ereervyeyyerrs ἘΠ ΠΗ Η dah fts Wik ἬΜΩΙ 84. ΜῊΝ eyed | ΣΕΈΨΕΥΡ. 1 ΜῊΝ nite si Wi i i W ii i f Hiren inn " os le ie i “" ᾿ beh eee ΝΕ ba aad atl ltt ted et el hat tteh shi bibs | ». ἔς ὦ ὁ ΠΩΣ . Hil ae . ‘ne ci = = = ——— = = eee Se EEE ee “-- - φ, τον a δ. - “- son = = ὑπ - τσ τ ὌΝ = aoe = 2 wre eee ee ee ee eee ‘ Υ ἢ ΣΝ «. ‘a ia ᾿ Me THEE Hi ᾿" i ἮΝ HH NA i ni TH Ϊ Ϊ " ἢ} Mi il ill wil iH ἢ i} | A Hib iT i - = = ——— : : πὸ = ᾿ — ——== sr = ee == a ern A a --- -- ————— = ΞΞΞΞΞΞΞΞ === i - = = <== HA HUT ΗΜ ἢ! Ἢ Hh iit ἯΙ ἷ " Ht 2 i “ ἢ ᾿" ἡ" | } | a | Ι]} ἢ} Ϊ Mh -᾿---- - ττ LS ee ,πας-τ-οὺς-.---- A Ζ.-ςς-- or -- -- = ---- ὶ ᾿ς ϊ ORNS Fe Saat, Δ νυ. he : ΑΝ αν αν ΤῊΝ ᾿ ae ae frig tee i it iid TATA AA ae { Νὰ ‘ik ni Nee " ᾿ ἊΝ ὃ ' fi ee “νι |p μή ΠΗ ad EE it i Ἢ a it C ἬΠΙΠΠ ἀν i -: ἡ} ‘thy ἣν ᾿ ly mt " i i Ἱ ΕΠ ΠῚ Ἢ : ΠΝ ΉΜΜΗΝ (ei "ἢ I i aa i i MULE ΠῚ ΠΠ] vail vin ΠῚ MM ΠῚ ΠΝ: ἘΠ ΠΜΗΗΝΗ tf, Se PRESENTED TO THE LIBRARY OF PRINCETON THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY BY Professor Henry van Dyke, D.D., LL.D. ee - ] BARROW’S WORKS. WO 4.8 Δ ΄ ~ ῃ ¢ ead gigs? οι “em THE ; ῳ “~ WORKS ISAAC BARROW, D.D. TO WHICH ARE PREFIXED, A LIFE OF THE AUTHOR, BY ABRAHAM HILL; AND A MEMOIR, BY JAMES HAMILTON, WITH THE NOTES AND REFERENCES CAREFULLY REVISED; AND INDEXES COMPILED EXPRESSLY FOR THIS EDITION. IN THREE VOLUMBS. VOLUME Iii. NEW YORK: JOHN C. RIKER ;—129 FULTON STREET. 1845. NOTICE. Tue Publisher of the only American edition’of the Works or Isaac Barrow, having now completed the volumes, solicits the attention of Theologians and other scholars to the Ser- mons and Treatises of one of the most erudite Authors of the seventeenth century. Two standard editions have been recently issued in Britain— one from the University Press at Oxford; and the other at Edinburgh. Both of them were carefully collated for this republication ; and all the articles that either of them contained have been inserted; with a Synopsis of the “ Treatise on the Pope’s Supremacy.” The Oxford edition is deficient in the biography of the Au- thor; which memorial is much enlarged in the copy published at Edinburgh. All that is novel in the latter narrative has been appended to the other unsatisfactory portraiture; with which, some other circumstances, ascertained by Mr. Hughes, have also been incorporated. The history of Barrow now detailed in the first volume of this edition of his Works forms therefore the most extensive Memoir of that learned Casuist and Mathe- matician, which yet has been offered, in connection with his writings, to the Student who peruses his masterly disquisitions. The Oruscuta THEoLocica, Orationes, and Pormara, in the Greek and Latin languages, although usually omitted in other reprints of Barrow’s works, are included in the third volume of this edition ; and will afford a rich intellectual repast for the Linguist. Thus all the literary productions of the Au- thor, except only his mathematical and scientific dissertations, are now collected. . * Ἂ vi NOTICE. . | ‘ Ἵ Theologians will also perceive the additional improvements, by the two copious Indexes which have been compiled expressly for the American edition. The acute criticisms, and the exe- getical interpretations by Barrow are of high consideration to a Biblical Reader—therefore a minute Table of the Texts of | Scripture has been prepared; from which the opinions of that Annotator can promptly be understood. The Publisher has also subjoined an accurate Index of the multiplied themes discussed by Barrow in his ingenious Ser- mons and Expositions. In this respect, the foreign editions are’ so meagre, that by them the Student would attempt in vain to discover hundreds of interesting and momentous Topics. ‘To supply that defect, a full alphabetic classification of all the sub- jects has been formed; and the admirers of Barrow’s splendid lucubrations will be gratified with the facility thus afforded them, to recur to the casuistical decision, or the critical explanation, or the didactic judgment, or the forceful arguments of an evan- gelical Philosopher, whose Discourses comprise some of the most profound and eloquent delineations of “ Christian Morals” which ever have appeared in the Anglo-Saxon language. With these numerous advantages, the American reprint of the “ Tueotocicat Works or Isaac Barrow” is confidently submitted to public inspection—especially as this copy is sold at LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF THE PRICE Of the last inferior edi- tion issued from the University Press at Oxford, in 1830. New York, August 7, 1845. “4 BARROW’S WORKS. —<=1Oe—— CONTENTS OF VOL. Ill. Pe coition of the Lord’s Supper. Exposition of the Decalogue. Doctrine of the Sacraments. Introduction of the Pope’s Supremacy. Treatise on the Pope’s ees: Supposition I. : Supposition IT. Supposition III. _ Supposition IV. Supposition V. Supposition VI. Observations Supposition VII. Synopsis of the Treatise on “the Pope’ 8 ‘Supremacy. Discourse on the Unity of the Church. Opruscuta THEOLOGICA, ORATIONES, PoEMATA. De Spiritu Sancto. . ; De Regimine Episcopali. De Tribus Symbolis. Anime Humane Corporibus non Preewistunt. De Potestate Clavium. Concio ad Clerum. Epitome Fidei et Religionis Turcica, a Malumeto Kureischita, Arabum Propheta, prius in Arabia Deserta, postea a successoribus per tolum P P » poster P pene Orientem diffuse. . Questiones Act. Moderat. April, 1651. Habitus humani acquisiti non sunt revera diversi a memoria hominis. Visionem fieri posse absque specie, aut imagine sensibili, probabile est. In Comitiis 1652, Cartesiana Hypothesis de Materia et Motu haud satis- facit precipuis nature phenomenis. Oratio Moderatoria in auspiciis termini, April 30, 1651. Oratio habita quinto Novemb. Anno 1651, in aula S. T. Collegii. ὦ Preafatio cum “sap die ot Feb. 21, 1653. Epistola, 1655. Pro Lectore Human. " Oratio. Oratio cum Grace lingue oe ascenderit ; A. D. 1660. Oratio ad Academicos in Comitiis. a PaGE viii CONTENTS. Oratio habita in Lectura Geometrica Collegii Greshamensis, Londini, A. D. 1662. . Oratio Prefatoria in ‘Schola Publica Mathematica, Mart. 14, 1664. Procancellarii Electi Oratio. A. D. 1675. Vicecancellarii Munere defuncti Oratio. . ‘ ΩΣ Oratio Sarcasmica in Schola Graca. . ΐ λ ; - Oratio Habita ix Comitiis. De Sestertio. . : ν Mundus neque fuit, neque esse potuit ab Eterno. Anno 1649. Creatura non potest creare. Anno 1649. : ; ; : Dantur rationes Boni et Mali aterne et indispensabiles. Anno 1651. . Dantur Substantie incorporee Natura sua Immortales. Anno 1651. Danitur forme substantiales. Anno 1652. Conscientia erronea obligat. Anno 1652. Christus per mortem fuit sacrificium proprie eapiatorium pro peccatis. Anno 1652. ‘Obedientia Christi non tollit iledicatioun Cir intkitiane Ἀνῶν 1652. Terram esse in mundi centro sitam nullis argumentis evincitur. Anno 1653. Hypothesis Cartesiana de materia et motu haud satisfacit pracipuis na- ture phenomenis. Anno 1663. Reverendissimo Magistro, et dignissimis Soctis Collegii S. δ. Trinitat. Cantabrigie. Anno 1655. Iter maritimum a portu Ligustico ad Constantinopolim. Nov. 6, “Anno 1657. : ; : De Religione Turcica, AKE®AAON ‘Anno 1658. ; 5 In obitum dignissimi Domini Spenceri Bretton, illustrissimi Consulis Anglorum Smyrna, Anno 1659. Elegia. ; Augustiss. regi suo reditum gratulatur Britannia. Anno” 1660, . In Psalmos a reverendo D. decano Babe is Homerico versu dona- tos, Anno 1674. ; Illustrissimo domino Georgio Monk, regis restitutori, regni liberatori, Anno 1660. : In 660. Henrici ducis Glocestrensis et Maria principis Arausionensis, 1660. . rae : ; ΐ ; ; ‘ jlegia. 1660. ; : ; 3 . . Epitaphium in Henricum Hammond, 1660. oe Epigrammata, Anno 1661. : “ Epithalamium R. Caroli et R. Catharina, 1662. , ‘ In victorium Navalem, Anno 1665. . Ratio secundi Precepti in Decalago est immutabilis, Anno 1668. . Divinitas TOY AOL OY consiat ex initio Evangelii secundum Johannem, Elegia. Anno 1669. : ‘ " : ‘ . ν Epigramma in istam Elegiam. . ; ‘ ; Σ ‘ In obitum ducisse Aurel. Anno 1670. ; ‘ , ‘ ς ‘ Epicedium in ducem Albemarle. Anno 1670. De S. Trinitate Jul. 1670. : . ὑόν Ὁ : ὶ ᾿ Ad Johannem Tillotson. Cum Libro Lect. Ad D. D Chr. Wrenn. es de le © ἕξ, ἈΝ EXPOSITION ON THE LORD’S PRAYER. — Among all the duties prescribed to us by our religion, the rendering due worship to God is in nature and for consequence the principal; God thereby being most directly honoured and served, we from it immediately deriving most ample and high benefits; to the performance of which duty we are furnished with ex- cellent direction and assistance from that Prayer which our Lord (at several times and upon several occasions) dictated, and recommended to his disciples, both as a pattern according to which they should regulate their devotions (Pray thus, or in this;manner, saith he in St. Matthew), and as a form in which they should ex- press them:* (When you pray, say: that is, say this, or in these words; so he enjoins them in St. Luke :”) unto it therefore we should carefully attend, as to our best rule ; and we should frequent- ly use itas our best matter of devotion :* to the well performing of both which duties, it is requisite that we should dis- tinctly understand the particulars con- tained therein; in order to which purpose we shall endeavour to explain them: but first let us premise a few words in general about prayer. Prayer, in its latitude of acceptation, doth comprehend all devotion, or wor- ship immediately addressed unto Almigh- * Quamlibet alia verba dicamus, que affec- tus orantis vel precedendo format ut clareat, vel consequendo attendit ut crescat, nihil aliud dicimus, quam quod in ἰδία Deminica Oratione positum est, si recte et congruenter oramus,— Aug. Epist. 121; vide illum. * Matt, vi. 9. * Luke xi. 2. Vow. Ill. - 1 ἐν» ty God ;* consisting of praise, which we render to God in regard to his most excellent perfections and glorious works ; of submissive gratulation, declaring our satisfaction in all the dispensations of his most wise and just providence ; of thanks- giving, for the numberless great bene- fits we have received from him; of ac- knowledging our total dependence on him, and our subjection to him; of pro- fessing faith in him, and vowing service to him; of confessing the sins we have committed against him, with the guilt and aggravation of them; of deprecating’the wrath and punishment due to us for our offences; of petition for all things need- ful and convenient for us; of interces- sion for others, whose good we accord- ing to duty or charity are concerned to desire and promote: prayer, I say (al- though, according to its most restrained sense, it only doth signify one of these particulars, namely, the petition of what is needful or expedient for us, yet), in its larger acception, as it commonly is , it doth comprise them all: and so may well take it here ; this form, al- though so very brief, being with so ad- mirable wisdom contrived, as without straining the words beyond their natural importance, we may, applying a moder- ale attention, discern them all, as to their main substance, couched therein ;+ so that we may indeed reasonably regard *1 Tim. ii. l—dejects, προσευχαΐ, ἐντεύξεις, edyaptoriat. ἦ Οὐ μόνον εὐχῆς ἐστι διδασκαλία ἐκεῖνα τὰ ζήμα- ra, ἀλλὰ βίου τελείου taidaywyla.—Chrys, tom. v. p- 185. 2 AN EXPOSITION ON THE LORD’S PRAYER. this prayer as a complete directory, and a full exercise of all our devotion toward God :* of devotion, I say, the which (to engage, excite, and encourage us to the careful and constant practice thereof) we may consider enjoined us as a necessary duty, commended to usas a requisite means of good, and a special instrument of all piety, and as a high privilege grant- ed to us by God. 1. It isa natural duty and debt we owe to God (both in correspondence to the design of our being made and endow- ed with rational capacities agreeable to. our relations ; and in requital for our be- ing, and for all the good we have, and do continually receive from him), as most highly to love and reverence him in our hearts, so to declare our esteem of his excellences, and our sense of his bounty toward us, to avow the dependence we have upon his will and providence ; the obligations we are under to his mercy and goodness; to yield our due homage of respect, submission, and obedience to him: if we do acknowledge a God, our Maker, our Lord, our continual Benefac- tor, to be, we must consequently acknowl- edge these performances in reason, justice, and gratitude due to him; and God ac- cordingly requires, and positively enjoins them: he isthe Lord our God, whom we must worship and serve; the God whom praise waiteth for ; who heareth prayers, and to whom therefore all flesh must come. ‘The scripture is very fre- quent in commanding the duty. 2. It is a most useful means, or a con- dition requisite, for the procurement of benefits and blessings upon us. God hath declared that he doth accept, he hath promised that he will reward, all devotions with an honest intention and pure mind offered up unto him; that he as nigh unto all them that call upon him in truth; that he will be found of them who seek him with all their heart; that he will fulfil the desire of them that fear him ; he will hear their cry, and will save them; that they who seek him shall not want any good thing; that, whatever we ask in prayer believing, we shall re- ceive ; that if we ask, it shall be given us; if we seek, we shall find; if we * Totius Evangelii. breviarium.—Tert. de Orat. i. 9. © Deut. x. 20; Matt. iv. 10; Psal. Ixv. 2. =e knock, it shall be opened to us.? Prayer is alsoa means of procuring a blessing upon all our undertakings; it sanctifieth every performance, &c. There is no good thing so great and precious, so high above the reach of common power, so strange to expect, or difficult to com- pass, Which we may not easily and sure- ly by this means obtain ; relief in all dis- tresses, both of our outward and inward estate ; supplies of all our needs, both corporal and spiritual ; comfort in all our sorrows and sadness; satisfaction in all our doubts and darknesses of mind ; help and strength against all our temptations, we may be confident to obtain, if we duly seek them from the Almighty Dispenser of all good gifts: sure promises there are, and obvious examples hereof, too many to be now recited : as, on the oth- er hand, they that will neglect this duty, that will not vouchsafe to seek help and remedy of God, may be sure to want it ; shall certainly suffer for their proud con- tempt, profane diffidence, or foolish sloth: You will not (saith our Saviour) come to me, that ye may have life :* no wonder, then, if they do not receive it, if they will not go thither for it where only it is to be had. All good things are in God’s hand ; and we shall never by any force or policy get them thence without his will, moved by entreaty : all good gifts come from heaven ; and thence we shall never fetch them down, without ascending thither in our hearts and affec- tions ; spiritual goods especially are so high above us, that we can never reach them otherwise than by God’s help by humble supplication obtained. 3. It is not only a means, by impetra- tion acquiring for us, but it is an effectu- al instrument working in us, all true good ; it is the channel by which God conveyeth spiritual light into our minds, and spiritual vigour into our hearts. it is both the seed and _ the food of spiritual life ; by which all holy dispositions of soul and all honest resolutions of practice are bred and nourished, are augmented and strengthened in us.* It exciteth, it * Difficillimum est opus orare.—Luth. 4 Τ)ὐχῆς δικαίας οὐκ ἀνήκοος Océs.—Psal. XXXxiv. 10; cxiv. 18, 19; x. 17.3, Jer. χε John iii. 22; Matt. xxi. 22; vii. 7; Luke xi. 9; John xiv. 13; xv. 7; xvi. 23. ὁ John v. 40. AN EXPOSITION ON THE LORD’S PRAYER. 3 quickeneth, it maintaineth all pious affec- tions; the love of God can no otherwise than by it be kindled, fomented, or kept in life (without it we certainly shall have an estrangement, and an aversion from him ;‘) it alone can maintain a constant reverence and awe of God, keeping him in our thoughts, and making us to live as in his presence ; it chiefly enliveneth and exerciseth our faith and our hope in God; it is that which begetteth in our hearts a savoury relish of divine things, which sweeteneth and endeareth to our souls the practice of piety, which only can enable us with delight and alacrity to obey God’s commandments ; it alone can raise our minds, from the cares and concernments of this world, to a sense and desire of heavenly things. By it God imparteth strength to subdue bad inclinations, to restrain sensual appetites, to compress irregular passions; to evade the allurements to evil, and the discour- agements from good, which this world always presenteth; to support also with patience and equanimity the many cross- es and troubles we must surely meet with therein. It is, in short, the only strong bulwark against temptation and sin; the only sure guard of piety anda good conscience : no man indeed can be a faithful servant to God, a real friend to goodness, a serious practiser of duty, without a constant tenor of devotion. 4. It is a most high privilege and ad- vantage to us, that we are allowed to pray and address our devotions to God. To have a free access to the presence and audience of an earthly prince (to the effect of receiving from him all that we could desire) would be deemed a matter of great honour and much advan- tage: how much more is it so to us, that we are admitted to the presence and ear of the great King of all the world; so mighty in power, so large in bounty, so full of goodness and _ pity, so thoroughly able, so exceedingly willing, to grant and perform our requests! How sweet a thing, of what comfort and _ benefit is it, to have the liberty of pouring out our souls and our hearts,* as the Psalmist speaks, before God ; of disburdening our ‘ Fervour of spirit—Rom. xii. 11, τῷ mvet- ματι sae © Psal. lxii. 8 ; xrlii. 4. minds of all their cares, their desires, their doubts, their griefs, and anxieties, into the breast of so kind a friend, so wise a counsellor, so able a helper ; who alone indeed can afford relief, ease, sat- isfaction, and comfort to us! Consider- ing which things, we shall appear not only very disobedient to God, and highly ingrateful toward him (who so infinitely condescends in vouchsafing to us, dust and ashes,» (vile and unworthy crea- tures) leave to speak and converse with him), but very injurious and unfaithful to ourselves, and to our own good, if we neglect this duty commanded, or slight this privilege indulged to us: In the due performance of which, we are directed and assisted by this form of prayer, composed and dictated for that purpose by him who best knew what we ought to pray for, and how we ought to pray; what matter of desire, what man- ner of address, what disposition of mind, would be most pleasing and acceptable to his Father, would most become and befit us in our approaches to him.* We might consequently observe many things concerning those particulars discernible in this form: the sublimity, the gravity, the necessity, the singular choiceness of the matter ; together with the fit order and just disposition thereof, according to the natural precedence of things in dignity or necessity ; the full brevity, the deep plainness, the comely simplicity of expression; the lowly reverence sig- nified therein, accompanied with due faith and confidence: these, and the like virtues directive of our devotion, we might observe running generally through the whole contexture of this venerable form: but we shall rather choose to take notice of them as they shall offer them- selves in their particular places; to the consideration of which in order we now do apply ourselves. Onur Father which art in Heaven. ®ur Father: upon this title, or man- ner of compellation, we may first ob- serve, that although our Saviour pre- scribeth this form as a pattern, and an * Deus solus docere potuit, ut se véllet orari. —Tert. de Orat. ¢. 9. » Gen. xviii. 27. 4 exercise of private prayer to be perform- ed in the closet (and alone in secret, as is expressed in the gospel), yet he di- recteth us to make our addresses to God in a style of plurality, saying, not my Father, but our Father;' thereby, it seems, implying, 1. That we should in our prayers consider and acknowledge the universality of God’s power and goodness. 2. That we should not in our conceit proudly and vainly appropriate or engross the regard of God unto our- selves ; but remember that our brethren have an equal share with us therein. 3. That in all our devotions we should be mindful of those common bands which knit us together as men and as Chris- tians (the band of nature and humanity ; the more strict ties of common faith and hope; of manifold relations unto God that made us, and our Saviour that re- deemed us, and the Holy Spirit who an- imateth and quickeneth us, and combin- eth us in spiritual union.) 4. That we should bear such hearty good-will and charitable affection toward others, as not only to seek and desire our own particu- lar and private good, but that of all men ; especially of all good Christians, who in a peculiar manner are God’s children and our brethren: He did not bid us say, my Father, but our Father, who art in heaven ; that, being taught that we have a common Father, we might show a brotherly good-will one toward another, saith St. Chrysostom.* As for the appellation Father, it doth mind us of our relation to God, who upon many grounds, and in divers high respects, is our Father (by nature, for that he gave us our being, and made us after his own image; by providence, for that he continually preserveth and main- taineth us; by grace, for that he renew- eth us to his image in righteousness and holiness ; by adoption, for that he allow- eth us the benefit and privilege of his children, assigning an eternal inheritance to us;) of this relation, which as crea- tures, as men, as Christians, we bear to God, it mindeth us, and consequently how we ought in correspondence thereto to behave ourselves ; yielding to him all * Οὐ γὰρ ἐκέλευε χέγειν, πάτερ pov, ὃ ἐν τοῖς οὐρα- νοῖς, ἀλλὰ ἔμενον ἡμῶν, ἵνα κοινὸν Πατέρα ἔχειν ὁ.- δαχθέντες, ἀδελφικὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους δεικνύωμεν εἄ- veiav.—Tom. Υ͂. p. 186. ι Matt. vi. 6, 9. AN EXPOSITION ON THE LORD’S PRAYER. respect, affection, and observance ; de- meaning ourselves in all things as_be- comes such a relation and rank: this in- deed of all God’s names, titles, and attri- butes, is chosen as most suitable to the nature of the present duty ; as most en- couraging to the performance thereof ; as most fully implying the dispositions re- quired in us, when we apply ourselves thereto. Our Saviour used to compare prayer to a son’s asking nourishment of his father ;) arguing thence what success and benefit we may expect from it: we come therein to God, not (directly) as to a lord or master, toreceive commands ; but rath- er as toa father, to request from him the sustenance of our life, and supply of our needs; torender withal unto him our thank- ful acknowledgments, for having con- tinuedly done those things for us ; and to demonstrate our dutiful respect and aflec- tion toward him. It is natural for chil- dren in any danger, strait, or want, to fly to their parents for shelter, relief, and succour: and it is so likewise for us to have recourse unto God, in all those ca- ses wherein no visible means of help appear from elsewhere: and to do so, the title of Father doth encourage us, signifying not only power and authority over us, but affection and dearness toward us: the name God, importing his excel- lent perfections ; the name Lord, mind- ing us of his power and empire over us, with the like titles declarative of his su- pereminent majesty, might deter us, be- ing conscious of our meanness and un- worthiness, from approaching to him; but the word Father is attractive and em- boldening; thinking on ¢hat, we shall be apt to conceive hope, that how mean, how unworthy soever, yet being his chil- dren, he will not reject or refuse us ; for, If men, being evil, do give good gifts un- to their children; how much more will our Father, which is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him ἐν It also plainly intimates how qualified and disposed in mind we should come to God ; namely, with high reverence, with humble affection, with hearty gratitude ; as to the Author of our being, to him that hath continually preserved and brought us up; from whose care and providence ) Matt. vii. 9; Luke xi. 11. κ Matt. vii. 11. eee a eS όνι , ht Δι) i 1 AN EXPOSITION ON THE LORD’S PRAYER. we have received all the good we have ever enjoyed; from whose mercy and favour we can only expect any good for the future. By calling God Father, we avow ourselves obliged to honour and love him incomparably beyond all things: we also declare our faith and hope in God ; that we believe him well affected toward us, and willing to do us good; and that we thence hope to receive the good desirable from him (the which are dispositions necessary to the due perform- ance of this duty.) It also implieth, that we should come thereto with purity of mind and good conscience, which is also requisite to the same intent; for if we are conscious of undutiful and disobedi- ent carriage toward God, how can we call him Father 2‘ With what heart or face can we assume to ourselves the title of children? If (saith St. Peter) ye call upon him as Father, who impartially judges according to every man’s work,” (that is, who only esteemeth them for his children who truly behave themselves as becometh children), pass the time of your pilgrimage in fear (or in reverence to- ward God.) We may add, that we also hereby may be supposed to express our charity toward our brethren ; who bear unto God, the Father of all men, the same common relation. But I proceed : Which art in Heaven. God Almighty is substantially present everywhere; but he doth not every where in effects discover himself alike, nor with equal splendour in all places dis- play the beams of his glorious majesty, the scripture frequently mentioneth a place of his special residence (seated in regions of inaccessible light, above the reach, not only of our sense, but of our fancy and conception), where his royal court, his presence chamber, his imperial throne, are; where he is more immedi- ately attended upon by the glorious an- gels and blessed saints; which place is called heaven, the highest heavens; the τὰ ὕψιστα, the highest places ;" by his presence wherein God is described here, as for distinction from all other parents | Matt. xxi. 22; James i.6; 1 Tim. ii. 8. m= 1 Pet. i. 17. ® Luke ii. 14; xix. 38; Matt. xxi, 9. . 5 here on earth, so to increase reve- rence in us toward him (while we reflect upon his supereminent glory and majes- ty), and to raise our hearts from these in- ferior things unto desire, and hope, and love of heavenly things; withdrawing (saith St. Chrysostom) him that prays from earth, and fastening him to the places on high, and to the mansions above.* But so much for the title. The first sentence of our Prayer is, Hyallowed (or sanciitied) be thn Name. Let us first (with St. Chrysostom) ob- serve the direction we hence receive in all our prayers to have a prime and prin- cipal regard to the glory of God; not seeking any thing concerning our own good before his praise: that for the or- der. As to the substance of this particu- lar, we may consider, that sanctity im- plying a discrimination, a distance, an ex- altment in nature or use of the thing, which is denominated thereby ; and God’s name signifying himself with all that we can know of him; himself, as however discovered or declared, with all that re- lates to him, and bears his inscription ; we do here accordingly express our due acknowledgments and desires; for by a rare complication this sentence doth in- volve both praise and petition ; doth ex- press both our acknowledgment of what is, and our desire of what should be: we do, I say, hereby partly acknowledge and praise the supereminent perfections of God above all things, in all kinds of ex- cellency, joining in that seraphicaldox- ology, (which to utter is the continual employment of the blessed spirits above, who incessantly day and night cry out) Holy, holy, holy; confessing with the heavenly host in the Apocalypse that he is worthy of all honour, glory, and pow- er :* we doalso partly declare our hearty wishes,that God may be every where had in highest veneration ; that all things re- lating to him may receive their due re- gard; that all honour and praise, all duty and service, may in a peculiar manner be rendered unto him by all men, by all creatures, by ourselves especially: that * Tis γῆς ἀπάγων τὸν εὐχόμενον, καὶ τοῖς ὑψη- λοῖς προσηλῶν χωρίοις, καὶ ταῖς ἄνω διατριδαῖς. . * Rev. iv. 8, 11 —Té ἁγιασθήτω ἀντὶ τοῦ δο- ξασθήτω clonrai.—-Chrys. tom. v. p. 186. 6 AN EXPOSITION ON THE LORD’S PRAYER. all minds may entertain good and worthy opinions of him; all tongues speak well of him, celebrate and bless him; all creatures yield adoration to his name, and obedience to his will: that he be wor- shipped in truth and sincerity, with zeal and fervency; this particularly in the prophet Isaiah, and by St. Peter, is called sanctifying God’s name, in opposition to idolatrous and profane religion: (Sanecti- Sy the Lord of hosts himself, and let him be your fear, let him be your dread, saith the prophet; and, Fear not their fear, nor be troubled, but sanctify the Lord God in your hearts,’ saith the apostle.) ‘Thus do we here pray and wish in respect to all men, and to all creatures capable of thus sanctifying God’s name ; but more par- ticularly we pray for ourselves, that God would grant to us, that we, by our relig- ious and righteous conversation, may bring honour to his name: so that men seeing our good works may glorify our Father which is in heaven.” (Vouchsafe, saith he, that we may live so purely, that all men by us may glorify thee :* so de- scants St. Chrysostom. ) Ch» Kingdom Come. This petition, or devout wish, being subordinate to the former, as expressing a main particular of that which is there generally desired (we here, to the glory of God, desiring a successful and speedy propagation of true religion), seems, in its direct and immediate sense, to respect the state of things in that time, more es- pecially befitting our Lord’s disciples then, when the kingdom of God (that is, the state of religion under the evangeli- cal dispensation) was coming and ap- proaching; (according to that of our Saviour in St. Luke: J say unto you of a truth, there be some of you standing here that shall not taste death, till they see the kingdom of God ;* whence it did become them, in zeal to God’s glory, and charity for men’s salvation, to desire that Christianity might soon effectually be propagated over the world, being gene- * Karagiwoov. φησὶν, οὕτως ἡμᾶς βιοῦν καθαρῶς, ὡς δὲ ἡμῶν dmavras σε δοξάζειν, éc.—Chrys. in Matt. vi. 8 Isa. viii. 13 5 xxix. 235 1 Pet. iii. 14, 15. P Matt. v. 16; 1 Pet. ii. 12. 4 Luke ix. 27; Matt. xvi, 28; iii. 2. rally entertained by men with due faith and obedience ; that is, that all men willingly might acknowledge God as their Lord and Maker, worshipping and serving him in truth; that they might receive the blessed Son Jesus Christ as their King and Saviour, heartily embracing his doc- trine, and humbly submitting to his laws: to which purpose our Lord enjoins his disciples to pray, that the Lord of the harvest would send labourers into the har- vest ;* and St. Paul exhorts the Thessa- lonians to pray, that the word of the Lord may run and be glorified.s And in parity of reason, upon the same grounds, we are concerned and obliged to desire, that the Christian religion may be settled and confirmed; may grow and be increased; may prosper and flourish in the world ; that God’s authority may, to the largest extension of place, to the highest intention of degree, universally and perfectly be maintained and promot- ed, both in external profession and real effect ; the minds of all men being sub- dued to the obedience of faith; and avowing the subjection due to him; and truly vielding obedience to all his most just and holy laws. ‘Thus should we pray that God’s kingdom may come; particularly desiring that it may so come into our own hearts; humbly imploring his grace, that he thereby would rule in our hearts, quelling in them all exhorbi- tant passions and vicious desires, protect- ing them from all spiritual enemies, dis- posing them to an entire subjection to his will, and a willing compliance with all his commandments: for this is the king- dom of God, which as our Lord telleth us, is within us ;* the which doth not, as St. Paul teacheth us, consist in meat and drink (in any outward formal performan- ces), but in righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost ;* that is, in obedi- ence to God’s will, and in the comfortable consequences thereof : this is the kingdom of God, which we are enjoined, before any worldly accommodations, first to seek.» * 'Τυραννούμενοι ὑπὸ τῶν τοῦ σώματος παθημάτων, καὶ μυρίας πειρασμῶν δεχόμενοι προσθολὰς τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ χρήζομεν βασιλείας, ἵνα μὴ βασιλεύσῃ ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐν τῷ θνητῷ σώματι ἡμῶν, &c.—Chrys. r Matt. ix. 38. * 2 Thess. iii. 1. ‘ Luke xvii. 21; Rom. xiv. 17. « Matt. vi. 33. AN EXPOSITION ON THE LORD’S PRAYER. 7 Thy Wil be done in Earth, as it is in Heaven. This sentence is likewise complicated of praise, good desire, and petition; for we thereby first do acknowledge the wisdom, justice, and goodness of God, in all res- olutions of his will and dispensations of his providence. 1. We profess our approbation of all God’s counsels, our complacence and sat- isfaction in all his proceedings, our cheer- ful submission and consent to all his pleasure ; joining our suffrage, and say- ing, in harmony with that blessed choir in the Revelation, Great and wonderful are thy works, O Lord God Almighty ; just and true are thy ways, O thou King of Saints... We disclaim our own judg- ments and conceits, we renounce our own desires and designs, so far as they appear inconsistent with the determina- tions of God’s wisdom, or discordant with his pleasure ; saying after our Lord, Let not my will, but thine be done.» 2. We do also express our desire, that as in heaven all things with a free and undisturbed course do pass according to God’s will and good-liking, every inti- mation of his pleasure finding there a most entire and ready compliance from those perfectly loyal and pious spirits (those ministers of his that do his plea- sure,* as the Psalmist calls them) so that here on earth the gracious designs of God may be accomplished without oppo- sition or rub; that none should presume, as the Pharisees and lawyers are said to do, ἀθετεῖν τὴν βουλὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ, to disap- point or defeat God’s counsel ;¥ ἀπωθεὶσ- Gur, to thrust away or repulse God’s word, asthe Jews did in the Acts ;” to resist, provoke, or defy God by obstinate disobedience, as many are said to do in the scriptures; but that every where a free, humble, hearty, and full obedience be rendered to his commands. 3. We do also pray, that God would grant us the grace willingly to perform whatever he requires of us (perfecting usy'(as the apostle speaketh) in every good work to do his will, and working in ᾿ Rev. xv. 3. ~ Luke xxii. 42. * Psal. ciii. 20. Υ Luke vii. 30. * Acts xiii. 46. 7 us that which is well pleasing in his sight,*) contentedly to bear whatever he layeth upon us ; that God would bestow upon us a perfect resignation of our wills unto his will ; a cheerful acquiescence in that state and station wherein he hath placed us ;" a submiss patience in all ad- versities whereinto he disposeth us to fall; a constant readiness with satisfac- tion and thankfulness (without reluctancy or repining) to receive whatever cometh from his will, whether grateful or dis- tasteful to our present sense; acknowl- edging his wisdom, his goodness, his jus- tice, in all his dealings towards us; hear- tily saying with good Eli, It is the Lord, let him do what seemeth him good ,° with Hezekiah, Good is the word of the Lord. which thou hast spoken ; with David, Be- hold, here I am; let him doto me as seemeth good to him:' with Job, Shall we receive good at the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil 2 and, T'he Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord :* yea, it were well, if we could, after the heathen philosopher, upon all occasions with our hearts say, εἰ ταύτη Θεῷ φίλον, ταύτη γε- νέσθω: If God will have it so, so let it be ;' if we could observe those rules and precepts, which even the philosophers so much inculcate,* to commit all our af- fairs to God, to love and embrace (hug) all events: to follow, and to accompany God: to yield, deliver, and resign our- selves up to him; (Deo se prebere, de- dere, tradere, &c.) and the like. Give us this Dap our daily Bread. I shall not stand to criticise upon the hard word here used, translated daily; 1 only say, that of two senses offering themselves, both are probable, and by * Tod ὑπόλοιπον rod βίου διέξελθε, ὡς Θεοῖς ἐπι- τετροφὼς τὰ σεαυτοῦ πάντα, &c.— eo as) ἘΞ a oe νιν ee Cry AN sions and appetites ; letting them to fall into the manifold snares of false opinion, evil custom, and contagious example, which the world sets before them (the world, which by its fair promises and pleasing flatteries enticeth to sin, or by its angry frowns and fierce threats dis- courageth from goodness ;) permitting the Devil, without control or impediment, by his wiles to delude and seduce them ; which kind of proceeding of God with men is clearly represented in the 8lst Psalm; where, of the Israelites, God says, that having signally declared his pleasure to them, and by promise of great benefits invited them to observe it, upon their wilful neglect, he dealt thus with them: But, says God there, my people would not hearken to my voice, and Israel would none of me ; so I gave them up unto their own hearts’ lusts ; and they walked in their. own counsels.” In such manner, if God, provoked there- to by our heinous miscarriages, doth just- ly bring us into, or doth let us enter in- to temptation (as our Lord otherwhere expresseth it; Pray, saith he, that ye enter not into temptation), we shall in- fallibly run into many grievous sins and desperate mischiefs ;* no less surely, than we shall wander and stumble in the dark, than we shall slide and fall in the most slippery places, and sometimes be entan- gled, when we do walk in the midst of snares, surrounded with traps innumera- ble, most cunningly laid to catch us: J is not (saith | the prophet) iz man to di- rect his sleps, soas to go straight and upright ;° it is not in him to see “duty, to bend his inclinations to compliance there- with ; to restrain his appetites, when sen- sible objects forcibly press on them ; to govern his passions, when they are vehe- mently stirred to disorderly motion; we do continually need God’s instruction to guide us, God’s hand to uphold us, God’s care and help to guard us :° when there- fore, | say, our condition and circumstan- ces do minister dangerous occasions of sin; when our vain “and weak tempers do incline or betray us thereto; when the world would smile or frown us into it; when the Devil violently solicits, or thrusts on toward it; thus to be destitute * Psal. Ixxxi. 11, 12. * Luke xxii. 40, 46. » Jer. x. 23 * Psal. xxxvii. 23, 24, EXPOSITION ON THE LORD’S PRAYER. 11 οἵ God’s grace, thus to be left to our- selves, isthe most horrible judgment that can be. In such cases and seasons, God’s interposal is necessary, either to remove those temptations, or to support and defend us from the prevalence of them, φυλάσσων ἀπταίστους, keeping us from stumbling and falling, as St. Jude speaks ;1 not suffering us, as St. Paul expresseth it, to be tempted above what we are able, but making with the tempta- tion also away to escape, so that we shall be able to sustain it.° That God would please to do this for us, we do here pray ; and in pursuance of this petition, we subjoin that which in part may pass for an illustration thereof (implying an antithesis serving to that purpose: for, delivering from evil im- porteth the same with ῥύεσθαι ἐκ πειρασ- μοῦ, being rescued from temptation, in St. ae ; The Lord, saith he, knoweth how to rescue the godl y out of temptation ;* and τηρεῖν ἐπ τῆς ὥρας πειρασμοῦ, to pre- serve from the time of temptation, in the Revelation ;* which are opposed to bring- ing into temptation), partly it may be supposed an improvement thereof; de- livering from evil signifying perhaps somewhat more, than not permitting us to incur occasions strongly inviting us to evil; even the effectual keeping us from being over-borne or complying with it. But let us consider that petition itself. But deliver us from Evil. From evil, ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ" St. Chry- sostom takes it for the Devil; who is the ~ ὁ πονηρὸς, the evil one, the tempter, who seduceth us to evil: but we shall take it according to the more common acception : from evil ; that is, principally, from sin, or evil moral and spiritual ; the only evil, simply and in its own nature such, and the root of all other evil; from that, and consequently from all mischief (evil natu- ral and temporal, or evil penal and afflic- tive) which may grow upon, or sprout from thence. As for such evils as these ; the want of things necessary or conve- nient for us ; bodily disease and pain; dis- appointment in our designs, and ill suc- cess in our undertakings; disgrace and * 1 Cor. x. 23. ® Rey. iii. 10. 4 Jude 24, f 2 Pet. ii. 9. 12 AN EXPOSITION ON THE LORD’S PRAYER. ᾿ reproach upon our good names ; dangers, difficulties, and distresses concerning our outward estate; distractions, vexations, and troubles of mind about temporal mat- ters, with the like evils (in some sense, insome degree evils, or appearing such to our natural sense and fancy ;) we may indeed deprecate them (as even our Lord himself did), with submission (as he did) to the wisdom and will of God, in case it pleaseth him, and he thinketh fit to re- move them: but all these things being but names and empty sounds in compari- son to spiritual and eternal evils (such as are vicious distempers of mind ; indispo- sitions to serve God; ill progress in our| spiritual affairs ; dissatisfaction concern- ing our state in respect to God; actual transgression of God’s holy will and law ; incurring God’s displeasure and disfa- they should be dispensed, to the wisdom and goodness of God; who doth (as our Lord telleth us) know what things we have need of, before we ask him; and is not only adle (as St. Paul says, but willing also) to do for us superabundantly above what we can ask or think." We are here- by (it seems) taught this point of good /manners in our devotion, not to be tedi- ously punctual and particular in our pray- ers, as if God needed our information, or /were apt to neglect the particulars con- cerning our good. We shut up all with a doxology, most suitable to the nature of devotion signi- fying our due faith, our affection, and our reverence toward God. Sor thine is the Ringdom, the Pow- er, and the Glory, for ever and vour; being deprived of his grace and'! assistance; wanting the communion and comfort of his Holy Spirit ; remorse of conscience, and anguish of spirit, for| That is, for thou hast a perpetual and having violated or neglected our duty ;| Wnmoveable authority, whereby justly to blindness of mind, hardness of heart ;| dispose of all things; thou hast an inde- want of love, reverence, devotion toward | fectible and irresistible power, whereby God, of charity and good-will toward our | thou canst effect whatever seems just and neighbour ; of sobriety, humility, regu-| g00d to thee ; wherefore we profess only larity of passion, and calmness of tem-|to rely upon, and seek help from thee ; per, in respect to ourselves and the in-| With hope and confidence we address our- ward frame of our souls; these, I say,| Selves to thee for the supply of our needs : and such like evils), we should absolutely | thine is the glory ; all honour and reve- request of God, that he in mercy would oS all love and thankfulness, are due ever Amen. deliver and free us from them; they be- ing irreconcilably repugnant to his will and glory, and inconsistent with our eter- nal welfare. Yet even these, and all other things, we do request only in gene- ral terms, having the distinct matter, and manner, and measure, according to which unto thee; therefore we render our ado- rations and acknowledgments to thee. Even so, to thee, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, be for ever ascribed all glory and praise. Amen. h Matt. vi.8; Eph. 111. 20. AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. AurHovucH this system of precepts may seem to have been its design rather politi- cal than moral ; to regard public and ex- ternal, rather than private and interior action; that great branch of morality, which respecteth ourselves in our private retirements, or in our particular conver- sation, sobriety of mind and manners, being scarce touched herein, at least not openly and plainly expressed; as also devotion toward God (in any of its kinds, of praise, thanksgiving, confession of sin, prayer and intercession), that great part of natural religion, being not explicitly and positively enjoined: although also (as by the introduction thereto, and some passages therein, especially as itis de- livered in Deuteronomy, may appear) it seemeth particularly to concern the Jew- ish nation; a people called and chosen by God out of all nations, to be governed in a more special and immediate manner by God himself, obliged to him by pecu- liar benefits and favours, designed by him to a separate manner of living ;* being also perhaps in temper and disposition, as well as in condition and circumstances of life, different from other people ; whence laws convenient (or in a manner necessary) for them might not so well suit to all others ; upon which accounts, as other of their laws, so perchance some passages in this notable part of them, may not unreasonably be deemed pecu- liarly to concern them ; although, how- ever, this system doth more directly and immediately oblige that people, all being * 'O yap ἐν Χωρὴβ παλαιὸς ἤδη νόμος παὶ ὑμῶν on &ec, —Just. Mart. Dial. cum Tryph. p. 228, eee ———_—_—_—— ... formally, and in style of law, directed only to them, promulged in their ears, expressed in their language, inserted into the body of their laws, as a principal member of them ; it being also expressly called a covenant with that people: (He declared unto you, says the text, his cove- nant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments), and accordingly was reposed inthe ark, hence it seems named the ark of the covenant," the which, when all nations should be convert- ed to God,and admitted into the church, was, as the prophet Jeremiah foretold, to be utterly discarded and laid aside: (In those days, saith God in him, they shall say no more, the ark of the covenant of the Lord : neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they remember it; nei- ther shall they visit it; neither shall that be done any more.”) Hence, although some passages herein, according to their primary, strict, and literal meaning, might never have been intended univer- sally and perpetually to oblige ; Yet, notwithstanding these exceptions, if we consider, 1. ‘The manner of its delivery ; with what extraordinary solemnity it was pro- claimed; how it was dictated immedi- ately from God’s own mouth; and writ- ten with his finger ; or, 2. The matter of it, containing the prime dictates of natural reason, the chief rules of piety toward God, and equity toward our neighbour (whence those elogies conferred on it, in Nehe- miah: Thou camest also down from * Deut. iv. 13; x.2; Exod. xxxiv. 1, 28. > Jer. iii. 16, 17. 14 AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. mount Sinai—and gavest them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes and commandments :* and by St. Paul; The law is holy ; the commandment holy, just, and good : for that commendation doth, | suppose, especially respect this part of the Jewish law, out of which he takes his instance, Thou shalt not covet :°) if we also consider, 9. The end and design of these pre- cepts, which was to ground them in true notions of religion, and to dispose them to the practice of righteousness ; to ren- der them loyal and acceptable subjects to God; to promote God’s glory and their own good; which being expressed ;in general concerning their law, doth more especially agree to this system ;' being as the base and platform, the heart and quintessence of all their other Jaws; the which seem added as superstructures on it, or fences thereof. 4. If we also consider, that our Sav- iour did not derogate from this law ; but declared his intention only to expound it, or to ampliate and extend it (they are the words of Tertullian and *Trenzus;) and how the apostles do sometimes allege some passages in it, as retaining some authority and force to oblige.s 5. Considering also, further, that there is no commandment herein (howsoever according to its immediate and direct sense seeming peculiar to that people) which may not in a larger, or in a mys- terious and spiritual meaning, which at least may not according to good analogy, or parity of reason, concern us; oblig- ing us, if not by direct authority in punc- tual manner to the very same thing, yet, as a signification of God’s pleasure and approbation, to somewhat answerable and like thereto. 6. Lastly, If we consider that all, or the greatest part of, the main duties con- cerning us are either plainly expressed, or closely insinnated in thd; or may at least be conveniently reduced to them; our Saviour himself having gone before, directing us in the matter and manner of doing it: Considering, I say, these things, we have no small reason to yield great ven- " « Neh. ix. 13. 4 Rom. vii. 12. f Deut. x. 12. * Rom. vii. 7. ε Rom. vii. 7; Eph, vi. 2, eration to this ancient system of pre- cepts: and to acknowledge the great use thereof in order to the guidance of our life and practice : we accordingly shall so descant thereon, as by considering the main drift, intrinsic reason, and spiritual intention of each particular, to reduce the chief precepts of Christian doctrine which oblige us thereto. Premising thus much, I address my discourse to the particular; omitting all controverted niceties concerning the divi- sion thereof, and all circumstantial ques- tions ; touching only such things as shall appear substantial and useful. God spake all these Words, san- ing: This is a title, or superscription, like the Par de le Roi (by the King) at the head of a proclamation, declaring from whom, and in what manner, that which follows doth come; and therefore imply- ing what it is, and how it should be re- ceived. Gov Spake: It comes from God, as author; and that most immediately, as it were, from his own mouth; and hath consequently the nature and force of a law, obliging to highest regard and obe- dience; as that which proceedeth from the most sovereign, unquestionable, and uncontrollable authority ; which is pro- mulged in a way most evident and most direct : every signification of God’s pur- pose or pleasure is usually called God’s word ; for God (as the apostle says) én divers kinds and manners did speak un- to the fathers ;» and to every such word our ear should be attentive, our heart should be submissive, our hand should be obedient ; but especially they should beso, when God himself immediately declares his mind and will; ashe did notoriously in this case, by a great voice, distinctly au- dible and intelligible, miraculously form- ed by himself: Behold (say the people), the Lord our God hath showed us his glory and his greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire: we have seen this day that God doth talk with man, and he liveth: and if what ever is in God’s name (by message of angels, by inspiration of men, or by t Heb. i. 1. i Deut. v. 24, AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. 15 any other ways) revealed, must be en- tertained with all submiss respect, what regard is due to that word, which God is pleased, not by his ministers and instru- ments, but himself in person, as it were, to pronounce ! hese Coys; that is, these speeches or sentences (for so a word in scripture style signifieth;) or these things and matters (for the Hebrew word debrim, as the Greek ῥήματα, signifieth both words and things :) they are several times in the Pentateuch called the tex words or ten things ; whence the system of them is named the Decalogue.' All these words :* all, without distinc- tion or exception, did proceed from the same authority, and in the same man- ner; and all therefore do require the like regard and observance to be yielded to them. 3 am the Lord: or, lam Jehovah, thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt: These words are by some taken for a precept, enjoining the acknowledgment and acceptance of God, answerable to what is here implied; and consequently all the positive duties of religion, deduc- ible hence: but we see the style is de- clarative and assertive, not directly im- perative ; and so it may pass rather as a preface, further enforcing obligation to obedience ; wherein are expressed or in- timated the chief reasons upon which it is grounded ; every word containing in it somewhat of remarkable emphasis. I am Jehovah ; or that very same God, who under this appellation discoverd my- self to thy forefathers; who enacted a special covenant with them ; who receiy- ed homage, worship, and engagements to service from them; who promised es- pecial protection and favour to them and to their seed; that Jehovah, who indeed am, what this name importeth, the only true and real God; eternal, independent, and indefectible in essence ; true and infallible in word ; constant and immutable in pur- pose ; firm and faithful in performance of whatever I promise or threaten: that same Jehovah 1 am: to whose words, ) Exod. xxxiv. 28; Deut. iv. 13; x.2; James ii. 10, 11. * Matt.v 19. therefore, upon all accounts of reason, of duty, of interest, thou particularly dost owe most submissive attention and obe- dience. Thy God: that supereminent Being and Power, to whom thou peculiarly dost owe worship and honour, love and aflec- tion, duty and service: who although he be indeed the Lord of all the world, yet beareth a special relation unto thee; as having chosen and avouched thee to be a special people to himself, above ail the people that are upon the face of the earth ; having promised thee to make thee high above all nations which he hath made, in praise, and in name, and in honour ;! and having by many signal demonstra- tions of favour and mercy confirmed to thee the performance of his covenant and promise ; thoualso reciprocally hav- ing avowed me to be thy God, to walk in my ways, to keep my statutes, my com- mandments, my judgments, and to heark- en to my voice.” Who brought thee out of the Land of Eqnpt: ont of the House of Dondage: This is a particular and most remark- able instance, by which it appeareth what God it is that doth thus impose law upon them, and how they are obliged to en- tertain it: that God it is, who in pursuance of his singular favour toward thee, and of his covenant .made with thee, hath particularly obliged thee by so eminenta benefit, in a manner so full of wonder in itself, so full of grace toward thee, de- livering thee from saddest oppression and elavery, bringing thee into a desirable state of present liberty and of sure tend- ency (not otherwise than by thy fault to be frustrated) toward enjoyment of rest, of plenty, of all joy and comfort in the promised land; declaring hereby, as his glorious and divine perfections of wisdom and power, so his exceeding goodness toward thee, his faithful care over thee, his readiness and sufficiency, in all thy needs and exigencies, to protect, preserve, and deliver thee : I then being such, Jehovah, the only true God ; thy God, by particular engage- ' Deut. vii. 6; xiv. 2; xxvi. 18, 19. ™ Deut. xxvi. 16. 16 AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. ment and endearment ; thy gracious and bountiful benefactor, not in will only, but in deed, do thou propound my will unto thee ; and upon all accounts of general and special duty, of reason, of justice, of gratitude, require thy regard and ob- servance of what follows. Now what God in a direct and literal sense thus speaketh tothe Jewish people, may, according to likeness of case and parity of reason (especially in a mystical and spiritual way), upon more consider- able and effectual accounts, be applied unto us: the Lord Jehovah is such no less to us than to them; he is the same yesterday, to-day and for ever ;" to him, as to the only true, eternal, and Almighty God, the essential Author, Lord, and Governor of all things, our highest re- spect and observance are due; he also, in a stricter relation, founded on higher grounds, is our God, having chosen us, and consecrated us more especially to himself; having received us into a closer confederacy (a new and better covenant, as the apostle calls it, established upon better promises ;°) having obliged us by granting nobler privileges, and dispens- ing more excellent benefits to us : who likewise hath brought us up out of a spir- itual Egypt, andstate of infinitely more wretched bondage ; hath rescued us from the tyrannical dominion of Satan (a far more intolerably cruel and hard master than any Pharaoh;) hath freed us from serving sin in our souls and bodies, a far harder service than making bricks, or any bodily toil can be; who hath con- ducted us in the way, and conferred on us an assured hope (if we be not wanting to ourselves and our duty), of entering into the heavenly Canaan, a place ef perfect rest and unconceivable bliss ; who (as St. Paul expresseth it) hath de- livered us from the power of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of his most beloved Son: who therefore here, according to spiritual intent, may be understood to speak in a higher strain to us; justly exacting a more punctual and accurate obedience to his command- ments. But so much for that part which seems introductory. ” Heb. xiii. 8. P Col. i. 13. 9 Heb. viii. 6 ; vii. 22. Thou shalt have no other Gods before me. (First Commandment.) It is in the Hebrew, There shall be to thee no other Gods (or no strange Gods ;* for alii some render it, some alieni), “ID ὃν (al pant) to my face, or at my face ; that is, in comparison, or compe- tition with me ; so as to be confronted to me; or together and in consort with me: Iam he (saith God otherwhere), and there is no God “1x9 (immadhi) with me, or beside me : πλὴν éudd, the LXX. render it ; and so the phrase commonly importeth; as in that saying of the scribe, answering to this, There is one God, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν αὐτοῦ, and there is no other God beside him :* but we need not criticise on the words, the sense being plain; as containing a prohibition of assuming any other into partnership with the one true God; acknowledging, in mind or in outward expression, any other for God. The precept, as most of the rest, is in form negative and prohibi- tive, but supposeth and implieth some- what affirmative and positive ; as the rest also may be conceived to do; it implies this affirmative precept Thou shalt have me for thy God. Now to have for our God, signifies, as to internal disposition of mind, a most high esteem, honour, dread, and love of that Being, as endued with attributes and perfections superlatively excellent ; the admiring all his works, ap- proving all his actions, acquiescing in all his proceedings and dealings with us; the reposing our hope and trust in him, as most able and willing to help us, and do us good: in outward expression, to acknowledge, praise, and bless him as such; to yield all fitting demonstrations of respect to his name, and to whatever is specially related to him; patiently to submit to his will, and readily to obey his commandments: these principally, and the like acts of internal devotion and external piety, are comprised in the words having him for our God, and we are to understand them here enjoined to us; the same which is in scripture called 4 Matt. iv. : Deut. xxxii. 39. * Mark. xii. 32. AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. the fearing, the serving, the worship- ping, the loving God with all our heart, and all our soul, and all our mind, and all our might.* This is implied: and it is expressly prohibited us to yield to any other beside him the like esteem, acknowledgment, or service. ‘That there is in truth but one such being, to whom eminently those acts are due, nature, ancient tradition, general consent, and especially divine revelation, do assure us; whereupon is consequent, that yielding them (yielding, I say, those opinions, estimations, and af- fections of our mind, or those acknowledg- ments and expressions in word, or those performances in deed or work, which we before specified) to any other being what- ever, whether really existent in the world, or merely formed by our imagination, is highly unreasonable, unbeseeming us, and unjust toward him. 1. It is highly unreasonable, as false and groundless in itself, as vain and un- profitable to us, as productive of many bad effects. It is from error in a matter of the highest nature and manifest conse- quence ; and so beyond any other mis- take hurtful to us, as reasonable and in- telligent creatures; the μετάλλαξις τῆς ἀληθείας τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐν τῷ ψεύδει, the trans- muting the truth of God into α lie, St. Paul calls it;" reckoning it for a griev- ous folly and crime. It is a vanity of all most lamentable ; a pursuance of shad- ows, an embracing of clouds ;’ a build- ing in air, or mere vacuity; a leaning upon that which hath no substance, or no strength to support us, a dreaming and doting upon mere nothing ; whence those false deities well in scripture are termed μάταια, vanities; for that, as they have no truth, or substance, or efficacy consid- erable in them, so all our thoughts, affec- tions, expectations, and labours are idly misemployed, and unprofitably mispent upon them.” 2. It is also a thing most unbeseeming us men (whom God hath placed in so high a rank of worth and dignity among his creatures; who are in our original so near of kin, so like in nature, so dear in relation and regard unto God himself), to t Matt xxii. 37; Luke x. 27; Deut. vi. δ. ἃ Rom i. 25. Y Jer. ii. 13. Ὗ Jer. viii. 19, &c.; Acts xiv. 15, &e. Vor. Til. 3 17 admire and worship, to place our choice affections upon, to afford lowly submis- sions unto, to rest our hope and confi- dence in any other but him, who alone truly so far excels us, and can worthily challenge such respects from us: all flat- tery is base and unworthy ; but this of all is the worst and most unbecoming. 3. To do so, is also most unjust and in- jurious to God; to whom, as to the Au- thor of our being, and of all our good received since, we do owe all that our mind can yield of reverence, all that our heart can hold of affection, all that our tongue can utter of praise, all that our utmost might can perform of service : and since the exhibiting to any other thing part of these must needs not only by that communication debase and derogate from their worth, but also withdraw them in great measure from him, so diminishing and embezzling his due (for we cannot, as our Saviour teacheth us, together ad- here unto, or serve, diverse masters ;) therefore having any other God, but the true one, is a high indignity and a hein- ous injury to him.* This command, therefore, is most rea- sonable upon many accounts; which as it hath been in grossest manner violated by those who have not acknowledged or worshipped any God at all, and by those who have acknowledged and adored many gods (by all Atheists and Polythe- ists;) from which transgressions thereof we Christians may seem totally exempt, who in formal profession and practice have but one God (the Maker and Lord of all things, infinitely perfect and glori- ous;) yet there are many subtle, and, perchance, no less mischievous trans- gressions thereof, of which even we may be very guilty, and to which we are very obnoxious.? If we do not with all our hearts reverence and love the most wise and powerful, the most just and ho- ly, the most good and gracious God ; if we do not trust and hope in him, as the fountain of all our good; if we do not * Οὐ᾽περισπᾶται πρὸς τῷ θεῶ καὶ ἄλλῳ reve δουλεῦ- ev per’ αὐτοῦ, οὐδὲ πρὸς τὸ δυσὶ κυρίοις δουλεῦειν.----- Onig. 1, viii. p. 382. Λέγει ὁ Ξήνων, ὃ τῆς Στωΐϊκῆς κτίστης aiptee- ὡς---μήτε ναοὺς ποιεῖν pire ἀγάλματα" οὐδὲν γὰρ εἶναι τῶν θεῶν ἄξιον xaracxebacva.—Clem. Alex. Strom. v. p. 426; Id. de Numa. p. 223; Strom. i. vide Aug. de Ὁ. Ὁ. 4, 31. | ᾿ Ὶ ' | eo eh on 18 AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. diligently worship and praise him; {{] creature, he hath another God, against we do not humbly submit to his will and obey his laws, we break the positive in- fent of this law, not having him for our God; being indeed like those of whom St. Paul speaketh, who profess to know God (that is, who in words and outward pretence acknowledge him), but 2 works deny him, being abominable, and disote- dient, and to every good work reprobate.* Likewise, if we frame in our fancy an idea untrue, disagreeable unto, or unwor- thy of, that one most excellent Being, and to such a phantasm of -our own crea- tion do yield our highest respects and best affections, we break this law, and have another God to ourselves. If upon any creature (whether ourselves or any other thing) we impart our chief esteem or affection, or employ our most earnest} care and endeavour, or chiefly rely upon it, or most delight in it, that thing we make a god unto us, are guilty of break- ing this law. Hence St. Paul more than once calls the covetous (or wrongful) per- son an indolater ;s and our Lord calls the immoderate pursuit of riches, the serv- ing (or worshipping) of Mammon; and St. Paul speaketh of some persons who were φιλήδονοι μᾶλλον ἢ φιλόθεοι, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God ;* of whom otherwhere he says, that ‘their god was their belly: we meet with those in the scripture, who put their trust in their horses and their chariots ;* with those who sacrifice to their net, and burn incense to their drag; with them who trust in man, and make flesh their arm? (Men of Mezentius’s faith, ready to say with him, Dextra mihi Deus est, et tel- um quod missile lilro ;) with those whose heart is lifted up (as the prince of Tyre in Ezekiel), and who say they are gods :* these, and whoever practise in like man- ner, are sO many transgressors of this covenant: in short, whoever chiefly re- gards and affects, seeks and pursues, con- fides and delights in wealth, or honour, or pleasure; wit, wisdom, strength, or beauty; himself, friends, or any other Tit. i. 16. Eph. v. 5; Col. iii. 5; Matt. vi. 24. 2 Tim. iil. 4. Phil. iii. 19; Psal. xx. 7. Hab. i. 16; Jer. xvii. 5. Virg. ZEn. 10; Ezek. xxviii. 2; Isa. x. 13. eceern < Ww the design and meaning of this holy law. Thon shalt not make unto thee anv graven Image, Vc. (Second Commandment.) The first commandment determined the final object of our religion ; this doth limit the manner of exercising and ex- pressing it; as to the chief intent of it, interdicting that mode, which in the prac- tice of ancient times had so generally prevailed, of representing the deities (ap- prehended so) in some corporeal shape, and thereto yielding such expressions of respect, as they conceived suitable and acceptable to such deities. 1 cannot stand to declare the rise and progress of such a practice ; how the Devil’s malice, and some men’s fraud conspiring with other men’s superstitions ignorance and fondness, prevailed so far to impose up- on mankind; I shall only observe, that men naturally are very prone to comply with suggestions to such guises of reil- gion: for as the sense of want, and pain, and manifold inconvenience, not to be removed or remedied by any present sen- sible means, doth prompt men to wish and seek for help from otherwhere ; and this disposes them to entertain any hopes propounded to them (with how little so- ever ground of probability) of receiving it from any absent or invisible power ; as it also consequently engageth them to undertake any conditions required by those who propound such hopes, as need- ful for obtaining thereof; whence the ordinary sort of men are very apt to em- brace any way of religion suggested to them, especially by: persons of credit, and authority for knowledge; so also, when the proposition thereof doth come atterided with circumstantial appearances, and shows, gratifying their senses, or bhu- mouring their passions, or delightfully amusing their fancies, it most easily al- lures and takes them: as likewise, on the other side, when abstraction of mind and restraint of passion are required, and sense or fancy are little entertained thereby, men are somewhat averse from such proposals of religion, and are not so easily brought heartily to like, or earnest- Oa ss ee Ee ee a ee ee Te eee AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. 19 ly to embrace them: wherefore since the propounding of images and sensible representations (relating to somewhat not immediately discerned, from whence men are promised the supply of their needs, or relief from the inconveniences which they endure), by their magnifi- cency, beauty, curiosity, strangeness, or even by their sensibility itself, do make so facile and pleasant impressions upon the dull and low conceits of men; it is the less wonderful, that men commonly have been so easily inveigled into such idolatrous superstitions, so unreasonable in themselves, and of so mischievous con- sequence.* For what can be more sense- less, than to imagine, that that Being, which in wisdom and power is sufficient to overrule nature, and thereby to afford us the assistance we need, may be resem- bled by any of these corporeal things, the best of which we cannot, without debasing ourselves, esteem superior to ourselves ? how unreasonable is it to con- ceit thus, how unworthy is it, and unsuit- able to the dignity of our nature, derived from heaven, to crouch unto such mean representations ! It is St. Paul’s discourse, Being (saith he) the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead islike unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.t How injurious also to that most excellent nature must it be, toframe, and expose to view, such, not only homely and mean, but, in respect of the divine nature, most foul and ugly, portraitures of him, which can- not but tend to vilify him in men’s con- ceit!*+ He that should form the image of a serpent, ora toad, and exhibit it as the similitude of a king, would surely dero- gate much from his majesty, and beget very mean and unbeseeming conceits of his person in their minds whom he should persuade to take it for such; and infinite- ly more must he detract from the dignity, * Kowds ἁπάντων vépos,— Max. Tyr. diss. 38, —where he defendeth idolatry. , + ᾿Εξευτελίζει τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ σεμνότητα ἡ iv ἑτοίμῳ τῆς ὄψεως συνήθεια, καὶ τὴν νοητὴν οὐσίαν δι᾽ ὅλης σεδάζεσθαι ἀτιμάζειν ἐστὶν αὐτὴν δι᾿ αἰἱσθήσεως.---- Clem. Strom. v. p. 408. The being ordinarily exposed to view doth (saith Clemens Alexandrinus), extenuate the venerability of God; and to worship the intel- ligible nature by matter doth vilify it through the sense. 4 Acts xvii. 29. and diminish the reverence due to that immense, almighty, all-wise, most pure and perfect Being, who shal! presume to present any sensible, any finite, any cor- ruptible thing, as a resemblance of him ; changing (as St. Paul expresseth it) ‘he glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasis, and creep- ing things ;* as the Israelites are said to have changed their glory (that is, their glorious God) into the similitude of an ox, that eateth grass :* no wonder it was that they, who used such expressions of their religion, had so low opinions con- cerning those supposed deities whom they worshipped ; that they supposed them liable to. such passions, fathered such ac- tions upon them, described them as vile in their dispositions and their doings, as they represented them in their shape: most reasonable therefore is this prohibi- tion of making any resemblance, of what kind soever (by picture, sculpture, or fu- sion), in order to religious adoration ; and yielding to them any such signification of respect, which the custom or consent of men hath appropriated to religion; as bowing, falling down, lying prostrate before them, orthe like: most reasona- ble, I say; for since there is but one proper and allowable object of our wor- ship, as the first commandment declares and enacts, the making an image of any other existent in nature, or devised by our own fancy in order to the worship thereof, is buta pursuance of that unrea- sonable, unhandsome, and unjust super- stition there forbidden ; adding some ab- surdity inthe manner, to the pravity in the substance, of such worship. And as for that one true object of our devotion, the eternal, immense, and all- perfect God ; the glorious excellency of whose nature doth infinitely transcend our comprehension, and consequently of whom we cannot devise any resemblance not infinitely beneath him, unlike to him, unworthy of him (whereby we shall not disparage him, and expose him to irrever- ent apprehensions, especially with the gross vulgar; whereby indeed we shall not cloud his true, inimitable perfections, and affix imperfections to him ; blending inexpressible truth with apparent false- * Rom. i. 23. f Psal. evi. 20. i a 20 hood ;) it must be therefore a profane fol- ly to pretend the representing him by any image ; and the doing of it is upon such accounts in many places of scripture forbidden ; and thatit is so here, accord- ing to the intent of this precept, is plain by that place in Deuteronomy, where Moses reports the ground of this prohibi- tion: Take ye therefore (saith he) good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: lest you corrupt, and make you agraven image :* no shape representing God did appear at his utter- ance of these laws, to prevent their fram- ing any resemblance of God, and taking occasion to practise this sort of worship, thereby implied to be unreasonable. And the prophet Isaiah having in sublime lan- guage and discourse set out the incom- parable greatness, power, and majesty of God: (Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with a span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance ;—before whom the na- tions are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of a balance :— yea, before whom all nations are as noth- ing, and are counted to him less than nothing, and vanity :—who sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabit- ants thereof are as grasshoppers: who stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, und spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in :") having, I say, in this, and more such language, endeavoured to describe the might and majesty of God, he infers, To whom then will ye liken God? or what likeness will ye compare unto him 2: and thereupon he proceeds to discourse against making images for religious use. Like whereto is the discourse of St. Paul to the Athenians: God (saith he) who made the world and ail things that are therein, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands ; nor is worshipped by the hands of men :— we therefore being the offspring of God, ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, the engravement of art and man’s device :i ε Deut iv. 15. δ Isa. xl. 12-22. ) Acts xvii. 24-29. ' Isa. xl. 25. AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. in which place, as the forming any image to represent divine things is manifestly prohibited, so the reasons which we touch- ed against such practice are discernibly enough insinuated. Neither should we omit, that this law is confirmed in the New Testament, and there made a part of God’s new law; for we are therein often commanded to flee idols, not to be idolaters, to shun idolatry as a most heinous crime, of the highest rank, proceeding from fleshly pravity, inconsistent with good conscience, and exposing to damnation : for the mean- ing and notion of idolatry in which places, why should we understand it otherwise, than according to the plain sense of the “word, which is the worship of images, or resemblances ?* why should we take it otherwise, than as opposite to God’s law, then in force? why should we otherwise expound it, than according to the common notion and acceptance of God’s people at that time? The word idolatry was unknown to other people than the Jews: among the Jews, it signified the violation of the second com- mandment: wherefore the observance of that commandment is_ established and enforced by the apostles. ‘T’he Jews detested the worshipping any im- ages: their detestation was grounded on this law: they therefore, who earn- estly exhort them to continue in detesta- tion thereof, do confirm and enforce the obligation of this law: nor can we rea- sonably suppose any distinction, or reser- vation for any idolatry (or any worship- ping of images), as lawful or allowable to christians; since the apostles, as they found it universally prohibited to the Jews, so they continued to charge Chris- tians against it. This discourse hath more force, considering that the same reason upon which this law was enacted doth still apparently continue; men still unmeasurably affecting this fanciful way of religion, being apt in the exercise thereof (if not curbed by a law) to dote upon sensible representations ; being averse from raising up their minds to the only true object of worship, as endued with intelligible and spiritual perfections : this the experience of men’s wild eager- ness for images, reliques, and other such ‘k 1 John v. 21; ΤΟ νυ vi. 9; Gal. ν. 20; Rev. ix. 20; xxi. 8; xxii. 15. AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. 21 foolish trinkets, which had almost quite oppressed our religion (as in many ages the best and wisest men did observe and complain), doth plainly evince. We may add, that if the common tra- dition and consent of the ancient church is in any case a ground of persuasion, or rule of practice to us, we are thence obliged to disapprove and decline the worshipping images; for nothing can be more evident, than that all such wor- ship was not only carefully eschewed, but zealously detested, by the primitive Christians: this is manifest from most ex- press words of the Fathers generally im- pugning and condemning all worship of images ; which are as applicable to that worship which hath been practised among Christians, as to that of the heathens; their expressions do not signify, nor their arguments prove, any thing, if any wor- ship of images be allowable; if they do not as well condemn and confute the modern, as the ancient Romans; they could not with any reason or modesty have used such words, or urged such rea- sons, if their practice had been like that which afterward crept into the church: their darts then against pagan idolatry easily might, surely would, have been re- torted on themselves ; which is so far from having been done, that the pagans accus- ed them for having no images :* Celsus objecteth (saith Origen), that we shun mak- ing altars, statues, and shrines, thinking this to be a faithful pledge (or mark) of our secret communion together :+ this Origen answers by confessing the matter of fact, but defending the right: Not for your reason (saith he) we shun these things, but because we, by the doctrine of Jesus, having found the true manner of piety toward God, do eschew those things, which in conceit or appearance of piety do make men impious—and the images * Cur nauilas aras habent, templa nulla, nulla nota simulacra ?—Minut. _ Consuestis crimen nobis maximum impieta- tis aifigere, quod neque edes sacras veneratio- nis ad officia construamus, non Deorum alicu- jus simulacram constituamus, aut formam, &c. —Arnob. 6. t Κέλσος φησιν ἡμᾶς βωμοὺς, και ἀγάλματα, καὶ νεὼς ἱδρῦσθαι φεύγειν, ἐπεὶ τὸ πιστὸν ἡμῖν ἀφα- νοῦς καὶ ἀποῤῥήτου κοινωνίας οἴεται εἶναι σύνθημα ..---- Vili. p. 389. ‘O Μωσῆς τὰς δοκίμους καὶ γλαφυρὰς τέχνας ζω- γραφίαν καὶ ἀνδροντοποιΐαν ἐκ τῆς καθ᾽ αὑτὸν πολι- τείας é{jdace.—Philo de Gig. of Christians are (saith he) their vir- tues, whereby they resemble God, and truly worship him; and every good Christian, carefully imitating God, is his best statue.* Yea, the Fathers were so far from practising worship of images, that some of them condemn the simple making of them ; calling the art of doing it a falla- cious art, introduced by the Devil, and forbidden by God ; expounding this com- mandment so, as that in it not only the worshipping, but the forming any simili- tude is forbidden : Moses (saith Clemens Alexandrinus) did of old expressly give law, that no carved, or fusile, or plas- tered, or painted portrailure or imagery should be made; that we should not at- tend to sensible things, but pass to things entellzgible :+ and Tertullian in several places saiththe same.t Whether their exposition (concurring, it seems, with the common opinion of the Jews in their time) were true, I shall not now discuss ; that making any similitudes in order to worship is prohibited, is most evident. In fine, divers of the Fathers say, that all the commands in the Decalogue, ex- cepting the sabbath, do continue in force as naturally obligatory, and as confirmed by the Christian law: for instance, St. Augustine, in his 119th Epistle, speaketh thus. The other precepts (excepting the sabbath) there (in the Decalogue) we do observe properly, as they are command- ed, without any figurate observation ; for we have manifestly learned, not to worship idols, and not to take the name of the Lord our God in vain, to honour father and mother, &c. do not figur- ately pretend one thing and mystically signify another thing, Lut are so ob- served as they sound. x ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι εὑρόντες, διὰ τὴν "Incod διδασκαλ- ίαν, τὸν τρόπον τῆς εἰς τὸ θεὶον εὐσεβείας, φεύγομεν τὰ μην εὐσεδείας ἀσεβεῖς ποιοῦντα, “c.— Vide ert. de Idol. iii. iv. p. 389, 390. t Μωσῆς πρόπαλαι διαῤῥήδην ἐνομοθέτησεν μηδὲν δεῖν γλυπτὸν, ἢ χωνευτὸν, ἢ mAacrdv, ἢ γραπτὸν, ἄγαλμά τε καὶ ἀπεικόνισμα ποιεῖσθαι" ὡς μὴ αἰσθητοὶς προσανέχοιμεν, ἐπὶ δὲ τὰ νοητὰ μετίωμεν, &c.—Clem. Strom. v. p. 408. Οὐ γὰρ ἄν ποτε ὃ μηδὲ γλυπτὸν εἴδωλον δεμιουρ- γεῖν παραινέσας, αὐτὸς ἀπεικόνιζεν τῶν ἁγίων ἄγαλ- pa.—p. 411. ¢ Tertul. de Spectac. cap. 23; de Idol. 3, 4, 5, &c. ; Contra Mare. ii. 22 ; wide Iren. iv. 31, 32; Tertul. de Idol. per tot. Aug. contra Faust. xv. 4,7; et"xix. 18; Contra. 2 Epist. Pet. iii. 4. —_— "πα Ὁ ὦ 22 But so much for the prohibition: I shall add, that we may conceive this positive precept implied and intended here, That in our devotions and religious services of God, we should raise our mind above gross sense and fancy ; that we should entertain high and worthy conceptions of God; that we should ap- prehend him incomparably superior to all things which we do see or know; that we direct our minds unto him as to a Being transcendently perfect in good- ness, justice, wisdom, and power, above what we can comprehend and think ; that which our Saviour calls worshipping God in spirit and truth ;' which is (as I take it) the especial positive duty of this commandment. I need not further to urge, how pre- sumptuous and dangerous the practices of those men are, who (to the great danger and scandal of Christianity among Jews, and Mahometans, and men of other religions), notwithstanding these com- mandments of God, backed with others of the same import, frequently occur- ring in the holy scripture (never, that we find any intimation of, repealed or relaxed), particularly against that signal one made use of by our Saviour, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve ; without any an- cient good authority or example, without any necessity or good reason inducing, do not only yield themselves, but vio- lently force others to yield unto angels, and unto the souls of dead men (men of dubious state in reference to God, not having passed the last trial and judg- ment, the result whereof it isa profane temerity in us peremptorily to antici- pate), all kinds of worship, both internal (reposing trust and hope in them of ob- taining benefits from them; attributing unto them in their esteem the knowledge and power which, for all that we can know, are incommunicably proper unto God himself) and external, of prayer and invocation, of praise and thanksgiving ; and not only thus, as to the substance, imparting a kind of divine worship to them, but, as to the manner, erecting images of them, even in the places de- voted to God’s own service, and afford- ing to them the same expressions of rey- erence and respect that we do or can | John iv. 23, 24. a ΕΞ ee ee ΡΥ AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. present unto God himself (with great so- lemnity dedicating such images to them, with huge care and cost decking them, with great semblance of devotion saluting them, and casting themselves down be- fore them ; carrying them in procession, exposing them to the people, and making long pilgrimages to them;) so that in- stead of the spiritual worship of God himself, peculiarly required of Chris- tians, and to which our religion is per- fectly suited; a religion chiefly employ- ing sense and fancy, and for the great- est part directed unto the representations of creatures, is substituted, in despite, as it were, and in defiance of these com- mandmenis; the plain force of which they endeavour to elude and eyade by slender pretences and subtle distinc- tions, by the like to which there is no law which may not as easily be render- ed insignificant and invalid; never in the mean time considering, that these laws were not given to employ the wits of sophisters and schoolmen, but to direct the practice of rude and plain people; to which purpose no law, after such artists have had the handling of it, can signify any thing; nothing being so clear, which by their cavillations and quirks they cannot confound; nothing so smooth, wherein they cannot find or make knots. There is subjoined to these two com- mandments (as we reckon them; others have accounted them but one ;" and their opinion is somewhat countenanced by what is added here seeming to bear a common respect to both ; there is, I say, subjoined) a reason, or rather a contex- ture of reasons, strongly pressing and encouraging to obedience, deterring and discouraging from disobedience to them, or indeed generally to all God’s com- mandments, but especially unto these, most immediately relating to him : Sor 3 the Lord .thn God am a jealous Hod 3 (am ΕἸ kanah, fortis zelotes, as the Vulgar Latin reads it: it may seem to have been a name of God, implying, as all the other names of God do, some at- tribute of God ; for it is, in the 34th of Exo- dus, said, Thou shalt worship no other God 5 - St. Austin, Bede, &c. AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, or Kana, is a jealous God.) I ama jealous God; that is, a God very tender of my honour, and of my right; who am impatient of any mate, or competitor, in respect to those duties which properly and incommunicably be- long unto me: J am (saith God in the prophet Isaiah) the Lord; that is my name, and my glory I will not give to another, nor my praise to graven ima- ges.° This jealousy doth contain in it, not only a strong dislike, but a fierce dis- pleasure, against the infringers of these laws: For the Lord thy God (saith Moses in Deuteronomy, pressing the observance of this same precept, concerning the worship of images) is a@ consuming fire, he is a jealous God :» and if God be thus jealous, so easily provoked to indignation by our detracting his due honour, and imparting it to any other, we have great reason to be afraid of incurring the guilt of either; for who can stand in his sight, when he is angry ? who can support the effects of his displeasure 7" Visiting the iniquity of the fath- ers upon the Children, unto the third and fourth Generation of them that hate me: Visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children: God doth not only punish those persons themselves, who commit notorious and heinous sins (such as these of idolatry and_profaneness, whereby he is publicly wronged and dis- honoured), but the more to deter men (who naturally bear much regard to their posterity, and are afraid to be, ashamed to appear, the causes of ruin and calamity to their family), he declar- eth that in respect to their doings it shall go ill with their posterity ; they shall therefore be more strictly and severely dealt with ; they shall upon this score be capable of less favour and mercy from God, than otherwise they might have been : for we must not hereby under- stand, that God will arbitrarily inflict un- deserved pains upon the childrenof bad men for the faults of their ancestors ® Exod. xxxiv. 14. ὁ Isa. xlii. 8. P Deut. iv. 24. « Pal. Ixxvi. 7. τ κα ......ν.ν.ν.ν.νϑνϑνϑνϑνϑνϑν.ν.ν..νϑ....ϑνϑΦΨῷᾷϑ.ν.΄ῚὲΔώῤ||ς|έ|5ΠπςὉ1|ὲ0 ο-ο-π5ςᾳὲὼΨ5ὼ000τττὔἰἀἰ---.-. OO τῦτοθρὈᾷὑΤτῦῖῖῖἋῷἤΗΡΜΡΜὄ το προ 23 (God doth expressly disclaim such kind of proceeding: The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father ; the soul that sinneth it shall die ;" saith he in the prophet: and, Every one shall die for his own iniquity ; Every man that eat- eth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge,) but that he will upon that ac- count withdraw his free favours from them ; that measure of grace and indul- gence, which otherwise the son of such a person (had he not been a great traitor against God) might, according to the general course of God’s goodness, have received, the which might have more effectually restrained him from sin, and consequently have prevented his guilt and his punishment, God may well (in consistence with his justice and good- ness, to manifest his detestation of hei- nous wickedness) withhold from him. Sucha son, if he do fall into personal of- fences (for that also is to be understood ; otherwise, such is the goodness of God, that he hath declared, if a son seeing his father’s sins, and considering, doeth not the like, he shall not die for the in- iquity of his father, but shall surely live ;* if, I say, he falleth into personal sins), God will visit, that is, will use a close inspection and. animadversion upon him, will severely punish and avenge his sin ; not only upon his own, but on his father’s account ; examples of which pro- ceeding do in the divine histories fre- quently occur ; in Solomon, in Jeroboam, in Baasha, in Ahab, in Jehu, and in oth- ers." Of idem that bate me. We may observe, that in the scripture style the trans- gressors of God’s laws are termed haters and enemies of God; because their ac- tions signify a disposition of mind in them repugnant to the mind of God; and be- cause by them they resist and oppose God’s will: no wonder, then, if God deal thus severely with them. But God not only deters from disobe- dience by threatening a train of punish- ments, but he encourageth to obedience by a declaration of his intention (or prom- t Ezek. xviii. 