewhat immo­dest, in that they live neither by Law, Cu­stome, nor Example; but, because they are Ministers of the Roman Church, think themselves more venerable than any o­ther.

In the second Synod, Flavianus being excommunicated by the Bishop of [Page 4] Rome (as theLib. 10. cap. 10. Tripartite history shews) is restored against his will by the first Synod, as ap­pears by a Synodal E­pistle inLib. 5. cap. 9. Theodoret, accor­ding to the Prescript of the Nicene Law and Decision, as the Canon requires.

In the third general Synod (notwith­standing the18 Num. in Edit. 6.55. Epistle of Innocent the first to A­lexander, wherein he de­clares, that the Cyprians are not wise ac­cording to the Faith, unless they subject themselves to the Patriarch of Antioch) it was decreed, that what the Patriarch of Antioch attempted, was praeter-cano­nical, and therefore the Holy and Uni­versal Synod declares, that all Letters brought by him against the Cyprians, were void. So in the 178 Canon of the Code of the Universal Church.

Et Tom. 2. E­phesin. Append. 1. cap 4.In the Council of Chalcedon, Act. 18. the Legats of Leo the first contradicted the Privi­ledges of the Constantinopolitan Patriarch; [Page 5]but, because they were according to the Canon of the fifty Holy Fathers assem­bled at Constantinople, Leo 1. withstand­ing, it was Synodically defined for the Patriarch of Constantinople.

These out of the Acts of the four ge­neral Councils, whichCan. sicut. Dist. 16. Gregory receives as the four Books of the Holy Evangel. yea (as Cardinal Deus-dedit [i. e. God-gave] observeth in his Col­lection of Canons) there was an ancient form of the Popes Oath, which is yet extant,Can. sicut. Dist. 16. wherein hee sweareth, that he will ob­serve the four Councils to a title; out of which the most learnedIn Consult. Ve­net. Leschasseri­us wittily infers, That the Pope of Rome cannot by right contend that hee is above those Canons of the Councils, unless hee arrogate to himself a power a­bove the four Evangels.

Agreeable to this oath of the Pope is the ancient Profession ofCan. Cont. Sta­tut. 5. q. 5. Pope Zozimus. The [Page 6]Authority of this See cannot ordain, or change, any thing against the decrees of the Fathers. AndIbidem Canon. sunt quidam. Pope Ur­ban. Where the Holy Fa­thers have judicially defi­ned any thing, there the Pope of Rome ought not to give a new Law, but to the hazard of life and blood, confirm rather what is published. TheCan. 8. E­phesine Council expresly orders, that every single Church of the Provinces, should have its rights preserved. Hence arise the Appeals ab abusu, and exceptions against the new Oecumenical commands. So the Gallick Bishops, un­der Ludovicus Pius, except formally in these words against certain new Laws, That they will obey them, unless the Autho­rity of the ancient Canons order otherwise. AndTract. de Libert. Eccles. Leschasserius hath another honest note con­cerning the Gallick Na­tion; That it was the usual manner of the Gallick Church to profess, That shee acknowledged not the Pope of Rome, but legitimately and canonically. Which [Page 7]is the restriction of the Universal Church, as hee there learnedly proveth. Hence the African Fa­thers, in aCap. 105. Synod under Boniface, and Coelestine, refuse to obey the commands of those Popes, because they found it ordained by no Synod of the Fathers, that any such thing should bee done. And, that I may pass by Hinc­marus inTom. 10. Anno 878. num. 30. Baronius, who saith, Hee receives the de­crees of the Popes approved by Holy Councils, and Gerbertus (after­ward calledEod. Tom. Anno 992. N. 42. Sylvester the second) accepting the decrees of the Apostoli­cal See, with this clause, so they bee not dissonant from these Canons; Illustrious was the testimony of St. Ignatius the Constantinopolitan; and so of the whole Church approving his fact even to this day, inTom. 10. Anno 818. N. 48. Ba­ronius; For he passed by with a deaf ear, the Pope excommuni­cating him, unless within thirty daies he recalled his Priests out of Bulgaria. And [Page 8] Baronius doth not think Ignatius excom­municate, for that command not fulfil­led, because hee defended the right of his Church, as hee was bound by oath, on the hazard of life eternal. Therefore of greater authority is a Canon granting priviledge to the Church of Constanti­nople, than a command of the Pope, even Baronius being Judge.

See the very learned Collections of Vigorius Comment. in Reipub. Synodal. p. 26, 46, 22.

And because Hincmarus a most con­stant Defender of the Canons, is bitter­ly taxed by Baronius, Dunallius, and ma­ny more Neotericks, I would have the Reader take notice, that hee is praised byAd An. 109. N. 42. Baronius, Tom. 2. as a man very famous for learning and piety.

Look Cassand. lib. De Officio pii viri. They which make the Pope of Rome little less than God, and exalt his authority not onely above the whole Church, but above the Divine Scripture it self, and constitute his decree, equal to the Divine Oracles; yea, [Page 9]the infallible Rule of Faith; I see no rea­son why you may not call them Pseudo-Ca­tholicks and Papists.

b That the withdrawing from the Ecclesiastical Magistracy of the Roman Church, is deservedly reputed Schisma­tical, I will confirm by the testimonies of Cassander, and the Arch-Bishop of Spa­lato, yet writing in England; which may seem to arise rather from the desert of the thing, than their blind affection to­ward the Roman Church.