20. * Deut. xxiv. 16; Jer. xxxi. 30. Δ Ezek. xviii. 14, 17. " 1 Kings xi. 35; xiv. 13; xiii, 34; xiv. 10; xvi.3; xxi.29; 2 Kingsix.8; x. 30; xv. 12; Job. xxvii. 14. | "= ae ee a ὙΥΓῊ i ΦΌΨΥΟΥ Σ ΨΥ ee! ee i 24 AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. ise) graciously to reward, not only upon the obedient persons themselves, but up- on their posterity for ever (in a manner), unto thousands, that is, unto a thousand descents : Showing Mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep mp commandments. Shewing mercy :¥ God doth not abso- lutely promise that he will forbear to pun- ish the posterity of good men, in case they offend, but that he will show mercy, and deal the more favourably with them in that respect: his meaning and method in these cases are plainly represented in those words concerning David: If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; If they break my stat- utes, and keep not my commandments ; then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes: nevertheless my loving-kindness will I not utterly take from him :* God declares he will punish the offending children of very good men, yet so that their misdeeds shall not interrupt his kindness toward the rest of their posterity, or abolish his remembrance of their goodness: so we may see God dealt with Abraham and the patriarchs, passing by (in memory of their love and reverence to him, and their faith- ful obedience to his will) the manifold provocations of their posterity ;* so that he did not for a long tract of time, and af- ter many generations passed, suffer them (according as their personal demeanour highly deserved) to incur ruin; upon this consideration he brought them out of Egypt, he settled them in Canaan, he frequently delivered them from their ene- mies, he restored them from oppressions and captivities ; as is often expressed and insinuated in scripture. So also it is fre- quently mentioned, that for David’s sake, his posterity, although highly provoking God by their miscarriages, was protect- ed and preserved; | cannot stand to mention places.’ I shall only further γ᾿ Vide Deut. vil. 9. Ἢ Psal. Ixxxix. 30 ; 2 Chron. xxi. 7. * Isa. xlv. 45; Psal. cv. 425 Deut. iv. 37; Levit. xxvi. 42; Exod. ii. 34. 7 1 Kings xi. 12, 34; av. 43; Psal. xviii. 50; Isa, xxxv. 1. 35, note, that which is very obvious and most remarkable here, the difference between God’s proceeding in way of severity and in way of favour: by a vast proportion the expressions of God’s mercy do exceed those of justice, althought both insisting upon like or correspondent grounds : he visiteth the iniquities of disobedient fathers unto the third or fourth genera- tion, but he showeth mercy to a thousand generations of those that love and obey him ; he soon forgetteth the wrongs done, but he long retaineth in memory the ser- vices performed to him: which consid- eration should work upon our ingenuity, and engage us willingly to obey so gra- cious a Lord. It is also observable, that as disobe- dience is styled hatred of God, so loving God and keeping his commandments are conjoined as terms equivalent: they are indeed inseparably connected, love be- ing a certain cause of obedience, obedi- ance an infallible sign of love: He that hath my commandments, and observeth them, he it is (saith our Saviour) that loveth me: and, If any man love me, he will keep my word.” But I pass forward to the next. Thou shalt not take the Name of the Lord thn God im vain, for the Lord will not hold hin guiltless that taketh his Name in vain. (Third Commandment.) It consisteth, we see, of a precept, and of a reason deterring from disobedience thereto, by declaring or threatening the mischief ensuing thereon. The precept is, Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain: it might be rendered, ‘Thou shalt not bring the name of the Lord thy God to a vanity (orto a lie, for so the mw, shaveh,* fre- quently importeth ;) that is (as it seems interpreted ina parallel place, where most of these laws are repeated, inculcated, and fenced by additional injunctions), Thou shalt not swear in my name to a falsehood ; and in the 24th Psalm, to lift up one’s soul to vanity, is explained by * John xiv. 21, 16; xxiii. 24. * Levit. xix. 12. — AN EXPOSITION OF swearing ΤΙΣ 25 (lemirmah) to deceit or Jfalsehood.® Josephus eexprsseth it by ἐπὶ μηδενὶ φαύλῳ τὸν Θεὸν ὀμνύναι, to adjure God to no bad matier (or to no false mat- ter, as the word φαῦλος commonly in good writers is taken.) And our Lord him- self, in his Sermon onthe Mount, seemeth to respect this law, when he says, Ye have heard that it was said to the ancients Οὐκ ἐπιορκήσεις, Ye shall not forswear, but shall render to the Lord your oaths ;° for he doth immediately before cite other passages out of the Decalogue ( Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not commit adultery), with intention to explain or extend them ; and therefore probably he proceeds res- pecting this law, the most conspicuous of all those which relate to this matter; and if this law be (as some conceive) suppos- ed to signify more strictly, it had been more suitable to his purpose to cite it, than any other of more lax importance ; his drift being plainly to extend in matter, and to straiten in obligation, even the fullest and strictest of ancient laws, at least as they were then commonly ex- pounded and understood; yea, even in this case, our Lord seemeth to affirm that the ancients had no law strict and perfect enough for evangelical practice ; considering which things, it is probable that the prime intent of this law is to prohibit that great sin of perjury, that is, of invoking God’s attestation to a lie; thereupon appealing to him, as witness and judge, that what we assert is true ; as a surety that what we promise we do stedfastly resolve and shall faithfully en- deavour to perform ;* implying also, that we do expecta curse, and vengeance from him upon us, if we be found know- ingly to falsify in our affirmation, or wil-| fully to violate our promise. _ Swearing is in its own nature imme- diately an act of religion, and as such was enjoined by God (Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God, and serve him, and shalt swear by his name ;") it expresseth | the pious persuasion we have concerning | God’s chief attributes and prerogatives ; of his omnipresence and omniscience | (extending to the knowledge of our most inward thoughts and secret purposes ;) * Ilas ὅρκος εἰς κατάραν τελευτᾷ τῆς ἑπιορκίας. * Psal. xxiv. 4; Jos. Areh. iti. 4. © Matt. v. 33. 4 Deut. vi. 13; x. 20. Vor. MMT. 4 Le Γ᾿ THE DECALOGUE. 25 of his watchful providence over what we do; of his justice and fidelity in main- taining truth and right, in avenging iniqui- ty and falsehood: the reason of using it was derived from, or grounded upon, a persuasion about God, which hath ever been common among men, that God, the governor and judge of the world, the pro- tector and patron of right, is always ready, upon our invocation and reference unto him, to undertake the cognizance of matters in debate and controversy be- tween men, for the protection of truth, the maintenance of right, and preserva- tion of peace among them: (An oath, saith the Apostle, for confirmation is to men an end of all strife*) so that the use thereof becometh a main instrument of promoting those purposes, the strongest tie of fidelity, the surest ground to pro- ceed upon in administration of justice, the most sacred band of all society; which, therefore, he that shall presume to violate, doth not only most unworthily wrong this or that person, this or that so- ciety of men, but doth what in him lies to subvert the foundations of all public justice and peace ; withal most impiously abusing and affronting God Almighty him- self; profaning his mostsacred ordinance, making his name instrumental to the com- passing his deceitful and base purposes, despising his judgment, and defying his vengeance. This seems to be the first and direct meaning of this law; but it may by parity of reason well be extended further, so as we may hereby understand all light and vain swearing, all wanton and irreverent use of God’s holy name: and hitherto our Lord hath plainly extended it, for- bidding us to swear at all, and charging us in our conversation to use only the simple and plain manner of assertion, or promise, saying only, Yea, yea, or Nay, nay ;* without presuming upon any slight occasion to introduce the holy name of God; which indeed we should not with- out extreme awe of spirit ever think upon, nor without high veneration dare to men- tion: it is an instance of the most sottish folly, itis an argument of the most hor- rible impiety that can be, thus (without any cause, or temptation thereto, without any profit or pleasure thence) to trifle * Heb. vi. 16. * Matt. νυ. 37. ee a eee ey seal ate” a ee? or ΥΎ with the divine Majesty; to abuse his glorious name, and provoke his dreadfu! vengeance, who will in nowise hold him 26 AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. firm) that the patriarchs were not obliged thereto, nor did practise it.* And we may observe, that the law | concerning the sabbath is mentioned and | insisted upon separately from the body of Remember Che Sabbath) Dan ty, their laws, as being in nature different keep it holy from the rest, and enacted upon a special | on design; as from the forecited passages (Fourth Commandment.) appeareth ; and further may appear from ak considering how the condition of the The Decalogue is in several places of) proselytes (those of the stricter sort, call- scripture (as we before noted) called a ed proselytes of righteousness) is de- covenant with the Jewish people ; and the | scribed in Isaiah: The sons of the stran- observation of this law is likewise 80 call-| gers (saith God in that prophet) that join guiltless that taketh his name in vain. ed ina particular and special manner: it is expressed to have been appointed as a sign, or characteristical note, whereby their peculiar relation to God might be discerned, and they distinguished from all other people. As circumcision was themselves to the Lord, to serve him, and to love the name of the Lord, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sab- bath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant ; even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joy- a seal of the covenant made with Abra- ful in my house of prayer :* where to ham and his posterity; so keeping the !‘undertake the observance of the sabbath, sabbath did obsignate the covenant made| and to lay hold of the Jewish covenant, with the children of israel after their de- livery out of Egypt: The children of Israel (saith the text) shail keep the sab- bath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual cove- nant: itisa sign between me and the are signified to be coincident, or: espe- cially coherent. All the other precepts indeed (one pas- sage in the second commandment, as it may be understood to prohibit absolutely the making of any similitude, being lia- children of Israel for ever :* and, I gave] ble to exception) are immediately ground- them (saith God in Ezekiel) my statutes,| ed in the reason of the thing, and have a and showed them my judgments, which tf| necessary obligation, even visible to natu- a man do, he shall live in them: MOTEOVET | ral licht 5 they consequently have been 1 gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign be- acknowledged as reasonable and obliging tween me and them, that they might know by the general consent of men; gr that I am the Lord, who sanctifies them | micht be so propounded and asserted by and, Thou camest down from mount Sinat argument, as easily to extort such con- (say the Levites in Nehemiah), and spak-! sent: but this command (although as to est with them from heaven, and gavest| its general and remote matter it is most them right judgments, and true laws, | evidently reasonable, and requireth that good sialuies and commandments ; and| which no man can deny to be matter of madest known unto them thy holy sab- | necessary duty, yet) as to the more im- bath’s:' where making known to them| mediate matter, as to the determinate the sabbaths, as also otherwhere giving | ‘them the sabbath,' are expressions (to-| gether with the special ends of the sab-| measure and manner of performing those general duties, no reason can dis- cern an obligation distinct from, or ante- bath’s appointment, which are mentioned! eedent to, the Lawgiver’s will, to prac- in those places), confirming the judgment tise according thereto: that we should of the ancient Christians, Justin Martyr, Irenzeus, Tertullian, &c. who refer the first institution of the sabbath to Moses, | affirming (that which indeed the history by its total silence concerning the sabbath before him sufficiently doth seem to con- b Ezek. xx. 11, 12, 20. ) Exod. xvi. 29. « Exod. xxxi. 16. 1 Neh. ix. 13, 14. * Kai γὰρ μὴ eabbaricavres of πρδωνομασμένοι πάντες δίκαιοι τῷ θεῶ ἐνηρέστησαν, &C.—Just. p. 290. ᾿Απὸ ᾿Αϑραὰμ ἤρξατο περιτομὴ καὶ ἀπὸ Μωσέως σάῤθατον, καὶ θυσίαι καὶ προσφοραΐ, ὅζο.---Φ201. Abraham sine cireumeisione, et sine obser- vatione sabbatorum credidit Deo, &c.—Zren. Iv. 90. Tertul. adv. Jud. ii. 4: K Isa. lvi. 6, 7, (4.) ——_— 2 > ΤΕΣ Τ᾿ ΣῊ ῊἮΨΕΥ »- AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. 27 frequently with grateful and joyful sense reflect upon the glorious works of God ;' (especially that grand and fundamental one, wherein God’s wonderful excellen- cies of goodness, wisdom, and power, were so illustriously displayed, the crea- tion of the world; wherein so great ac- commodations and benefits were gene- rally dispensed to all the creatures, and to us eminently among them; remem- bering with deepest respect and most hearty thankfulness our bountiful Ma- ker ;) that we should not be unmindful of the special favours by God’s gracious providence vouchsafed to our country, our relations, ourselves (especially such very signal ones as was that of the delivery from Egyptian slavery ina manner so remarkable and miraculous;) that we should not spend ourselves and our time in perpetually carking and labouring about affairs touching our body and this present life ; but should assign some com- petent time both for the relaxation of our mind, and for attendance to the concern- ments of our soul: that also we should allow fitting time of respite and refresh- ment to those of our brethren whom di- vine Providence hath disposed into a meaner condition and relation of servants to us; that their lives may not by inces- sant care and toil be rendered overbur- densome and grievous to them, but so that they may with some comfort serve us; that also they be not destituted of leisure and opportunity to serve God, our common master; and to regard the wel- fare of their souls, no less precious than our own: that also we should show some kindness and mercy even toward our beasts, allowing them some ease from their painful drudgeries in our be- half: these are all of them things which reason evidently dictates, which common sense must needs admit, as duties of pie- ty, justice, and humanity: and to secure the performance of them, both as to the substance, due measure, and fit manner of them, common prudence would sug- gest that set times should be appointed ; in which they should be solemnly and notoriously discharged, under the public testimony and cognizance : and accord- ingly we find that, in all wise and civil | Psal. exliii. 5 ; xcii. 4; ονἱϊ. 22; xxvi, 7; exly. 10, societies, some provision ever hath been made, by appointing festival times, for the practice of such duties, in some kind or degree: The founders of Jaws (saith Seneca) did institute festival days, that men should publicly be consirained to cheerfulness ; inlerposing, as necessary, a temperament of their pains.* Plato, with a more admirable sagacity, refers the invention, or first institution, of such times unto God himself: The geds (saith he, that is, the divine Providence admin- istering affairs here by the ministry of inferior invisible powers, according to his notion and manner of speaking), pitying mankind, born to painful labour, appoint- ed, for an ease and cessation from their toils, the recourses of festival seasons ob- served to the gods.t ‘Thus, 1 say, reason acknowledges the substance of these du- ties, and approves the securing their per- formance, as a good end, or fit matter of law both divine and human. Butas to the cireumstantial determination of measure and manner; that a seventh day preciser ly should be assigned ; that a total cessa- tion from labour for man and beast should be prescribed; this is above reason to discern a necessity of, or a conveniency in comparison with other limitations in those respects devisable and practicable : nor can we assuredly resolve the obliga- tion thereto into any other ground than the pleasure of the most wise Author of this law, who did see what was most fit to be prescribed to those whom this law concerned. Here is indeed mentioned a reason, why God especially did choose this day to bless, and sanctify it in this manner to such purposes ; namely, his resting upon the seventh day from his works of creation; the which yet doth not certainly import a natural convenien- cy, toward accomplishing those purposes, of this precise quantity of time, or in this way of observing it, in preference to any other that might have been appoint- ed; it only seemeth to imply a fitness of these determinations, as containing some- * Legum conditores festos instituerunt dies, ut ad hilaritatem homines publice cogerentur, tanquam necessarium laboribus interponentes temperamentum.—Sen de Trang. An. t+ Θεοὶ δὲ οἰκτείραντες τὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἐπίπονον πεφυκὸς γένος ἀναπαῦλας τὲ αὐτοῖς τῶν πόνων ἐτάξατο τῶν ἑορτῶν ἁμοιδὰς τοῖς Ocots.—Plat. de Leg. ii. p. by 787. wae ee —— δ σοσννυδο a —— el iter 28 AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. what of profitable significancy, that such a correspondency in circumstances of time, and manner of practice, might ad- monish us concerning the substance of our duty, or a principal part thereof, pe- culiarly designed in the sanction of this law, the grateful commemoration of God’s most glorious work (the foundation, as it were, of all other his acts of beneficence), the creation of the world: for thus in all ceremonial institutions we may observe, that some significant circumstance is se- lected on purpose to instruct or excite us to practice, by representing to our fancy the nature and intention of the main duty required ; as in circumcision, in the pass- over, in baptism, and other ritual consti- tutions, it is not hard to perceive: so it being God’s design to enforce the per- formance of that excellent duty, by ap- propriating a time thereto, we may con- ceive that he therefore especially selected that day, as most apt to mind them to whom this law was given, of the history of the creation; the reflecting upon and celebrating which was the main duty in- tended. Seeing, therefore, the observation of the sabbath is expressed to have a pecu- liar respect to the children of Israel, asa sign of the covenant made with them when he led them out of Egypt; seeing in its own nature it differeth from the rest of the ten Laws, the obligation there- to being not, discernibly to natural light, grounded in the reason of the thing, we can nowise be assured that an universal and perpetual obligation thereto was in- tended, or that its obligation did extend further than to the Jews, to whom it was as a formal law delivered, and upon spe- cial considerations severely inculcated ; to whose humour, condition, and circum- stances, it might also perhaps be particu- larly suited: Justin Martyr was of opin- ion that this law, as many others, was giv- en to the Jews διὰ τὴν ἀνομίαν, καὶ σκλη- ροκαρδίαν, for their iniquity and hardness of heart," by way of concession and indul- gence ; for, because they by their natural disposition were apt to forget their Maker ; to neglect the state of their soul, being wholly intent on worldly affairs: to ex- act intolerable pains from their brethren whoserved them ; to use cruelly the poor beasts employed in tilling their ground, ™ Just. Dial. cam Tryph. p. 235, &c. or bearing their burdens; therefore God (considering this incorrigible temper of theirs) did indulge six days to them for the prosecution of those affairs to which they were so devoted, contenting himself to exact from them no more than this part of time for his own service, for the benefit of servants and ease of beasts: if he had required more of them, they could, it seems, or would hardly have endured it; the command would perhaps not only have been disobeyed itself, but the dislike thereof might have rendered them averse from all religion and service of God; as it happeneth, when commands very rigor- ous, and exceeding men’s strength, are enjoined: for we see the prophets com- plain of them, that they could hardly be induced to go thus far, or to afford God this so moderate share of time ; but were impatient even for this one day in seven to abstain from their secular business, to relax themselves, or their servants, or their cattle, from their daily labours : they impeach them for polluting, pro- faning, hiding their eyes from (that is, wholly overlooking, neglecting, and dis- regarding) the sabbath; for doing their own pleasure and exacting their own labours upon it; for not delighting therein, or not willingly observing it :" Hear this (saith the prophet Amos), O ye that swallow up the needy, even to make the poor of the land to fail, say- ing, When will the new moon be gone, that we may sell corn? and the sabbath, that we may set forth wheat 2° ‘This be- ing the disposition of that people, not bearing a greater strictness, they not be- ing able to preserve within their hearts a perpetual remembrance of God’s works and favours; not to moderate their pur- suits of temporal good things; not to bear a due regard and tenderness toward their brethren and their fellow-creatures (the performing which things in a con- stant uninterrupted tenor, the said holy father and blessed martyr supposeth to be the sabbatism which Christians are bound to observe ;*) therefore God, con- sidering their infirmity and incapacity to comply with higher injunctions, did use * Σαδδατίζειν ἡμᾶς ὃ καινὸς νόμος διαπαντὸς ἐθέ- Ae—p, 229, Ὁ Isa, lviii. 3,13; Ezek, xx. 13,21; xxii. 26 ; xxiii. 38. * Amos viii. 4, 5. ies 1 Ey ee a ee ee AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. (as in the cases of divorce, revenge, and the like) an indulgence toward them, per- mitting them on the other days to do their pleasure,” as the prophet speaks, reserv- ing only this day for a punctual and solemn performance of the duties speci- fied: thus discoures that good ancient in his Dialogue with the Jew. However, that this law (as to its circumstantial parts) was not intended to oblige general- ly and perpetually, we have a most for- cible ground to suppose; St. Paul him- self his express discharging Christians from the observation thereof: yea, his earnest reprehension of some persons for rigorously insisting thereon, deeming it themselves, and urging it upon others, as a necessary duty to observe it: his conjoining it with other ceremonial ob- servances, whose nature was merely sym- bolical, and whose design was to continue no longer than till the real substance of that which they represented came in- to full force and practice: Let no man (saith he to the Colossians) judge you for meat, or drink, or upon account of a festival day, or new moon, or sabbath : which things are the shadow of future things ; but the body is of Christ (that is, they did only prefigure and presigni- fy ; the real substance intended and re- presented by them is somewhat in the law and doctrine of Christ; which com- ing immediately to appear and to oblige, that shadow vanisheth, and ceaseth to have any regard due thereto:) again more sharply to the Galatians, whom some Judaizing dogmatists had reduced, or were reducing to the practice of !egal rites, under conceit of needful obliga- tion to them: How (saith he) do ye return againto those weak and beggarly elements, to which back again you are pleased to be enslaved? Ye observe days, and months, and years ;* which words, that they relate generally to the Jewish festi- vals, the context doth plainly enough show and there is good reason to think that they chiefly respect the sabbath we treat on, for which probably these men had the greatest respect and zeal: again, in the 141} to the Romans, the same great patron and champion of Christian lib- P Isa. lviii. 13. 4 Coloss. ii. 16, 17.—(cabBarwy and σαδθάτου are both read; both equivalent.) γ Gal. iv. 10. 29 erty not obscurely declareth his mind, that Christians of strength in judgment did regard no day above another, but es- teemed all days (he excepteth none) alike, as to any special obligation, ground- ed upon divine law and right; in subor- dination to which doctrine we may add, that this appears with great evidence to have been the common opinion of the wisest and most orthodox Christians in the primitive church, the most constant and strict adherence to catholic tradition (who from the apostles’ instruction best understood the purport and limits of the liberty purchased by Christ), that this law, as it was not known or practised before Moses, so it ceased to oblige after Christ; being one of the shadows which the evangelical light dispelled, one of the burdens which this law of liberty did take off us.* ; Now, although upon these accounts we cannot press the strict observation of this law in all its parts, according to its literal and direct intention, yet we may learn much of our duty, much of God’s will, from it: all God’s laws, spiritually and wisely understood, did tend to the promoting of piety and virtue; and, ab- stracting from the special circumstances of that people, to whom they were con- signed, may (so far as our case is like theirs, and wherein a common reason doth appear) pass for fit patterns for us to imitate, suggesting proper means of exercising, nourishing, increasing those qualities in us: and so from this law we may learn these duties : 1. That we should frequently call to mind and consider the great and glorious works of God, performed for the general good of his creatures, and specially for mankind’: the creation of the world; the redemption of mankind ; the nativi- ty, passion, resurrection, and exaltation of our Lord and Saviour, and the like, no less now considerable to us, both in re- spect of glory due to God and of benefit accruing to us, than was the creation formerly to the Jews. 2. ‘That we are bound to restrain our- selves in the prosecution of worldly busi- ness ; not distracting our minds with care, * Inter omnia decem preecepta solum ibi quod de sabbato positum est figurate observan- dum preecipitur.—Aug. Ep. 119 ; vide Cit. Pa- tres. 30 AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. not exhausting our bodies with toil about them; but allowing our mind convenient and seasonable freedom, affording our souls sufficient leisure with vigour and alacrity to enjoy its nobler entertainments, and to pursue its higher interests. 3. That we are obliged to use the same indulgence toward those whom di- vine Providence hath disposed to be un- der our power, care, or governance : or to allow our children, our subjects, our ser- vants,a competent measure of restand re- freshment from their ordinary labours, suf- ficient time and leisure undistractedly to serve God,and quietly to mind their spirit- ual welfare : we must so charitably tender their good, as to permit and procure that their life may be easy and comfortable here ; and that also they may have means to obtain for themselves a happy immor- tality hereafter; not-being in these re- spects either harsh to their outward man, or uncharitable to their souls. 4. That we must not be unmerciful to any creature; not only abstaining from inflicting, in wantonness of humour, need- less vexation upon them, but also from vearying and grieving them too much for our emolument or convenience: the advantage and pre-eminency bestowed upon us by God over them should be managed with moderation and clemency ; we should be gentle masters to them, not cruel tyrants over them: we should con- sider that God did make them, as to help and serve us, so toenjoy somewhat them- selves of delight and satisfaction in their being; which if we go to deprive them of, rendering their condition intolerable, and worse than if they had no being, as we do abuse and injure them, transgress- ing the bounds of our right over them, so we encroach upon, disappoint, and wrong their Maker, and cannot therein but displease him: doing thus is a point of injustice not enough considered by them who commit it; they consider not how beastly they are themselves when they misuse poor beasts. 5. We may hence further learn, that it is fit certain times should be allotted for the public and solemn performance of the forenamed duties: common reason prompteth, that God (upon whose pro- tection and disposal the public good de- pends) should be publicly honoured, and also that care should be taken in every society, that all states of men should lead their lives in some competent degree of content ; that all objects of grievous pity should be removed from public view; also common sense will inform us, that these things cannot effectually be execut- ed without constituting definite periods of time, and limiting circumstances, accord- ing to which they shall be practised under public inspection and censure : and these dictates of ordinary prudence the divine Wisdom hath ratified by his exemplary order; the which, in cases wherein he hath not interposed his direct authority by way of precept, may serve for a good direction to governors, what they may with safety, what they should in wisdom, establish ; what provision they should make for the promotion of piety and vir- tue: such a precedent requires greatest veneration and respect, cannot but ap- pear of high moment in consultation about matters of this nature. It is indeed particularly observable, that in this command there is not an express order concerning the natural or moral service of God (by prayer, or hearing God’s Law) to be publicly. performed on this day ; but the Jews were themselves so wise as to understand these duties couched in the sanctification of the day prescribed to them; and accordingly they practised ; they in all places of their habi- tation did settle synagogues and oratories ; to them upon this day they resorted ; in them then they did offer devotions to God (as the names προσευχαὶ and προσευκτήρια do import;) the Scribes did read the Law, and expound it to the people: Mo- ses (saith Josephus) did command the peo- ple to assemble for hearing of the Law, not once, or twice, or many temes, but every seventh day, laying aside their works, and exactly to learn it ;* whence addeth he, the people became so skilful in the laws, that if one asked any of them concerning them, he would more ea- sily tell them all than his own name ;t whence also an admirable concord in *Ovn εἰσάπαξ ἀκρυασαμένους, οὐδὲ δὶς, ἢ πολλάκις, ἀλλ᾽ ἑκάστης ἑβδομάδος τῶν ἔργων ἀφεμένους, ἐπὶ τὴν ἀκρόασιν τοῦ νόμου ἐκέλευσε συλλέγεσθαι, καὶ τοῦτον ἀκριθῶς ἐκμανθάνειν .---- ΦΟ56 ἢ. adv. App. iL. p. 946. Tt ‘Hpav δ' ὃδντινοῦν εἴ τις ἔροιτο τοὺς νόμους, pdov ἂν εἴποι πάντα, ἣ τοὔνομα τὸ ἑαυτοῦ.---ΦΟ56ρὶι. his benefits frequently acknowledged ; | adv. App. ii. p. 947. J ! "᾿ AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. 31 mind and uniformity in practice did, as he further observes, arise: and, The cus- tom, saith Philo, was always as occasion gave leave, especially upon the seventh days, to philosophate,* &c. In conside- ration of which practice it,was, that the Jews so highly valued this precept, that it was a saying among them, The sabbath weigheth against all the commandments ;' as procuring them all to be known and ob- served. And if that blind people could pick these duties out of this Law, much more should we see ourselves obliged, according to the analogy thereof, to ap- point set times» for ensuring the practice of them. 6. Again; we may hence also learn our obligation to submit obediently to the constitution of governors relating to this matter; that we readily should observe all solemn times of festivity and rest, which the rulers of church or state do appoint for the securing or the promoting those purposes of piety or charity, ac- cording to the measure and manner pre- scribed by them: for reason approving the thing as good and useful, and divine order more clearly and fully confirming it to be so, and it not appearing that God hath made express determinations about it, it remains, that it is left wholly to them to whose care God hath intrusted the public welfare, and hath committed to their judgments the providing means con- ducible thereto ; having also, consequent- ly, enjoined us in all lawful things to fol- low their guidance and appointment in order thereto. God decreed death to be inflicted on those who violated his com- mand concerning the sabbath, which showeth how great a fault it is to offend in this particular ; and we may reasona- bly esteem that command to be his, which proceedeth from his ministers by authori- ty from himself, and in conformity to his own pattern. 7. We add, that whereas God required of the Jews such a portion of time to be solemnly dedicated to religion and mercy, we, to whom he hath vouchsafed higher benefits, and proposed greater encour- agements, cannot reasonubly but deem ourselves obliged to sequester and conse- t Ἔθος γὰρ ἦν, ἀεὶ μὲν κατὰ τὸ παρεῖκον, προηγου- ee be ταῖς ἑδδόμαις, φιλοσοφεῖν, &c.—Philo de il. Os. Midrash. Exod. xxvi. crate as much or more time to the same | intents: we should indeed be content to withdraw ourselves more frequently from pursuance of our own profits and plea- sures to the service of God, to the re- membrance and celebration of his fa- vours ; we should willingly allow greater relaxation to our dependents: and should the public be deficient in exac- ting a performance of such duties from us, it would become us to supply such de- fects by our private devoting fit and fre- quent seasons thereto ; that in some pro- portion we may exceed the Jews in grateful piety, as we surpass them in the matter and causes thereof; that we may appear in some degree more charitable than they, as we have much greater rea- son and obligation to be so than they. So much for this. I proceed briefly to consider the re- maining commandments, the which im- mediately concern another object: those foregoing did chiefly serve to regulate our religious practice in yielding due reverence toward God; these following (which are supposed to have made up the second of those tables, which, writ- ten by God’s hand, were delivered to Moses, and preserved in the ark of the testimony) do guide our conversation and carriage toward our neighbour; in the front of which worthily is placed that which obligeth to dutifulness toward our parents; unto whom, after God and his supreme vicegerents, we owe the highest respect, gratitude, and duty. Honour thy Father and thn Mother. (Lifth Commandment.) Honour : the word signifies to have in weighty regard, and aptly serves to de- note those particular acts of duty, which are otherwhere expressed in scripture ; fear and reverence (Ye shall fear every man his father and mother :) observance and obedience (Children obey your pa- rents in all things, for this is well pleas- ing to God:) gratitude and retribution (Let children learn ἴδιον οἶκον εὐσεβεῖν, to be pious toward their own family ; and ἀμοιβὰς ἀποδιδόναι, to render suitable re- turns, or fo requite their parents; for this is good and acceptable before God 1" * Lev. ix. 3; Col. ili. 20; 1 Tim. v. 4. 32 regarding their instruction and advice (My son, hear the instruction of thy fa- ther, and forsake not the law of thy moth- er :‘) it also comprehendeth ἃ prohibi- tion of the contrary acts, contemning, cursing, offering violence or contumely unto, disobedience and contumacy toward parents, the which are forbidden under capital penalties and dreadful commina- tions: Cursed be he that setteth light by his father or mother ; and, The eye that mocketh at his father, and despiseth to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley shall pick it out, and the young eagles shall eat it ;* (that is, God in a fearful and strange manner will avenge that wickedness upon him :) and in the Law it is ordained, that the rebellious and stub- born son, who will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that when they have chastened him will not hearken unto them, shall be stoned by all the men of his city, and put to death in that manner. Whence we may learn the nature of tlie duty here enjoined, and what rank it beareth among other duties ; what high obligation belongs thereto, of what con- sideration it is with God, and how griev- ous a crime the violation thereof is; that, briefly, we are obliged to yield our pa- rents high affection: of heart, great ex- pressions of respect and observance in word and deed; that the neglect of these duties is, next to that of profaneness and undutifulness toward God himself, the greatest disorder we can be guilty of: this all civil nations have consented to be our duty ; and if we consider the grounds upon which it is built, we shall find that reason, justice, and necessity do require it: St. Paul presseth his precept of ob- servance to parents with a τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι δίκαιον, for this is just and equal :* for if we look upon the disposition of pa- rents in their mind toward their children, we may presume them always full of tender affection and good-will toward them, full of desire and care for their good, full of pity and compassion toward them, in the highest and most especial degree beyond what they bear to others ; which dispositions in reason and equity ¥ Prov. i. 8; xxiii, 22. ~ Deut. xxvii. 16 ; Exod. xxi. 15, 17. * Eph. vi. 1. aot!) eo AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. do require answerable dispositions in those upon whom they are placed, and who from them do receive inestimable benefits ; for if we do regard the effects proceeding from them, we shail discern, that, F 1. From parents children do receive being and life; that good which nature inclineth so highly to value and tender, as the foundation of all the good, happi- ness, and comfort, we are capable of. 2. They are obliged to their parents for the preservation, maintenance, and protection of their life: it is a long time before we come to be able (such is the particular condition of man among all living creatures, so ordered on purpose, as it were, to beget this obligation and endearment) anywise to provide for or to defend ourselves; and the doing there- of, in that senseless and helpless state, re- lies upon the care, pain, and solicitous vigilance of our parents ; the which they are not only always obliged, but are com- monly disposed, with admirable willing- ness to spend on their children. 3. Parents not only thus at first under- go such care and trouble to maintain their children, but by expensive education (of- ten with much inconvenience and incom- modity to themselves) they provide means for their future support and subsistence during life. 4. Children are so strictly tied to their parents, as by their willing concession to partake in all the comforts of their state and ornaments of their fortune. 5. The goods acquired by the parents’ industry do. usually devolve upon their children by inheritance and succession ; whence that children live handsomely and comfortably is the reward of their parents’ merit, comes from the store that they have carefully provided and laid up for them. 6. To which we may add, that not only the provision for our temporal neces- sities and conveniences dependeth upon our parents, but the care of our souls, and our spiritual welfare, is incumbent on them; they are obliged to instruct us in the fear of God, and to set us in the way toward eternal happiness.’ 7. We may consider also, that all this they do most frankly, and out of pure ¥ Deut. vi. 7, 20; Eph. vi. 4. AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. kindness ; without regard to any merit antecedent, or benefit consequent to them- selves ; as they received nothing to oblige and move them to such performances, so they can seldom hope for answerable returns: it is a!undantsatisfaction to them, if they see their children do well; their chief delight and contentment is in their children’s good absolutely and abstracted- ly, without indirect regards to their own advantage. Upon these, and the like accounts, it appeareth, that as parents have the affec- tions most resembling those of God to- ward us, as they perform toward us the actions most like to his, as they are the principal instruments of divine provi- dence and bounty (by which God’s bles- sings are conveyed and conferred upon us ;) so they may be deemed in a sort to represent God, and, as his most lively images, have an especial veneration due to them. God himself, to endear and render himself amiable, or in the most kindly way venerable to us, to engage us to a more ready obedience of him, to de- clare the nature of our duty toward him, assumes the title of Father ;” and all na- tions have agreed to style him so: recip- rocally also, whereas the duties toward other men are termed justice, or charity, or courtesy, or liberality, or gratitude, those towards parents in every language (I suppose) are styled piety, implying somewhat divine in the object of those duties ;* it is more than injustice to wrong a parent; itis more than uncharitable- ness to refuse them succour or relief; it is more than discourtesy to be unkind to them; it is more than sordid avarice to be in their need illiberal to them; it is rather high impiety to offend in any of these kinds. He that returns not love in answer to their tender affection; that doth not (as occasion requires, and his ability permits) requite the benefits received from them, doth not defer to them an especial rever- ence, in regard to that sacred name and character they bear, thereby intimates that he would in like manner be unjust, ungrateful, and disingenuous toward God, from whom he hath received the like ben- efits; the beginning and continuance of * Deut. xxxii. 6. * Evoséetv, 1 Tim. v. 4 ; Colere parentes. Vor. ΠῚ. 5 his being; the preservation, maintenance, and protection of his life: if he will not honour his earthly parents, whom he hath seen, how will he reverence his heavenly Father, whom he hath not seen? so we may, according to St. John, argue. I might subjoin, that as justice and in- genuity do enforce this duty, so for the good of the world there is a necessity that it should be observed: if parents are not only by natural instincts disposed, but by divine command obliged, and by human law (the preservation of the world so requiring) constrained to undergo such hardships for the maintenance and edu- cation of their children, it is fit and nec- essary they should be supported and en- couraged in the bearing them by recipro- cal obligations in children to return them dutiful respect, observance, and requital ; the world could not well subsist without children being engaged to these duties: there were no reason to exact, there were no ground to expect, that parents should cheerfully and faithfully discharge their part upon other terms. To this precept there is added a prom- ise (and it is, as St. Paul observeth, the first precept that hath a promise formally annexed ;” whereby he enforceth his ex- hortation to the observance thereof :) That thn Dans man be long upon the Land which the Lord thy God giveth) thee. So God expressly promiseth to bless dutiful children with a long life in the comfortable possession of those good things which he should bestow upon them ;* this was the most of reward, ex- plicitly covenanted to the Jews, in re- gard to their obedience; there is also implied a commination of a contrary curse from God upon the infringers of this law, that they should either be im- maturely cut off from life (as Abimelech and Absalom were upon this score), or should draw on a wretched life in banish- ment from the contents thereof: by which things respectively are intimated to us the rewards of piety in this kind, or the punishments of impiety in the fu ture state, whereof the land here men, * ‘Teaviis βιώσεις γηροδοσκῶν τοὺς γονεῖς. * Eph. vi. 2. 7 34 AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. tioned was a shadow or figure: what length of days in Canaan was to them, that to us is immorial life in heaven; what being excluded thence was then, that now is everlasting death, or banish- ment into the regions of misery. I might also note the congruity of the reward propounded, that they who are grateful to those from whom, in subordi- nation to God, they received life, shall by God’s dispensation enjoy that life long and well; and that they who neglect the authors of their life shall soon be depriv- ed of it, or of its comforts. But I find the same reward assigned to the diligent observers of other duties; particularly to them who are just in their dealings; to them who are charitable to the poor; to them who are meek and patient; to them who confide in God; and to all good men that obey God’s commandments.° I shall only add, further, that we may, according to analogy and like ground of reason, reduce unto this commandment the obligation we have to honour all those who perform toward us beneficial offices like unto those which we receive from our parents; those who preserve our life by relief, protection, or defence ; those who afford us maintenance or edu- cation; those who watch over us for the good of our body or of our soul; those who instruct us, or advise us; such are our governors and magistrates, either po- litical or ecclesiastical; our benefactors and patrons; our schoolmasters and tu- tors; our especial faithful friends; and the like: but I pass forward. In the subsequent precepts are contain- ed the prime rulers of justice toward our neighbour ; the observation of which is not only most equal and reasonable in it- self, but necessary for the preservation of civil society, and public peace among men; for the procurement of our safe and pleasant living and conversing in the world ; men thereby being secured in the quiet enjoyment of God’s gifts and the fruits of their industry, and of whatever is dear and precious to them: of their lives first; then of the comforts of their conjugal state; of their possessions; of their reputations: the laws respecting * Deut. xvi. 20; Psal. xxxvii. 29, 9, 11; τον, 12, 18, 16; Prov. viii. 16; Deut. xxvi. 15. these being here disposed in order, ac- cording to the value of their respective objects, in the nature of things, or in the opinion of men, or in regard to the con- sequences arising from them. Thon shalt not kill. (Sixth Commandment.) Of all good gifts conferred upon us, none (according to the natural and com- mon esteem of men) is more precious than life itself, the foundation of enjoy- ing the rest: God hath therefore reserv- ed the disposal of it entirely to himself, as his special prerogative; neither he that hath it, nor any other person, having absolutely any just power or right over it: no man can take away any man’s life, but by commission or license from God, reasonably presumed to be granted by him: so may God (the absolute king of the world) be supposed to have com- mitted to lawful magistrates, as his vice- gerents and officers, in his name and be- half, upon reasonable cause, for preser- vation of public justice, peace, and order, in a lawful course of justice, to dispose of men’s lives, who have forfeited them to the law: (the magistrate, as St. Paul saith, bearing not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of God, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.*) He hath not forbidden sovereigns (in case of necessity, and when amica- ble means will not prevail) to maintain the safety or welfare of the societies in- trusted to their care, even by armed vi- olence, against such as wrongfully in- vade them, or anywise harm them, and will not otherwise be induced to forbear doing so; in which case the resolution of such differences (insomuch as they cannot be tried at any other bar, or composed by other means) is referred to God’s arbitre- ment, who is the Lord of Hosts, the sove- reign protector of right, and dispenser of success; the soldier, in a just cause, being then his minister, and carrying a tacit commission from him. God also may be supposed, together with life, with a nat- ural love to it, with means to preserve it, to have imparted to every man a right to defend his life, with its necessary sup- ᾿ αὶ Rom. xiii. 4; 1 Pet. ii. 14. —e —— i Y AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. 35 ports, against unjust,extreme, and inevita- ble violence upon it or them: the slaugh- ter, therefore, which may happen in these cases (or in the like, wherein God hath plainly by a general order, or by special command, or by permission reasonably supposed, conferred on any person a power over his neighbour’s life, in the maintenanc®é of God’s own honour, or in subserviency to public good) is not con- cerned in the design or meaning of this precept: for he that kills another, ina | Way not irregular, asa minister of jus- tice, or in a lawful war, as a soldier au- thorised by a sovereign power here under God,or for his own just and necessary de- fence, doth not, according to the intent of this law, kill ; but rather God himself, the Lord of life and death, doth then kill ; the authority of killing so being derived from him, and his work being done there- by: vengeance is his, and he so (by his instruments) repays it. But here is for- bidden all other voluntary taking away our neighbour’s life, when a man acts as a private person ; without just and nec- essary cause, in any illegal or irregular way; upon what motive, principle, or end soever (whether it be out of hatred, spite, envy, revenge; for our presumed safety, or pretended reparation of hon- our; for promoting what interest, or pro- curing what satisfaction soever to our- selves), by what means soever, either by direct violence, or by fraudulent contri- vance ; In an open or clandestine man- ner; immediately by ourselves, or by means of others; by advising, encourag- ing, anywise becoming instrumental, or accessory thereto. This is the crime expressly prohibited : but a positive duty should also be under- stood ; that we are obliged, so far as we are able, to preserve our neighbour’s life; by relieving him in extreme need, by succouring him in extreme danger ; by admonishing him of any destructive mischief, when he appears tending una- wares thereinto; the neglect of which things argueth a murderous disposition toward our neighbour, is in reasonable esteem, and in God’s sight, a killing of him; for we mistake, if we think with Cain that we are not our brother’s keep- ers, or are not bound, when we are able, to preserve his life. The violation of which commandment is certainly the most heinous sin that can be committed of all those which are not immediately directed against God him- self, or the persons which peculiarly re- present him ; and a sin which never can escape vengeance and due punishment from him. It is the greatest wrong to God; it is the extremest injury to our neighbour ; it is the highest sort of un- charitableness ; it isa principal offence against public society. 1. It is an exceeding wrong and af- front done unto God; in assuming the disposal of his gifts; in dispossessing him of his rights, by robbing him of a creature, of his child, his servant, his subject {one whose life is precious to him, and toward whom he beareth a tend- er regard;) an usurping ina high way his sovereign authority, his throne of majesty, his tribunal of justice, his sword of vengeance ; to omit the sacrilege, as Philo speaks, committed herein by violat- ing God’s own image, which every man doth bear. 2. It is also an extreme injury to the person, who is thereby deprived of an unvaluable good, which can nowise be repaired or compensated: he that loses his life, doth therewith lose all the good he possesseth, or is capable of here, with- out any possibility of recovering it again: the taking therefore of life can be no suitable revenge, no reasonable satisfac- tion, for any injury or damage received ; it infinitely, in a manner, surpasseth all the evil which any man can sustain from another in his estate, or fame, or welfare of any kind ; for those things have their measure, and may be capable of some reparation, but this is altogether extreme and irreparable ; and therefore doth in- clude greatest iniquity: add hereto, that not only all temporal good is hereby at once ravished from a man, but the soul also of the person may incur the great- est damage or hazard in respect to its future estate by being thus snatched away: the slayer not only robbeth his brother of his temporal life, but of his time of repentance, and opportunity of making peace with God. 3. It is also the highest uncharitable- ness to deal thus with our neighbour ; ar- guing that nothing of good-will, of pity, of humanity toward him is left in us: to hate his brother to the death, is the ut- ΨΥ; θη ᾽Ἤ ΣωΗςΩ 36 AN EXPOSITION OF most pitch of hatred. If in imitation of our Saviour,’ and out of respect to him, we ought, as St. John instructeth us, to be willing to lay down our lives for our brethren; how enormous a crime, how opposite to Christian charity is it, to take away our brother’s life ! 4. It is likewise a main offence against the public, not only by unlawful bereay- ing it of a member and subject, but to its prejudice and dishonour (yea, so far as lies in us, to its subversion and dissolu- tion) assuming to ourselves, pulling away from it, its rights and prerogatives of judgment. Such, briefly, is the direct intent and importance of this law :* but our Saviour in his comment hereon hath explained and extended it further, so as to interdict all that any wise approaches in nature, or in effect tends unto this heinous evil: he means to obstruct all the springs, and extirpate all the roots thereof; such as are rash, causeless, outrageous, inveterate anger,contumelious and despiteful lan- guage, reserving grudges or spite in our heart, not endeavouring speedily to re- concile ourselves to them who have done us injury or displeasure ; for these things, as they commonly do produce the act of murder, so they argue inclinations there- o (which, if fear and self-respect did not restrain, would produce it), and con- sequently in moral account, which regard- i i ee ke 8 i la iii, THE DECALOGUE. their conjugal estate ; the enjoyment of that special affection ‘and friendship, to- gether with those instances of benevo- lence, which by divine institution and mutual contract, ratified by most sacred and solemn promises of fidelity, are re- served peculiar to that state: which en- closures, therefore, of his neighbour, whoever shall invade or tréspass upon, who shall anywise loose or slacken those holy bands, who, shall attempt the affec- tion or chastity of his neighbour’s wife, doth most grievously offend God, and committeth (as Joseph, when he was tempted thererto, did call it) @ great evil against God, against his neighbour, against himself, against the common society of men. He violateth an institu- tion to which God hath affixed especial marks of respect and sanctity ; he wounds his neighbour’s honour and interest in the most tender part, wherein the content of his mind and comfort of his life are most deeply concerned. He as much (or rather more) dishonoureth and abus- eth himself, not only by commiiting a fact of so high injustice, but by making himself accessory to the basest perfidi- ousness that can be. [ Whoso commit- teth adultery lacketh understanding: he that doth it destroyeth his own soul. A wound and dishonour shall he get; and his reproach shall not be wiped away. For jealousy is the rage of aman: there- eth not so much the act as the will, are | fore he will not spare in the day of ven- of the same quality therewith ; however they arise from the same bitter root of great uncharitableness; upon which score St. John telleth us, that he that hateth his brother is a murderer ;' and consequently in effect all malice and spite, envy, hatred, malignity, rancour, im- moderate and. pertinacious anger and an- imosity, are here prohibited. Chou shalt not commit Adultery. (Seventh Commandment.) After life (if after that, for this com- mand in the Greek translation of Exodus (though not in Deuteronomy), in some places of the New Testament, and in D | sundry ancient writers, is placed before that against murder), nothing commonly is more dear to men than the comforts of 9 Matt.v. 21. Γ1 John iii. 15, 17. geance. He will not regard any ran- som; neither will he rest content, though thou givest many gifts.e| He also of- fendeth against the public quiet and wel- fare, breeding inextricable confusions and implacable dissensions in families; so that hardly from any other cause such tragical events have issued as from this : in fine, this crime is, as Philo calls it, στυγητὸν, καὶ θεομίσητον ἀδίκημα, a loath- some unrighteousness, most odious to God ; and a fire,” as Job representeth it, that consumeth to destruction. But we must further also consider, that acts of this kind contain also in them an- other evil: that persons committing them do not only so highly wrong their neigh- bour, but defile themselves also by the foulest turpitude; in which respect the prohibition of all unlawful and irregular ε Prov. vi. 32-34. » Job xxxi. 12. eS le fe AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. satisfactions to lustful appetite; all com- pliance with that great enemy of our souls, the flesh; all kinds of impurity and lasciviousness, not in act only, but in thought, in speech, in gesture, may be reduced to this law :' our Lord himself doth so interpret it, as to make it include a forbidding of all unchaste desires ; and Christianity doth in a most strict and special manner oblige us to all kinds of sobriety and modesty, of chastity and purity in body and spirit; enjoining us to abstain from ail fleshly lusts, as ene- mies to our souls; to mortify our fleshly members ; to possess our vessels (or bodies) in sanctity and honour; not to have any impurity or filthiness so much as named among us: nor to suffer ὦ foul word to proceed out of our mouth: not to defile our bodies, consecrated unto God, and made temples of the Holy Spirit: ex- cluding persons guilty of such things from any title or capacity of entering into God’s kingdom :* in fine, represent- ing all such practices as most dishonour- able to us, most displeasing to God, most grievous to God’s holy, Spirit (the foun- tain of all virtue and goodness), most contrary to the nature and design of our religion, and most destructive of our souls. Chou shalt not steal. (Eighth Commandment.) That every man should quietly enjoy those supports and those conveniences of life, which in any honest manner (by God’s bounty immediately dispensing it, or by God’s blessing upon his industry) he hath acquired the possession of, or right unto, as all reason and equity do require, so it must be acknowledged ab- solutely necessary for the preservation of common peace, and the maintenance of civil society among men ; to secure which purposes, and to encourage honest indus- try, this law prohibiteth all invasion or usurpation, by any means whatever (ei- ther by open violence and extortion, or by clandestine fraud and surreption) of our neighbour’s proper goods and rights: he that in any way, against his neighbour’s knowledge or will, getteth into his pow- ! Matt. v. 14. 1 1 Pet. ii. 11; Col. iii, 5; 1 Thess. iv. 4; : Eph. v.3; iv. 29; 1 Cor. iii. 17; vi. 18, 19. Eph. v. 4, dee. 37 er, or detaineth therein, what doth in equity belong to his neighbour, and which he can restore to him, doth transgress against the intent of this law ; as we see it interpreted in Leviticus, where it is thus expressed: Thou shail not defraud thy neighbour, not rob him.' Defraud- ing by cunning practice is no less forbid- den, than robbing by violent force. Any- Wise ἀποστερεῖν, (that is, to deprive our neighbour of his due ;) γοσφίζεῖν, to pur- loin, or (by subtle and sly conveyance) to separate any part of our neighbour’s substance from him;™" πλεονεκτεῖν, to exact or extort anything more than one’s due 3" ὑπερδαίνειν ἐν τῷ πράγματι, lo go beyond, or overreach our neighbour in dealing, to delude and cozen him by false speeches or fallacious pretences, are acts, in St. Paul’s expression, to be referred hither, as so many special acts of theft. I cannot stand to reckon up all the sorts of unrighteousness included here, or reducible to this matter (such as, beside downright rapine and cheating, are, foul dealing in bargains and con- tracts; using false weights and meas- ures; withholding the pledge; detain- ing the labourer’s wages from him; the exercising vexatious, biting, and devour- ing usuries ; removing bounds or posses- sion; oppressing by undue or rigorous exaction ; corrupting justice for reward or favour; raising gain by unlawful and shameful arts or practices ; consenting or sharing with, advising or instigating to these, and the like acts,’ these I shall not particularly insist upon), but shall only say, that God expresseth great indigna- tion against, and threateneth most severe- ly to punish, all acts of this kind; For all (saith he) ‘shat do such things (suchas use deceitful measures in trade), and all that do unrighteousness, are an abomina- tion unto the Lord thy God :® ἔκδικος ὁ Θεὸς περὶ πάντων τούτων, God (saith St. Paul, speaking against the circumventing and defrauding our neighbour) is az avenger for all these kinds of things :4 nor indeed is the gospel more severe in ! Lev. xix. 13. m 1 Cor. vi. 8; Tit. ii. 10. ® 1 Thess iv. 6. ὁ Prov. xxii. 18; xx. 143; ix.24; Ezek. xxii. 12 ; xviii. 7, 16; Hos, v. 10 ; Amos viii. 5; Deut. xxv. 13; Lev.xix. 13; Deut. xxiv. 14; Psal. xv. 4; Isa. i. 23 5 James v. 4. P Deut. xv. 16. 4 1 Thess. iv. 6. 38 AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. denunciation of punishment against any crime than thts: Know ye not that un- just persons (saith St. Paul, meaning this sort of unjust persons, so most properly and strictly called) shall not inherit the kingdom of God :* and κλέπται, theovéx- tat, ἅρπαγες, thieves, exactors (or cheat- ers), and rapacious persons, make a good party in the catalouge of those who shall be excluded from eternal bliss. I should add the positive duties here to be understood, and referred to this mat- ter, the which are commended to us in scripture: such are, diligence and indus- try in our calling, whereby, with God’s blessing, we may support ourselves, pre- venting the need, and escaping the temp- tation of encroachment upon our neigh- bour’s property (whereby we may, as St. Paul speaketh, have need of nothing, may eat our own bread, may even have where- with to impart to the needs of others ;) contentment in that estate wherein God hath placed us, how mean soever ; trust- ing in God and relying upon his provi- dence ; casting our burden and care upon him, who hath promised to sustain us, who hath said that he will never leave or jorsake us ;* lastly, charitable relief of our neighbour in his need; for in such a case our neighbour hath a title to the goods we possess, derived from the ap- pointment and donation of God, who is the absolute proprietor of all we have, we being only his stewards and dispensers thereof, according to the rules he hath declared ; so that if we do not according to his order, supply our poor neighbour, we are in just estimation, we shall in God’s judgment appear to be, thieves, both in respect to God himself and to our neigh- bour ; for that we thereby detain from God what by original right is his, and be- reave our neighbour of what God hath bestowed on him. a ee ee ee eee a ee aes SS eee - - ᾿ Chou shalt not bear false witness against thy Neighbour. (Ninth Commandment.) It is inthe Hebrew, Thou shalt not answer (to wit, being examined or ad- ® 1 Cor. vi. 9. 6 Eph. iv. 28; 1Thess.iv. 12; 2 Thess. vili. 12; Phil.iv. 115 1 Tim. vi. 8; Prov. xxx. 8; Psal. lv. 23; 1 Pet. v. 7; Heb. xiii. 5. jured in judgment) against thy neighbour as a false witness ; so that primarily, it seems, bearing false testimony against our neighbour (especially in matters of capital or of high concernment to him) is prohibited ; yet that not only this great crime, but that all injurious (even extra- judicial) prejudicing our neighbour’s reputation, and consequently his safe- ty or his welfare in any sort, is for- bidden, we may collect from that expli- cation of this law, or that parallel law, which we have in Leviticus: Thou shalt not, it is there said, go up and down as a talebearer among thy people; neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbour : as talebearer, ">> that is, a merchant, or trader in ill reports and stories concerning our neighbour, to his prejudice ;* defaming him, or detracting from him, or breeding in the minds of men an ill opinion of him; which vile and mischievous practice is otherwhere under several names condemned and re- proved : such are muttering (The words of a mutterer, saith the Wise Man, are as wounds, going into the innermost parts of the belly,)whispering, ψιθυρισμὸς: we have often, in the Son of Sirarch and in St. Paul, mentioned with a bad charac- ter, or with prohibition and reproof: sup- planting (so in the good man’s descrip- tion, Psal. xv. it is said, He supplants not with his tongue ; so the word signi- fies:) detraction, or backbiting, καταλα- dia, which is so often in the apostolical writings forbidden and _ reprehended : slander, or calumny, and sycophantry ; that is, oppressing, abusing, or any way harming men by false tales, suggestions, or pretences:" which sort of practices, how base they are in themselves (noth- ing being more unworthy of an honest and ingenuous mind, nothing more ugly to the judgment of them who have any sense of goodness;) how contrary they are io justice, which doth not permit us to wrong our neighbour, as well in his credit and good name, as in his other goods (for they perhaps may be as much valued by him, may really be of as much * LXX. οὐ πορεύσῃ δόλῳ. * Levit. xix. 16. * Prov. xviii. 8; "5 Sirac. v. 143 xxi. 30 ; xXvill. 13 : 2 Cor. xii. 20 «0 Rom.i. 30; Psal. xv. 33; 555, 2 Cor. xii. 20; James iv. 11; Rom. i. 30; 1 Pet. ii. 1; Luke iii. 14; xix.8; Levit. xix. 11; Psal. lxxii. 4; exix. 134. ea ae , a =) ptr. aa | AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. 39 consequence to him, as any thing that he hath ;) which bindeth us to abstain from hurting him, as well in word as in deed ; how opposite they are to charity, which obligeth us to think the best of our neigh- bour, and to endeavour that others also may do 80 ; to conceal his real faults and blemishes; much more not to devise and affix false ones to him, not to gather and disperse ill reports to his prejudice ; of how mischievous consequence also they are, breeding ill-will, and sowing strife in all societies both public and pri- vate (even separating chief friends, as the Wise man telleth us), common sense and experience do show:” they conse- quently must be very odious in the sight of God, who loveth the place and wel- fare of men; and very offensive to men, who do the mischiefs springing from them. To this law may be reduced our obli- gations to be candid in our opinions and discourses concerning others (according to St. Paul’s excellent description of chari- ty ;* to forbear rash and harsh censure, as you know our Saviour in his most di- vine sermon on the mount chargeth us ; to be veracious, sincere, and faithful in all our conversation ; which duties are so often taught and pressed in both Testa- ments: Ye shall not (saith the Law) steal, nor deal falsely, nor lie one to another ; and, 70 walk uprightly, and work righteousness, and speak the truth from his heart, are the first lineaments in the good man’s character drawn by the Psalmist 5 and, These are the things ye shall do, saith God in the prophet; Speak ye every man the truth to his neigh- bour ; execute the judgment of truth and peace in your gates: and in the New Testament, To lay aside lying, to speak the truth every man with his neighbour ; to lay aside all malice, all guile, all hy- pocrisies, envyings, and backbitings, are apostolical commands.” * Prov. x. 12; 1 Cor. xiii. 5, 7. Ὑ Prov. xvi. 28, * 1 Cor. xiii. y Levit. xix. 11; Psal. xv. 2. * Zech. viii. 16; Eph. iv. 25; Col. c ili. 9 ; 1 Pet. ii. 1. Chou shalt not covet thn Neigh- bour’s fjouse; ilou shalt not covet thy Neighbours Wife; nor his ftlan-servant, nor his Maid servant, nor his Ox, nor his Ass, nor aun thing that is thn Neighbour’s. (Tenth Commandment.) This law is comprehensive and recapi- tulatory, as it were, of the rest concerning our neighbour,prescribing universal justice toward him (whence St. Mark, it seems, meaneth to render it in one word, by μὴ ἀποστερήσης, deprive not,* or bereave not your neighbour of any thing ;) and this not only in outward deed and dealing, but in inward thought and desire, the spring whence they do issue forth (for, from the heart, as our Saviour teacheth, do proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, forni- cations, thefis, false-witness, blasphe- mies ;") we are obliged to be so far from depriving our neighbour of any good thing belonging to him, that we are not so much as to wish or desire it ; not only to abstain from injurious action, but to repress covet- ous inclinations: wherein is also implied, that we should have a delight and com- placence in our neighbour’s good ; not envying him any enjoyment; being in our minds content with the portion God pleaseth to vouchsafe us; and entirely trusting in him, that he will supply us with what is needful or befitting to us, without the damage of our neighbour. Thus God’s law is, as St. Paul observed, spiritual ;° not only restraining exterior acts, but regulating our inmost thoughts, quelling all inordinate appetites and affec- tions of heart within us ; the which may be extended so as to respect not only mat- ters of justice toward our neighbour, but all objects whatever of our practice ; so as toimport that which in the Christian law is so frequently enjoined us, as the life of our religion, circumcising our hearts, crucifying the flesh with its pas- sions and desires, mortifying our earthly members, pulting to death by the Spirit * Mark x. 19. * Rom. vii. 7, 14. > Matt xv. 19. 40 AN EXPOSITION OF THE DECALOGUE. the deeds of the body, putting off the old man, which is, corrupted according to the deceitful lusts: Οὐκ ἐπιθυμήσεις, Thou shalt not unlawfully or irregularly desire, doth, according to the spiritua] intent, import all this.¢ { have done; and shall only add, that the sum and end of these, and all other good laws, of all religion, and all our du- ty, is (as we often are taught in the New Testament) comprised in those two rules, ¢ Rom. 11. 29; Phil. iii. 3; Col. ii. 11; Gal. v.24; Rom. vi.6; Col. iii.5; ii. 11; Eph. iv. 22; Rom. viii. 13. of loving God with all our heart, and loving our neighbour as ourselves ;° se- riously and honestly attending unto which, we can hardly fail of knowing what in any case our duty is: it remains that we employ our best care and endeavour on the conscientious practice thereof; im- ploring therewith the assistance of God’s grace, and that good Spirit, which God hath most graciously promised to those who duly ask it, by which alone we can be enabled to keep God’s commandments : to him be all glory and praise. Amen. oT Ti. 1S. THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS. ir is a peculiar excellency of our religion, that it doth not much employ men’s care, pains, and time, about matters of cere- monial observance ; but doth chiefly (and in a manner wholly) exercise them in works of substantial duty, agreeable to reason, perfective of man’s nature, pro- ductive of true glory to God, and solid benefit to men.* Its design is not to amuse our fancies with empty shows, nor to take up our endeavours in fruitless per- formances ; but to render us truly good, and like unto God, first in interior dispo- sition of mind, then in exterior practice ; full of hearty love and reverence to God, of tender charity and good-will toward men; of moderation and purity in the enjoyment of these things; of all true piety and virtue; whereby we may be- come qualified for that life of bliss which it tendereth and promiseth ; for conversa- tion in that holy society above, to which it designeth and calleth us. Yet because fancy is naturally a medium, and an ef- fectual instrument of action, and because sensible objects are apt strongly to affect our minds,* it hath pleased the divine Wisdom to apply them, in fit measure, and to sanctify them to those good pur- poses, by appointing some few solemn and significant rites to be observed by us, being in their own nature proper and use- ful, and by God designed to declare his mind and gracious intents to us; to con- sign and convey his grace into our souls, to confirm our faith in him, to raise our * It hath, especially upon vulgar and weaker minds, a strong efficacy. 5 Cypr. Ep. 76. Vor. ΤΠ. β devotion toward him, to quicken our res- olutions of obeying his will; to enable and excite us to the practice of those great duties, which he requireth of us: Our Lord Jesus Christ (saith St. Austin) hath subjected us to his gentle yoke and light burden; whence, with sacraments most few in number, most easy for obser- vance, most excellent in signification, he bound together the society of new people: and, The mercy of God (saith he again) would have religion free, by the celebra- tion of a most few and most clear sacra- ments.* Of these there appear two (and St. Austin, in the place cited, could instance in no more) of general and principal use, instituted by our Lord himself; which, because they represent to us somewhat not subject to sense, and have a secret influence upon us; because what is in- tended by them is not immediately dis- cernible by what is done, without some explication (their significancy being not wholly grounded in nature, but deptnding upon arbitrary institution, as that of words, which is of kin tothem ; whence St. Aus- tin calls a sacrament, Verdum visibile), have usually been called mysteries (that * Dominus noster leni jugo suo nos subdidit, et sarcine levi; unde sacramenus numero paucissimis, observatione facillimis, significa- tione prestantissimis societatem novi populi colligavit; sicut est baptismus Trinitatis nomi- ne consecratus, communicatio corporis et san- guinis ipsius ; et si quid aliud in seripturia ca- nonicis commendatur, &c.— Ep. 118. Reli- gionem paucissimis et manifestissimis celebra- lionum sacramentis misericordia Dei liberam esse voluit,—Jd. Ep. 119. 4 ee rs, i, ‘ “ ! 42 THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS. is, actions of a close and occult impor- tance, of deeper meaning and design than is obvious to ordinary perception ;) and thence are also called sacraments, for no other reason, I conceive, than because the ancientest translators of the Bible in- to Latin did usually render the word μυσιήριον by the word sacramentum ; whence every thing containing under it somewhat of abstruse meaning, is by an- cient writers termed a sacrament. (So Tertullian calls all Christianity the sacra- ment of Christian religion ; and Elisha’s axe he calls the sacrament of wood; and St. Austin speaks of the sacrament of bread, of fish, of numbers, of the rock, &c.* In short, he says of all signs, that when they belong to divine things they are called sacraments :+ which shows to how small purpose the disputes are, yea, on what small grounds the decrees are, concerning the number, general nature, and efficacy of sacraments: for where a name or form of asacrament is of so large, ambiguous, and indeterminate sig- nification, there can be nothing but con- fusion in the disputes about it.) But those which chiefly at least, and in way of em- inency, have obtained this name, are those two instituted by our Lord, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper; of which I shall in order discourse ; and so of each, as very briefly to consider the occasion of their institution ; the actions enjoined in them ; the nature of them, or wherein their mys- tery doth consist ; the ends for which they were intended ; and the effects they pro- duce; together with the dispositions and duties (antecedent, concomitant, and con- sequent) required of us in the use and practice of them. And first, OF BAPTISM.t THERE were, as the Apostle to the He- brews telleth us, in sacred use among the Jews, διάφοροι βαπτισμοὶ, several kinds of baptisms.” ‘The learned in their laws * Exod. xii. 26.—Sacramenti natura diserte et plane exprimitur. + Nimis autem Jongum est convenienter disputare de varietate signorum, que, cum ad res divinas pertinent, Sacramenta appellantur. —Aug. Ep. 5. In cunctis Christi actionibus sacramentorum mysteria corruscarunt.—Leo. i. Ep, 4. $ Βαπτισμῶν διδαχή.---Ἐ 60. vi. 2. * Heb. ix. 10; Seld. De Synedriis. and customs teach, that they never did receive any person into their covenant, whether that which was more strict (to which natural Jews and proselytes of righteousness were tied), or that which was more lax, with which strangers and proselytes of the gate did comply, with- out a baptism. And that priests and Le- vites entering into their office were to be sanctified by washing with water, we see plainly prescribed in their Law ;° like- wise that all persons who had contracted any kind of defilement were purified by the like ceremony, particularly children new born, is expressed there.* Moreover, that it was in use for persons, who were conscious to themselves of having trans- gressed God’s law, being in God’s name invited by some person of eminent au- thority (a prophet, or like a prophet, one commissionated by God) unto repentance and amendment of life, to be washed by him, in testimony of their steadfast pur- pose to amend, and in hope to obtain par- don from God of their past offences, and to be reinstated in his favour, appears probable by St. John the Baptist’s under- taking, and the success thereof. For if the manner of his proceeding had been altogether unusual and unknown, somany, it seems, would not so readily (without any stir or obstacle) have complied there- with; especially among the Scribes and Pharisees, those zealous adherents to tra- ditionary practice, who, to maintain their credit and interest with the people, were so averse from all appearance of novelty. This practice, than, of washing, in so many cases, and to so many purposes, customary among God's people, to signi- fy men’s entering into a new state ,or course of life, being withal most apt and proper for his design, our blessed Saviour, who never favoured needless innovations, was pleased to assume and impose upon the disciples and followers of his religion, accommodating it.to those holy purposes, which we shall now endeavour to declare. What the action itself enjoined is what the manner and form thereof, is apparent by the words of our Lord’s institution : Going forth therefore (saith he) teach (or disciple) all nations, baptizing them © Exod. xxix. 4; Numb. viii. 6. “ Levit. xv. 8, 16, 18,27; xxii.6; Numb. xix. 7, ὅσο. ; -Ezek. Xvi. 4. © * John i. 25, 33. ᾿ THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS. 43 in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things which I have commanded you.' The action is baptizing, or immersing in water; the object thereof, those per- sons of any nation whom his ministers can by their instruction and persuasion render disciples ; that is, such as do sin- cerely believe'the truth of his doctrine, and seriously resolve to obey his command- ments. It is performed in the name; that is, it is ministered by the authority, and bears special relation unto the Persons of the blessed Trinity as the chief objects of the faith professed, and the sole objects of the obedience undertaken therein ; as exhibiting gracious favours unto the per- son baptized, and as receiving special ob- ligations from him. Such is the action itself declared to be ; the mystery thereof consists in its being a notable sign to represent, and an au- thentic seal to ratify, the collation then made of certain great benefits to us; and our undertaking correspondent duties toward God. The benefits which God then signifies, and (upon due terms) engageth to confer on us, are these: 1. The purgation or absolution of us from the guilt of past offences, by a free and full remission of them (the which washing by water, cleansing from all stains, doth most appositely represent ;) and consequently God’s being reconciled. unto us, his receiving us into a state of grace and favour, his freely justifying us (that is, looking upon us, or treating us as just and innocent persons, although be- fore we stood guilty of heinous sins, and thereupon liable to grievous punishments), that these benefits are conferred in bap- tism, many places of scripture plainly show; [and the primitive church, with most firm and unanimous consent, did believe.}| And now (saith Ananias to St. Paul), why dost thou tarry? Arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins: and, Repent saith St. Peter, preach- ing to the Jews), and let every one of you be baptized for the remission of sins “5 and Christ (saith St. Paul again to the f Matt. xxviii. 19; Mark xvi 15, & Vide Just. Apol. 2; Tertul. de Bapt. &c.3 Acts xxii. 16; ii. 38; Eph. v. 26, - Kphesians) loved his church, and deliver- ed himself for it, that he might sanctify it, purging it by the washing of water, ἐν ῥήματι (that is, he effectually in baptism consigned to the members of his church, that mercy and remission of sins which he purchased and merited by his passion :) and again, Such (saith he to the Corin- thians) were some of you (that is, ye were persons guilty of heinous sins ;) but ye have been washed, ye have been sanctified, ye have been justified in the name of our Lord, and by the Spirit of our God: where having been washed in Christ’s name doth (in congruity with what is said in other places) denote baptism in his name ;" being sanctified and justified do express the first benefits accompanying that baptism. And indeed, wherever a general remission of sins, ora full sancti- fication, or consecration, and justification of men’s persons in God’s sight, are men- tioned ; that remission of sins, that separa- tion, or dedication unto God’s service ; that reception into grace, which are con- signed in baptism, are (I conceived) un- derstood ; there being no other season or occasion, wherein ordinarily and visibly God doth exhibit those benefits. It may be demanded, How children, by reason of their innocent age, are capable of these benefits ;* how they can be par- doned, who never had offended ; how they can be justified, who never were capable of being unjust ὃ I briefly answer, that because they come from that race, which by sin had forfeited God’s favour, and had alienated itself from him; be- cause also they have in them those seeds of pravity, from which afterward certain- ly, life continuing (without God’s restrain- ing grace), will sprout forth innumerable evil actions; therefore that God, over- looking all the defects of their nature, both relative and absolute, or personal, doth assume them into his special favour, is no small benefit tg them, answerable to the remission of actual sin, and restitu- tion from the state consequent thereon in others.t 2. In baptism, the gift of God’s holy Spirit is conferred, qualifying us for the * Quid festinat innocens ewtas ad remissio- nem peccatorum ?— Tertud. + ——impletur apud nos Spiritu Sancto pu- erorum innocens ewtas, &c.—Cypr. Bpist. 10. 5 1 Cor, vi. 11. ε νος δον. il . ‘ 44 THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS. state into which we then come, and en- abling us to preform the duties we then undertake, which otherwise we should be unable to perform; for purification of our hearts from vicious inclinations and de- sires; for begetting holy dispositions and affections in our souls; for to guide and instruct us, to sustain and strengthen us, to encourage and comfort us in all the course of Christian piety: the which ef- fects are well also figured by water, which purifieth things both from inherent and adherent filth. That this benefit is annexed to baptism, the scripture also teacheth us: Be baptized (saith St. Peter) in the name of Christ to the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost : εἰς ἕν πνεῦμα ἐποτίσθημεν, We being baptized in one body, are made to drink of one Spirit (saith St. Paul :)) and with the laver of regeneration St. Paul again enjoined the renovation of the Holy Ghost : aud it is represented as an advantage of our Savour’s baptism above that of John, that our Lord not only baptized with water to repentance, but with the Holy Ghost, and fire.* Some preventing operations of the Holy Ghost (whereby God freely draweth men to Christianity, persuading their minds to assent thereto, inspiring their hearts with resolutions to comply with it) do precede baptism ; but a more full communication thereof (due by compact, assured by promise), for the confirming and main- taining us in the firm belief and constant practice of Christianity, is consequent thereon: After ye had believed, ye were sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, saith St. Paul.* ‘To signify which benefit then conferred, the ancient Christians did to baptism annex the chrism, or holy unction, signifying the collation of that healing and cheering Spirit to the baptiz- ed person ; that which St. Paul may seem to respect, when he saith, He that es- tablisheth (or confirmeth) ws with you into Christ, and who hath anointed us, is God ; who also hath sealed us, and hath given us the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.' 3. With those gifts is connected the benefit of regeneration, implying our en- * Aovrody παλιγγενεσίας, ἀνακαίνωσις πνεύματος dytov,—Tit. ill. δὲ Matt. iii. 11. + Acts ii. 38. 1.}-Cor.. xii. 18, « Eph. i. 14. Σ Cor. i. 21. trance ‘into a new state and course of life ; being endowed with new faculties, dispositions, and capacities of souls ; be- coming new creatures and new men, as it were, renewed after the likeness of God in righteousness and true holiness ;™ our being sanctified in our hearts and lives, being mortified to fleshly lusts and worldly affections, being quickened to a spiritual life and heavenly conversation : iy short, becoming, in relation and in dis- position of mind, the ‘children of God. This the matter and the action of baptism do set out: for as children new born (for cleansing them from impurities adherent from the womb), both among the Jews and other people, were wont to be wash- ed ;* so are we in baptism, signifying our purification from natural and worldly de- filements: the mersion also in water, and the emersion thence, doth figure our death to the former, and reviving toa new life. Whence baptism is by St. Paul called the laver of regeneration ; and our Lord saith, that ἐγ a man be not born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God ;" that is, every one becoming aChristian is by baptism regenerated, or put into a new state of life, getteth new dispositions of soul, and new relations to God: Ye are all (saith St. Paul) the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus ;° that is, by embracing his doctrine, and submitting to his law professedly in baptism: and, We (saith st. Paul again) are buried with Christ through baptism unto death; that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so also we should walk in newness of life.” 4. With these benefits is conjoined that of being inserted into God’s church, his family, the number of his chosen people, the mystical body of Christ, whereby we become entitled to the privileges and im- munities of that heavenly corporation. We (saith St. Paul) Aare been all Laptiz- ed in one Spirit into one body, the mysti- cal body of Christ :* and, So many of you (saith he again) as have been baptized * Ezek. xvi. 4.--βούσασα καὶ ἐμπλήσασα ya- Naxrt.—Theocr, ™ Eph. il. 22, 23, 243; Col. iii, i, ae o Tit. δὴ John 5: P Rom. vi. 4; Col. ii. 12. * 1 Cor. xii. 13. 10; 2 Cor. 9 Gal. iii. 26. THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS. 45 into Christ (into Christ mystical, or the church) have put on Christ ; and ye are (adds he) all one in Christ Jesus." As proselytes among the Jews by baptism were admitted unto the communion and privileges of the Jewish, so thereby are we received into the like communion and privileges of the Christian, far more ex- cellent, society. 5. In consequence of these things, there is with baptism conferred a capaci- ty of, a title unto, an assurance (under condition of persevering in faith and obedience to our Lord) of, eternal life and salvation. We are therein, in St. Peter’s words, regenerated unto a lively hope of an incorruptible inheritance, by that resurrection of Christ,» which is represented to us in this action; and so therein applied, as to beget in us a title and a hope to rise again in like manner to a blissful life; whence we are said therein to rise with him ; Being (saith St. Paul) buried with him in baptism, where- in also we were raised again :‘ whence by the two great apostles baptism is said to save us: Baplism (saith St. Peter, the an- titype of the delivery in the flood) doth save us ;“ that is, admitteth us into the ark, putteth us into the sure way of salvation : and, God (saith St. Paul) according to his mercy saved us, by the laver of regener- ation» and, He that shall believe, and shall be baptized, shail be saved, is our Saviour’s own word and promise :” shal/ be saved ; that is, shall be put into a state and way of salvation; continuing in which state, proceeding in which way, he assuredly shall be saved: for faith there denoteth perseverance in faith, and bap- tism implieth performance of the condi- tion therein undertaken; which next is to be considered. For as this holy rite signifieth and seal- eth God’s collation of so many great ben- efits on us; so it also implieth, and, on our part, ratifieth our obligation, then in an especial manner commencing, to sev- eral most important duties toward him. It implieth, that we are in mind fully per- suaded concerning the truth of that doc- trine which God the Father revealed by his blessed Son, and confirmed by the P Gal. iii. 27. * 2 Pet, i. 9. ' Col. ii. 12. 