Cassander saith thus, in Tract. De Of­ficio pii viri. Very many of them who have assumed their name from the Evangel, despise utterly that party which hath retain­ed the ancient name of Catholicks, and the Roman Church, and fly off from all com­munion with it; nor do they account it a member of the same body, but abominate it as the very body of Satan and Antichrist. This I know truly, and lament, and do not see how they that are such, can be exempted from the imputation of Schism. And hee observeth, that Luther himself at first confessed as much; yea, and afterward, [Page 10]when made more fierce by the Popes Bull, hee did not deny, that the Roman Church, wherein the Roman Pontifie swayed, was the true Church of Christ, although hee proclaimed the Gover­nours of it, as the Pope, Cardinals, &c. not Members, but Tyrants and Enemies of the Church. For be it, that the Pope is the Antichrist, who, Paul teacheth, is to sit in the true Temple, and true Church of God; yet wee must abide in the true Church, that the evil Pastour may be cast out of it; for by our departure from the Church, hee shall not the sooner be put out of doors. Beside, know, That it is one thing to recede from commu­nion with the Pope, another, from com­munion with the Church: for in case of Heresie declared, the Canons perswade, and command, both to adhere to her Canons, and to separate ones-self from e­very Bishop that teacheth amiss. To this purpose may be read the Canons of the Universal Church; the third Canon of the Ephesine Council. Wee command those Clerks, who either have, or do, disunite, by [Page 11]no means to obey their Bishops, [...], nor at all, in any manner, to bee subject unto them. And Can. 1. A Metropolitane, being an Here­tick, can do nothing against the Bishops of his Province. And Synod. Constant. [...]. Can. 13. They that separate them­selves from communion with their Prelate, being condemned for Heresie by the Holy Fathers, or Synods, that is, hee preaching Heresie publickly, they shall not onely not be subject to Canonical punishment, before a hearing in the Synod, having separated themselves from communion with him, who is called their Bishop; but shall be accounted worthy of the honour meet for Orthodox persons; for they have not condemned their Bishops, but their Pseudo-Episcopal teachers; nor have they rent by Schism the union of the Church; but have endeavoured to free the Church from Schisms and Divisions. The same speaks the single Canon of the Carthaginian Synod under Cyprian, which is extant in Balsamon and Zonaras, joyned to the Synod of Carthage. Videatur Ca­non 6. & 9, 32, 33. Laodicenus, & 9. [Page 12] Canon P. Timothei Alexandrini.

CHAP. 2. Concerning the Priviledges OF THE Isle of Great Britain.

WHat some have writ, is truly to be lamented, That the Kings of Great Britain are Feudataries of the See Apostolick, and consequently subject to the Holy Pope (as Monarch independent on the Canons) as well in Temporals, as Spi­rituals; whereby they have too much exasperated them, and alienated them from their Obedience to His Holiness, and Roman-Catholick Communion. It were here to be wished, that the Holy Pope would yeeld somewhat to the publick peace and safety of Great Britain, and be content that the most Serene King and Kingdome of Great Britain, might be admitted to the Communion [Page 13]of the Holy Roman Church, without a­ny actual dependance on the Sovereign­ty of the Holy Pope, until, at least, in a full and free Council, a remedy might be gotten for this mis-fortune. Now I shall assign a threefold Theological Foundation, out of which (with sub­mission to better judgement) appears, that such a Council is probable, and con­venient to be assembled.

(A) The first is a grievous fear, which the wiser Politicians conceive, as affairs stand in Britain, from an actual subjection to be yeelded to the See Apostolick; and truly who would not fear to be subject unto him, that, if you displease him, can, in a little half hours space, take a­way Kingdome, and Life, and Reputa­tion, and is able to arm his Catholick Subjects against him? The second foun­dation is, because adhering to the de­crees of the Councils of Constance, and Basil, which have declared them to bee accounted Hereticks, who maintain, (B) That the Pope is not subject to General Councils; it seems in practice, the modern [Page 14]Popes are to be accounted (C) Hereticks, especially since they pertinaciously de­fend the Heresie which the said Fathers condemned, by censures of the Bull in Coena. Which I speak not to raise a controversie against His Holiness, but humbly to insinuate a probable founda­tion of pacifying so illustrious a King­dome, and aggregating it to the Catho­lick Church. The third is, because by the Ephesine Canon the ancient privi­ledges of Churches ought to be conser­ved, yea, if ravished away by force, to be recovered. Now the Isle of Britain, in times past, hath enjoyed the Cyprian priviledge, that it should be subject to the Law of no (D) Patriarch; & although this priviledge was heretofore abolished by the tumults and violence of wars; yet, whereas in the time of Henry the eighth, it hath been recalled by the consent of the whole Kingdome, and since that time peaceably prescribed, it seems that, for peace-sake, it ought to be retained, without the loss of Catholicism, or the brand of any Schism, so that in other [Page 15]things the Kingdome conform it self to the Universal Canons and Customes of the Catholick Church. These things I humbly suggest to His Holiness, ready to bee corrected by Him, if in any parti­cular I have erred from the truth.

Paralipomena.