5.1 Pet. iii, 21. τ Tit. iii, 5. » Mark xvi. 16. miraculous operation of the Holy Ghost; we therein profess our humble and thank- ful embracing the overtures of mercy and grace purchased for us by our Sav- iour’s meritorious undertaking and per- formances, the which are then exhibited and tendered to us; we therein declare our hearty resolution to forsake all wick- ed courses of life, repugnant to the doc- trine and law of Christ; fully to conform our lives to his will, living thereafter in all piety, righteousness, and sobriety, as loyal subjects, faithful servants, and du- tiful children to God: in brief, we there- in are bound, renouncing all erroneous principles, all vicious inclinations, and all other engagements whatever, entirely to devote ourselves to the faith and obedi- ence of God the Father, our glorious and good Maker; of God the Son, our gra- cious Redeemer ; of God the Holy Ghost, our blessed Guide, Assistant, Advocate, and Comforter: these are the duties an- tecedent unto, and concomitant of, our baptism (immediately and formally re- quired of those who are capable of per- forming them, mediately and virtually of them who are not), the which are signi- fied by our being baptized in the name of the holy Trinity. These duties the scripture commonly expresseth by the word, faz/h and repen- tance ; sometimes singly, sometimes con- junctly: Jf (said Philip to the eunuch) thou believest with thy heart, it is lawful (for thee to be baptized ;*) faith was an indispensable condition prerequisite there- to: and, Repent (saith St. Peter), and let every one of you be baptized ;’ repen- tance also was necessary to precede it: indeed both these (as they are meant in this case) do in effect signify the same ; each importeth a being renewed in mind, in judgment, in will, in affection ; a seri- ous embracing of Christ’s doctrine, and a stedfast resolution to adhere thereto in practice. Hence are those effects or con- sequences attributed to faith, justifying us, reconciling and bringing us near to God, saving us; because it is the neces- sary condition required by God, and by him accepted, that we may be capable of those benefits conferred in baptism ; the same being also referred to that re- pentance, or change of mind, which * Acts viii. 37. Υ Acts ii. 38. ms ae | eee eee Se ee ee — as) — rer 46 THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS. must accompany our entrance into Chris- tianity ; that good conscience with which we stipulate a perpetual devotion and obe- dience to God ;* the which therefore doth, as St. Peter telleth us, save us; it con- tributing to our salvation, as a duty nec- essarily required in order thereto. This is that death to sin, and resurrection to righteousness, that being buried with Christ, and rising again with him, so as to walk in newness of. life, which the baptismal action signifies, and which we then really undertake to perform. And as such are the duties preceding or accompanying baptism ; so, making good the engagements they contain, con- stantly persisting in them, maintaining and improving them, are duties necessari- ly consequent thereupon: Having (saith the apostle) had our bodies washed with pure water, let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering.» We should indeed continually remember, fre- quently and seriously consider, what in so solemn a manner we (upon so valuable considerations) did then undertake, prom- ise, and vow to God, diligently striving to perform it; for violating our part of the covenant and stipulation then made, by apostacy in profession or practice from God and goodness, we certainly must forfeit those inestimable benefits which God otherwise hath tied himself to be- stow ; the pardon of our sins, the favour of God, the being members of Christ, the grace, guidance, assistance, and com- fort of the Holy Spirit; the right unto, and hope of, salvation. We so doing, shall not only simply disobey and offend God, but add the highest breach of fideli- ty to our disobedience, together with the most heinous ingratitude, abusing the greatest grace that could be vouchsafed us: If we wilfully sin after we have taken the acknowledgment of the truth (saith the apostle, meaning that solemn profession of our faith in baptism), we trample under foot the Son of God, we profane the blood of the covenant, we * Acts xxvi. 14; v.31; xx. 21; xxvi. 20; iii. 19; xvii. 30; Rom. v.1,2; iii. 25; 11. 4; Gal. ii. 16; iii. 8; Heb. x. 39; Eph. ii. 8; iii. 12; 2 Thess. ii. 13; 2 Tim. ii. 25; 2 Pet. iii. 9; Matt. ix. 13. Δ Luke xxiv. 47; Markii.17; 1 Pet. iii. 21; Rom. vi. 3, 4, &c. b’ Heb. x. 23 ; 2 Pet. iii. 17. do despite unto the Spirit of grace ;° and incurring so deep guilt, we must expect suitable punishment. But I pro- ceed to the other sacrament, THE EUCHARIST. Amone the wonderful works of power and grace performed by God Almighty in favour of the children of Israel, and in order to their delivery from the Egyp- tian slavery,a most signal one was the smiting the firstborn in every house of the Egyptians, and passing over the houses of the children of Israel ;* where- in God declared his just wrath against their cruel oppressors, depriving them in a sudden and dreadful manner of what was nearest and dearest to them; and his gracious mercy toward them, in pre- serving what was alike dear to them from so wofula calamity ; thus (as the text expresseth it) putting a difference be- tween the Egyptians and the children of Israel. Now, that the memory of so re- markable a mercy might be preserved, that their affections might be raised toa strong sense of God’s goodness, and their faith in him confirmed, so as in the like need to hope for the same favourable help and protection, by the consideration of so notable an experiment, it pleased God to appoint a sacrament, or mysteri- ous rite, to be annually celebrated, re- presenting and recalling to mind that act of God, wherein his special kindness was so eminently demonstrated toward his people: the same also (as did other rites and sacrifices instituted by God among that people) looking directly for- ward upon that other great delivery from sin and hell, which God in mercy design- ed toward mankind, to be achieved by our Saviour; prefiguring, that the souls of them who should be willing to for- sake the spiritual bondage of sin, should be saved from the ruin coming upon them who would abide therein; God regarding the blood of our Saviour (that immaculate Lamb, sacrificed for them) sprinkled upon the doors of their houses ; that is, by hearty faith and repentance, applied to their consciences. The occasion of celebrating which holy rite, © Heb. x. 26, 29. a Cypr. Ep. 63. 9 Exod. xii. 23; Heb. x. 223 1 Pet. 1. 2. ᾽ KS 7 EE φι ,ϑϑΆρΘὅθςς-οοἨἸ,τὲ.οτὌη-οιχ| τ ο ῦττὔὕὖῷὦὉὖ0}«ᾳὋ5Σ2Ξὄἅ»ὦὥὕὅὔὄδΔδ2οὖἰὔὦἅορὸῦτὸὺ,γοσ“ το —_ — ν THE DOCTRINE OF our Saviour we see did improve to the institution of this sacrament, most agree- ing therewith in design, as representative and commemorative of the greatest bless- ing and mercy that we are capable of having vouchsafed to us; some part of that ancient rite or sacrifice (which was most suitable to the special purposes of this institution, and most conformable to the general constitution of the Chris- tian religion, whereby all bloody sacri- fices are abolished) being retained in this. The action itself (or rather the whole rite, consisting of divers actions) we see plainly described in the Gospels, and in the First Epistle of St. Paul to the Co- rinthians, distinguishable into these chief parts: 1. The benediction and con- secration (by prayer and thanksgiving) of bread and wine. 2. The breaking of bread, and handlingthe cup. 3. The delivery and distribution of them to the persons present. 4. The declaration accompanying that delivery, that those symbolical things and actions did repre- sent our Saviour’s body given and broken, our Saviour’s blood shed and poured out for us, in sanction of the new covenant. 5. The actual partaking of those sym- bols, by eating the bread and drinking the wine, done by all present.’ These things we find done at the first institu- tion and exemplary practice of this holy ceremony ; the which our Saviour oblig- ed us to imitate, saying, Do this in re- membrance of me. ‘There followeth in St. Matthew and St. Mark, presently after the narration concerning these par- ticulars,—Kel ὑμνήσαντες, And having sung a hymn, they went to the mount of Olives ;* which action was indeed in itself proper to conclude the practice of this holy rite; yet what reference it hath thereto, cannot thence be determin- ed: however, with these the church hath always joined several acts of devo- tion (confessions, prayers, praises, thanks- givings, intercessions, vows) suitable to the nature and design of the sacrament, apt to glonfy God, and edify the faithful in the celebration thereof. Such is the practice itself instituted f | Tim. iv. 5 ; Luke xxii. 19, 20, εὐχαριστή- cas.—1 Cor. xi. 24, 95, &e\ace.—Luke xxi. 17, dtapepioars.—Mark xiv. 22, 23, 24, ἔπιον ἅπαντες. = Matt. xxvi.30; Mark xiv. 26. THE SACRAMENTS. 47 and enjoined by our Saviour; the mys- terious importance thereof, as we find it explained in holy scripture (the only solid and sure ground upon which we can build the explication of supernatural mysteries), consisteth chiefly in these particulars : 1. It was intended for a commemora- tive representation of our Saviour’s pas- sion for us; fit to mind us of it, to move us to consider it, to beget affections in us suitable to the memory and considera- tion thereof: J otro ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν dvaurvyow Do this (saith our Lord) for my remembrance, or in commemora- tion of me;° that is, so as thereby to have raised in youa reflection of mind and heart upon those grievous pains which I shall have endured for your sake, to procure for you a remission of sins and reconciliation to God: and, So often (saith St. Paul) as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, καταγγέλλετε, ye tell forth (or significantly express) the death of our Lord till he come, or during his absence from us.‘ The suffering of our Saviour (the most wonderful act of good- ness and charity that ever was perform- ed in the world, which produced effects of highest consequence to our benefit, the consideration whereof is apt to work the best dispositions of piety in us) should very frequently be present to our thoughts and affections;. and that it may be so with advantage, such a solemn and sen- sible representation thereof is very con- ducible ; wherein we behold him crucifi- ed, as it were in effigie, his body broken, his blood poured out for us; it being, in a sort, a putting us into the circumstances of those who did behold our Saviour for us hanging upon the cross. Our Lord being absent in body from us (sitting in heaven at God’s right hand), to supply that absence, that we should not be apt to forget him, and thereby become whol- ly estranged from him, is pleased to or- der this occasion of being present, and conversing with us, insuch a manner, as may retain in our memories his gracious performances for vs; may impress in our hearts a kindly sense of them; may raise us up in mind and affection to him. 2. The benefits consequent upon our δ Luke xxii. 19; 1 Cor. xi. 25. ν΄ 1 Cor. xi. 26. ee ee ee a ΤῊ ΟΣ ΜΝ νλνν.».... ‘ 48 THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS. ἣν Saviour’s passion, rightly apprehended, |could not more fitly be set out, than by heartily believed, seriously considered by us, are hereby livelily represented, and ef- fectually conveyed, to the sustenance and nourishment of our spiritual life, to the refreshment and comfort of our souls. It is a holy feast, a spiritual repast, a divine entertainment, to which God in kindness invites us; to which, if we come with well-disposed minds, he there feeds us with most holy and delicious viands, with heavenly manna, with most reviving and cherishing liquor. Bread is the staff of life, the most common, most necessary, and most wholesome and most savoury meat; wine is the most pleasant and wholesome also, the most sprightly and cordial drink: by them, therefore, our Lord chose to represent that body and blood, by the obligation of which a ca- pacity of life and health was procured to mankind; the taking in which by right apprehension, tasting it by hearty faith, digesting it by careful attention and med- itation, converting it into our substance by devout, grateful, and holy affections, joined with serious and steady resolutions of living answerable thereto, will cer- tainly support and maintain our spiritual life in a vigorous health and happy growth of grace; refreshing our hearts with comfortand satisfaction unspeakable: He that doeth thus, eats our Saviour’s flesh, and drinks his blood (that is, who, our Saviour interpreteth it, doth delieve in him ;' that belief importing all other acts of mind and will connected with right persuasions concerning hiin), hath eternal life, and shall lire for ever, as himself declares and promises: which benefits, therefore, in the due perform- ance of his holy duty are conveyed unto us. 3. This sacrament declares that union which good Christians partaking thereof have with Christ; their mystical inser- tion into him, by a close dependence up- on him for spiritual life, mercy, grace, and salvation ;* a constant adherence to him, by faith and obedience ; a near con- formity to him in mind and affection ; an inseparable conjunction with him, by the strictest bands of fidelity, and by the most endearing relations: which things 1 John. vi. 51, 47; v. 36. κ John xv. 4. the partaking our best and most necessa- ry food; which being taken in, soon be- comes united to us, assimilated and con- verted into our substance; thereby re- newing our strength, and repairing the decays of our nature: wherefore, He (saith our Saviour) that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him;' and, The cup of blessing (saith St. Paul) whzch we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ ? the bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ 2 We in the outward action partake of the symbols representing our Saviour’s body and blood; we in the spiritual intention communicate of his very person, being (according to the manner insinuated) inti- mately united to him. 4. By this sacrament consequently is signified and sealed that union which is among our Saviour’s true disciples com- municating therein; their being together united in consent of mind and unity of faith ; in mutual good-will and affection ; in hope, and tendency to the same bless- ed end, in spiritual brotherhood and soci- ety; especially upon account of their communion with Christ, which most closely ties them one to another; they partaking of this one individual food, be- come translated, as it were, into one body and substance: Seeing (saith St. Paul) We being many, are one bread, one body; for ali of us do partake of one bread.” In the representing; producing, and promoting these things, we are taught the mystery of this sacrament doth consist ; it was designed, as a proper and efficacious instrument, to raise in us pious affections toward our good God and gracious Re- deemer ; to dispose us to all holy prac- tice; to confirm our faith, to nourish our hope, to quicken our resolutions of walk- ing carefully in the ways of duty; to unite us more fastly to our Saviour, and ‘to combine us in charity one toward another; the accomplishing of which in- tents thereof doth suppose our faithful and diligent concurrence in the use there- of: whence arise many duties incumbent ! John vi. 56. m | Cor. x. 16. n Vide Cypr. Ep. Lxiii. p. 146; Ixvil. p. 208; 1 Cor. x. 17. ; _= υἧυ- “2 ἊΨ» ᾿ ἣ 4 THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS. 49 wpon us in respect thereto ; some antece-|should therefore remove and abandon dent, some concomitant, some consequent | from us, not only all vicious inclinations to the use thereof. and evil purposes; but even all worldly 1. Before we address ourselves to the | cares, desires, and passions, which may partaking of this venerable. mystery, we | distract or discompose us, that may dull should consider whither we are going, |or deject us, that may cause us to be- what is the nature and importance of the | have ourselves indecently or unworthily action we set ourselves about; that we | before God, that may bereave us of the are approaching to our Lord’s table® (so | excellent fruits from so blessed an enter- St. Paul calleth it), to come into his more | tainment. especial presence, to be entertained by| To these purposes we should, accord- him with the dearest welcome and the | ing to St. Paul’s advice, δοκιμάζειν éov- best cheer that can be ; to receive the full- | zovc, examine and approve ourselves Ὁ est testimonies of his mercy, and the |considering our past actions and our surest pledges of his favour toward us; | present inclinations ; and accordingly, by that we are going to behold our Lord in | serious meditation, and fervent prayer to tenderest love, offering up himself a sac-|God for his gracious assistance therein, rifice to God, therein undergoing the | working our souls into a hearty remorse sorest pains and foulest disgraces for our | for our past miscarriages, and a sincere good and salvation ; that we ought there- | resolution to amend for the future: for- fore to bring with us dispositions of soul | saking all sin, endeavouring in all our ac- suitable to such an access unto, such an | tions to serve and please God; purging intercourse with, our gracious Lord. | owt (as St. Paul again enjoineth us) the Had we the honour and favour to be in- | old leaven of vice and wickedness ;* so vited to the table of a great prince, what |that we may feast, and celebrate this especial care should we have to dress | passover, in which Christ is mystically our bodies in a clean and decent garb, to | sacrificed for us, in the unleavened dispo- compose our minds in order to expres-| sitions of sincerity and truth. Such sion of all due respect to him ; to bring | are the duties previous to our partaking nothing about us noisome or ugly, that | this sacrament. might offend his sight, or displease his 2. Those duties which accompany it mind: the like, surely, and greater care, | are, a reverent and devout affection of we sh@ld apply, when we thus being | heart, with a suitable behaviour therein ; called, do go into God’s presence and ᾿ δὴ awful sense of mind, befitting the communion. We should, in preparation | majesty of that presence wherein we do thereto, with all our power, endeavour to | appear, answerable to the greatness, and cleanse our souls from all impurity of | goodness, and holiness of him with whom thought and desire ; from all iniquity and | we converse, becoming the sacredness of perverseness ; from all malice, envy, ha- | those mysteries, which are exhibited to tred, anger, and all such evil dispositions, | us, (that which St. Paul seemeth to call which are most oflensive to God’s all- | dcuxolrery τὸ σῶμα Κυρίου, to discern or piercing sight, and unbeseeming his glo- | distinguish our Lord’s body ;" that is, rious presence; we should dress our) yielding a peculiar reverence of mind souls with all those comely ornaments of | and behaviour in regard thereto ;) a de- grace (with purity, humility, meekness, | votion of heart, consisting in hearty con- charity) which will render us acceptable | trition for our sins, which did expose our and well-pleasing to him; we should | Saviour to the enduring such pains, then compose our minds into a frame of rev- | remembered; in firm resolution to for- erence and awful regard to the majesty |sake the like thereafier, as injurious, of God ; into a lowly, calm, and tender | dishonourable, and displeasing to him ; disposition of heart, apt to express all |in fervent love of him, as full of so won- repect due to his presence, fit to admit , derful goodness and charity toward us; the gracious illapses of his holy Spirit; |in most hearty thankfulness for those un- very susceptive of all holy and heavenly | conceivably great expressions of kind- affections, which are suitable to sucha communion, or may spring from it. Wel, 1 qo, xi, 28. «1 Gory, ὁ ° 1 Cor. x. 21. τ] Cor. xi. 29. Vor. Il. ἢ i Ό΄ς--΄.ὃ.Ὸ5ςς -.--ςςς-ς-.- .Ἑ. " | | | SS δ. ΟΞ 50 THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS. ness toward us; in depest humility, up- on sense of our unworthiness to receive such testimonies of grace and favour from him (our unworthiness to eat the crumbs that fall from his table: how much more to be admitted into such de- gress of honourable communion and fa- miliarity, of close conjunction and union with him !) of pious joy in consideration of the excellent privileges herein impart- ed, and of the blessed fruits accruing to us from his gracious-performances ; in a comfortable hope of obtaining and enjoy- ing the benefits of his obedience and pas- sion, by the assistance of his grace; in steady faith and full persuasion of mind, that he is (supposing our dutiful compli- ance) ready to bestow upon us all the blessings then exhibited; in attentively fixing the eyes of our mind, and all the powers of our soul (our understanding, will, memory, fancy, affection) upon him, as willingly pouring forth his life for our salvation; lastly, in motions of enlarged good-will and charity toward all our brethren for his sake, in obedience to his will, and in imitation of him: such like duties should attend our participation of this holy sacrament. 3. The effects of having duly perform- ed which, should appear in the practice of those duties which are consequent thereon; being such as these: an in- crease of all pious inclinations and affec- tions, expressing themselves in a real amendment of our lives, and producing more goodly fruits of obedience; the thorough digestion of that spiritual nour- ishment, by our becoming more fastly knit to our Saviour by higher degrees of faith and love; the maintaining a more lively sense of his superabundant good- ness; the cherishing those influences of grace which descend upon our hearts in thiscommunion, and improving them to nearer degrees of perfection in all piety and virtue; a watchful care and endeavour in our lives to approve our- selves in some measure worthy of that great honour and favour which God hath vouchsafed us in admitting us to so near approaches to himself; an earnest pur- suance of the resolutions, performance of the vows, making good the engage- ments, which in so solemn a manner, upon so great an ogcasion, we made, and offered up unto our God and Sa- viour ; finally, the considering that by the breach of such resolutions, by the violation of such engagements, our sins receiving so mighty aggravation of vain inconstancy and wicked perfidiousness, our guilt will hugely be increased ; our souls relapsing into so grievous distemp- er, our spiritual strength will be exceed- ingly impaired ; consequently hence our true comforts will be abated, our best hopes will be shaken, our eternal state will be desperately endangered. There is one duty which I should not forbear to touch concerning this sacra- ment ; that is, our gladly embracing any opportunity presented of communicating therein ; the doing so being not only our duty, but a great aid and instrument of piety ; the neglecting it a grievous sin, and productive of great mischiefs to us. The primitive Christians did very fre- quently use it, partaking therein, as it seems, at every time of their meeting for God’s service: it is said of them by St. Luke, that they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and communion, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers ; and, when you meet together, it is not (as according to the intent and duty of meeting it should be) to eat the Lord’s Supper, saith St. Paul :* and Justin Mar- tyr, in his second Apology, describing the religious service of God in@heir as- semblies, mentioneth it as a constant part thereof; and Epiphanius reporteth it a custom in the church, derived from apostolical institution, to celebrate the eucharist thrice every week, that is, so often as they did meet to pray and praise God; which practice may well be con- ceived a great means of kindling and preserving in them that holy fervor of piety, which they so illustriously express- ed in their conversation, and in their gladsome suffering for Christ’s sake : and the remitting of that frequency, as it is certainly a sign and an eflect, so in part it may possibly be reckoned a cause, of the degeneracy of Christian practice, into that great coldness and slackuess which afterward did seize upon it, and now doth apparently keep it in a lan- guishing and half-dying state. The rarer occasions, therefore, we now have of performing this duty (the * Acts ii. 42; 1 Cor. x.20. , EV — νὰ: —e 7 ‘ ΜῈ a. ee ae es ae eee THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS. 51 which indeed was always esteemed the principal office of God’s service), of en- joying this benefit (the being deprived whereof was also deemed the greatest punishment and infelicity that could arrive to a Christian), the more ready we should be to embrace them. If we dread God’s displeasure, if we value our Lord and his benefits, if we tender the life, health, and welfare of our souls, we shall not neglect it; for how can we but extremely offend God by so extreme rudeness, that when he kindly invites us to his table, we are averse from coming thither, or utterly refuse it? that when he calleth us into his presence, we run from him ὃ that when he, with his own hand, offereth us inestimable mercies and blessings, we reject them ? It is not only the breach of God’s command, who enjoined us 10 do this, but a direct con- tempt of his favour and goodness, most clearly and largely exhibited in this of- fice. And how can we bear any regard to our Lord, or be anywise sensible of his gracious performances in our behalf, if we are unwilling to join in thankful and joyful commemoration of them? How little do we love our own souls, if we suffer them to pine and starve for want of that food which God here dis- -penseth for their sustenance and com- fort ? if we bereave them of enjoying so high a privilege, so inestimable a ben- efit, so incomparable pleasures as are to be found and felt in this service, or do spring and flow from it? what reasona- ble excuse can we frame for such neg- lect? Are we otherwise employed? What business can there be more impor- tant, than serving God, and saving our own souls ? is it wisdom, in pursuance of any the greatest affair here, to disre- ont the principal concern of our souls ? Ὁ we think ourselves unfit and un- worthy to appear in God’s presence ? but is any man unworthy to obey God’s commands ? is any man unfit to implore and partake of God’s mercy, if he be not unwilling to do it? What unworth- iness should hinder us from remember- ing our Lord’s excessive charity towards us, and thanking him for it ? from pray- ing for his grace? from resolving to amend our lives? Must we, because we are unworthy, continue so still, by shun- ning the means of correcting and curing us ? Must we increase our unworthiness, by transgressing our duty? If we esteem things well, the conscience of our sin- fulness should rather drive us to it, as to our medicine, than detain us from it. There is no man indeed who must not conceive an@ confess himself unworthy ; therefore must no man come thither at God’s call? If we have a sense of our sins, and a mind to leave them; if we have a sense of God’s goodness, and a heart to thank him for it; we are so worthy, that we shall be kindly received there, and graciously rewarded. If we will not take a little care to work these dispositions in us, we are indeed un- worthy ; but the being so, from our own perverse negligence, is a bad excuse for the neglect of our duty. In fine, I dare say, that he who, with an honest mean- ing (although with an imperfect devo- tion), doth address himself to the per- formance of this duty, is far more ex- cusable than he that upon whatever score declineth it; no scrupulous shyness can ward us from blame; what then shall we say, if supine sloth, or profane con- tempt, are the causes of such neglect ? “Ὥσπερ γὰρ τὸ ὡς ἔτυχε προσιέναι κίνδυνος, οὕτω τὸ μὴ κοινωνεῖν τῶν μυστικῶν δείπνων ἐκείνων, λιμὸς καὶ θάνατος. Αὕτη γὰρ ἡ τράπεζα τῆς ψυχῆς ἡμῶν τὰ νεῦρα, τῆς διανοίας ὃ σύνδεσμος, τῆς παῤῥησίας ἡ ὑπόθεσις, ἡ ἐλπὶς, ἡ σωτηρία, τὸ φῶς, ἡ §w4.—Chrys. in 1 Cor. Or. 24.* Thus having briefly dispatched the considerations that offered themselves upon these subjects, I shall conclude all with prayer to Almighty God, that we, by his grace and help, believing rightly, strongly, constantly, and finally; being frequent and fervent in prayer, and all pious devotion ; sincerely obeying all God's commandments ; continuing or- derly, dutiful, and worthy members of Christ’s church, growing continually in grace, by the worthy participation of the holy sacraments, may obtain the end of our faith, the success of our prayers, the reward of our obedience, the continu- ance in that holy society, the perfect consummation of grace in the possession of eternal joy, glory, and bliss: which God in his infinite mercy grant to us, for our blessed Saviour’s sake ; to whom be all glory and praise for ever and ever. Amen. * Mens deficit, quam non recepta Eucha- rista erigit et accendit.—Cypr. Ep. 54. oh δΥ δὶ ‘aa fa hea dia. wit hs! shi F Frat en ims ἫΝ Fe We a at re bis? ite ida Soak eae hey j ay Clee te = oie q 172 yikes ban rad eae Pein S ee, ai row it <1 ; Pais! δὲ Ἔ et cr 7; tot "ἢ Γ 7's pl . pate” . | bith ts Hey Otho ral ; : ἢ ΛΗ ΨΩ ΟΝ Fett 3) aed ε it ae ἢν yb yd ΚΝ νη ; : on WT sts ve Br -, act | | eee ἮΝ ρον ἜΝ ΠΣ SY 0 tt ; 7 yaar uN at τ τα οὐδε Vit aii ety δὲ. A bial iy hut: yy ΝΕ i { ty .. at i ἥν δὰ Ὁ Ὗ fet ah ite a a ny aheviaty: BO ποῦ q Dye ot feo ἐπ ἢ aie bieey “hei } te" is ἀμ, ἊΝ "ἡ ΠΡ χὰ “ite Bites ὃ ds ies ϑημι in ξανὰ ἜΣ ἫΝ Mics: τα! es lh oF bid ian ἃ ne el He (a thet’ ΠῚ Νὰ "τῇ ley) ὝΕΣ, i Wiel av " V4 Wawa: BI! yey Sere? ii “ee sin ἐγ Vir a δι μάν τὰ i a ler Gg pis re try er AT OF ΜΠ Bole , CPs elimi EO wf ri bir 9 ἊΝ eer tf ‘lian \y’ tae) 0 aa cette AM RCSL? eR ae ides, - ΠΝ MM ey it, ie ‘ert vs if γ Ἧ “ΜῊ Ling bp ον myten: wiht ) ἐπῇ πω, . ath ane eee ey: ‘aint ati if On Ci ad tae ony Cane ve cite, i “a. tp eae, Sow τ Ὗ vie κω δε O78 } INTRODUCTION OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. § I. Taz Roman party doth much glo- ry in unity and certainty of doctrine, as things peculiar to them, and which no other men have any means to attain: yet about divers matters of notable conside- ration, in what they agree, or of what they are certain, it is hard to descry. They pretend it very needful that con- subject about which they should thorough- ly consent, and which they, by this time, should have cleared from all disputes ; so that (so far as their decisive faculty goeth) we might be assured wherein his authori- ty consisteth, and how far it doth extend ; seeing the resolution of that point so nearly toucheth the heart of religion, the troversies should be decided, and that| faith and practice of all Christians, the they have a special knack of doing it : yet do many controversies of great good of the church, and peace of the world ; seeing that no one question (perhaps weight and consequence stick on their| not all questions together) hath created hands unresolved, many points rest in| so many tragical disturbances in Christen- great doubt and debate among them. The κύριαι δόξαν of the Roman sect (concerning doctrine, practice, laws, and customs of discipline, rites, and ceremo- nies) are of divers sorts, or built on di- vers grounds. 1. Some established by (pretended) general synods. 2. Some founded on decrees of popes. 8. Some entertained as upon tradition, custom, common agreement. 4. Some which their eminent divines or schoolmen do commonly embrace. 5. Some prevail- ing by the favour of the Roman court, and its zealous dependents. Hence it is very difficult to know Wherein their religion consisteth: for those grounds divers times seem to clash, and accordingly their divines (some build- ing on these, some on others) disagree. This being so in many points of impor- tance, is so particularly in this. For instance, the head of their church (as they call it) is, one would think, a dom, as that concerning the bounds of papal authority.* This disagreement of the Roman doc- tors about the nature and extent of papal authority is a shrewd prejudice against it. If a man should sue for a piece of land, and his advocates (the notablest could be had, and well paid) could not find where it lieth, how it is butted and bounded, from whom it was conveyed to him, one would be very apt to suspect his title. If God had instituted such an office, it is highly probable we might satisfactorily know what the nature and use of it were: the patents and charters for it would de- clare it. Yet for resolution in this great case we are left to seek; they not having either the will, or the courage, or the * Agitur de summa rei Christiane.—Bel?. Praf. de Rom. Pont. Upon this one point the very sum and substance of Christianity de- pends. 54 power, to determine it. This insupera- ble problem hath baffled all their infalli- ble methods of deciding controversies ; their traditions blundering, their synods clashing, their divines wrangling endless- ly about what kind of thing the pope is, and what power he rightly may claim. ‘* There is” (saith a great divine among them) ““ 50 much controversy about the plenitude of ecclesiastical power, and to what things it may extend itself, that few things in that matter are secure.’’* This is a plain argument of the impo- tency of the pope’s power in judging and deciding controversies, or of his cause in this matter ; that he cannot define a point so nearly concerning him, and which he so much désireth an agreement in; that he cannot settle his own claim out of doubt; that all his authority cannot se- cure itself from contest. So indeed it is, that no spells can allay some spirits; and where interests are ir- reconcileable, opinions will be so. Some points are so tough andso touchy, that nobody dare meddle with them, fear- ing that their resolution will fail of suc- cess and submission. Hence even the anathematizing definers of Trent (the boldest undertakers to decide~controver- sies that ever were) did wave this point ; the legates of the pope being enjoined “to advertise, That they should not for any cause whatever come to dispute about the pope’s authority.”’+ It was indeed wisely done of them to decline this question, their authority not being strong enough to bear the weight of a decision in favour of the Roman see (against which they could do nothing), according to its pretences ; as appeareth by one clear instance. For whereas that council took upon it incidentally to enact, that any prince should be excommuicate, and deprived of the dominion of any city or place, where he should permit a duel to be fought ; the prelates of France in the Convention of Orders, anno 1595 * Tanta est inter doctores controversia de plenitudine ecclesiastice potestatis, et ad que se extendat, ul pauca sint in ea materia secu- ra Almain, de Auct. Eccl. cap. 3. ἡ di avertire, Che non si venga mai per qual causa sisia alla disputa dell autorita di papa.—Coneil. Trid. lib. ii. p. 159. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. lt PR see ' ων ᾿ ον x [INTROD. did declare against that decree, as in- fringing their king’s authority.* It was therefore advisedly done not to meddle with so ticklish a point. But in the mean time their policy seemeth great- er than their charity; which might have inclined them not to leave the world in darkness and doubt, and unresolved in a point of so main importance (as indeed they did in others of no small conse- quence, disputed among their divines with obstinate heat, viz. the divine right of bishops, the necessity of residence, the immaculate conception, &c.) The opinions therefore among them concerning the pope’s authority, as they have been, so they are, and in likelihood may continue, very different. § Il. There are among them those who ascribe to the pope an universal, absolute, and boundless empire over all persons in- differently, and in all matters; conferred and settled on him by Divine immutable sanction: so that all men, of whatever degree, are obliged in conscience to be- lieve whatever he doth authoritatively dictate, and to obey whatever he doth prescribe. So that if princes themselves do refuse obedience to his will, he may excommunicate them, cashier them, de- pose them, extirpate them. If he charg- eth us to hold no communion with our prince, to renounce our allegiance to him, to abandon, oppose, and persecute him, even to death, we may without scruple, we must in duty obey. If he doth inter- dict whole nations from the exercise of God’s worship and service, they must comply therein. So that, according to their conceits, he is in effect sovereign lord of all the world ; and superior, even in temporal or civil matters, unto all kings and princes. It is notorious, that many canonists (if not most) and many divines of that party do maintain this doctrine ; affirming, that all the power of Christ (the Lord of lords, and King of kings, to whom all power in heaven and earth doth appertain) is * Hic articulus est contra authoritatem re- gis, qui non potest privari, suo dominio tem- porali, respectu cujus nullum_ superiorem re- cognoscit.—Bochel. 1. v. tit. 20, ὁ. 45. This article is against the authority of the king, who cannot be deprived of his temporal dominion, wherein he acknowledges no superior. InTROD. ] imparted to the pope, as to his vicege- rent.* This is the doctrine which almost 400 years ago Augustinus ‘Triumphus,? in his egregious work concerning ecclesiastical power, did teach; attributing to the pope an incomprehensible and infinite power ; “because great is the Lord, and great is his power, and of his greatness there is no end.” This is the doctrine which the leading theologue of their sect, their angelical doctor, doth affirm, both directly, saying, that ““ in the pope is the top of both pow- ers ;” and by plain consequence, assert- ing, that “* when any one is denounced excommunicate for apostacy, his subjects are immediately freed from his dominion, and their oath of allegiance to him.” This the same Thomas (or an author passing under his name, in his book touch- ing The Rule of Princes) doth teach, af- firming, that the pope, ‘“‘ as supreme king of all the world, may impose taxes on all Christians, and destroy towns and castles for the preservation of Christianity.”’|| * Prima sententia est, summum pontificem jure divino habere plenissimam potestatem in universum orbem terrarum, tam in rebus ec- clesiasticis quam civilibus. Ita docent Aug. Triumphus, Alvarus Pelagius, Panormitanus, Hostiensis, Silvester, et alii non pauci.—Bell. v. l. The first opinion is, that the pope hath a most full power over the whole world, both in ecclesiastical and civil affairs. This is the doctrine of Aug. Triumphus, &c. and of many others. + Scripsit egregiam summam de potestate ecclesia,— Bell. de Script. an. 13061. Error est, non credere pontificem Rom. universalis eecle- si pastorem, Petri successorem, et Christi vi- carium, supra temporalia et spiritualia univer- salem non habere primatum ; in quem quan- doque multi labuntur, dicta potestatis ignoran- tia; que cum sit infinita, eo quod magnus est Dominus, et magna virtuo ejus, et magnitudinis éjus non est finis, omnis creatus intellectus in ejus perscrutatione invenitur deficere. Aung. Triumph. de Potest. Eccl. in pref. ad P. Joh. XXII. ¢ Thomas in fine Secun. Sentent. dicit in papa esse apicem utriusque poiestatis — Bell. v. 1, Quum quis per sententiam denunciatur propter apostasiam excommunicatus, ipso facto ejus subditi a dominio, et juramento fidelitatis ejus liberati sunt—Th. ii. Secund. qu. 12. art. 2. || S. Thomas (in lib. iii, de Regim. Prine. cap. 10, 19,) affirmat sammum pontificem jure divino habere spiritualem’et temporalem potes- tatem, ut supremum totius mundi regem, adeo A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. _ L$ λ᾽ὨἙ«ςἝς-ὩἙσπσσ““ρ τ Ἂν» 55 This (as Cardinal Zabarell near 300 years ago telleth us) is the doctrine ‘* which, fora long time, those who would please popes did persuade them, that they could do all things, whatever they pleas- ed; yea, and things unlawful; and so could do more than God.”* According to this doctrine then current at Rome, in the last Lateran great synod, under the pope’s nose and in his ear, one bishop styled him, prince of the world ;+ another orator called him, king of kings, and monarch of the earth;t another great prelate said of him, that he had all power above ail powers both of heaven and earth.|| And the same roused up Pope Leo X. in these brave terms: ‘Snatch up therefore the two-edged sword of divine power, committed to thee ; and enjoin, command, and charge, that an universal peace and alliance be made among Christians for at least ten years ; and to that bind kings in the fet- ters of the great King, and constrain no- bles by the iron manucles of censures: for to thee is given all power in heaven and in earth.”’9 This is the doctrine which Baronius, with a Roman confidence, doth so often assert and drive forward, saying, that ‘there can be no doubt of it, but that the civil principality is subjest to the sacerdo- tal: and, that “ God hath made the po- ut etiam taleas omnibus Christianis possit im- ponere, et civitates ac castra destruere pro con- servatione Christianitatis.— Bell. v. 5. * Que jura sunt notanda, guia male consid- erata sunt per multos assentatores, qui volue- runt placere pontificibus, per multa retro tem- pora, et usque ad hodierna snaserunt eis, quod omnia possent ; et sic quod facerent quicquid liberet, etiam illicita, et sic plus quam Deus.— Zab. de Schism. T Orbis princeps.— Epise. Spal. sess. i. p. 24. 1 Regum rex, et orbis terrarum monarcha. — Del. Rio, sess. viii. p. 87. || —Virum, in quo erat potestas supra om- nes potestates, tam cceli, quam terre.— Epise. Patrac, sess. x. p. 182. § Arripe ergo gladium divine potestatis, tibi creditum, bis acutum ; et jube, impera, manda, ut pax universalis et coligatio per decennium inter Christianos ad minus fiat ; et reges ad id in compedibus magni regis liga, et nobiles in manicis ferreis censurarum constringe: quo- niam tibi data est omnis potestas in ccelo et in terra.—/Jbid. p. 133. 4 Politicum principatum § sacerdotali esse subjectum nulla potest esse dubitatio.—Ann. 57, § 23. 56 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. litical government subjeet to the domin- ion of the spiritual church.”’|| § Hl. From that doctrine the opinion in effect doth not differ, which Bellarmine voucheth for the common opinion of ca- tholics, that ‘* by reason of the spiritual power, the pope, at least indirectly, hath a supreme power even in temporal mat- ters.’’9 This opinion, so common, doth not, I say, in effect and practical consideration, any wise differ from the former ; but only in words devised to shun envy, and veil the impudence of the other assertion: for the qualifications, by reason of the spiritual power, and, at least indirectly, are but notional, insignificant, and illusive, in regard to practice: it importing not, if he hath in his keeping a sovereign power, upon what account, or in what formality he doth employ it; seeing that every matter is easily referrible to a spiritual account ; seeing he is sole judge upon what account he doth act; seeing experience sheweth, that he will spirit- ualize all his interests, and upon any oc- casion exercise that pretended authority ; seeing it little mattereth, if he may strike princes, whether he doth it by a down- right blow, or slantingly. § IV. That such an universal and ab- solute power hath been claimed by divers popes, successively for many ages, is ap- parent from their most solemn declara- tions and notorious practices ; whereof (beginning from later times, and rising upwards toward the source of this doc- trine) we shall represent some. The bull of Pope Sixtus V. (An. 1585) against the tro sons of wrath, Henry, king of Navarre, and the prince. of Con- de, beginneth thus: “The authority given to St. Peter and his successors, by the immense power of the eternal King, excels all the powers of earthly kings and princes—It passes uncontroll- able sentence upon them all—And if it| find any of them resisting God’s ordi- nance, it takes more severe vengeance || Politicum imperium subjecit spiritualis ec- clesiae dominio.—Ibid. § 53. § Tertia sententia media et catholicorum communis, pontificem ut pontificem non habe- re directe et iumediate ullam temporalem po- testatem, sed solum spiritualem, tamen ratione spiritnalis habere saliem indirecte potestatem quandam, eamque summam, in temporalibus. —Bell. v. 1. es [InTRop. of them, casting them down from their thrones, though never so puissant, and tumbling them down to the lowest parts of the earth, as the ministers of aspiring Lucifer.” And then he proceeds to thunder against them, ‘“‘ We deprive them and their posterity for ever of their dominions and kingdoms ;”* and accord- ingly he depriveth those princes of their kingdoms and dominions, absolveth their subjects from their oaths of allegiance, and forbiddeth them to pay any obedi- ence to them. “By the authority of these presents, we do absolve and set free all persons, as well jointly as seve- rally, from any such oath, and from all duty whatsoever in regard of dominion, fealty, and obedience; and do charge and forbid all and every of them, that they do not dare to obey them, or any of their admonitions, laws, and com- mands.”’*t Pope Pius V. (An. 1570) one of the holiest popes of the last stamp, who hardly hath escaped canonization until now,t beginneth his bull against our Queen Elizabeth in these words: * He that reigneth on high, to whom is given all power in heaven and in earth, hath committed the one holy catholic and apostolic church owt of which there is no salvation, to one alone on earth, namely, to Peter, prince of the apos- tles, and to the Roman pontiff, succes- sor of Peter, to be governed with a pleni- tude of power: this one he hath consti- tuted prince over all nations, and all king- doms, that he might pluck up, destroy, * Ab immensa eterni Regis potentia B. Pe- tro ejusque successoribus tradita auctoritas omnes terrenorum regum et principum super- eminet potestates—Inconcussa profert in om- nes judicia—Et si quos ordinationi Dei resis- tentes invenit, severiore hos vindicta ulciscitur, et, quamvis potentiores, de solio dejiciens, ve- luti superbientis Luciferi ministros, ad infima terre deturbatos prosternit——. Dominiis, regnis, &c. nos illos illoruamque posteros priva- mus in perpetuum : + A juramento hujusmodi, ac omni prorsus dominii, fidelitatis et obsequii debito, illos om- hes tam universe quam singulatim auctoritate preesentium absolvimus et. liberamus ; preecip- imusque et interdicimus eis universis et singu- lis, ne illis eorumque monitis, legibus et man- datis andeant obedire.—Bulla Sizxti V. contra Hen. Navarr. R. ὅκα. 1 Pius V.—Quem mirum est:in albo sancto- m nondum relatum esse.—Briet. Chr. anno 72 ~. ru 15 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 57 INTROD. ] dissipate, ruinate, plant, and build.” *— And in the same bull he declares, that ‘he thereby deprives the queen of her pretended right to the kingdom, and of all dominion, dignity, and privilege, what- soever ; and absolves all the nobles, sub- jects, and people of the kingdom, and whoever else have sworn to her, from their oath, and all duty whatsoever, in regard of dominion, fidelity, and, obedi- ence.” 7 Pope Clement VI. (An. 1346) did pre- tend to depose the Emperor Lewis IV. Pope Clement V. in the great synod of Vienna (An. 1311) declared the empe- ror Subject to him, or standing obliged to him by a proper oath of fealty.i Pope Boniface VIII. (An. 1294) hath a decree extant in the canon law running thus: “ We declare, say, define, pro- nounce it to be of necessity to salvation, for every human creature to be subject to the Roman pontiff.” || The which sub- jection, according to his intent, reacheth all matters ; for he there challengeth a double sword, and asserteth to himself jurisdiction over all temporal authorities ; for “* one sword,” saith he, “" must be un- der another, and the temporal authority must be subject to the spiritual power ;— whence, if the earthly power doth go astray, it must be judged by the spiritual power.” ‘The which aphorism he prov- * Regnans in excelsis, cui data est omnis in celo etin terra potestas, unam sanctam, ca- tholicam et apostolicam ecclesiam, extra quam nulla est salus, uni soli in terris, videlicet apostolorum principi Petro, Petrique successori Romano pontifici, in potestatis plenitudine tra- didit gubernandam: hunc unum super omnes gentes et omnia regna principem constituit, qui evellat, destruat, dissipet, disperdat, plantet, et wdificet —P. Pius V.in Bull. contra R. Eliz. (Camb. Hist. anno 1570.) + Ipsam pretenso egni jure, nec non omni quocungue dominio, dignitate privilegioque privamus; et iterum proceres, subditos, ἄτα — Thid. $ Apostolica auctoritate de fratrum nostro- rum consilio declaramus, illa juramenta pre- dicta fidelitatis existere et censeri debere.— Clem. lib. ii. tit. 9. Vide Conc. Vienn. p. 909. || Subesse Romane pontifici omni humane creature declaramus, dicimus, definimus, et pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate salu- tis. —Eztrav. com. lib. i. tit. 8, cap. 1. ᾧ Oportet gladium esse sub gladio, et tempo- ralem authoritatem spirituali subjici potestati. —Ibid. Ergo si deviat terrena potestas, judi- cabitur a potestate spirituali—Jbid. Vou. ΠΙ. 8 eth by scriptures admirably expounded to that purpose. This definition might pass for a rant of that boisterous pope (“* a man above meas- ure ambitious and arrogant,”*) vented in his passion against king Philip of France, if it had not the advantage (of a greater than which no papal decree is capable) of being expressly confirmed by one of their general councils ; for “ We” (saith Pope Leo X. in his.bull read and passed in the Lateran council) “‘ do renew and approve that holy constitution, with approbation of the present holy council.”’+ Accordingly Melch. Canus saith, that ἐς the Lateran council did renew and ap- prove that extravagant” (indeed extrava- gant) “constitution: and Baronius saith of it, that “all do assent to it, so* that none dissenteth, who doth not by discord fall from the church.”’|| The truth is, Pope Boniface did not in- vent that proposition, but borrowed it from the school ; for Thomas Aquinas, in his work against the Greeks, pretendeth to shew, that “ itis of necessity to salva- tion to be subject to the Roman pontiff.’§ The which scholastical aphorism Pope Boniface turned into law, and applied to his purpose of exercising domination over princes ; offering, in virtue of it, to de- prive King Philip of his kingdom. The appendix to Mart. Pol. saith of Pope Boniface VIII. ““ Regem se regum, mundi monarcham, unicum in spirituali- bus et temporalibus dominum promulga- vit; that ““ he openly declared himself to be king of kings, monarch of the world, and sole lord and governor both in spirit- uals and temporals.” Before him, Pope Innocent IV. (An. 1245) did hold and exemplify the same notion; declaring the Emperor Frederick Il. his vassal, and denouncing, in his general council of Lyons, a sentence of * Vir super modum ambitiosus et arrogans. —(Binivs in Vita Bonif. VI111.) 7 Constitationem ipsam, sacro presenti con- cilio approbante, innovamus et approbamus.— Concil. Lateran, sess. Xi. p. 153. ¢ Quam extravagantem renovavit et sp el bavit concilium Lateranense sub Leone X.— Canus. loc. vi. 4. || Hee Bonifacius, cui assentiuntur omnes, ut nullus discrepet, nisi qui dissidio ab ecclesia excidit.— Baron. anno 1053, ᾧ 14. § Ostenditur etiam quod subesse Romano pontifici sit de necessitate salutis.—({ Thom. in Opuse. contra Gracos.) 58 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. deprivation against him in these terms : ** We having about the foregoing and many other his wicked miscarriges had before a careful deliberation with our brethren and the holy council, seeing that we, although unworthy, do hold the place of Jesus Christ on earth, and that it was said unto us in the person of St. Peter the apostle, Whatever thou shalt bind on earth,—the said prince (who hath ren- dered himself unworthy of empire and kingdoms, and of all honour and dignity, and who for his iniquities is cast away by God, that he should not reign or command, being bound by his sins and cast away, and deprived by the Lord of all honour and dignity) do shew, denounce, and ac- cordingly by sentence deprive ; absolving all who are held bound by oath of allegi- ance from such oath forever; by apostolical authority firmly prohibiting, that no man henceforth do obey or regard him as em- peror or king; and decreeing, that who- ever shall hereafter yield advice, or aid, or favour to him as emperor or king, shall immediately lie under the band of ex- communication.””* Before him, Pope Innocent the Third (that true wonder of the world, and changer of the aget) did affirm “ the pon- tificial authority so much to exceed the royal power, as the sun doth the moon :᾽ and applieth to the former that of the prophet Jeremiah: Ecce, constitua te su- per gentes et regna ;— See, I have set thee over the nations and over the king- doms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy and to throw down,”* &c. Of this power that pope made experi- ment, by deposing the Emperor Otho [V. ; * whom,” saith Nauclerus, “‘ as rebellious to the apostolical see, he first did strike with an anathema ; then him persevering in his obstinacy did in a council of pre- lates, held at Rome, pronounce deposed from empire.”’|| * Nos itaque super premissis, &c.—P. In- noc. IV.in Conc. Lugd. Matt. Paris (anno 1253) saith, he deemed kings mancipia pape. + Vere stupor mundi, et immutator seculi.— Matt. Par. anno 1217. + Ut quanta est inter solem et lunam tanta inter pontifices et reges differentia cognoscatur. —P. Innoc. 111. in Decret. Greg. lib. 1, tit. 33, cap. 6. \| Imperatorem—ut rebellem sedi apostolic et inobedientem anathemate primum, deinde in pertinacia perseverantem, in concilio prasu- ® Jer. 1. 10 Stk lll ao pT On Se te [Inrrop. The which authority was avowed by that great council under this pope (the which, according to the men of Trent, did represent or constitute the church), wherein it was ordained, that if a “* tem- poral lord, being required and admonish- ed by the church, should neglect to purge his territory from heretical filth, he should by the metropolitan and the other com- provincial bishops be noosed in the band of excommunication ; and that if he should slight to make satisfaction within a year, it should be signified to the pope, that he might from that time denounce the sub- jects absolved from their fealty to him, and expose the territory to be seized on by Catholies,”* &c. Before that, Pope Paschal II. (An. 1099) deprived Henry IV. and excited enemies to persecute him; telling them, that they could not ““ offera more accept- able sacrifice to God, than by impugning him, who endeavoured to take the king- dom from God’s church.” Before him (An. 1088), Pope Urban II. (called Turban by some in his age) did preach this doctrine, recommended to usin the decrees, that ‘‘ subjects are by no authority constrained to pay the fideli- ty which they have sworn to a Christian prince, who opposeth God and his saints, or violateth their precepts.”¢ An in- stance whereof we have in his granting a privilege to the canons of Tours ; ἐς which,” saith he, “if any emperor, king, prince, &c. shall wilfully attempt to thwart, let him be deprived of the dig- nity of his honour and power.”’|| lum, quod Rome tum Innocentius celebrabat, ab imperio depositum percussit et pronuncia- vit.— Nauel. anno 1212. * Neque enim per. Lateranense concilium ecclesia statuit, &c.— Syn. Trid. sess. xiv. cap. 5. Si vero dominus temporalis requisitus et monitus.—Conc, Later. cap. 3, in Decret. Greg. lib. v. tit. 7, cap. 13. y+ Nam in hac non tantum parte, sed ubi- que, cum poteris, Henricum, hereticorum ca- put, et ejus fautores pro viribus persequaris. Nullum profecto gratius Deo sacrificium, quam sieum impugnes, qui se contra Deum erexit, qui ecclesia regnum auferre conatur.—P. Pasch. Ep. vii. ad Rob, Fland. Com. 1 Fidelitatem enim quam Christiano principi jurarunt, Deo ejusque sanctis adversanti, eo- ruunque preecepta, nulla cohibentur auctoritate persolvere.—Caus. xv. qu. 7, cap. 9. || Si quis imperator, rex, princeps—contra hance constitutionem venire tentaverit—potesta~ ris honorisque sui dignitate careat—. P. Urb. 11. Ep. 12. A TREATISE OF THE Introp. ] But the great apostle (if not author) of this confounding doctrine was Pope Gre- gory VII. (a man of a bold spirit and fiery temper, inured even before his en- try on that See to bear sway, and drive on daring projects ; possessed with resolu- tion to use the advantages of his place and time in pushing forward the papal inter- est to the utmost), who did lift up his voice like atrumpet, kindling wars and seditions thereby overChristendom. His dictates and practices are well known, being iterated in his own epistles, and in the Roman councils under him, extant :* yet it may be worth the while to hear him swagger in his own language. “ For the dignity and defence of God’s holy church, in the name of Almighty God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, I depose from imperial and royal admin- istration, King Henry, son of Henry sometime Emperor, who too boldly and rashly hath laid hands on thy church; and I absolve all Christians subject to the empire from that oath whereby they were wont to plight their faith unto true kings : for it is right that he should be deprived of dignity, who doth endeavour to dimin- ish the majesty of the church.t “ Go to, therefore, most holy princes of the apostles, and what! said, by interpos- ing your authority, confirm ; thatall men may now at length understand, if ye can bind and loose in heaven, that ye also can upon earth take away and give em- pires, kingdoms, and whatsoever mortals can have : for if ye can judge things be- longing unto God, what is to be deemed concerning these inferior and profane things ? And if itis your part to judge angels, who govern proud princes, what becometh it you to do toward their ser- vants? Let kings now, and all secular * Vide ejus dictata apud Bin. post, lib. 2; Ep. lv.; iv,2; viii. 21, et passim; i. 58; ii, 5, 12, 13, 18, 32; iii. 10; iv. 1, 9, 3, 7, 22. + Hac itaque fiducia fretus, pro dignitate et tutela ecclesim suw sanct~, Omnipotentis Dei nomine, Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti, Henri- cum regem, Henrici qaondam imperatoris fili- um, qui audacter nimium et temerarie in ec- clesiam tuam manus injecit, imperatoria ad- ministratione regiaque dejicio; et Christianos omnes imperio subjectos juramento illo absol- vo, quo fidem veris regibus prestare consueve- runt: dignum enim est, ut is honore careat, qui majestatem ecclesia imminuere causatur. — Plat. nm ang VI. et tom. 7, Conc. Rom. iii. apud Bin. p. 484. POPE’S SUPREMACY. 59 princes, learn by this man’s example, what ye can do in heaven, and in what esteem ye are with God; and let them henceforth fear to slight the commands of holy church: but put forth suddenly this judgment, that all men may understand, that not casually, but by your means, this son of iniquity doth fall from his king- dom.”* So did that pope, not unadvisedly in heat or passion, but out of settled judg- ment, upon cool deliberation, express him- self in his synods at Rome. This pope is indeed by many held the inventor and broacher of this strange doc- trine ; and even those, who about his age did oppose it, did express themselves of this mind, calling it ‘“ the novel tradition, schism, heresy of Hildebrand.”’t “ Pope Hildebrand” (saith the church of Liege, in their answer to the epistle to Pope Paschal) “" is author of this new schism, and first did raise the priest’s lance against the royal diadem.—Who first did girt himself, and by his example other popes, with the sword of war against the emperors.”’t “ This only novelty,” saith Sigebert, “ not to say heresy, had not yet sprang up in the world, that the priests of him who saith to the king, Apostate,” and who maketh hypocrites to reign for the sins of the people, should teach the people that they owe no subjection to bad kings ; and although they have sworn allegiance to the king, they yet owe him none, and that they who take part against the king may not be said to be perjured ; yea, that he who shall obey the king may be held excommunicate ; he thatshall oppose the king, may be absolved from the crime of injustice and perjury.”’|| * Acite, igitur, apostolorum sanctissimi prin-~ cipes, et quod dixi—. Plat. in Greg. VII. Conc. Rom. vii. apud Bin. tom. vit. p. 491. + Quod ex novella traditione Hildebrandas. —Eccl. Leod. upud Bin. tom. vii. p. 521. t Hildebrandus P. author est hujus novelli schismatis, et primus levavit sacerdotalem lan- ceam contra diadema regni.—Jdid. p. 522. Qui primus se et suo exemplo alios pontifices, con- tra imp. accinxit gladio belli—ZJdéd. p. 523. || Heee sola novitas, ne dicam heeresis, non- dum in mundo emerserat, ut sacerdotes illius qui dicit regi, apostata, et qui regnare facit hy- pocritas propter peccata populi, doceant popu- lum, quod malis regibus nullam debeant sub- jectionem, et licet ei sacramentam fidelitatis » Job xxxiv. 18, 30. 60 Indeed certain it is, that this man did in most downright strains hold the doc- trine, and most smartly apply it to prac- tice ; yet did he disclaim the invention or introduction of it; professing that he followed the notions and examples of his predecessors, divers of which he allegeth in defence of his proceedings. “ We,” saith he, “ holding the statutes of our holy predecessors, do by apostolical au- thority absolve those from their oath who are obliged by fealty or sacrament to ex- communicate persons, and by all means prohibit that they observe fealty to them.* And so it is, that (although for many successions before Pope Hildebrand the popes were not in condition or capacity to take so much upon them ; there having been a row of persons intruded into that See, void of virtue, and of small authority, most of them very beasts, who depended upon the favour of princes for their ad- miitance, confirmation, or support in the place; yet) we may find some popes be- fore him, who had a great spice of those imperious conceits, and upon occasion made very bold with princes, assuming power over them, and darting menaces against them. For | Pope Leo IX. telleth us, that Constan- tine M. ““ did think it very unbecoming, that they should be subject to an earthly empire whom.the Divine Majesty had set over an heavenly :’’* and surely he was of his author’s mind, whom he alleged; although indeed this pope may be sup- posed to speak this and other sayings to that purpose, by suggestion of Hilde- brand, by whom he was much governed. ‘Pope Stephanus VI. told the Emperor Basilius, that ‘* he ought to be subject with all veneration to the Roman church.” fecerint, nullam, tamen fidelitatem debeant ; nec perjuri dicantur, qui contra regem sense- rint ; imo, qui regi paruerit pro excommunica- to habeatur; qui contra regem fecerit, a noxa injustitic et perjurii absolvatur.—Sigeb. Chron. anno 1088. * Nos, sanctorum predecessorum statuta tenentes, eos qui excommunicatis fidelitate aut sacramento constricti sunt, apostolica auctori- tate a sacramento absolvimus, et ne eis fideli- tatem observent omnibus modis prohibemus.— Greg. VII. Ep. viii. 213 Caus. xv. qu. 7, cap. 4. + Valde indignum fore arbitratus, terreno imperio subdi, quos Divina Majestas pracfecit eclesti.—P. Teo. 1X. 7 1 cap. 12. 1 Plat. in Vita Leon. 1X. Quis te seduxit, A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. Tr ἈΝ δμμνυυ....... [΄πτπον. Pope John VIII. (or IX.) did pretend obedience due to him from princes (An. 873) ; and in default thereof threatened to excommunicate them.* Pope Nicholas I. (An. 858) cast many imperious sayings and threats at King Lotharius ; these among others: ‘* We do therefore by apostolical authority, un- der obtestation of the divine judgment, enjoin to thee, that in Triers and Colen thou shouldest not suffer any bishop to be chosen, before a report be made to our apostleship.”+ (Was not this satis pro imperio 2) And again, ‘‘ That being com- pelled thou mayest be able to repent, know, that very soon thou shalt be struck with the ecclesiastical sword; so that thou mayest be afraid any more to com- mit such things in God’s holy church.”’¢ And this he suggesteth for right doc- trine, that subjection is not due to bad princes; perverting the apostle’s words to that purpose : “ Be subject to the king as excelling, that is,” saith he, “ in vir- tues, not in vices :”’|| whereas the apostle meaneth eminency in power. Pope Gregory VII. dothalsoallege Pope Zachary, ‘‘ who,” saith he, “‘ did depose the king of the Franks, and did absolve all the French from the oath of fidelity which they had taken unto him, not so much for his iniquities, as because he was unfit for such a power.”§ This indeed was a notable act of juris- diction, if Pope’Gregory’s word may be ut pontificem cecumenicum scommatibus laces- seres, et S. Romanam ecclesiam maledictis in- cesseres, Cui cum omni veneratione subditus esse debes?—Steph. VI. Ep.i. Baron. anno 885, § 11. * —cuncti venire per inobedientiam neglex- istis—Joh. VIII. Ep. 119; deinceps excom- municamus omnes, &e.—Jbid. + Idcirco apostolica authoritate, sub Divini judicii obtestatione, injungimus tibi, ut in Tre- virensi urbe et in Agrippina Colonia nullum eligi patiaris, antequam relatum super hoc nos- tro apostolatui tiat.—Grat. Dist. Ixiii. cap. 4. + Ut saltem compulsus resipiscere valeas, noveris, te citissime mucrone ecclesiastico feri- endum ; ita ut ulterius talia in S. Dei ecclesia perpetrare formides.—P. Nic. I. Ep. 64. || Regi quasi preecellenti, virtutibus scilicet, non vitiis, subditi estote.—P. Nic. I. Ep. 4, App. p. 626. § Alius item Rom. pontifex, Zacharias scili- cet, regem Francorum, non tam pro suis ini- quitatibus, quam pro eo quod tante potestati erat inutilis, deposuit—omnesque Francigenas a juramento fidelitatis quod illi——. Deéeret. il. part. Caus, xv. q. 6. oe ee Intron. | taken for matter of fact; but divers main- tain that pope Zachary did only concur with the rebellious deposers of King Chil- perick in way of advice or approbation, not by authority. It was pretty briskly said of Pope Adrian I. (An. 772), “* We do by general decree constitute, that whatever king, or bishop, or potentate, shall hereafier be- lieve, or permit, that the censure of the Roman pontiffs may be violated in any case, he shall be an execrable anathema, and shall be guilty before God, as a be- trayer of the Catholic faith.”* “ Constitutions against the canons and decrees of the bishops of Rome, or against good manners, are of no moment.’’f Before that, Pope Gregory II. (An. 730), because the Eastern emperor did cross the worship of images, did withdraw subjection from him, and did thrust his authority out of Italy. ““ He” (saith Be- ronius), “did effectually cause both the Romans and Italians to recede from obe- dience to the emperor.’’t This was an act in truth of rebellion against the emperor, in pretence of juris- diction over him; for how otherwise could he justify or colour the fact? * So,” as Baronius reflecteth, ‘* he did leave’ to posterity a worthy example” (forsooth), ‘* that heretical princes should not be suffered to reign in the church of Christ, if, being warned, they were found pertinacious in error.”’|| And no wonder he then was so bold, seeing the pope had obtained so much re- spect in those parts of the world, that (as he told the Emperor Leo Isaurus) “ all the kingdoms of the west did hold St. * Generali decreto constituimus, ut exse- crandum anathema sit, et veluti prevaricator catholic fidei semper apud Deum reus exis- tat, quicaunque regum, seu episcoporum, vel potentam, deinceps Romanorum pontificum censuram in quocunque crediderit, vel permis- erit violandam.—P. Had. 1. Capit. apud Grat. Caus. xxv. qu. 1, cap. 11. + Constitationes contra canones et decreta neo we Romanorum, vel bonos mores, nul- ius sunt Momenti.— Distinct. x. cap. 4. 6 Tum Romanos tum Italos ad ejus obedi- cs recedere penitus fecit.— Baron. anno 730, 4. _ || Sic dignum posteris reliquit exemplam, ne in ecclesia Christi regnare sinerentur heretici principes, si spe moniti, in errore persistere obstinato animo invenirentur.— Baron. ibid. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 61 Peter as an earthly god :”* of which he might be able to seduce some to uphold him in his rebellious practices. This is the highest source, as 1 take it, to which this extravagant doctrine can be driven. For that single passage of Pope Felix ΠΙ., though much ancienter, will not amount to it. ‘ Jt is certain, that, in causes relating to God, it is the safest course for you, that according to his in- stitution, ye endeavour to submit the will of the king to the priests,”’+ ὅσο. For while the emperor did retain any considerable authority in Italy, the popes were better advised than to vent such no- tions ; and while they themselves did re- tain any measure of pious or prudent modesty, they were not disposed to it. And we may observe divers popes near that time in word and practice thwarting that practice. For instance, Pope Gelasius, a vehement stickler for papal authority, doth say to the Emperor Anastasius, “I, as being a Roman born, do love, worship, reverence thee as the Roman prince.”t And he saith, that * the prelates of religion (knowing the empire conferred on him by Divine Providence) did obey his laws.’’|| And otherwhere he discourseth, that ‘* Christ had distinguish- ed by their proper acts and dignities the officers of ecclesiastical and civil pow- er,’ that one should not meddle with the other ; so disclaiming temporal pow- er due to himself, being content to screw up his spiritual authority. After him, as is well known, Pope Gregory I. (as became a pious and good man) did avow the emperor for ‘his lord, by God’s gift superior to all men, to whom he was subject, whom he in * Ὃν αἱ πᾶσαι βασιλεῖαι τῆς δύσεως ὡς θεὸν ἐπὶ- γειὸον &xovor.—Greg. 11, Epist. i. Bin. tom. v. p. 508. + Certum est, rebus vestris hoc esse salutare, ut, cum de causis Dei agitur, juxta ipsius con- stitutionem, regiam voluntatem sacerdotibus Christi studeatis subdere, non preeferre—&e.— P. Felix. 111. (anno 483), Dist. x. cap. 3. { Te, sicut Romanus natus, Romanum prin- cipem amo, colo, suspicio—P. Gelas. 1. Epist. 8 (ad Anast. Imp.) | cognoscentes imperium tibi superna dispositione collatum, legibus tuis ipsi quoque parent religionis antistites.—J’. Gelas. I. Epist. 8, (ad Anast. Imp.) § Christus, dispensatione magnifica tempe- rans, sic actionibus propriis dignitatibusque distinctis officia potestatis utriusque discrevit, &e, ΓΦ ——<— —_———<_- ΗΑ 62 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. duty was bound to obey ;”* and suppos- ed it a high presumption for any one to “set himself above the honour of the empire,’ + by assuming the title of uni- versal bishop. After him, Pope Agatho (An. 680), in the acts of the sixth general council, doth call the Emperor Constantine Pogo- natus his lord; doth avow “ himself, to- gether with all presidents of the churches, servants to the emperor ;’¢ doth say, that his see and his synod were subject to him, and did owe obedience to him. Presently after him, Pope Leo I. who confirmed that general synod, doth call the emperor ‘‘ the prototype son of the church ;”’|| and acknowledgeth the body of priests to be servants “" {meanest ser- vants) of his royal nobleness.’’§ After him, Pope Constantine (An. 709) (the immediate predecessor of Pope Gre- gory li.), when the emperor did com- mand him to come to Constantinople, “the most holy man,” saith Anastasius in his Life, ‘* did obey the imperial com- mands.”’4[ Yea, Pope Gregory II. himself, before his defection (when perhaps the cir- cumstances of time did not animate him thereto), did, in his epistle to Leo Isaurus, acknowledge him as emperor to be ** the head of Christians,’** and himself con- sequently subject to him. This Gregory therefore may be re- puted the father of that doctrine, which, being fostered by his successors, was by Pope Gregory VII. brought up to its ro- bust pitch and stature. * Ad hoc potestas Dominorum meorum pie- tati ccelitus data est super omnes homines. Ego indignus famulus vester Ego quidem jussioni subjectus. P. Greg. I. Ep. ii. 26. + Qui honori quoque imperii vestri se per privatum vocabulum superponit.— Ep, iv. 32. Ἢ Δεσπόται καὶ réxva.—Act. Syn. vi. p. 53. ἡμεῖς δοῦλοι τοῦ βασιλέως, p. 304. ἡμετέρα δουλεία, Ῥ. 32. τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν πρόεδροι οἱ δοῦλοι τοῦ χρισ- τιανικωτάτου ὑμῶν κράτους. p. 94. δουλικὸς ὑμῶν καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς θρόνος. p. θ4. ἔνεκεν ὑπακοῆς, ἧς ὀφείλο- μὲν. pp. 33, 34, || ILowrérumoy ἐκκλησίας réxvov.—Act. Syn. vi. p. 303. ᾧ Ἢ βασιλικὴ εὐγέμεια τοῖς ἐσχάτοις ἑαυτῆς δούλοις cvyxarébatve.—Ibid. p. 304. { Misit imp. ad Constantinum P. sacram, per quam jussit eum ad regiam ascendere ur- bem; qui sanctiss. vir jussis imperialibus ob- temperans.—Anast. in Vit. P. Const. BR ‘Os βασιλεὺς on τῶν Χοιστιανῶν.---. Greg. II, ad Leon. {s. Ep. i. (p. 502.) SN anne Se ae [InrRop. I know, Pope Gregory VII. to counte- nance him, doth allege Pope Innocent I. excommunicating the Emperor Arcadius for his proceedings against St. Chry- sostom :* and the writers of St. Chry- sostom’s Life, with others of the like age and credit, do back him therein.‘ But seeing the historians who lived in St. Chrysostom’s own time, and who write very carefully about him, do not mention any such thing ; seeing that, be- ing the first act in the kind, must have been very notable, and have made a great noise; seeing that story doth not suit with the tenor of proceedings, re- ported by those most credible historians, in that case; seeing that fact doth no- ways sort to the condition and way of those times; that report cannot be true, and it must be numbered among the many fabulous narrations, devised by some wanton Greeks, to set out the life of that excellent personage. The same pope doth also allege St. Gregory M. denouncing excommunica- tion and deprivation of honour to all kings, bishops, judges, &c. who should violate the privilege granted to the mon- astery of St. Medard.* But this (as are many such privileges) is a rank for- gery, unworthily imposed on Pope Gre- gory (that prudent, meek, and holy man), much to his wrong and disgrace : which I will not be at trouble to confute, hav- ing shewed St. Gregory to have been of another judgment and temper, than to behave himself thus towards princes; and seeing that task is abundantly dis- charged by that very learned man, Mon- sieur Launoy.° Indeed (upon this occasion to digress a little farther), it doth not seem to have been the opinion of the ancient popes, that they might excommunicate their sovereign princes: for if they might, why did they forbear to exercise that power, when there was greatest reason, and great temptation for it ? * Siquis autem regum, antistitum, judicum, vel quarumcumque secularium personarum, hujus apostolice auctoritatis, et nostre pracep- tionis decreta violaverit—cujuscunque dignita- tis vel sublimitatis sit, honore suo privetur.— Gr. M. Post. Et. xxxviit. lib. 2. ¢ Greg. VII. Ep. viii. 2; Baron an 407, ᾧ 23. 4 Greg. Alex. Vit. Chrys. cap. 68; Anon. Vit. Chrys. cap. 39; Socrates, Sozomen, Theo- doret, Palladius. ¢ Epist. pars vii. —— ττο “--- » — Introp. | Why did not Pope Julius or Pope Libe- rius excommunicate Constantius, the great favourer of the Arians, against whom Athanasius, St. Hilary, and Luci- fer Calar. do so earnestly inveigh, call- ing him heretic, antichrist, and what not? How did Julian himself escape the censure of Pope Liberius? Why did not Pope Damasus thunder against Valens, thai fierce persecutor of Catho- lics? Why did not Damasus censure the Empress Justina, the patroness of Arianism? Why did not Pope Siricius censure Theodosius 1. for that bloody fact, for which St. Ambrose denied him the communion? How was it that Pope Leo I. (that stout and high pope) had not the heart to correct Theodosius Ju- nior in this way, who was the supporter of his adversary Dioscorus, and the ob- stinate protinate protector of the second Ephesine council, which that pope so much detested? Why did not that pope rather compel that emperor to reason by censures, than supplicate him by tears ? How did so many popes connive at Theo- doric and other princes professing Arian- ism at their door? Wherefore did not Pope Simplicius or Pope Felix thus punish the Emperor Zeno, the supplanter of the synod of Chalcedon, for which they had so much zeal? Why did neither Pope Felix, nor Pope Gelasius, nor Pope Sym- machus, nor Pope Hormisdas, excom- municate the Emperor Anastasius (yea, did not so much, Pope Gelasius saith, as “touch his name,’”’*) for countenancing the oriental bishops in their schism, and refractory noncompliance with the papal authority ? Those popes did indeed clash with that emperor, but they expressly deny that they did condemn him with others whom he did favour. “We,” saith Pope Symmachus, “ did not excom- municate thee, Ὁ emperor, but Acacius.— If you mingle yourself, you are not ex- communicated by us, but by yourself.” And, “If the emperor pleaseth to join himself with those condemned,” ’ saith Pope Gelasius, * it cannot be imputed to υ8.᾽} * Quid sibi vult autem, quod dixeri timperator a nobis se in religione damnatum, cum super hac parte decessor meus non solum minime nomen ejus attigerit ?—P. Gelas. I. Epist. 4. | Nos te non excommunicavimus, imperator, Acacium.—Si temisces, non a nobis, sed a A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 63 Wherefore Baronius doth ill, in affirm- ing Pope Symmachus to have anathema- tized Anastasius:‘ whereas that pope plainly denied that he had excommunicat- ed him, yea, denied it even in those words which are cited to prove it, being rightly read :* for they are corruptly written in Baronius and Binius; ego (which hath no sense, or one contradictory to his former assertion) being put for nego, which is good sense, and agreeable to what he and the other popes do affirm in relation to that matter. Why do we not read that any pope formally did excommunicate, though di- ‘vers did zealously contradict and oppose, the princes who did reject images ? In fine, a noble bishop above 500 years ago did say, “I read and read again the records of the Roman kings and emperors, and 1 nowhere find that any of them before this was excommanicated or deprived of bis kingdom by the Ro- man Pontiff.”’+ Surely therefore the ancient popes did either not know their power, or were very negligent of their duty. Such have been the doctrine and be- haviour of popes in reference to their power. § V. This doctrine of the pope’s uni- versal power over all persons in all matters may reasonably be supposed the sentiment of all popes continually fora long time, even for more than 500 years unto this present day. For, 1. If this doctrine be false, it implieth no slight error, but one of a very high nature and most dangerous consequence ; which involveth great arrogance and ini- quity, which tendeth to work enormous wrongs and grievousemischiefs : whence, te ipso excommunicatus es.—P. Symmachus I. Ep. 7. Siisti placet se miscere damnatis, no- bis non potest imputari.—P. Gelas. 1. Ep. 4. * Dicis quod, mecum conspirante senatu, excommunicaverim te. Ista quidem ego (nego), sed rationabiliter factum a decessoribus meis sine dubio subsequor.—P. Sym. Ep. 7. You say, that I excommunicated you by the joint consent of the senate. This I deny: but] un- doubtedly follow what was with good reason done by my predecessors. + Lego et relego Romanorum regum et im- peratorum gesta, et nusquam invenio quen- quam eorum ante hune a Romano pontifice excommunicatum, vel regno privatum.—Otho Frising. Chron. \ib. vi. cap. 305. f Baron. an, 503, ᾧ 17. 64 if any pope should conceive it false, he were bound openly, to disclaim, to con- demn, to refute it; lest the authority of his predecessors, and his connivance, should induce others into it, or settle them in it; as it is (in regard to Pope Hon- orius) charged upon Pope Leo II. * who did not, as it became the apostolical au- thority, extinguish the flame of heretical doctrine beginning, but did by neglecting cherish it.’* In such a case a pope must not be silent: for, ** No small dan- ger,” saith Pope Gelasius, “ lieth upon popes in being silent about what agreeth to the service of God:”’t and ‘ If,” saith Pope Paschal, ‘‘a pope by his si- lence doth suffer the church to be pol- luted with the gall of bitterness and root of impiety, he should nowise be excus- able before the eternal Judge :”’¢ and, ςς Error,” saith Pope Felix ILL, ““ which is not resisted (by those in eminent of- fice), is approved; and truth which is not defended, is oppressed:’’|| and, ‘“‘He is not free from suspicion of a close society in mischief, who ceaseth to obviate it:”§ and, ‘ We,” saith Pope Gregory I., ‘do greatly offend, if we do hold our peace at things that are to be corrected.’’4[ But all popes since the time specified have either openly declar- ed for this doctrine, or have been silent, and so have avowed it by tacit consent. 2. Any pope disapproving that tenent were bound to renounce communion with those that hold and profess it ; or at least to check and discountenance it. But on the contrary they have suffered it to be maintained in their presence and audience; and have hugged that sort of men with especial favour, as their most % cum Honorio, qui flammam heretici dogmatis non, at decuit apostolicam authorita- tem, incipientem extinxit, sed negligendo con- fovit.—P. Leo 11. Ep. 2. + Non leve discrimen incumbit pontificibus siluisse pro divinitatis cultu quod congruit.—P. Gelas. 1. Ep. ἃ, (ad Anastas. Imp.) t Si vero nostro silentio pateremur ecclesi- am felle amaritudinis et impietatie radice pol- lui, qua ratione possemuf apud eternum Judi- cem excusari ?—P. Paschal. 11]. Ep. 3, (ad An- selm. Cant.) || Error cui non resistitur, approbatur ; et veritas que minime defensatur, opprimitur.— P. Feliz Ill. Ep. 1. (ad Acacium.) § Non caret scrupulo societatis occulte, qui evidenter facinori desinit obviare.—Jd. Ibid. 4] Si ea que nobis corrigenda sunt tacemus, valde delinquimus.—P. Greg. 1. Ep. ui. 37. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. [Inrrop. affectionate and sure friends: they have suspected, discountenanced, and frowned on those who have showed dislike of it. Those men indeed who vouch this doc- trine, may reasonably be deemed to do it as accomplices with the popes, on pur- pose to gratify and curry favour with them, in hopes of obtaining reward and preferment of them for it.* 3. The chief authors and most zeal- ous abettors of these notions (popes, syn- ods, doctors of the school) have continu- ally passed for most authentic masters of divinity, and have retained greatest au- thority in the church governed and guid- ed by the pope. 4. The decrees containing them do stand in their canon law, and in their col- lections of synods, without any caution or mark of dislike ; which is a sufficient indication of their constant adherence to this doctrine. 5. The common style of the papal edicts or bulls doth import their sense ; which is imperious, in regard to all per- sons without exception: “ἢ Let no man” (say they) ‘presume to infringe this our will and command,” &c. 6. Popes of all tempers and qualifica- tions (even those who have passed for the most wise and moderate among them) have been ready to practise according to those principles, when occasion did in- vite, and circumstances of things did per- mit; interdicting princes, absolving sub- jects from their allegiance, raising or en- couraging insurrections ; as appeareth by their transactions not long since against our princes, and those of France ; which shews the very See imbued with those notions. 7. They do oblige all bishops most sol- emnly to avow this doctrine, and to en- gage themselves to practice according to it. For in the oath prescribed to all bishops they are required to avow, that ‘they will observe the apostolical com- mands with all their power, and cause them to be observed by others ;”t that “they will aid and defend the Roman papacy and the royalties of * Od μόνον αὐτὰ ποιοῦσιν, ἀλλὰ Kal συνευδοκοῦσι τοῖς rodooovor,—Rom. i. 32. They not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. + Mandata apostolica totis viribus observabo, | et ab aliis observari faciam. IntRoD. ] St. Peter against every man;’* that “they will to their power persecute and impungn heretics, schismatics, and rebels to the pope or his successors,”’+ without any exception; which was, 1 suppose, chiefly meant against their own prince (if occasion should be); together with divers other points, importing their acknowledgment and abetting the pope’s universal domination. These horrible oaths of bishops to the pope do seem to have issued from the same shop with the high Hildebrandine dictates: for the oath in the Decretals is ascribed to Pope Gregory (I suppose Gregory VII.) And in the sixth Roman synod under Gregory VII. there is an oath of like tenor, exacted from the bish- op of Aquileia; perhaps occasionally, which in pursuance of that example might be extended to all.* And that before that time such oaths Were not imposed doth appear from hence ; that when Pope Paschal II. did require them from some great bishops (the bishop of Palermo, and the arch- bishop of Poland), they did wonder and boggle at it, as an uncouth novelty; nor doth the pope, in favour of his demand, allege any ancient precedent, but only proposeth some odd reasons for it." ““ You have signified unto me, most dear brother, that the king and his nobles did exceedingly wonder, that an oath with such a condition should be every where offered you by my commissioners, and that you should take that oath, which I had written, and they tendered to νου. ἢ § VI. All Romanists, in consistence with their principles, do seem obliged to hold this opinion concerning the pope’s universal power. For, seeing many of their standing masters and judges of con- troversies have so expressly from their _ * Papatum Romanum ect regalia S. Petri ad- jutor eis ero ad retinendum et defendendum contra omnem hominem. + Heereticos, schismaticos, et rebelles eidem Domino nostro vel successoribus praedictis pro posse persequar et impugnabo. t Significasti, frater charissime, regem et regni majores admiratione permotos, quod pas- sim tibi ab apoecrisiariis nostris tali conditione oblatum fuerit, si sacramentum, quod a nobis Scriptum detulerant, jurares.—P. Pasch. 11. 6 “€ Greg. Decret. lib. ii. tit, 24, eap. 4; Con- cil. Rom. vi. apud Bin. p. 489. * Decret. Greg. lib. i. tit. 6, cap. 4. Vou. Il. 9 —- = ry yee ote A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 65 chair declared and defined it; all the row for many ages consenting to it and countenancing it; not one of them hav- ing signified any dissent or dislike of it ; and considering that, if in anything they may require or deserve belief, it is in this point ; for in what are they more skil- ful and credible than about the nature of their own office? ‘‘ What,” saith Bel- larmine wisely, “ may they be conceiv- ed to know better than the authority of their own See?”* Seeing it hath been approved by their most great and famous councils, which they hold universal, and which their adored synod of Trent doth allege for such (the Laterane under Pope Innocent If]. that of Lyons under Pope™ Innocent IV. the other Laterane under Pope Leo X.); seeing it hath been cur- rent among their divines of greatest vogue and authority, the great masters of their school; seeing by so large a con- sent and concurrence, during so longa time, it may pretend (much better than divers other points of great importance) to be confirmed by tradition or prescrip- tion; why should it not be admitted for a doctrine of the holy Roman church, the mother and mistress of all churches ? How can they who disavow this notion be true sons of that mother, or faithful scholars of that mistress? How can they acknowledge any authority in their church to be infallible, or certain, or obliging to assent ? How can they admit the pope for au- thentic judge of controversies, or master of Christian doctrine, or in any point credible, who hath in so great a matter erred so foully, and seduced the Chris- tian world ; whom they desert in a point of so great consideration and influence on practice; whom they, by virtue of their dissent from him in this opinion, may often be obliged to oppose in his proceed- ings ? How can they deny, that bad doctrines might creep in, and obtain sway in the church, by the interest of the pope and his clients ? How can they charge novelty or hete- rodoxy on those who refuse some dic- tates of popes, of papal councils, of scho- lastic divines, which stand upon no better * Ipsis preecipue debet esse nota sue sedis authoritas,— Bell. iv. 3. 66 grounds than those on which this doc- trine standeth ? Why hath no synod, of the many which have been held in all parts of Christendom, clearly disclaimed this opin- ion; but all have let it slip, or have seemed by silence to approve it? Yea, how can the concord and unity of that church well consist with a dissent from this doctrine? For, No man apprehending it false, seem- eth capable with good conscience to hold communion with those who profess it; for, upon supposition of its falsehood, the pope and his chief adherents are the teachers and abettors of the highest vio- lation of divine commands, and most en- ormous sins; of usurpation, tyranny, im- posture, perjury, rebellion, murder, ra- pine, and all the villainies complicated in the practical influence of this doctrine. It seemeth clear as the sun, that, if this doctrine be an error, it is one of the most pernicious heresies that ever was vented; involving the highest impiety, and producing the greatest mischief. For if he that should teach adultery, in- cest, simony, thieft, murder, or the like crimes, to be lawful, would be a heretic; how much more would he be such that should recommend perjury, rebellion, regicide (things inducing wars, confu- sions, slaughters, desolations, all sorts of injustice and mischief,) as duties! How then can any man safely hold communion with such persons? May Wwe not say with Pope Symmachus, that “to communicate with such is to consent with them ?” with Pope Gelasius, that **it is worse than ignorance of the truth to communicate with the enemies of truth ?” and, that “* he who communicat- eth with such an heresy is worthily judg- ed to be removed from our society ?”’