(A) SEarch the resolution of theBochel. in Decret. dict. 1. Gal. l. 5. Tit. 5. Cap. 5. ss. 3. Galli­can Church in the Council of Tours, 1510. under Lewis 12. where the question is put, Whe­ther, for notorious hatred, and unjust assault, it be lawful for a Prince to withdraw him­self from the obedience of the Pope, atten­ding so long, until the Pope have stirred up other Princes and Communities, yea, and hath attempted to compel them to invade the Countries and Dominions of the said Prince. It was concluded by the Coun­cil, That the Prince may substract himself from the obedience of such a Pope, and with­draw for the maintenance and defence only of his temporal rights. And Gerson [Page 16] Tract. de Aufe­ribilitate Papae ab Ecclesia; Consid. 14. excellently. If there be any one who would convert his Presidence, and Papal dignity into an instrument of wickedness, and destruction of some part of the Church, in Temporals, or Spirituals, and that there appear no other sufficient re­medy, but by withdrawing himself from such a raging and self-abusing Pope; and this for a time, until the Church or a Council shall provide; This shall be law­ful, yet so, as that a certain pious necessity urgeth to do it. The same hee asserteth in the question, Whether in controversies of Faith it be lawful to appeal from the Pope? where hee saith, The like substractions were approved by the holy Council of Con­stance, and that so was practised in the council of Pisa, from which theIn Ep. apud Nyem. lib. 3. c. 34. Cardinal of Liege writing, saith, that what was just before affirmed by Gerson, is most assured; and alledgeth for himself Augu­stin, Ambrose, Bede, and others. And Gerson saith, that this Proposition of Petrus de Luna, That it is never lawful to [Page 17]make a substraction from the true Pope, was reputed Heretical in the Council of Con­stance. Now, whether the causes of sub­straction, in the Kingdome of Great Bri­tain, are sufficient, is not a matter of Faith, but Fact, wherein wee must stand to the reasons and authority of the more wise and skilful persons. For the Pre­lates of the Church, when the question is concerning the admission of penitents to the Communion and Sacraments of the Church, ought not, especially in matters of fact, to be so tenacious of their own opinion. Let them beware lightly to condemn of mortal sin, when as in the practick, for a strong reason or authority, the opinion of the penitent might be probable. Unto which, the practick being laid down, by reason of some circumstance, or the possession of some other, Confessours ought to con­form themselves in their own opinion. For surely they are not alwaies obliged to follow the safer opinion, if it bee the more rigid; if they follow one that is safe, it is enough; but if the opinion of [Page 18]the Penitent be not accounted very safe, let Confessours consider whether they may leave him in ignorance, with dis­charge of their trust. In doubtful cases, Confessours ought to follow the more fa­vourable opinion, for their penitents sake. In Sum. De Sacr. poenit. ca. 26. num. 8. So Hen­riques a Divine of the So­ciety of Jesus, out of Na­varre, Sylvester, and Cordubensis, whom hee cites, and followeth. I suppose it to bee accounted an opinion, not onely pro­bable, but certain, among Writers, who favour the party of the (B) Holy Pope, (C) That that Faith is to be received for Catholick (so as the opposite is hereti­cal, and they accused of Heresie that defend the same) which is delivered as such by the definition of an Oecumenick Council, approved by an undoubted Pope; But when asDe Locis l. 5. c. 4. Conclus. 3. Ca­nus, Lib. 4. De Rom. Pontif. cap. 2. Bellarmine, &c. do every where confess; But when as theSess. 4. & 5. Council of Constance, approved by theSess. 16. Bull of Martin 5. andSess. 2. that of Basil [Page 19]confirmed for legitimate by the Bull of Eugenius, determine the Pope to be un­der an Oecumenick Council; it is at least probable that the opposite to it is Here­sie. Chronicon Chronicorum, the work of a learned nameless Writer, in the time of Eugenius the fourth, and one that fa­voured him, writes, That Eugenius, by Apostolick Letters, approved their de­crees. So likewise Platina in Eugenius; and it is a matter very well known to him that reads the Bulls. The Univer­sity of Paris, in an appeal against Leo the tenth, saith, That the condemnation of the Council of Basil is against the Catholick Faith. T. 2. Comment. de Gest. Concil. Ba­sil. 9. Aeneas Sylvius reports, That an Almoner to the King of Arragon, a Bishop of Eureux, an Ab­bot of Virgiliac, and a Bishop of Lubec, when they perceived their hour of death to approach, having called many grave men to them, in the very presence of Christs body, which they were present­ly to receive, and before whose Tribunal, within few hours, to appear, spake thus; [Page 20] All you who are present, pray yee God that hee would convert them who acknowledge Gabriel for the Holy Pope, because in that state they cannot be saved; professing in their own behalf, That they died in the Faith of the Council of Basil. Lewis Car­dinal of Arles, a man famous for learn­ing and miracles, calls Eugenius a Deva­statour of the Church, and those that ad­here to him, men departing from the truth of the Faith. And on the contrary, hee saith, Those that adhere to the Council of Basil, will not refuse to dye for the truth of the Faith, and traditions of the Holy Fa­thers. Aeneas Sylvius, in the same place, calls the Anti-Synodal sentence, The Eugenian Heresie. The Council of Pisa, among these in Bochellus, calls Cajetans little Book, concerning the Authority of the Pope, because it is against the Coun­cils of Constance, Basil, and Pisa, and a­gainst John Gerson, the best defender of the Church, suspected, and full of inju­ries; and Cajetan for it, is termed, a bold and dangerous man. And the most learned man Vigorius witnesseth, That, [Page 21] in the Pragmatical Sanction of Charls the seventh, the Decrees of the Council of Basil, were received with the consent of all the Orders of France, the Gallican Church, and Universities.

Moreover, Pius the second, in Bulla re­tract. witnesseth, That honour is given to the Council of Basil, by men almost of all Nations; so that Vigorius truly related in the cited place, That it was pronounced by the best Lawyers, whom hee quotes, an arrogant and sacrilegious thing, to demur at the things approved by the Council of (D) Constance, or the Conciliary authority it self.