* § VII. Yet so loose and slippery are the principles of the party which is jum- bled in adherence to the pope, that di- vers will not allow us to take this tenent of infinite power to be a doctrine of their church; for divers in that communion do not assent to it. * Ancommunicare non est consentire cum talibus?—P. Sym. JI. Ep. 7. Quasi non sit de- terius, et non ignorasse veritatem, et tamen communicasse cum veritatis inimicis.—P. Ge- las. I Ερ. 1. Cuicunque heresi communicans merito judicatur a nostra societate removendus. —-Id.ibid. Vide Ep. xiii. p. 642. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. [IntRop. For there is a sort of heretics (as Bel- larmine and Baronius call them) sculk- ing everywhere in the bosom of their church, a!l about Christendom, and in some places stalking with open face, who restrain “the pope’s authority so far, as not to allow him any power over sove- reign princes in temporal affairs; much less any power of depriving them of their kingdoms and principalities.””* “They are all branded for heretics, who take from the church of Rome, and the See of St. Peter, one of the two swords, and allow only the spiritual.” This heresy Baronius hath nominated the ‘“‘heresy of the politics.”+ This heresy a great nation, otherwise sticking tothe Roman communion, doth stifly maintain, not enduring the papal sovereignty over princes in temporals to be preached in it. There were many persons, yea, syn- ods, who did oppose Pope Hildebrand in the birth of his doctrine, condemning it for a pernicious novelty, and branding it with the name of heresy ; as we before shewed. Since the Hildebrandine age there have been in every nation (yea, in Italy itself) divers historians, divines, and lawyers, who have in elaborate tracts maintained the royal sovereignty against the ponti- fical.’ This sort of heretics are now so much increased, that the Hildebrandine doctrine is commonly exploded. Which, by the way, sheweth, that the Roman party is no less than others subject to change its sentiments ; opinions among them gain- ing and losing vogue, according to cir- cumstances of time and contingencies of things. § VUI. Neither are the adherents to the Roman chureh more agreed concern- ing the extent of the pope’s authority even in spiritual matters. * Altera non tam sententia quam heresis duo docet primo, pontificem ut pontificem ex jure divino nullam habere temporalem potesta~ tem, nec posse ullo modo imperare principibus secularibus, nedum eos regnis et principatu privare Bell. V. 1 + Heeresis errore notantur omnes qui ab eccle- sia Rom, cathedra Petri e duobus alterum gla- dium auferunt, nec nisi spiritualem concedunt. —Baron. anno 1053, § 14. Heeresis Politico- rum, Baron. an. 1073, § 13. ‘ Otto Frising. Sigebert. Abbas Ubsp. Occam, Marsilius Patav. &c. intRop. ] For, although the popes themselves plainly do claim an absolute supremacy in them over the church; although the stream of divines who do flourish in fa- vour with them doth run that way; al- though, according to their principles (if they had any principles clearly and cer- tainly fixed), that might seem to be the doctrine of their church: yet is there among them a numerous party, which doth not allow him such a supremacy, putting great restraints to his authority (as we shall presently shew.) And as the other party doth charge this with heresy, so doth this return back the same imputation on that. § IX. That their doctrine is in this matter so various and uncertain, is no great wonder ; seeing interest is concern- ed in the question, and principles are de- fective toward the resolution of it. 1. Contrary interests will not suffer the point to be decided, nor indeed to be free- ly disputed on either hand. On one hand, the pope will not allow his prerogatives to be discussed ; accord- ing to that maxim of the great Pope In- nocent III., “ When there is a question touching the privileges of the apostolic see, we will not that others judge about them.”* Whence (as we before touched) the pope did peremptorily command his legates at ‘Trent, in no case to permit any dispute about his authority. On the other hand, the French will not permit the supremacy of their king in temporals, or the privilegesof their church in spirituals, to be contested in their king- dom. Nor, we may suppose, would any prince admit a decision prejudicial to his authority and welfare, subjecting and en- slaving him to the will of the Roman court. Nor (we may hope) would any church patiently comport with the irre- coverable oppression of all its rights and liberties by a peremptory establishment of papal omnipotency. 2. Nor is it easy for their dissensions to be reconciled upon theological grounds, and authorities to which they pretend deference. For, not only their schools and masters of their doctrine do in the case disagree, but their synods do notori- ously clash. * Cum super privilegiis sedis apostolice causa vertatur, nolumus de ipsis per alios judi- cari.— Greg. Deer. lib. ii. tit. 1, cap. 12. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 67 § X. Yea, even popes themselves have shifted their pretences, and varied in style, according to the different circumstances of time, and their variety of humours, de- signs, interests. In time of prosperity and upon advan- tage, when they might safely do it, any pope almost would talk high, and assume much to himself: but when they were low, or stood in fear of powerful contra- diction, even the boldest popes would speak submissly or moderately. As, for instance, Pope Leo ἴ., after the second E:phesine synod, when he had to do with Theodosius I{., did humbly supplicate,and whine pitifully; but after the synod of Chalcedon, having got the emperor favour- able, and most of the bishops complacent to him, he ranted bravely. And we may observe, that even Pope Gregory VII., who did swagger so boisterously against the Emperor Henry, was yet calm and mild in his contests with our William the Conqueror ; who hada spirit good enough for him, and was far out of his reach. And popes of high spirit and bold face (such as Leo I., Gelasius I., Nic. I., Gre- gory Il., Gregory VII., Innocent III., Bon- face VIII., Julius Il., Paul IV., Sextus V., Paulus V., &c.), as they did ever aspire to screw papal authority to the highest peg ; so would they strain their language in commendation of their See as high as their times would bear. But other popes of meeker and modester dis- position (suchas Julius I., Anastasius II., Gregory I., Leo II, Adrian VL, &c.), were content to let things stand as they found them, and to speak in the ordina- ry styleof their times; yet so, that few have let their authority go backward or decline. We may observe, that the pretences and language of popes have varied ac- cording to several periods, usually grow- ing higher as their state grew looser from danger of opposition or control. In the first times, while the emperors were pagans, their pretences were suited to their condition, and could not soar high ; they were not then so mad as to pretend to any temporal power, and a pittance of spiritual eminency did content them. When the empire was divided, they could sometimes be more haughty and peremptory ; as being in the west, shroud- ed under the wing of the emperors there a μδ.υ a ΄ ΦῪ ἣ ἕ 68 (who commonly did affect to improve their authority, in competition to that of A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. other bishops), and at distance from the reach of the eastern emperor.’ The cause of Athanasius having pro- duced the Sardican canons, concerning the revision of some causes by the popes, by colour of them they did hugely en- large their authority, and raise their style ; especialy in the west, where they had great advantages of augmenting their power. When the western empire was fallen, their influence upon that part of the em- pire which came under protection of the eastern emperors rendering them able to do service or disservice to those empe- rors, they, according to the state of times, and the need of them, did talk more big or more tamely. Pope Boniface 1Π., having by compli- ance with the usurper Phocas obtained a declaration from him concerning the head- ship.of the Roman church, did make a considerable step forward toward the height of papal greatness. After that Pope Gregory II. had with- drawn Italy from the oriental. empire, and Rome had grown in a manner loose and independent from other secular pow- ers; in the confusions of the west, the pope interposing to arbitrate between princes, trucking and bartering with them, as occasion served, for mutual aid and countenance, did grow in power, and an- swerably did advance his pretences. The spurious Decretal Epistles of the ancient popes (which asserted to the pope high degrees of authority) being foisted into men’s hands, and insensibly creeping into repute did inspire the pope with confidence to invade all the ancient constitutions, privileges, and liberties of churches ; and having got such interest every where, he might say what he pleas- ed, no clergyman daring to check or cross him. Having drawn to himself the final decision of all causes, having gota finger in disposal of all preferments ; having by dispensations, exemptions, and grants of privileges, tied to him so many depend- ents, what might not he say or do? Pope Gregory VII. being a man of un- tameable spirit, and taking advantage from the distractions and corruptions of ! P. Nich. ad Imp. Mich, p. 511, 513. | INTROD. his times, did venture to pull a feather with the emperor; and with success hav- ing mated him, did set up a peremptory claim to sovereignty over all persons in all causes. In his footsteps his successors have trodden, being ever ready upon occasion to plead such a title, and to practise ac- cording to it. No pope would forego any power which had been claimed by his predecessors. And popes would ever be sure to have dancers after their pipe, numberless abettors of their pretences. No wonder, then, that persons defer- ring much regard to the authority of popes, and accommodating their conceits to the dictates of them (or of persons de- pending on them), should in their opin- ions vary about the nature and extent of papal authority ; it having never been fixed within certain bounds, or having in several ages continued the same thing. § XI. Wherefore intending by God’s help to discuss the pretended authority of the pope, and to shew that he by no di- vine institution, and by no immutable right, hath any such power as he doth claim ; by reason of this perplexed varie- ty of opinions 1 do find it difficult to state the question, or to know at what distinct mark I should level my discourse. § XII. But seeing his pretence to any authority in temporals, or to the civil sword, is so palpably vain, that it hardly will bear a serious dispute, having noth- ing but impudence and sophistry to coun- tenance it ; seeing so many in the Roman communion do reject it, and have sub- stantially confuted it; seeing now most are ashamed of it, and very few (even among those sects which have been its chief patrons) will own, it; seeing Bel- larmine himself doth acknowledge it a novelty devised about 500 years ago in St. Bernard’s time;* seeing the popes themselves, whatever they think, dare now scarce speak out, and forbear upon sufficient provocation to practise accord- ing to it; I shall spare the trouble of meddling with it, confining my discourse to the pope’s authority in ecclesiastical * Primi qui temporalem potestatem summo pontifici ex Christi institutione tribuunt, viden- turesse Hugo de S. Victore, Bernardus, &c.— Bell. v.5. The first that yield the pope tem- poral power by Christ’s institution, seem to be Hugo, ἄτα. Inrrop.] affairs; the pretence whereto I am per- suaded to be no less groundless, and no less noxious than the other to Christen- dom; the which being overthrown, the other, as superstructed on it, must also necessarily fall. § XIII. And here the doctrine which I shall contest against is that in which the cordial partisans of that See do seem to consent, which is most common and cur- rent, most applauded and countenanced in their theological schools; which the popes themselves have solemnly defined, and declared for standing law, or rule of jurisdiction; which their most authentic synods (whereby their religion is declar- ed, and distinguished from others) have asserted or supposed ; which the tenor of their discipline and practice doth hold forth ; which their clergy by most solemn professions and engagements is tied to avow; which all the clients and confi- dents of Rome do zealously stand for (more than for any other point of doc- trine ;) and which no man can disclaim without being deemed an enemy ora prevaricator toward the apostolic see. § XIV. Which doctrine is this, That (in the words of the Florentine synod’s de- finition) ‘* the apostolical chair and the Ro- man high priest doth hold a primacy over the universal church ; and that the Roman high priest is the successor of St. Peter, the prince of the apostles, and the true lieutenant of Christ, and the head of the church; and that he is the father and doc- tor of all Christians; and that unto him,” in St. Peter, “ full power is committed to feed, and direct, and govern the catholic church under Christ ; according as is con- tained in the Acts of General Councils and in the Holy Canons.”* That (in the words of Pope Leo X. ap- proved by the Laterane synod)t+ “ Christ before his departure from the world, did in solidity of the rock institute Peter and his successors to be his lieutenants, to whom it is so necessary to obey, that who doth not obey must die the death.” * "re δρίζομεν τὴν ἁγίον ἀποστολικὴν καθέδραν écc.—Concil. Fior. defn. p. 854 : os + Christus—migraturus ex mundo ad Pat- Tem, in soliditate Petre Petrum ejusque suc- cessores Vicarios suos instituit, quibus ex libri sRegum testimonio ita obedire necesse est, ut qui non obedierit, morte moriatur.—P. Leo X. in Conc. Later. sess. xi. p. 151. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 69 That to the pope, assovereign monarch by divine sanction of the whole church, do appertain royal prerogatives (regalia Petri, the royalties of Peter, they are called in the oath prescribed to bishops.) Such as these which follow : To be superior to the whole church, and to its representative, a general synod of bishops. To convocate general synods at his pleasure ; all bishops being obliged to attend upon summons from him. ‘To preside in synods, so as to suggest mat- ter, promote, obstruct, overrule the de- bates in them. To confirm or invalidate their determinations, giving like to them by his assent, or subtracting it by his dis- sent. To define points of doctrine, or to decide controversies authoritatively ; so that none may presume to contest, or dis- sent from his dictates. To enact, establish, abrogate, suspend, dispense with ecclesias- tical laws and canons. To relaxor evacu- ate ecclesiastical censures by indulgence, pardon, &c. To avoid promises, vows, oaths, obligations to laws by his dispensa- tion.* To be the fountain of all pastoral jurisdiction and dignity. To constitute, confirm, judge, censure, suspend, depose, remove, restore, reconcile bishops. To confer ecclesiastical dignities and bene- fices by paramount authority, in way of provision, reservation, &c. ‘To exempt colleges, monasteries, ὅσο. from jurisdic- tion of their bishops and ordinary supe- riors. To judge all persons in all spiri- tual causes, by calling them to his cogni- zance, or delegating judges for them, with a final and peremptory sentence. To receive appeals from all ecclesiasti- cal judicatories; and to reverse their judgments, if he findeth cause. ‘To be himself unaccountable for any of his do- ings, exempt from judgment, and liable to no reproof. 'To erect, transfer, abolish episcopal sees, To exact oaths of fealty and obedience from the clergy. To found religious orders ; or to raise a spir- itual militia for propagation and defence of the church. To summon and com- misionate soldiers by croisade, We. to fight against infidels, or persecute infidels. Some of these are expressed, others in general terms couched in those words of Pope Eugenius, telling the Greeks what they must consent unto. “ The « Bell. iv. 22. 70 pope,” said he, “will have the preroga- tives of his church; and he will have ap- peals to him; and to feed all the church of Christ, as shepherd of the sheep. Beside these things, that he may have authority and power to convoke general synods, when need shall be; and that all the patriarchs do yield to his will.’* That the pope doth claim, assume, and exercise a sovereignty over the church endowed with such prerogatives, is suffi- ciently visible in experience of fact, is apparent by the authorized dictates in their canon law, and shall be distinctly proved by competent allegations, when we shall examine the branches of this pretended authority. In the mean time it sufficeth to observe, that in effect all clergymen do avow so much, bona fide and without prevarication do submit to take the oaths and engage- ments prescribed to them of course by papal appointment. For this surely, ac- cording to the pope’s meaning (by which their obligation is to be measured), is de- signed in the profession ordained by Pope Pius IV. wherein every beneficed clergyman is enjoined to say, ‘* And I do promise and swear true obedience to the Roman pontul, the successor of St. Pe- ter, and the vicar of Jesus Christ.’’t Which profession was appointed in pursu- ance of a sanction made by the Trent council, that all such persuns “ should vow and swear to abide in obedience to the Roman church ;”¢ and consequently, how hard soever its yoke should be, they would not shake it off: which inferreth most absolute sovereignty of that church, or of the pope, who ruleth the roast in it. But what that ¢rue obedience doth im- port, or how far the papal authority in the pope’s own sense, and according to the public spirit of that church, doth stretch, is more explicitly signified in the * Θέλει τὰ προνόμια τῆς ἐκκλησίας αὐτοῦ, καὶ θέ- λει ἔχειν τὴν ἔκκλητον, καὶ ποιμαίνειν πᾶσαν τὴν ἐκκ- λησίαν τοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὥσπερ ποιμὴν τῶν προθάτων' πρὸς τούτοις, ἵνα ἔχη ἐξουσίαν καὶ δύναμιν συγκρο- τεῖν σύνοδον οἰκουμενικὴν, ὅτι δεήσεις" καὶ πάντας τοὺς τατριάρχας ὑπείκειν τῷ θελήματι αὐτοῦ. ---- Conc. Flor. p. 346. + Romanoque pontifici, B. Petri successori, ac Jesu Christi vicario, veram obedientiam spon- deo ac juro.—Bull, Pi LV. super forma juram. t Provisi de beneficiis—in Romane ecclesiz obedientia se permansuros spondeant ac jurent. —Cone. Trid. sess. xxiv. cap. 12. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. rs ee ea Ἶ [INTROD. oath which all bishops at their consecra- tion, and all metropolitians at their in- stalment, are required to take; the which, as it is extant in the Roman Pon- tifical,* set out by order of Pope Clem- ent VIII. doth run in those terms :— «ΠΝ. elect of the church of N., from henceforward will be faithful and obedi- ent to St. Peter the apostle, and to the holy Roman church, and to our lord the Lord N. pope NN. and to his successors, canonically coming in. I will πολλοῦ ad- vise, consent, or do any thing that they may lose life or member, or that their persons may be seized, or hands anywise laid upon them, or any injuries offered to them, under any pretence whatsoever. The counsel which they shall intrust me withal, by themselves, their messengers, or letters, 1 will not knowingly reveal to any to their prejudice. I will help them to defend and keep the Roman papacy, and the royalties of St. Peter, saving my order, against all men. The legate of the apostolic see, going and coming, I will honourably treat and help in his necessities. The rights, honours, privi- leges, and authority of the holy Roman church, of our Lord the pope, and his foresaid successors, [| will endeavour to preserve, defend, increase, and advance. I will not be in any counsel, action, or treaty, in which shall be plotted against our said lord, and the said Roman church, any thing to the hurt or prejudice of their persons, right, honour, state, or power ; and if I shall know any such thing to be treated or agitated by any whatsoever, | will hinder it to my power; and as soon as I can will signify it to our said lord, or to some other, by whom it may come to his knowledge. The rules of the holy fathers, the apostolic decrees, ordinances, or disposals, reservations, provisions, and mandates, I will observe with all my might, and cause to be observed by others. Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our said lord, or his foresaid succes- sors, I will to my power persecute and oppose. I will come to a council when 1 am called, unless I be hindered by a ca- nonical impediment. L will by myself in person visit the threshold of the apostles every three years; and give an account to our lord and his foresaid successors of | * Pontif. Rom. Antwerp. anno 1626, p. 59, 86. ee ee - ‘ ‘ ν ἴω» » A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. IntRop.] all my pastoral office, and of all things anywise belonging to the state of my church, to the discipline of my clergy and people, and lastly to the salvation of souls committed to my trust ; and will in like manner humbly receive and diligent- ly execute the apostolic commands. And if I be detained by a lawful impediment, I will perform all the things aforesaid by a certain messenger hereto specially em- powered, a member of my chapter, or some other in ecclesiastical dignity, or else having a parsonage ; or in default of these, by a priest of the diocese ; or in default of one of the clergy [of the dio- cese], by some other secular or regular priest of approved integrity and religion, fully instructed in all things above men- tioned. And such impediment I will make out by lawful proofs to be trans- mitted by the foresaid messenger to the cardinal proponent of the holy Roman church in the congregation of the sacred council. The possessions belonging to my table I will neither sell, nor give aWay, nor mortgage, nor grant anew in fee, nor anywise alienate, no, not even with the consent of the chapter of my church, without consulting the Roman pontiff. And if I shall make any aliena- tion, I will thereby incur the penalties contained in a certain constitution put forth about this matter. So help me God and these holy gospels of God.”* * Ego N, electus ecclesia N. ab hac hora in antea fidelis et obediens ero B. Petro apostolo, sancieque Romane ecclesia, et domino nostro, domino N. pape N. suisque successoribus ca- nonice inirantibus. -Non ero in cousilio, aut consensu, vel jacto, ut Vitam perdant, aut mem- bram ; seu capiantur mala captione ; aut in eos manus quomodolibet ingerantur ; vel injurie@ ali- qua inferantur, quovis quasito colore. Consilium vero quod mihi credituri sunt, per se, aut nun- clos Suos, seu literas, ad eorum damnum, me sci- ente, nemini pandam. Papatum Romanum ef regalia Sancti Petri adjutor eis ero ad defenden- dum et retinendum, salvo meo ordine, contra omnem hominem. Legainm apostolicem sedis in eundo et redeundo honorifice traciabo, et in Suis hecessitatibus acjuvabo. Jura, honores, a auctoritatem sancte Rvumanae eccle- se, m nostri papa εἰ successorum pre- dictorum, conservare, defendere, augere, pro- movere curabo. Neque ero in consilio, vel facto, seu tractatu in qvibus contra ipsum do- minum nostrum, vel candem Romanam eccle- siam aliqua sinistra vel prejudicialia persona- rum, juris, honoris, status et potestatis eorum machinentur. st talia a quibuscunque 71 Such is the oath prescribed to bishops, the which is worth the most serious at- tention of all men, who would under- stand how miserably slavish the condi- tion of the clergy is in that church, and how inconsistent their obligation to the pope is with their duty to their prince. And in perusing it we may note, that the clauses in a different character are in ‘the more ancient oath extant in the Gre- gorgian Decretals: by which it appear- eth how the pope doth more and more en- large his power, and straiten the bands of subjection to him.' And it is very remark- able that the new oath hath changed those words, ‘‘ regulas sanctorum patrum” into “regalia Sancti Petri,” 7. e. “the rules tractart vel procurart novero, tmpediam hoc pro posse, et quanto citius potero significabo erdem domino nostro, vel aliert per quem pos- sit ad ipsius notitiam pervenire. Regulas sanctorum Patrum, decreta, ordinationes, seu dispositiones, reservationes, provisiones et mandata apostolica totis viribus observabo, et aciam ab alus observari. Hereticos, schis- maticos, et rebelles eidem domino nostro vel successoruus predictis pro posse persequar et unpugnabo, Vocatus ad synodum veniam, nisi prepeditus fuero canouica prepepitione. Apos- tolorum limina singulis trienniis personaliter per me ipsum visitabo, et domino estro ac succes- soribus prefatis ratiunem reddam de toto mco pastoralt officio ac de rebus omnilus ad mee ecclesi@ statum, ad cleri, et populi disciplinam, animarum denique que mee πάει tradite sunt, salutem quovis modo pertinentibus, et vicissim mandata apostolica humiliter recipiam et quam diligentissime exeyuar. Quod st legitimo im- pedimento detentus fucro praefata omnia aa- implebo per centum nuncium ed hoc speciale mandatum habentem de gremio mei capituli, aut alium in dignitate ecclesiastica constitu- tum, seu alias, personatum habentem; aut, his mihi deficuentibus, per diecesanum sacerdotem ; et clero deficiente omnino per aliguem alium presbyterum secularem vel regularem spectate prolitatis et religionis de supradictis omnibus plene instructum. De hujusmodi cutem im- pedimento docebo per legitimas probationes ad sancte Romane ecclesia cardinalem proponen- tem in congregatione sacri concilii per supra- dictum nuncium transmittendas. Possessio- nes vero ad mensam meam pertinentes non vendam, nec donabo neque impignorabo, nec de novo infeudabo vel aliguo modo alienabo, etiam cum consensu capituli ecclesia mee, in- consulto Romano pontifice. Et si ad aliguam alienationem devenero, panas in quadam super hoc edita constitutione contentas 0 ipso incur- rere volo. Sic me Deus adjuvet et hen sanc- ta Dei evangelia. ' Greg. Decib. |. ii. ut. 24. cap. 4. 72 of the holy fathers” into ‘the royalties of St. Peter.” § XV. I know there are within the Ro- man communion great store of divines, who do contract the papal sovereignity within a much narrower compass, refus- ing to him many of those prerogatives, yea, scarce allowing to him any of them. There are those who affirm the pope, in doctrine and discipline, subject to the church, or to a general synod represent- ing it. Which opinion thwarteth a prop- osition, in Bellarmine’s opinion, even al- most an article of faith: but to be even with him, they do hold his proposition to be quite heretical: “The pope is sim- ply and absolutely above the universal church ;—this proposition is almost an article of faith,’* saith Bellarmine: the cardinal of Lorrain on the contrary, ‘“* But I,” saith he, ““ cannot deny but that Tama Frenchman, and bred up in the church of Paris, which teaches that the Roman pontiff is subject toa council, and they who teach the contrary are there branded as heretics.” There are those who affirm the pope, if he undertake points of faith without assistance of a general synod, may teach heresy ; (which opinion, as Bellarmine thought, doth “closely border on here- sy :᾽1) and those who conceive that popes may be and have been heretics; whence Christians sometimes are not obliged to admit their doctrine, or observe their pleasure. There are those who maintain the pope, no less than other bishops, subject to the canons, or bound to observe the constitutions of the church; that he may not infringe them, or overrule against them, or dispense with them: and that to him attempting to do so, obedience is not due. There are those who maintain, that the pope cannot subvert or violate the rights and liberties of particular churches, * Summus pontifex simpliciter et absolute est supra ecclesiam universam ; hee proposi- tio est fere de fide.—Bell de Conc. ii. 17. + Ego vero negare non possum quin Gallus sim, et Parisiensis ecclesiz alumnus, in qua Rom. pontificem subesse concilio tenetur, et gui docent ibi contrarium, li tanquam heretici notantur.—Card. Loth. apud Laun. Ep.\. 1. ¢ Que sententia videtur omnino erronea et heresi proxima —Bell. iv. 2. ae a ee A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. [InrRop. settled in them agreeably to the ancient canons of the church. universal. There are those who assert to general councils a power of reforming the church, without or against the pope’s consent. There are those who, as Bellarmine telleth us, do allow the pope to be no more in the ecclesiastical republic than as the Duke of Venice in his senate, or as the general of an order in his congre- gation; and that he therefore hath but a very limited and subordinate power." There are consequently those who con- ceive the pope notoriously erring, or mis- demeaning himself, to the prejudice of the Christian state, may be called to an account, may be judged, may be cor- rected, may be discarded by a general synod. | Such notions have manifestly prevail- ed'in a good part of the Roman com- munion, and are maintained by most di- vines in the French church; and they may be supposed every where common, where there is any liberty of judgment, or where the inquisition doth not reign. There have been seasons wherein they have so prevailed, as to have been defined for catholic truths in great syn- ods, and by them to have been applied to practice. For, In the first great synod of Pisa it was declared, that councils may ‘‘ reform the church sufficiently both in head and members :”" and accordingly that synod did assume to judge two popes (Gregory ΧΙ. and Benedict XIII.) contending for the papacy (whereof one was the true pope; and deposing them both, did sub- stitute Alexander V. ‘* who for one year” (as Antoninus reporteth), ‘‘ according to the common opinion, did hold the seat of Peter,”* The synod of Constance declared, that ‘the synod lawfully assembled in the Ho- ly Ghost, making a general council repre- senting'the catholic church militant, hath immediately power from Christ; to which every one, of whatever state or dignity he be, although it be papal, is. bound to obey in those things which belong to * Qui anno uno sedem Petri tenuit, secun- dum communem opinionem.—Anion. de Conci. Pis. cap. v. ὁ 3. “ Bell. de Conc. ii. 14. *" Anon 1409, Conc. Pis. Sess. 16, 17. Inrrop.] faith, and the extirpation of (the said) schism, and the general reformation of the church of God in head and mem- bers.””* ‘ The which doctrine they notably put in practice, exercising jurisdiction over popes, and for errors, misdemeanours, or contumacies, discarding three (of whom it is hard if one were not true pope), and choosing another, who afterwards did pass for a right pope, and himself did | correct or suppress them, (30 | to be violent in reclaiming them to his confirm the acts of that council. that this semi-heresy hath at least the au- thority of one pope to countenance it.) * Our most holy lord the pope said in answer thereunto, that he would maintain and inviolably observe all and every of those things that were conciliarly deter- mined, concluded, and decreed, by the present council in matters of faith.’’t The synod of Basil declared the same point, “that. councils are superior to popes, to be atruth of catholic faith, which whoever doth stiffly oppose is to be ac- counted a heretic:t Nor (say they) did any skilful man ever doubt the pope to be subject to the judgment of general synods in things concerning faith.|| In virtue of which doctrine, and by its irre- sistible authority,”§ the synod did sen- tence and reject Pope Eugenius as crim- inal, heretical, and contumacious. These synods, although reprobated by popes in counter-synods, are yet by many Roman Catholic divines retained in great veneration ;* and their doctrine is so current in the famous Sorbonne, that (if we may believe the great Cardinal of Lorrain) the contrary is there reputed heretical.4| * Primo declarat quod ipsa synodus, &c.— Sess. 4, 5. 7 Sanctiss. Dominus noster papa dixit, res- ndendo ad pradicta, quod omnia et singula eterminata, conclusa et decreta in materiis fidei per praesens concilium conciliariter tene- re, et inviolabiliter observare volebat.—Conc. Const. sess. xlv. p. 1119. } Veritas de potestate concilii supra papam —— est veritas fidei catholico—cui pertina- citer repugnans est censendus hereticus.— Conc. Bas. sess. xxxiii. (p 95.) || Nec unquam aliquis peritoruam dubitavit, summum pontificem in his que fidem concer- nunt judicio earundem generalium synodoruam esse subjectum.—Concil, Bas. sess, xiv. p. 117. § Vigore cujus, ac ineffabili et inexpugnabili authoritate——. Sess.xxxviii. p. 101. Ἵ Ego vero negare non possum, ὅζο. = age Later. &c.) ov. Il. 10 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 7 —_— σῦν» ~~ " ? . ’ 7 73 § XVI. Yet notwithstanding these op- positions, the former opinion averring the pope’s absolute sovereignty, doth seem to be the genuine doctrine of the Roman church, if it hath any. For those divines, by the pope and his intimate confidents, are looked upon asa mongrel brood, or mutinous faction; which he by politic connivance doth only tolerate, because he is not well able to He is afraid sense, lest he spend his artillery in vain, and lose all’ his power and interest with them.* Nor indeed do those men seem to ad- here to the Roman party out of entire judgment or cordial affection; but in compliance with their princes, or upon account of their interest, or at best re- gard to peace and quiet. They cannot conveniently break with the pope, be- cause his interest is twisted with their own, so as not easily to be disentangled. For how can they heartily stick to the pope, whenas their opinion doth plainly imply him to be an usurper and a tyrant (claiming to himself, and exercising au- thority over the church, which doth not rightfully belong to him;) to be a rebel and traitor against the church (invading and possessing the sovereignty due to it; for such questionless the Duke of Venice would be, should he challenge and as- sume to himself sucha power over his commonwealth, as the pope hath over Christendom ;) to be an impostor and se- ducer, pretending to infallible conduct, which he hath not. How can they honestly condemn those who (upon such grounds) do shake off such yokes, refusing to comply with the pope, till he correct his errors, till he desist from those usurpations and im- postures, till he restore to the church its rights and liberties ? How are the doctrines of those men consistent or congruous to their practice ? For they call the pope monarch of the | church, and universal pastor of Chris- tians, by God’s appointment, indefecti- bly ; yet will they not admit all his laws, and reject doctrines which he teacheth, particularly those which most nearly * Nam adhuc videmus ab ecclesia tolerari, qui eam sententiam sequuntur ——. Bell. iv. 2. 74 touch him, concerning his own office and authority. They profess themselves his loyal subjects, yet pretend liberties which they will maintain against him. They hold that all are bound to entertain com- munion with him, yet confess that he may be heretical and seduce into error. They give him the name and shadow of a supremacy, but so that they can void the substance and reality thereof.* In fine, where should we seek for the doctrine of the Roman church, but at Rome, or from Rome itself? where these doctrines are heterodoxies. § XVII. We shall not therefore have a distinct regard to the opinion of these semi-Romanists ; nor consider them other- wise, than to confirm that part of truth which they hold, and to confute that part of error which they embrace ; allowing, at least in word and semblance, more power to the pope than we can admit as due to him. Our discourse shall be levelled at him as such as he pretendeth himself to be, or as assuming to himself the forementioned powers and _ preroga- tives. § XVII. Of such vast pretences we have reason to require sufficient grounds. He that demandeth assent to such im- portant assertions, ought to produce clear proofs of them: he that claimeth so mighty power, should be able to make outa good title to it; for, “No man may take this” (more than pontifical) ‘honour to himself, but he that is call- ed by God, as was Aaron.”’? ‘ They are worthily to be blamed, who tumultu- ously and disorderly fall upon curbing or restraining those who by no law are subject to them.” We cannot well be justified froma stupid easiness, in admitting such a lieu- tenancy to our Lord, if we do not see exhibited to us manifest and certain patents assuring its commission to us. * Monifestum autem schismatis argumen- tum est, cum quis se communioni subtrahit apostolic sedis.—Balus. not. ad Agobard. p. 112. It is a manifest argument of schism, when any man withdraws himself from com- munion with the apostolic see. + Jure culpandi sunt, qui turbide atque inor- dinate in eos coercendos insiliunt, qui nulla sibi lege subjecti sunt.—Aug. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 17. » Heb. v. 4. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. = SF). me ΕΣ [InTROD- We should love the church better than to yield up its liberty to the will of a pretender, upon slight or no ground. Their boldly claiming sucha power, their having sometime usurped such a power, will not excuse them or us.* Nor will precarious assumptions, or subtle distinc- tions, or blind traditions, or loose con- jectures, serve for probations in such a case. § XIX. Such demands they cannot wholly balk: wherefore for satisfaction to them, not finding any better plea, they hook in St. Peter ; affirming that on him by our Lord there was instated a prima- cy over his brethren, all the apostles and the disciples of our Lord, importing all the authority which they claim; and that from him this primacy was devolved by succession to the bishops of Rome, by right indefectible for all future ages. Which plea of theirs doth involve these main suppositions : Ι. That St. Peter had a primacy over the apostles. Il. That St. Peter’s primacy with its rights and prerogatives was not personal, but derivable to his successors. 1Π. That St. Peter was bishop of Rome. IV. That Si. Peter did continue bish- op of Rome, after his translation, and was so at his decease. V. That the bishops of Rome (accord- ing to God’s institution, and by original right derived thence) should have an universal supremacy and jurisdiction over the Christian church. VI. That in fact the Roman bishops continually from St. Peter’s time have enjoyed and exercised this sovereign power. Vil. That this power is indefectibdle and unalterable. The truth and certainty of these pro- positions we shall in order discuss ; so that it may competently appear, whether those who disclaim these pretences are (as they are charged) guilty of heresy and schism ; or they rather are liable to the imputations of arrogancy and impiety who do obtrude and urge them. * Nemo sibi et professor et testis est.— Ter- tul. v. 1, adv. Marc. None can be both a claim- er and a witness for himself. A TRE OF POPE'S SU Marr. x. 2.—Now the names of the twelve apostles were these ; the first, Simon, who is called Peter.* Amonc the modern controversies there is scarce any of greater consequence than that about universal supremacy, ATISE THE PREMACY. the primacy of St. Peter; endeavouring to shew what primacy he was capable of, or might enjoy; what he could not pretend to, nor did possess. SUPPOSITION I. which the bishop of Rome claimeth over| The first supposition of those who claim the Christian church; the assertion where- of on his side dependeth upon divers suppositions ; namely these : I. That St. Peter by our Lord’s ap- pointment had a primacy, implying a universal jurisdiction to the pope over the church is, That St. Peter had a primacy over the apostles. In order to the resolution of this point, sovereignty of authority and jurisdiction| we may consider that there are several over the apostles. Il. That the rights and prerogatives of this sovereignty were not personal, but derivable, and transmitted to succes- sors. fil. That St. Peter was bishop of Rome. IV. That St. Peter did continue bish- op of Rome after his translation, and was so at his decease. V. That hence of right to the bishops of Rome, as St. Peter’s successors, an universal jurisdiction over the whole church of Christ doth appertain. VI. That in fact the said bishops con- tinually from St. Peter’s time have en- joyed and exercised this power. ΝῊ. That this power is indefectible ; such as by no means can be forfeited or fail. In order to the discussion and resolu- tion of the first point, I shall treat upon * Πρῶτος Σίμον. kinds of primacy, which may belong to a person in respect of others: for there are, 1. A primacy of worth, or personal excellency. 2. A primacy of reputation and es- teem. 3. A primacy of order, or bare digni- ty and precedence. 4. A primacy of power or jursidic- tion. To each of these what title St. Peter might have, let us in order examine. 1. As for the first of these (a prima- cy of worth, or merit, as some of the ancients call it), we may well grant it to St. Peter, admitting that probably he did exceed the rest of his brethren in personal endowments and capacities (both natural and moral), qualifying him for the discharge of the apostolical office in an eminent manner; particularly that in quickness of apprehension, in boldness of spirit, in readiness of speech, in char- Ὺ ὝΨΗ Ὅς Ὁ “ἡ. bs ee” eal a 76 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ity to our Lord, and zeal for his service,; gory Nazianzen, “than the rest at ae- in resolution, activity, and industry he| knowledging Christ.”* was transcendent, may seem to appear; When our Saviour walked on the sea, by the tenor of the evangelical and apos-} who but he had the faith and the courage tolical histories; in the which we muy} to venture on the waters towards him?‘ ‘ observe him upon all occasions ready; When our Lord was apprehended by to speak first, and to make himself the} the soldiers, presently up was his spirit, mouth, as the fathers speak, of the apos- tles, in all deliberations nimble at pro- pounding his advice, in all undertakings forward to make the onset; being παν- ταχοῦ θερμὸς, always hot and eager, al- ways prompt and vigorous, as St. Chry- sostom often affirmeth concerning him: these things are apparent in his demean- our, and it may not be amiss to set down some instances.* When our Lord, observing the differ- ent apprehensions men had concerning him, asked the apostles, “" But whom say ye that 1am?” up starteth he, προπηδᾷ καὶ προλαμθάνεται, * he skippeth forth, and preventeth the rest,” crying, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.* | The other apostles were not ignorant of the point; for they at their conversion did take Jesus for the Messias, which (even according to the common notion of the Jews) did imply his being the Son of God; Nathanael (that is, St. Barthol- omew, as is supposed) had in terms con- fessed it; the whole company, upon see- ing our Lord walk on the sea, had avow- ed τι: St. Peter before that in the name of them all had said, ‘//uets πεπίστεύκα- μεν, καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν, We have believed, and have known, that thou art the Chris/, the Son of the living God.© ‘They there- fore had the same faith, but he, from a special alacrity of spirit, and expedition in utterance, was more forward to declare it; “‘He was more hot,” saith St. Gre- * 'Ενπερίστροφος γὰρ dei πως ἣν ἄνθρωπος, κεκεν- τρωμένος οὐ μετρίως εἰς τὴν ἐπὶ τὸ δρᾶσαι καὶ εἰπεῖν προθυμίαν .----ΟΥ 11}. in Joh. xxi. 15. He was ἃ very active and stirring man, exceedingly spurred on with much promptness and alacrity in doing and speaking. Πανταχοῦ εὑρισκεται ἀπὸ πάθου bppav.—Chrys. in Joh. Or. xii. (13, 24.) Διὰ πάντων καὶ ἐν πάσιν τὴν αὐτὴν ἐμφαίνει Ocppérnra.—Chrys. tom. v. Or. 59. + Licet czeteri apostoli sciant, Petrus tamen respondet pro ceteris.—Ambr. in Luc. lib. vi. cap. 9 « Matt. xvi. 15, 16. * John i. 42,46; Matt. xxvi.63; Johni. 50; Matt. xiv. 33. * John vi. 69. and out went his sword in defence of hira.° When our Lord predicted, that upon his coming into trouble all the disciples would be offended, and desert him, he was ready to say, Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will] never be offended ; and, Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee ;* such was his natural courage and confi- dence. When our Lord was discoursing about his passion, he suddenly must be advising in the case, and urging him ¢éo spare him- self ;* upon which St. Chrysostom biddeth us to ““ consider, not that hisanswer was unadvised, but that it came from a genu- ine and fervent affection.”