See the Speech of St. Robert of Lin­coln, in Westminster, Matth. Paris 1253. Polychronicon, Fabian, and Harpsfield, who thinks it would be the greatest sort of pertinacy in the holy Pontifies, to compel men, by censures and excommunications, to embrace those things which are bad, and which fight against faith and good manners. But the Bull in Coena forbidding appeals to General Councils, under pain of ex­communication, doth in effect forbid [Page 22]them to be above the Pope; for, as the Lawyers teach, It were open iniquity, and against the Law of Nature, to prohibit an appeal unto him, who is acknowledged to be Superiour. Hee therefore that will seem holily to take away Appeals to Councils by censures, potentially takes away their Supre­macy, and highest power over the Popes. These are the words of Westminster, re­lating to the year 1254. under Henry the third. Hee grievously reproves as well the Friars Preachers, as the Mi­nours, saying, That therefore their order is constituted in voluntary poverty, that they might more freely rebuke great ones for their errour; But in that they do not reprehend the sins of great persons, hee said, They were manifest Hereticks, and added, Heresie is an opinion chosen by hu­mane sense, contrary to Holy Scripture, openly taught, obstinately defended; But to give cure of souls to a little childe, is the opinion of a certain Prelate chosen by humane sense, for carnal reason, or through rashness, and it is contrary to Ho­ly Scripture, which prohibits Pastours to [Page 23]be made, who are not meet to drive a­way the Wolves; And it is openly taught, because it is manifestly carried in sealed or embossed Paper, Chartâ sigillatâ vel bullata; And it is obstinately defended, because if any one would contradict it; and doth not contradict it, hee sinneth, and seems to be a favourer of errour; ac­cording to that of Gregory. Hee wants not a scruple of close co-partnership, who ceaseth to oppose a manifest wickedness. These things hee spake upon occasion of the Popes Letters, appointing to have some­what done, which seemed unjust for a Bishop of the Church, and disso­nant from reason.

The Judgement of Westminster con­cerning St. Robert, is of this sort. This Ro­bert having a good zeal unto the Lord, and his neighbour, although hee vexed much his Canonicks, and darted lightning ter­ribly against the Religious of both Sexes; yet I confidently averre, That his vertues have pleased God more than his excesses have displeased him, which now is mani­fest, by the miracles shining forth at his [Page 24]tomb. And that although our Lord the Pope being very much moved at deeds and words of that sort, determined to precipitate him into confusion, that hee might become an astonishment, and an Example of trem­bling to the whole world: yet at length be­ing mollified by better counsel, permitted him to passe away, without taking any no­tice of it, lest he might seem to raise a grea­ter tumult hereupon. Thus hee. See the Authors before cited. I think I shall do what will bee acceptable to such as are studious of Antiquity, if I here briefly transcribe out of my Tractate some few things, by which it may appear that the Britains and Scots, whom wee call Irish, before the coming of Augustin into Eng­land, were Catholicks, and enjoyed the same Priviledges in the Western Church, as wherewith the Cyprians were honou­red in the Eastern. Gildas the Wise wri­teth, That Britain almost from the age of the Apostles, had Bishops, who com­municated with the rest of the world inPacificis & for­matis. Pacifique and formed letters, even [Page 25]from the beginning of the Gospel. Ter­tullian in his Book against the Jews Num. 43. of Pamelius's Edition, after hee hath reckoned up all the Catholick Churches throughout the world, adds, And the Britains holds, inaccessible to the Romans, are subdued to the yoak of Christ. And Pamelius upon the said place, out of Bede, and Polydore Virgil, confesseth, That Britain had publickly received the whole Evangile, not onely in the time of Mar­cus Antoninus Verus, under King Lucius, but asserts also out ofLib. de excid. Britan. Gildas, from the begin­ning of the Gospel; Out of Polydore Virgil, That the Britains had received the Religion of Christ, from Blessed Joseph of Arimathea. See there­uponIn Desens. Hist. Britan. Bilsius andIn 6. primi se­cul. cap 1. Harps­field. With Gildas not onely Tertullian giveth suffrage, but alsoHom. 4. in Eze­chiel. Origen; yea andIn secunda Apol. contra Arian. St. Athanasius glorieth, That Bishops passed out of Britain to the Council of Sardis, wherein Atha­nasius's [Page 26]absolution was obtained. And in his Epistle to Jovinian, then Emperour, which is extant inCap. 42. Nice­phorus Calixtus's tenth Book of Ecclesiastical History, he proves, that hee communicates with the Catho­licks diffused through the world, and a­mong others with the Spanish, Britan­nick, and Gallick Churches, which, hee saith, by common consent receive the Catholick Faith of Athanasius. Hierom in his 85th. Epistle. Both Gaule and Bri­tain adore one Christ, observe one Rule of Truth. The same thing teachethIn Orat. contr. Gent. Chrysostome; And that Catholick Bishops came from Britain to the Coun­cil of Ariminum, is mani­fest out of Severus Sulpi­tius, Theodoret, In Chron. Hierome, Ruffinus, Socrates, Zozo­men, In 15. Primi se­culi. cited by Harpsfield. That the Britannick Church kept this Communion and unity of Rule with the Gallicane, to the coming of St. Augustin into England, and afterward, I have [Page 27]proved in a large Tractate concerning the Primacy of Councils; and it appears out of the first book of the History of the English Nation, Cap. 20. Hist. 6 prim. sec. Harps­field, and other English Writers, That the Gallick Church sent into Britain St. German and Lupus, before the coming of Augustin into England, to succour the Britannick Church. AndLib. 3. cap. 7. Bede re­lates, That Aegilbert a Gallick Bishop resided no small time in Ireland, being imployed in reading upon the Scripture; Moreover it appears out ofHist. lib. 4. Bede, Hist. 7. Seculi. cap. 36. Harpsfield, Su­rius, and others, That Hilda the Nunne of Ca­lice was sent into England by St. Aidan, and had communicated with the Britannick Church. But on the other side presently, when as she lived in the Monastery at Calice, That St. Ma­lo, Brendan, Samson, Polensis, about the year 550. communicated with the Gal­lick and Aremorick Churches, more­over with the Britannick and Irish, as [Page 28]appears out ofC. 26.27. Hist. Harpsfield, among o­ther things, Argentraus, and such like Writers; And that St. Turseus did the same, Ceadde, Fislan, Vetan, Eustathius, Disciple of St. Columban, Disigod, Fridegund, Cedwall, King Oswald, Wigbert, Fiakre, Willebrod, Columban, who communica­ted with both Church, the Britannick and Gallick. The Britannick Church therefore, in the time of St. Augustin, the Apostle, as they call him, of England, was Catholick, and consequently the Scotick or Irish; for it is evident out ofL. 2. c. 4. Hist. Bede, That the Irish, whom they call'd Scots, lead the like course of life and profession; and afterward, The Scots differed nothing in conversion from the Britains. Now it appears out ofL. 1. Hist. c. 7. Bede, in the place last cited, and o­therwise, as alsoHist. l. 3. Henry of Huntington, That neither Britains, nor Scots, would communicate with the English, and their Bishop Augu­stin, more than with Pagans, as Hunting­ton [Page 29]speaks; and the reason was, because Augustin seemed to deal with them un­canonically, by constraining them to receive him for their Arch-Bishop, and to submit themselves to the mandates of Foreigners, when as the ancient man­ners of their Church required, that they should act all things Synodically among themselves, as in their Ordina­tions of Bishops, so in other affairs of the Church; their words out ofL. 2. Eccles. Hist. c. 2. Bede, are, Because they cannot, without the consent and license of their [Clergy so assem­bled] renounce their ancient man­ners, when as this appears to be against the sixth Nicene Canon, which commands ancient manners to be kept; and the eighth of the Ephesine Council, which will not have the rights of Churches taken away, and if they be taken away, even by what Patriarch soever, his fact is declared void; and command is given him, that hee re­store the Province, which hee hath made his own. In the mean time what are the manners of the Britannick Church, ap­pears [Page 30]out ofc­ L. 3. c. 3. Bede. St. Oswald the King, an observer of the Scotick and Britannick communion, desiring to have a Bishop, by whose learning and Ministry hee might be ruled, the English Nation sent unto the Ancients of the Scots; they be­gin to hold a great Treaty in Council, what should bee done; They decree Aidan worthy of the Episcopate, and so ordaining him, send him to preach; Which custome continued a long time in Ireland, as appears out of Sylvester, Girald, and the Topographie of Ireland. Dist. 3. c. [...]7. In Ireland the Bishops only consecrated one another to the time of Eugenius the 3d. wherein Pa­pirio was sent Legate to constitute Arch-Bishops there. And both inLib. 3. Huntington andL. 2. Hist. Bede, it is manifest, that the Scots and Britains act all their businesses by common consent. As evident it is out of Baronius, at the year 1089. In the end of that year Lanfrank, [Arch-Bishop] of Canterbury, relates in [Page 31]an Epistle to Serdalnac, King of Ireland, That the customes of the Kingdome were, that Bishops might be consecrated by one Bishop; Yea, that the Britannick Churches were Catholick, in the Judge­ment of Augustin himself, with whom they would not communicate, appears out ofL. 2. Hist. c. 2. Bede, for Augu­stin offers the Bishops of Britain his communion, if they would conform themselves to the Roman Church, in the ceremonies of Baptism, and observation of Easter; which shew, that the Britains agree with Augustin in matters of Faith. About this, by the way, mark a lapse of Bede; for in his Book concerning the sixth Age, Anno Mundi 4585. hee writes, That the Scots were Quartodecimans; and yetL. 3. c. 4. Bede saith, That they celebrated Easter on the Lords day, on which it is manifest, Anatolius, Patriarch of Constantinople celebrated it, who is as­serted to have delivered to them his use. The ancient manners of Britain were ab­rogated more by the force and power of [Page 32]the English Saxons, then Synodical con­sent; which those most holy men, Col­man and his fellows, seeing, had rather desert their Bishop and Monasteries, than their ancient manners of living, asL. 3. cap. 16. Bede relates. Since these things had been so, the three States of England, wil­ling to retrive the ancient Rites of the Kingdome, taken away more by force and power, than by Canon, by concession of the eighth Canon of the Ephesine Council, in the 24th. year of Henry the eighth,Cap. 12. Statut. decreed, that contro­versies should be determined within the limits of the Kingdome, without ap­peal to Foreiners.

CHAP. 3. Concerning The Popes Primacy, and Supreme Power of Kings, both in temporals, and also Spi­rituals, as they put on a Temporal re­spect, and are means for the hindring or procuring the safety of the Republick.

THe (A) Holy Fathers give a Pri­macy to the Roman Pontifie; That Primacy (as to Divine Right) confers not upon the Pope more authority over the rest of the Bishops, than hath the first President of a (B) Parliamentary Court over the rest of the (C) Sena­tours; And there being a double Ad­vent of Christ into this World; the first which he hath passed in the habit of a servant to minister; the second which makes an expectation of him in the form of a Lord and Monarch,Psal. 2. Matth. 2. to rule and break in peeces the Nations with a Rod of Iron, and to subdue all things unto himself; [Page 34]it is not without inconvenience, that the Disciples of Christ, who was a Servant, should bee Lords, and placed above their Master; And, whereas Christ was subject to the (D) Royal Power, and humbly obeyed it, that the Vicar of Christ should exercise empire and do­minion in Temporals over Temporal Lords. Kings have supreme power (E) immediately from God, and infe­riour to God alone in Temporals; yet by Temporals I understand, not onely those things which are meerly temporal, but also (F) Spirituals, especially cor­poreal, so far as they are necessary to conserve the quiet of the Temporal Republick, or oppose it by some neces­sary impediment; for under that consi­deration spirituals exceed the limits of Spirituals, and enter into the rank of Temporals; And, according to this ex­plication, can it be defended in a sound and Catholick sense, That Kings are Su­preme Lords in Spirituals, as they put on a temporal respect, no less than in Tempo­rals.

Paralipomena.

(A) MAtth. 10.2. Peter is called [...] the first, and that for some singular honour, as is observed byEp. prima ad Ja­cob. Dionys. Areo­pag. de Divin. no­min. c. 3. Hippolyt. Orat. De consum. Mundi. Origen. Hom. 5. in Exod. Hom. 17. in Luc. In cap. 6. ad Rom. Petr. Alexandr. Serm. de Poenitent. Euscb. Caesar. Hist. l. 2. c. 13, 14, Athanas [...] ad Felic. Basil. in c. 2. Esal. Orat. 3. de Peccato. Li. 2. contr. Eunom. Cyril. Hierosol. Catech. 2, 11, 14. Ephraem. Syro in Panopl. Gregor. Nazianz. in Apologet. ad Patr. Gregor. Epiphan. Haer. 51. Et in Anchorato. Chrysost. Orat. 5. in Jud. Et Orat. in Petr. & Paul. Hom. 23. in Matth. Item 83. Et Hom. 87. in Joan. Et Hom 80. ad Pop. Antiochen. Et Tom. 9. de Poenit. Cyril. Alex. l. 2. in Joan. c. 12. Et l. 4. c. 18. Et l. 10. c. 41. Et l. 12. c. 64. Et lib. 14. Thesaur. c. 2. Isidor. Pelus. l. 1. Ep. 142, 235. L. 2. Ep. 58, 99. Sozomen. l. 7. c. 4. Theodoret. in c. 1. ad Gal. Concil. Chalced. Act. 3. Joan. Damasc. Orat. de Transfig. Domini. Et Hist. Barlaam. c. 11. Theophyl. in 16. Matth. In 22. Luc. 21. Joan. In Epist. ad Gal. c. 1. Oecumen. in c. 1. Act. in c. 1. ad Gal. Euthym. in 16. Matth. Et 21. Joan. & 16. Marc. Clement, and many o­ther Greek Fathers [cited in the Margin.]

Hee is also honoured by all the La­tins, whom, that I bee not too profuse, [Page 36]you may see quoted byIn Thes. aureo. l. 7. art. 4. & 5. Iodoc. Coccius, who also sheweth how both Greek and Latin Fa­thers agree, that the Ro­man Bishops have suc­ceeded Peter, asEpist. 165. Et contr. Lit. Petil. l. 2. c. 5. Augu­stin expresly.

(B) Vigorius In Comment. ad Epist. Synod. Basil. ss. 4. num. 1. explains most learnedly the Pri­macy of the Holy Pope, in these words. The Primacy was not for this, that the successour of St. Peter should imperiously act all, at his pleasure; but that hee should be Moderatour and President of the Ecclesiastick Council, that is, the Cler­gy, as saith Cyprian. And in cases of dif­ficulty, and great moment, that hee should assemble a Council of Bishops, over whom hee might preside, as it is in the 33. Canon of the Apostles. But what things regard the plenitude of Power in the Roman Pon­tifie, they particularly accrewed to him af­terward, either from Councils, or use and custome, or by the amplitude of the City, or from the Emperours. The same deliversDe Benes. ibid. Duarenus, and the Ro­man [Page 37]Law apertly, whichCap. Conquestus 9. q. 3. Et c. 2. de Offic. Judic. Ord. Vigorius citeth, Wee define, That Primates, or Patriarchs, have no pri­viledge above the rest of the Bishops, but so much as the Holy Canons grant, and ancient Cu­stome hath of old conferr'd upon them. And in my Tractate concerning the Primacy of Councils, shortly to be published, I have shewed at large, That the Roman Pontifie, in respect of other Bishops, as Successour of St. Peter, by divine right, in regard of his Primacy, hath no actual Jurisdiction more than other Bishops have, but at the highest hath a certain habitual power by the Canons of the Church, to be extended or contracted for the commodity of the Christian Re­publick.

(C) The Doctors which say, That Temporal power belongs not unto the Pope, by divine right, have been moved to assert it, for that Christ had it not in his first Advent. Withrington cites almost forty of them in his Apology, whom you may there see. I will be content [Page 38]here to produce the judgement of oneAliace [...]s. in quaest. de resumpt. Cardinal [who writes thus.] If any sayings of holy men seem to intimate, That secular Judgements belong to Bi­shops, they ought to be understood, not con­cerning the judgement of coaction, but the judgement of discretion; and that this pertains to them not by natural or divine right, but by humane and Positive. Christ and his Apostles would subject themselves humbly to the Laws of Princes, and it seems a rash thing to affirm, that the fore­said are by divine right. And the Cardinal proves his speech concerning Christ, out of John 19. where Christ confesseth, That Pilate had power given by God to judge him.

Apologet. c. 21. Tertullian, among the rest, distinguisheth hand­somely this double Advent of Christ, where he calleth the first an Advent in humility, the second, in sublimity. The sameLib. advers. Tuel. cap. 19. Et lib. 3. contr. Marcion c. 7. Father, other­where calleth the power, a Royal Power in the Ad­vent [Page 39]of Christ. Concerning the Supreme Power of Kings, excellent is the confes­sion of the Ancient Church inApol. cap. 29. Tertul­lian. Emperours are next to God, the first after God; The Emperour is therefore Great, because hee is less than Heaven [that is, onely Heaven] Thence is the Emperour, whence is the man, before hee is Emperour; thence hath hee power, whence hee likewise hath breath. And chap. 35. I subject the Em­perour onely to God. And chap. 34. Lord under God, or representative of God, Do­minus vice Dei. And to Scapula, chap. 2. Hee is man next to God, less than onely God, greater than all, while less than God alone. This he.

Concerning this, let the Disputation at large bee viewed in the Author of the3. Par. De Pot. Pontif. pag. 416. & q. 3. Apologie for Andrew Dunal, wherein the Par­liamentary Custome in France is defended a­gainst the 25th. Section of the third Canon in the Council of Trent, accor­ding to the sense of Dunallius, who argues [Page 40]out ofRom. 13. & Act. 25. Paul andChrys. in 13. Rom. Chrysostom. And the Gloss also maintains, That Clerks, and Monks, are subjected to the commands of secular Princes, and to be governed by their Laws, so far as they pertain to the common society of living in a Kingdome, that most of all cherisheth peace and tranquillity, which cannot but ob­lige Clerks, so that necessarily they ought to obey them, their Clericate notwithstanding. And by what right hee saith that con­cerning the Ecclesiastick and spiritual personages of Clerks, hee ought to aver the same concerning their corporeal actions, yea their sacred and spiritual. And this Doctrine (as at large is proved in the said Apology) both Chrysostome and the Gloss assert in the cited places. Beside, the reasons which are brought byL. 5. De Rom. Pontif. Bellarmin, out of Scriptures, and Fa­thers, to prove, That sometimes the tem­poral Power is subjected to the Ecclesiastick, in order to a spiritual end; prove also, That the Ecclesiastick is subjected to the [Page 41]Temporal, in order to a Temporal end; as often as it may hinder, or conduce neces­sarily unto it.L. 1. c. 3. contr. Parmenian. Augustin also expresly inculcates this Doctrine, and calls them most unskilful peo­ple, that contradict it.In Tract. de Ju­risd. Imperat. Oc­cam, in his cases of Matri­mony, speaks thus. To say, That Spi­ritual causes no way pertain to a faithful Emperour, is judged erroneous by some; and hee saith, The Spirituals about which pre­cisely the Episcopal Power is conversant, are the Spirituals which are delivered onely in the Divine Scriptures, and which are no way common to the faithful and unfaithful. AndDialog. cap. 99. otherwhere hee saith, It is evident, That they who perturb the peace of the Church ought to bee suppressed by secular Powers. And herein theCap. 15. q. 5. c. Princeps. Gloss is of the same sense with Oc­cam. The same hathC. 3. q. 1.2. quale. Pope Pelagius, AndP. De potest. Pap. c. 14. Joan. Pa­risiens: When the Pope in Spirituals, as the Simonaick collation of [Page 42]Benefices, by evil teaching, &c. scandali­zeth the Church, nor is there any other re­medy, the Emperour, being required, ought to proceed against the Pope. And theSess. 2. Council of Basil yeelds a jurisdiction of punishing con­temners of the Canons by the secular Magistrate.Par. 3. q. 3. De Pot. Pap. Dunallius saith, That it is offensive unto Kings, to say, A Clerk that is a Parricide, Sorcerer, Traitour, one that lyeth in wait for the life of his Prince, cannot be punished by a secular Judge. And these things are not to be maintained in France. The Gloss on Rom. 13. citeth Hierome upon Jeremiah. Vid. Rhemens. de Pot. Reg. cap. 7. In 9. Abus. Cyprian saith, That Princes ought to defend their Churches, even against the abuses of Prelates. Pope Sylvester the fifth teacheth it, after Innocentius. AndLib 2. de Con­cil. cap. 19. & ult. Paludan. Tract. de Pot. Pap. Turrecremat. l. 3. de Eccles. 106. Jacobat. l. 8. A 3. n. 6 Hostiens. & Antonin. quos citat. D [...]al. par. [...], 9, 11. p. 8, 5. Cajetan. opusc. de Pap & concil c. 2 [...]. Symmach. de Haeret c. 3. ss. 3. Et c. 44. ss. 31. Panormitan. in c. sicut debuit jurando. Bellarmin. The Pope de­stroying [Page 43]the Church, may be resisted by force and arms. And Sayr the same in Thesaur. l. 12. cap. 8. n. 8. Joan. Parisiens. l. ci­tat. cap. 14. Ecclesiasticks, that are incor­rigibly delinquent in spirituals, may be cor­rected by calling the secular arm in assi­stance unto the Law; which, hee saith, Chiefly takes place in France; the reason is this. The act of sin belongs to the vice that commands it; if therefore Trea­son commands a spiritual act, as, for in­stance, the administration of Sacraments, the said administration will belong to Treason, and put on a temporal respect or guise, as it happened Anno 1034. in a Priest, who, by giving the communion, killed Henry the seventh, the Emperour; as it is in Genebrard and Cario. That ad­ministration, commanded by that crime, as such, is a temporal thing, and cor­rigible by the Civil Magistrate. And so holds Widrington. Apol. num. 154, 156. where hee will have the preach­ing of the Gospel, for so much as it wickedly troubles the Common wealth, capable of being punished by the Se­cular [Page 44]Judge. 3. par. q. 3. p. 393. Dunallius, out ofCap. 27. Enchir. n. 70. Covar. ruv. in pract. q. 9. c. 31. Citat. Jo­han. Fabrum, Au­frecium, Guiel. Benedict. Tirra­quel. Videatur Bo­chellus. l. 2. decr. Eccles. Gallic. Tit. 15. cap. 146. Navarre, saies, That the custome of France, to take cognizance of Eccle­siastick causes by seculars, hath been time out of mind. See theLib. 5. cap. 42. p. 122. Edit. Paris. Capitular of Charlemaigne; where the Kings Judges punish Bi­shops and Priests. In Somnio. c. 36. Philo­theus Achillinus saith, Kings, so they be absolute, enjoy the priviledges and right of Emperours in their Kingdomes; But it appears out ofIn Can. 38.14. Synodi. Balsamon, That Emperours in time past could [...], make Bisho­pricks anew, and exercise whatsoever Ecclesiastick Oeconomie, as seemed them good, [...]. Also upon the se­venteenth Can. of the Council of Chal­cedon, and the sixteenth of the Council of Carthage. The Kings therefore have prescribed authority in Spirituals by concession of the Church, confirming [Page 45]these ancient pacifick uses. See Justi­nians Code, where are Imperial Laws concerning the Catholick Faith, the ho­ly Churches, and their priviledges; con­cerning Bishops, Clerks, Hospitals for Orphans, Monks, Places for Ascetick Discipline, and their Priviledges; Lib. 4. Cod. de Causis matrimoni­alibus, ex 14. Tit. Nomocanonis Pho­tii. not a Book of which but a­bounds with Imperial Laws concerning Sacred things. While the Bi­shops of the second Sy­nod were called to Rome, Sozom. cap. 12. lib. 7. Niceph. lib. 12. c. 15. Theodo­ret. lib. 4. c. 8, 9. Theodosius summons them to Constantinople. In France, from the be­ginning of Christianity received there, the Kings took cognizance of Spi­ritual causes, as appears out of the firstEt in Praefat. Et Lib. 2. Concil. Can. 2.8. Et lib. 3. Can. 11, 13, 14, 22, 23, 24, 26. Council of Orleans, under Clodo­veus, cap. 1. & 2. and the second Council of Orleans under Childebert, cap. 1, 5, 9, 23. the fourth Council of Arles, in Prolog. under Charlemaigne [Page 46]the third of Toures, the first of Mentz in Praefat. that of Rhemes under Charle maigne, in Praefat. 51. the third of Ca­valeon, in Praefat. the first of Aix, or Aquisgrane, under Ludovicus Pius, and Lotharius, in their Epistles, &c. Flodoar­dus in the life of Hincmarus, l. 3. c. 1. writes, That Charles the Bald called a Sy­nod at Beauvois concerning the affairs of the Church of Rhemes. Idem Binius Tom. 3. Concil. pag. 344. Concilio Mel­deasi cap. 78, 79. Exempla Synodales Carolis Ealvi in Concilio Carissiaco, Concil. Pisteus. 863. cap. 1. Wormacti­cas in init. Tribu­neus: sub Arnus­pho Impri. Ep. Sy­nodali Aurelian. sub Rober [...]o 1017. Stampens Tempore sancti Bernardi i­dem docent. Whence appears, That the Kings of France acted in spiritual things, accor­ding to the manner afore­said. Which Authority of theirs, and prescribed Cu­stome, hath been transla­ted to the Court of Par­liament, which began to bee steady or standing under Lewis the tenth, as Gaguin. l. 4. Nicol. Aegid. in Hulmar. Genebrard. in Chron. l. 3. Anno 758. witness. The Parliament alwaies observed for invio­able Law the Capitularies of Charle­maigne; [Page 47]in the second of which it is thus ordained; Among Ecclesiasticks, if a cause arise which belongeth either to the dishonour of the Kingdome, or the common dammage, permit it not long to bee concealed from us; Wee ought to correct all these things; and whatsoever is in these things, which pertain to the peace and justice of our whole people, and to the honour of our Kingdome, and to the common utility. The Ritual of the Consecration of the Kings of France, in Bochellus, Lib. 5. Decret. Tit. 2. renders the Kings Oath to bee, To keep and defend the Canonical priviledge, Law, and Justice, due unto the Churches; The King is called, by the Arch-Bishop crowning him, a partaker of his Ministery. Constantine excellently in Eusebius; L. 4. cap. 14. you are Bishops of what's within, and I of all without; Caus. 20 q. 5. Secular Princes have the pinnacles of their power within the Church. I will conclude out of Parisiensis, a most solid Divine,Tract. de Potesta­te Papae, cap. 21. That the spiri­tual Right of Collation, &c. [Page 48]may appertain to a Laike by Custome; but, hee saith, That a spiritual is twofold one by causality, whereby a spiritual grace is caused: the other by concomitance, and that by consequence, or antecedence: Now, saith hee, neither the first spiritual, as the ad­ministration of Sacraments, nor the right that follows upon it, can appertain to a Laike, but the antecedent right may well, annexed to spiritual offices, as Praesenta­tion, Collation, especially by concession of the Church, and by long Custome prescri­bed. The King may acquire this right unto Himself, because this is not repug­nant to Him. And here let mee end.

[...]

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.