°= — And at the transfiguration, he fell to proposing about making an abode there, not knowing what he said ;" so brisk was he in imagination and speech. Upon the good woman’s report that our Lord was risen from the dead, he first ran to the sepulchre,' and so (as St. Paul impheth) did obtain the first sight of our Lord after the resurrection ;i such was his zeal and activity upon all occasions. At the consultation about supplying the place of Judas, he rose up, proposed, and pressed the matter.’ At the convention of the apostles and elders about resolving the debate concern- ing observance of Mosaical institutions, he first rose up, and declared his sense.* In the promulgation of the gospel, and defence thereof before the Jewish rulers, * Ocoudrepos τῶν ἄλλων εἰσ ἐπίγνωσιν Xperod.— Greg. Naz. Or. 34. + Μὴ τοῦτο ἐξετάσωμεν, ὅτι ἀπερίσκεπτος ἡ ἀπό- κρισις" ἀλλ᾽ ὅτι γνησίου πύθου ἣν καὶ ζέοντος.---- ΤΌ. v. Or. 99. 1 Kai ὅτι ὥφθη Knga, εἶτα rots dddexac—1 Cor. xv. 9. And that he appeared to Cephas, after that to the twelve. ¢ Matt. xiv. 28. * John xviii. 10. f Matt. xxvi. 33, 35; John xiii. 37, ε Matt. xvi. 22. Ὁ Μὴ εἰδὼς ὅ \éyer.—Mark ix. 6. i Luke ix. 33; xxiv.; xii. 34; Johnxx, 8. ) Acts i. 16. * Acts xv. 7. A TREATISE OF THE he did assume the conduct, and constantly took upon him to be the speaker ; the rest standing by him, implying assent, and ready to avow his word ; Peter, saith St. Luke, standing with the rest, lift up his voice, and said unto them ; so “ did they utter a common voice,” saith St. Chrysos- tom, ‘‘ and he was the mouth of all.’’* That in affection to our Lord, and zeal for his service, St. Peter had some ad- vantage over the rest, that question, Si- mon Peter, dost thou love me more than these? may seem to imply: (although the words πλεῖον τούτω» may bear other interpretations, whereby the seeming in- vidiousness of the question, according to that sense, will be removed.) However, that he had a singular zeal for promoting our Lord’s service, and propagation of the gospel, therein outshining the rest, seemeth manifest in the history, and may be inferred from the peculiar regard our Lord apparently did shew to him.t Upon these premises we may well ad- mit that St. Peter had a primacy of worth; or that in personal accomplish- ments he was most eminent among the twelve apostles; (although afterward there did spring up one, who hardly in any of these respects would yield to him ; who could confidently say, that he did not come behind the very chief apostles ; and of whom St. Ambrose saith, ‘‘ Nei- ther was Paul inferior to Peter be- ing well to bg compared even to the first, and the second to none :”’+ and St. Chrys- ostom, “ For what was greater than Peter, and what equal to Paulj?”’)|| This is the * Καινὴν προεδάλλοντο φωνὴν, καὶ πάντων αὐτὸς ἣν τὸ στύμα.. + Aug.in Joh. Tract. 123. ‘O μανικὸς épac- τὴς τοῦ Xproro}.—Chrys. tom. v. Or. 24. An extreme lover of Christ. Szpe diximus nimii ardoris, amorisque quam maximi fuisse Pet- rum in Dominum.—Hier. in Matt. xvi. 22. We have ofien said that Peter was transported with too much heat, and extraordinary great love of our Lord. Ipse enim Petrus in apos- tolorum ordine primus, in Christi amore promp- UssIMUS, 585 06 unus respondet pro omnibus.— Aug. Serm. xiii. do verb. Dom. in Matt.i. For Peter himself being first in the order of the apostles, and most prompt and forward in the love of Christ, answered oficntimes alone for all the rest. ¢ Nee Paulus inferior Petro——cum primo > aly facile conferendus, et nulli secun- us.—Ambr. de Sp. S. ii. 12. | Τί γὰρ Tlérpou pet{ov; τί δὲ Παύλου toov.— Chrys. tom. y. Or. 187. '1Cor. xv. 10; 2Cor. xi. 23,5; xii. 11. POPE’S SUPREMACY. 77 primacy which Eusebius aittributeth to him ; when he calleth him “ the excellent and great apostle, who for his virtue was the prolocutor of ali the rest.’* II. As to a primacy of repute ; which St. Paul meaneth, when he speaketh of the οἱ δοκοῦντες, those which had a special reputation, of those who seemed to be pillars of the ὑπὲρ λίαν ἁποστολοι, the supereminent apostles ;* this advantage cannot be refused him ; being a necessa- ry consequent of those eminent qualities resplendent in him, and of the illustrious performances achieved by him, beyond the rest. This may be inferred from that ad- vantageous renown which he hath had propagated from the beginning to all pos- terity. This at least those elogies of the fa- thers (styling him the chief, prince, head of the apostles) do signify.7 This also may be collected from his being so constantly ranked in the first place, before the rest of his brethren. Π|. As to a primacy of order or bare dignity, importing that commonly, in all meetings and proceedings, the other apostles did yield him the precedence, the προηγορία, or privilege of speaking first (whether in propounding matters for debate, or in delivering his advice), in the conduct and moderation of affairs ; that this was stated on him, may be questioned ; for that this were akind of womanish privilege ; and that it doth not seem to befit the gravity of such persons, or their condition and circumstances, to stand upon ceremonies of respect; for that also our Lord’s rules do seem to ex- clude all semblance of ambition, all kinds of inequality and distance between his apostles ; for that this practice doth not seem constantly and thoroughly to agree to his being endowed with this advan- tage ; especially seeing all that practice which favoureth it may fairly be assign- ed to other causes; for that also the fathers’ authority (if that be objected, as amain argument of such a primacy) in points of this nature, not bordering * Tov καρτερὸν καὶ μέγαν τῶν ἀποστόλων, τὸν ἀρετῆς ἕνεκα τῶν λοιπῶν ἁπάντων προήγορον. —Eu- seb. Hist. ii. 14. t Ὁ ἐπιφανέστατος τῶν ἀποστόλων Tlérpos.—Ath. Disp. cont, Arium, p. 121. ™ Gal. ii. 2, 6, 9. 5 2 Cor. xi. 5; xii. 11, 78 on essentials of faith, is of no great strength ; they in such cases speaking out of their own ingeny and conjecture ; and commonly indulging their imagina- tions no less freely than other men. But yet this primacy may be granted, as probable upon divers accounts of use and convenience ; it might be useful to preserve order, and to promote expedi- tion; or to prevent confusion, distrac- tion, and dilatory obstruction in the management of things; yea, to main- tain concord, and to exclude that ambi- tion or affectation to be foremost, which is natural to men. For seeing all could not go, speak, or act first, all could not suide affairs, it was expedient that one should be ready to undertake it, knowing his cue : *¢ See,” saith St. Chrysostom, noting on Acts ii. 14, where St. Peter speaketh for the rest, “ the concord of the Apostles ; they yield unto him the speech, for they could not all speak : ἢ and, ““ One” (saith St. Jerome) “tis chosen among the twelve, that a head being appointed, an occa- sion of schism might be removed.”’+ St. Cyprian hath a reason for it some- what more subtle and mystical, suppos- ing our Lord did confer on him a pre- ference of this kind to his brethren (who otherwise in power and authority were equal to him), that he might intimate and recommend unity to us;° and the other African doctors (Optatus and St. Austin) do commonly harp on the same notion.t Ican discern little solidity in this conceit, and as little harm. However, supposing this primacy (at least in respect to the fathers, who gene- rally seem to countenance it), divers pro- bable reasons may be assigned why it should especially be conferred on St. Peter. || * Σπόπαι τῶν ἀποστόλων τὴν ὁμόνοιαν, αὐτοὶ παρ- αχωροῦσιν αὐτῷ τῆς δημηγορίας, οὐ γὰρ ἔδει πάντας p0éyyec8ar.— Chrys. in Act. ii. 14. ἡ Inter duodecim unus eligitur, ut capite constituto schismatis tolleretur occasio.— Hier. in Jovin. \. cap. 14, t In typo unitatis ——. Aug. de Bapt. iii. 17. || Petrus—natura unus homo erat, gratia unus Christianus, abundantiore gratia unus idemque primus apostolus,—Aug. in Joh. Tract. 123. Peter was by nature one man, by grace one Christian, by a more abundant grace one and the same prime apostle. Ipse enim Petrus in apostolorum ordine primus, in Christi amore 9 Cyp. Ep 73, de Unit. Eccl. &c. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 1. It is probable that St. Peter was first in standing among the apostles; I mean not that he was the first disciple, or first converted to faith in Christ; but first called to the apostolical office ;* or first nominated by our Lord, when out of all his disciples he chose twelve, and called them apostles; Simon, whom he called Peter, and Andrew his brother.” He was one of the first believers at large ; he was perhaps the first that distinctly believed our Lord’s divinity; he was probably the very first apostle; as the fittest person in our Lord’s eye for that employment.t “He,” saith St. Hilary, “did first believe, and is the prince (or first man) of the apostleship.”{ ‘* He,” saith St. Cyprian, ‘* was the first whom the Lord chose.’’|| ‘ He,” saith St. Basil, ““ was by judgment preferred be- fore all the disciples."§ He by other ancients is called “the first fruits of the apostles.”{]— And according to this sense St. Jerome, I suppose, doth call him and his brother Andrew principes aposto- lorum, that is (according to frequent usage of the word princeps in Latin), the first of the apostles. So that as in divers churches (perhaps when time was, in all), anciently, priori- ty in ordination did ground a right to precedence, as it is in ours, with some exception ; so might St. Peter, upon this account of being first ordained apostle, obtain such a primacy. ; 2. St. Peter also might be the first in age; which among persons otherwise equal is a fair ground of preference ; for promptissimus, szpe unus respondet pro omni- bus.—Aug. de verbis Dom. Sup. Matt. 1. Serm. 13. For Peter himself being the first in the order of the apostles, the most forward in the love of Christ, he alone ofttimes answers for all the rest. * ΠΙροτίθησι δὲ Πέτρον καὶ ’Avdpéav, διότι καὶ nowréxAnrot.—Theoph. in Matt. x.] + Γινώσκων τίς ἐν πρώτοις ἄξιος τάττεσθαι, ἐξελ- ἔξατο τὸν Πέτρον ἀρχηγὸν εἶναι Epiph. Heer. li. 17, p. 440. + Primus credidit, et apostolatus est prin- ceps.— Hil. in Matt. Can. 7. || Quem primum Dominus elegit.—Cypr. Ep. 74, p. Tai: ᾧ Ὃ πάντων τῶν μαθητῶν rpoxpOeis.— Bas. de Judicio Dei, tom. il. p. 268. Ἵ ᾿Απαρχὴ τῶν ἀποστόλων. ---- Modest. apud Phot. Cod 275; Clem. ad Jac. P Luke vi. 14; Matt. iv. 18; Marki. 16; Luke v. 3. « Hier. in Jovin. 1. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. he was a married man; and that before he was called, as is intimated in St. Luke ;* and it may be inferred from hence, that he would not have married after that he had left all, and devoted himself to follow our Lord.s| Upon which account of age St. Jerome did suppose that he was preferred before the beloved disciple : “" Why,” saith he,‘* was not St. John elected, being a bachelor? it was deferred to age, because Peter was elder, that a youth, and almost a boy, might not be preferred before men of good age.”* | I know that Epiphanius affirmeth St. Andrew to have been the elder brother ;7 but it doth not appear whether he saith it from conjecture, or upon any other ground. And his authority, although we should suppose it bottomed on tradition, is not great; tradition itself in such matters being very slippery, and often one tradi- tion crossing another. 3. ‘The most eminent qualifications of St. Peter (such as we before described) might procure to him this advantage. They might breed in him an_ honest confidence, pushing him forward on all occasions to assume the former place, and thence by custom to possess it; for qui sibi fidit, dux regit examen it being in all action, as in walking, where he that naturally is most vigorous and active doth go before the rest. They might induce others to ἃ volun- tary concession thereof ;t for to those who indisputably do excel in good quali- ties or abilities, honest and meek per- sons easily will yield precedence, espec- ially on occasions of public concernment ; wherein it is expedient that the best qual- ified persons should be first seen. They probably might also move our Lord himself to settle, or at least to insin- uate this order ; assigning the first place to him, whom he knew most willing to * Sed cur non Joannes electus est virgo? wtati delatum est, quia Petrus senior erat; ne adhyec adolescens et pene puer progress wtatis hominibus preferretur.— Hier. in Jovin. i. 14. + Μικροτέρου ὄντος τοῦ Πέτρου τῷ χρόνῳ τῆς idixias —Ep. Heer. li. 17, p. 440. Peter being the younger in age. t Αὐτοὶ παραχωροῦσιν αὐτῷ, &c.—Chrys. in Act. ii. 14. they yield unto him, &c. ® Luke iv. 38; v. 7. * Matt. xix. 27. * Hor. Ep. i. 19. 79 serve him, and most able io lead on the rest in his service. It is indeed observable, that upon all occasions our Lord signified a particular respect to him, before the rest of his col- leagues ; for to him more frequently than to any of them he directed his discourse ; unto him, by a kind of anticipation, he granted or promised those gifts and privi- leges which he meant to confer on them all; him he did assume as spectator and witness of his glorious transfiguration ; him he picked out as companion and _at- tendant on him in his grievous agony ; his feet he first washed ; to him he did first discover himself after his resurrec- tion (as St. Paul implieth), and with him then he did entertain most discourse, in especial manner recommending to him the pastoral care of his church :" by which manner of proceeding our Lord may seem to have constituted St. Peter the first in order among the aposiles, or sufficiently to have hinted his mind for their direction, admonishing them by his example to ren- der unto-him a special deference. 4. The fathers commonly do attribute his priority tothe merit of his faith and confession wherein he did outstrip his brethren.* ‘ He obtained supereminent glory by the confession of his blessed faith,”’* saith St. Hilary. ‘ Because he alone of all the rest professeth his love (John xxi,), therefore he is preferred above all,”’+ saith St. Ambrose. 5. Constantly in all the catalogues of the apostles St. Peter’s name is set in the front ; and when actions are reported, in which he was concerned jointly with oth- ers, he is usually mentioned first, which seemeth not done without careful design, or special reason.” Upon such grounds it may be reasona- ble to allow St. Petera primacy of order ; such a one as the ringleader hath ina dance, as the primipilar centurion had in the legion, or the prince of the senate * Supereminentem beaie fidei sue ,confes- sione gloriam promeruit.—Hil. de Trin. lib. vi. . 121, 7 1 Ideo quia solus profitetur amorem saum (John xxi.) ex omnibus, omnibus antefertur.— Ambr. in Luc. cap. ult. * Matt. xvi. 16; xvii. 1; xxvi. 37; Jobn xiii. 6; 1 Cor. xv.5; John xxi. * Hil. in Mat. Can. xiv. p. 566. ~ Matt.x.2; Mark iii. 17; Luke vi. 14; Acts i. 12; John xxi. 2 80 had there, in the Roman state; at least, as among earls, baronets, &c. and others co-ordinate in degree, yet one hatha precedence of the rest. IV. As to a primacy importing superi- ority in power, command, or jurisdiction ; this by the Roman party is asserted to St. Peter, but we have great reason to deny it, upon the following considerations. 1. For such a power (being of so great importance) it was needful that a commis- sion from God, its founder, should be grant- ed in downright and perspicuous terms ; that no man concerned in duty grounded thereon, might -have any doubt of it, or excuse for boggling at it; it was necessa- ry, not only for the apostles, to bind and warrant their obedience, but also for us, because it is made the sole foundation of a like duty incumbent on us; which we cannot heartily discharge without being assured of our obligation thereto, by clear revelation, or promulgation of God’s will in the holy scripture ;* for it was of old acurrent,andever will bea true rule, which St. Austin in one case thus express- eth: “I do believe that also on this side there would be most clear authority of the divine oracles, if a man could not be ignorant of it without damage of his sal- vation ;’+ and Lactantius thus: * Those things can have no foundation, or firm- ness, which are not sustained by any oracle of God’s word.”’¢ But apparently no such commission is extant in scripture ; the allegations for it being, as we shall hereafter shew, no- wise clear, nor probably expressive of any such authority granted by God; but on the contrary divers clearer testimonies are producible derogating from it. 2. If so illustrious an office was insti- tuted by our Saviour, it is strange that * It was a reasonable demand, which was made to our Saviour, Tell us by what authority thou doest these things, or who is he that gave thee this authority? (Luke xx. 2;) end the reason- ableness of it our Lord did often avow, declar- ing that if by his doctrine and works he had not vouched the divinity of his authority, it had been no sin to disbelieve or refect him, (John v. 31, 36; x. 25, 37; xv. 22, 24.) + Credo etihm hine divinorum eloquiorum clarissima authoritas esset, si homo sine dis- Wy A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. nowhere in the evangelical or apostolical history (wherein divers acts and passages of smaller moment are recorded) there should be any express mention of that institution ; there being not only much reason for such a report, but many pat occasions for it; the time when St. Peter was vested with that authority ; the man- ner and circumstances of his instalment therein ; the nature, rules, and limits of such an office, had surely well deserved to have been noted, among other occur- rences relating to our faith and discipline, by the holy evangelists ; no one of them, in all probability, could have forborne punctually to relate a matter of so great consequence, as the settlement of a mon- arch in God’s.church, and a sovereign of the apostolical college(from whom so emi- nent authority was to be derived to all posterity, for compliance wherewith the whole church for ever must be accounta- ble) ; particularly it is not credible that St. Luke should quite slip over so notable a passage, who ““ had,” as he telleth us, ** attained a perfect understanding of all things, and had undertaken to write in order the things that were surely believ- ed among Christians’’* in his time; of which things this, if any, was one of the © most considerable. 8. The time of his receiving institution to such authority can hardly be assigned. For was it when he was constituted by our Lord an apostle?’ Then indeed probably he began to obtain all the pri- macy and pre-eminence, he ever had ; but nosuch power doth appear then con- ferred on him, or at any time in our Sav- iour’s life; atleast, if it was, it was so covertly and indiscernibly, that both he himself and all the apostles must be igno- rant thereof, whoa little before our Lord’s passion did more than once earnestly contest about superiority. And itis ob- servable, that whereas our Lord before his passion did carefully teach and press on the apostles the chief duties which they were to observe in their behaviour toward each other; the maintenance of peace, of charity, of unity, of humility toward one another; yet of paying due respect and obedience to this superior he pendio promisse salutis ignorare non posset.— | said nothing to them.” Aug. de Pec. Mer. et Rem. ii. 36. τ Nullum fundamentum aut firmitatem pos- sunt habere, que nullis divinarum vocum ful- eiuntur oraculis.—Lact, vii. 2. * Luke i. 1. y Matt. x. |. * Mark ix. 50; John xiii. 34; xv. 12; xvii. 21; xiii. 14. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. The collation of that power could not well be at any time before the celebra- tion of our Lord’s Supper, because be- fore that time St. Peter was scarce an ecclesiastical person ; at least he was no priest, as the convention of Trent under a curse doth require us to believe ;* for it were strange, that an unconsecrated person, or one who was not so much asa priest, should be endowed with so much spiritual power. After his resurrection, our Lord did give divers common instructions, orders, and commissions to his apostles, but it doth not appear that he did make any pe- culiar grant to St. Peter; for as to the pretence of such an one drawn out of the appendix to St. John’s Gospel, or grounded on the words Pasce oves, we shall afterward declare that to be inva- lid.7 4. If St. Peter had been instituted sov- ereign of the apostolical senate, his of- fice and state had been in nature and kind very distinct from the common of- fice of the other apostles; as_ the office of a king from the office of any subject ; as an ordinary, standing, perpetual, suc- cessive office, from one that is only ex- traordinary, transitory, temporary, per- sonal, and incommunicable (to speak ac- cording to distinctions now in use, and applied to this case ;) whence, probably, as it was expedient to be, it would have been signified by some distinct name, or title, characterizing it, and distinguishing it from others; as that of arch-apostle, arch-pastor, high priest, sovereign pontiff, pope, his holiness, the vicar of Christ, or the like; whereby it might have appear- ed that there was such an officer, what the nature of his office was, what spec- ialty of respect and obedience was due to him: but no such name or title (upon any occasion) was assumed by him, or was by the rest attributed to him, or in history is recorded concerning him; the * Si quis dixerit, illis verbis, Hoc facite in meam commemorationem, Christum non _ insti- tuisse apostolos sacerdotes anathema sit. Conc. Trid. sess. xxii. can. ἃ, If any one shall say that in those words, Do this in remembrance of me, Christ did not ordain his apostles priests let him be accursed, t "Evrec\dpevots τοῖς ἀποστόλοις Acts i. 2; John xx. 21; Matt, xxviii, 19; Luke xxiv. 49; Mark xvi. 15. 1} Vou. ἮΙ. 81 name of an apostle being all that he took on him, or by others was given to him. 5. There was indeed no office above that of an apostle known to the apostles, or to the primitive church; this, saith St. Chrysostom, ‘ was the greatest authori- ty,” and ‘the top of authorities ;” there was, saith he, ‘‘ none before an apostle, none superior, none equal to him :”* this he asserteth of all the apostles, this he particularly applieth to St. Paul; this he demonstrateth from St. Paul himself, who purposely enumerating the chief officers instituted by God in his church, doth place apostles in the highest rank; Our Lord, saith St. Paul, gave some apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers ; and God hath set some in his church, first apostles, secon- darily prophets, thirdly teachers; πρῶ- τον ἀποσιόλους ;* why not first a pope, an universal pastor, an cecumenical judge, a vicar of Christ, a head of the catholic church? Could St. Paul be so ignorant, could he be so negligent or so envious, as to pass by, without any distinction, the supreme officer, if such a one then had been? As put case, that one should undertake to recite the officers in any state, or republic, would he not do strangely, if he should pretermit the king, the duke, the consul, the major thereof? Would not any one, confiding in the skill, diligence, and integrity of such a relator, be induced from such an omission to believe there was no such of- ficer there ? St. Chrysostom therefore did hence very rationally infer, that the apos- tolical office was the supreme in the Christian state, having no other superior to it. St. Peter, therefore, was no more than an apostle; and as such he could have no command over those who were in the same highest rank co-ordinate to him, and who as apostles could not be subject to any. % ᾿Αρχὴ μεγίστη" κορυφὴ τῶν dpyav.—Chrys. tom. vill. p. 114. Eldes ὑψηλὸν καθήμενον τὸν ἀπόστολον, καὶ οὐδένα πρὸ ἐκείνου ὄντα, οὔτε ἀνώτερον. Ibid. "Τῶν δὲ ἀποστόλων ἴσος οὐδεὶς γέγονεν.---- Chrys. tom, v. Or. 33. Αὐτοῦ τοῦ Παύλου ἀκού- σαμεν ἀριθμοῦντος τὰς ἀρχὰς, καὶ ἐν τῷ ὑψηλοτέρῳ χωρίῳ τὴν ἀποστολικὴν xadifovros.—Chrys. tom. vill. ubi supra. We have heard Paul himself reckoning up powers or authorities, and plac- ing the apostolical in the highest place, * Eph. iv. 11; 1 Cor. xii. 28. 82 6. Our Lord himself, at several times, declared against this kind of primacy, in- stituting equality among his apostles, pro- hibiting them to affect, to seek, to as- sume, or admit a superiority of power one above another. There was (saith St. Luke, among the twelve, at the participation of the holy sup- per) a strife among them, who of them should be accounted the greatest,* or who had the best pretence to superiority: this strife our Lord presently did check and quash; but how? not by telling them, that he already had decided the case in appointing them a superior, but rather by assuring them that he did intend none such to be; that he would have no mon- archy, no eXercise of any dominion or authority by one among them over the rest:+ but that notwithstanding any ad- vantages one might have before the oth- er (as greater in gifts, or as preceding in any respect), they should be one as another, all humbly condescending to one another, each being ready to yield help and service to one another:t The kings (said he) of the Gentiles exercise lord- ship over them; and they that exercise authority over them are called benefac- tors; but ye shall not be so; but he that is greater among you, let him be as the younger ;\| and he that is leader as he that doth minister ;\" that is, whatever privilege any of you obtaineth, let it not be employed in way of command, but rather of compliance and subserviency, as occasion shall require; let him not pretend to be a superior, but rather be- have himself as an inferior: thus our Lord did smother the debate, by remov- * Luke xxi. 14, 24.—Tis αὐτῶν δοκεῖ εἶναι είζων. + So doth St. Clemens interpret μείζων, allud- ing to this place. ὁ "Hr τις πιστὸς, ἤτω δυνατὸς γνῶσιν ἐξειπεῖν, ἤτω σοφὸς ἐν διακρίσει λόγων, ἤτω γοργὸς ἐν ἔργοις, τοσούτῳ μᾶλλον ταπεινοφρονεῖν ὀφείλει, ὅσῳ δοκεῖ μᾶλλον μείζων εἶναι" καὶ ζητεῖν τὸ κοινωφελὲς πᾶσιν, μὴ τὸ Eavrod.—Clem. ad Corinth. 1. 48; apud Clem. Alex. Strom. vi. p. 647. Let aman be faithful, let him be powerful in declaring knowl- edge, let him be wise in discovering reasons, let him be strenuous in works, by so much the more ought he tobe humble-minded, by how much the more he seems to be greater than others; and to seek the common benefit of all, and not of himself, || ὁ μείζων. * Luke xxii. 25, 26. ᾧ ὁ ἡγούμενος. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ing from among them whatever great- ness any of them did affect or pretend to; forbidding that any of them should κυριεύειν, or ἐξουσιάζειν, exercise any dominion or authority over the rest, as worldly princes did over their subjects. Again, upon another occasion (as the circumstances of the place do imply), when two of the apostles (of special worth and consideration with our Lord, St. James and St. John, the sons of Zeb- edee) did affect a pre-eminence over the rest, requesting of our Lord, Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in thy glory (orin thy kingdom,° as St. Matthew hath it; that is, in that new state, which they conceived our Lord was ready to introduce ;) which request doth not seem to import any great mat- ter of authority ; nor probably did they desire so much, as our adversaries do give to St. Peter ; yet our Lord doth not oply reject their suit, but generally de- clareth, that none of them were capable of such a preferment in his kingdom ; which therein differed from worldly do- minion, because in it there was no room for such an ambition; especially in that state of things wherein the apostles were to be placed; which was a state of un- dergoing persecutions, not of enjoying dignity, or exercising command; all the preferment which they reasonably could aspire to being to be dispensed in the fu- ture state (whereof they were not aware), according to God’s preparation, in cor- respondence to the patience and industry any of them should exert in God’s ser- vice ; (upon which account St. Chrysos- tom saith), ‘It was a clear case that St. Paul should obtain the preference.”’* It was indeed (as our Lord intimateth) incongruous for those, who had forsaken all things for Christ, who hadembraced a condition of disgrace, who were design- ed, by self-denial, humility, neglect of temporal grandeur, wealth, and honour, by undergoing persecution, and under- taking conformity to our Lord (being baptized with the baptism with which he was baptised), to propagate the faith of a crucified Master, to seek or take on them authoritative dignity; for among them * Τυύδηλον ὅτι τῆς ἀνωτάτω ἀπολαύσεται τιμῆς καὶ mpoedotas.—Chrys. tom. v. Or, 33. ὁ Mark x. 37; Matt. xx. 25. oe A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. there could not well be any need of com- manding or being commanded; it was more fit, that all of them should con- spire to help and serve one another, in promoting the common design and ser- vice of their Lord, with mutual conde- scension and compliance; which was the best way of recommending them- selves to his acceptance, and obtaining from him answerable reward.* Such was the drift of our Lord’s discourse; whereunto (as in the other case) he did annex the prohibition of exercising do- minion: Ye know (saith he) that the princes of nations exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exer- cise authority upon them; but it shall not be so among you; but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will be first among you, let him be your servant ;' “Os ἐὰν θέλη, whoever among you hath a mind to special grandeur and pre-emi- nence, let him understand that there is no other to be attained, beside that which resulteth from the humble performance of charitable offices to his brethren: the which whoever shall best discharge, he alone will become greatest and highest in the eye of God. Again, at another time, the apostles dreaming of a secular kingdom to be erected by our Lord, disputed among themselves who should be the greatest ;* and for satisfaction presumed to inquire of our Lord about it ; when, as they sure- ly were very ignorant of St. Peter’s be- ing their head, so there was a fair occa- sion as could be of our Lord’s instruct- ing them in that point, and enjoining their duty towards him; but he did not so, but rather taught him, together with the rest, not to pretend to any such thing, as preferment above the rest: He silting down called the twelve, and said unto them, If any one desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all. How could he (considering the oc- casion and circumstances of that speech) in plainer terms establish equality, or dis- countenance any claim to superiority * Τότε ἡ ἐπιστασία ἣν οὐ τιμή. ἀλλὰ πρόνοια τῶν ἀρχομένων, &c.—Chrys. in Act. i. 6. hen the government was not an honour, but a provi- dent care of the governed, &c. 4 Matt. xx. 25, 26, 27. * Mark ix. 34; Luke ix. 46; Matt. xviii. 1. € Mark ix. 35. among them? Had St. Peter then ad- vanced such a plea, as they now affirm of right belonging to him, would he not thereby have depressed and debased him- self to the lowest degree ? To impress this rule, our Lord then calling a little child, did set him in the midst of them, telling them, thgt except they were converted (from such ambitious pretences), and became like little children (wholly void of such conceits) they could not enter into the kingdom of heaven ; that is, could not in effect be so much as ordinary good Christians ; adjoining, that whosoever should humble himself as did that little child (not affecting, or assum- ing more than such an innocent did), should be greatest in the kingdom of heaven ;* in real worth, and in the fa- vour of God, transcending the rest: so that St. Peter, claiming superiority to himself, would have forfeited any title to eminency among Christians. Again, as to the power which is now ascribed to St. Peter by the party of his pretended successors, we may argue from another place ; where our Saviour pro- hibiting his disciples to resemble the Jew- ish Scribes and Pharisees in their ambi- tious desires and practices, their affecta- tions of pre-eminence, their assuming places and titles importing difference of rank and authority, he saith, But be ye not called Rabbi: for there is one master (one Guide or Governor) of you, even Christ ; but ye are brethren. How more pregnantly could he have declared the nature of his constitution, and the relation of Christians one to another es- tablished therein, to exclude such differ- ences of power, whereby one doth in way of domination impose his opinion or his will on others ! Ye are all fellow-scholars, fellow-ser- vants, and fellow-children of God; it therefore doth not beegme you to be any- wise imperious over one another}; but all of you humbly and lovingly to con- spire in learning and observing the pre- * Kai τοῖς περὶ πρωτείων φιλονεικοῦσι γνωρίμοις μετὰ ἁπλότητος τὴν ἰσότητα παρεγγυᾷ, λέγων ὡς τὰ παιδία αὐτοὺς γενέσθαι detv.—Clem. Alex. Strem. v. (p. 660. [663].) And tothose familiar friends striving for the preeminence, he commends equality together with simplicity, saying, that they ought to become as little children. © Matt. xxiii. 8,—els καθηγητής. 84 cepts of your common Lord; the doing which is backed with a promise and a threat suitable to the purpose: He that exalteth himself shall be abased ; and he that will abase himself shall be exalted ; the which sentences are to be interpreted according to the intent of the rules fore- going. If it be said, that such discourse doth impugn all ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; I answer, that indeed thereby is removed all such haughty and harsh rule, which some have exercised over Christians; that αὐθεντία (arbitrary power); that ἐξουσία ἀνεύθυνος (absolute, wncontroll- able authority) ; that τυραννικὴ προνομία (tyrannical prerogative), of which the Fathers complain; that κατακυριεύειν τῶν κλήρων (domineering over their charges), which St. Peter forbiddeth." “We” (saith St. Chrysostom) “" were designed to teach the word, not to ex- ercise empire or absolute sovereignty ; we do bear the rank of advisers, exhort- ing to duty.’* A bishop, saith St. Jerome, differeth from a king, in that a bishop “ presideth over those that are willing,” the king “ὁ against their will : ὁ (that is, the bish- op’s governance should be so gentle and easy, that men hardly can be unwilling to comply with it; but should obey, as St. Peter exhorteth (υὐκ ἀναγκαστῶς, ἀλλ᾽ ἑκουσίως, not by constraint, but of their own accord ;)' and, ‘ Let’ (saith he) “the bishops be content with their honour ; let them know themselves to be fathers, not lords; they should be loved, not feared.”’¢ And, “Thou” (saith St. Bernard to Pope Eugenius) “dost superintend, the name of bishop signifying to thee not do- minion, but duty.”’|| * Eis διδασκαλίαν λόγου προεχειρίσθημεν, οὐκ εἰς ἀρχὴν, οὐδὲ εἰς αὐθεντίαν' συμθούλων τάξιν ἐπέχομεν napawoovrwv.—Chrys. in Eph. Or. 11. + Ile enim nolentibus preest, hic volenti- bus.— Hier. Ep. 3, ad Nepot. ἀξ; μέντοι éxév- των ὀφείλαν ἄρχειν, &c.—Chrys. in Tit. 1. 7. He ought to rule them so as they may be willing to be ruled, &c. +t Sed contenti sint honore suo; patres se sciant esse non dominos ——. flier. Ep. 62, ad Theoph. cap.3. Amari parens, et episcopus debet, non timeri.—Jhid. cap. 1. || Inde denique superintendis, sonante tibi 5 Chrys. in 1 Tim. iii. 1; in Eph. Or. 11: Isid. Pel. Ep. iv. 219; ii, 125; Greg. Naz. Or. 28; 1 Pet. v. 3. 1 Pet. v. 2, 3. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. At least those precepts of our Lord do exclude that power which is ascribed to St. Peter over the apostles themselves, the which indeed is greater than in likeli- hood any Pharisee did ever affect; yea in many respects doth exceed any do- mination which hath been claimed or usurped by the most absolute monarch upon earth; for the power of St. Peter in their opinion was the same which now the Roman bishop doth challenge to him- self over the pastors and people of God’s church, by virtue of succession to him (St. Peter’s power being the base of the papal, and therefore not narrower than its superstructure ;) but what domination comparable to that hath ever been used in the world ? What emperor did ever pretend toa rule so wide in extent (in regard either to persons or matters), or so absolute in effect ? Whoever, beside his holiness, did usurp a command, not only over the external actions, but the most inward cogitations of all mankind; subjecting the very minds and consciences of men to his dictates, his laws, his censures ? Who ever thundered curses and dam- nations on all those who should presume to dissent from his opinion, or to contest his pleasure ? Who ever claimed more absolute pow- er, in making, abolishing, suspending laws, or imposing upon men what he pleased, under obligation of conscience, and upon extremest penalties ? What prince ever used a style more imperious, than is that which is usual in the papal bulls: ‘“ Let it be lawful for no man whatever to infringe this expression of our will and command, or to go against it with bold rashness.”’”* What Domitian more commonly did admit the appellation of lord, than doth the pope? ‘* Our most holy lord,”? is the ordinary style attributed to him by the Fathers of Trent, as if they were his slaves, and intended to enslave all Chris- tendom to him. episcopi nomine non dominium, sed officium.— Bern. de Consid. ii. 6. * Nulli hominum liceat hane paginam nos- tree voluntatis et mandati infringere, vel ei au- su temerario contraire. + Sanctissimus dominus noster, — Concil. Trid. sess. xxii. cap. 11, &c, A TREATISE OF THE Who ever did exempt his clients and dependents in all nations from subjection to civil laws, from undergoing common burdens and taxes, from being judged or punished for their misdemeanours and crimes ? Who ever claimed a power to dispose of all things one way or other, either di- rectly or indirectly ? to dispose even of kingdoms, to judge sovereign princes, and to condemn them, to depose them from their authority, absolving their subjects from all allegiance to them, and expos- ing their kingdoms to rapine ? To whom but a pope were ever as- cribed prerogatives like those of judging all men, and himself being liable to no judgment, no account, no reproof or blame ; so that, as a papal canon assur- eth us, “ Let a pope be so bad, as by his negligence and maladministration to carry with him innumerable people to hell, yet no mortal man whatever must presume here to reprove his faults; because he being to judge all men, is himself to be judged of no man, except he be catched ’ swerving from the faith ;’* which is a case they will hardly suffer a man to sup- pose possible. To whom but to a pope was such power attributed by his followers, and admitted by himself, that he could hear those words applying to him, “all power is given to thee in heaven and in earth ?”+ Such power the popes are wont to challenge, and when occasion serveth do not fail to execute, as successors of St. Peter τῇ to whom therefore consequently they ascribe it : and sometimes in express terms; asin that brave apostrophe of Pope Gregory VII. (the spirit of which pope hath possessed his successors gene- rally :) ‘*Go to therefore” (said he, di- recting his speech to St. Peter and St. Paul), “ most holy princes of the apos- tles, and what I have said confirm by your authority; that now at length all men may understand, whether ye can bind and loose; that also ye can take away and give on earth, empires, * Si papa sum, &c.—Grat. Dist. x). cap. 6. t+ Conci!. Lat. Sub Leone X. sess. xi. p. 133, (in Or. Archiep. Patrac.) ¢ Hac itaque fiducia fretus, &e.—Excommun. Henrici R. in Concil. Rom. iii. sub, Greg. VII. apud Bin. tom. vii. p. 484. POPE’S SUPREMACY. 85 kingdoms, and whatever mortal men can have.””* Now if the assuming and exercising such powers be not that κατακυριεύειν, and κατεξουσιάζειν, that exalting one’s self, that being called rabbi, father, mas- ter, which our Lord prohibiteth, what is so? what then can those words signify’? what could our Lord mean ? The authority, therefore, which they assign to St. Peter, and assume to them- selves from him, is voided by those dec- larations and precepts of our Lord; the which it can hardly be well conceived that our Lord would have proposed, if he had designed to constitute St. Peter in such a supremacy over his disciples and church. 7. Surveying particulars. we shall not find any peculiar administration commit- ted to St. Peter, nor any privilege con- ferred on him, which was not also grant- ed to the other apostles. Was St. Peter an ambassador, a stew- ard, a minister, a vicar (if you please), or surrogate of Christ - so were they, by no less immediate and express warrant than he; for, as the Father sent me, so also I send you, said our Lord presently before his departure ; by those words, as St. Cyprian remarketh, “ὁ granting an equal power to all the apostles : ἢ and, We (saith St. Paul) are ambassadors for Christ ; we pray you in Christ's stead, be reconciled to God ; and, So let a man esteem us, as the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.i Was St. Peter a rock, on which the church was to be founded? Be itso; but no less were they all; for the wall of Jerusalem, which came down from heaven, had twelve foundations, on which were inscribed the names of the tvelve apostles of the Lamb; and, We (saith St. Paul) are all built upon the founda- tion of the prophets and apostles, Christ himself being the chief corner stone ;* whence ‘‘ equally” (saith St. Jerome) * Agite apostolorum sanctissimi principes, &e.— Plat. in Greg VII In Concil. Rom. vi. apud Bin. p. 491, + Et quamvis apostolis onynibus post resur- rectionein suam parem potestatem tribuat et dicat, Sicut, &c.—Cypr. de Un. Ecel. p. 195. } 2 Cor. v.20; 1 Cor. iv. 1; 2 Cor. vi. 4. k Matt. xvi. 18; Rev. xxi. 10,14; Eph. ii. 20, 86 “the strength of the church is settled upon them.”* Was St. Peter an architect of the spzr- atual house (as himself calleth the church ?) so were also they ; for I (saith St. Paul) as a wise masterbuilder, have laid the foundation.' Were the keys of the church (or of the kingdom of heaven") committed to him? so also were they unto them: they had a power to open and shut it by ef- fectual instruction and persuasion, by dis- pensation of the sacraments, by exercise of discipline, by exclusion of scandalous and heretical persons; whatever faculty the keys did import, the apostles did use it in the foundation, guidance, and gov- ernment of the church; and did (as the Fathers teach (impart it to those whom they did in their stead constitute to feed and govern the church. Had St. Peter a power given him of binding and loosing effectually ? so had they, immediately granted by our Sav- iour, in as full manner, and couched in in the same terms: Jf thou shalt bind on earth, it shall be bound in heaven, said our Lord to him; and, Whatsoever things ye shall bind on earth, they shall be bound in heaven," said the same divine mouth to them.7 Had he a privilege to remit and retain sins? it was then by virtue of that com- mon grant or promise; Whose soever sens ye remit, they shall be remitted ; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are re- tained.° Had he power and obligation to feed the sheep of Christ (all or some?) so had they indefinitely and immediately : so had others by authority derived from them ; who were nominated pastor ; who had this charge laid on them: Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you * Ex equo super eos ecclesiz fortitudo soli- datur.— Hier. in Jovin, i. 14. t "Ore ye καὶ τοῖς dn’ ἐκείνων τὸ ἀρχιερατικὸν κατὰ διαδοχὴν περιθεδλημένοις ἀξίωμα, τὴν αὐτὴν προσεῖναι τοῦ δεσμεῖν καὶ λύειν ἐξουσίαν πιστεύομεν. —Phot. Cod. 280, p. 1600. ‘Those who, by suc- cession from them (viz. the apostles), were en- dowed with episcopal authority, we believe to have the same power of binding and loosing. ! 1 Peter 11.5; 1 Cor. iti. 10. m Matt. xvi. 19. » Matt. xvi. 19; xviil. 18. * John xx. 23. ee er ee ae Ten NNT ᾿ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood; whom he doth himself exhort, Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof :* let feeding signify what it can, instruction, or guidance, or governance, or all of them together (Regio more impera, if you please, as Bellarmine will have it), it did appertain to their charge; to teach was a common duty, to lead and to rule were common functions ; St. Peter could not, nor would not appropriate it to him- self; it is his own exhortation, when he taketh most upon him, Be mindful of the commandment (or precept) of ws the apostles of the Lord and Saviour.‘ Was his commission universal, or un- limited ? so was theirs, by the same im- mediate authority; for, All power (said he to them, when he gave his last charge) is given to me in heaven and in earth; go therefore, and teach all na- tions, baptizing them, and teaching them to observe all things whaisoever I com- mand you; and, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” They, as St. Chrysostom speaketh, ἐς were all in common intrusted with the whole world, and had the care of all na- tions.’”* Was he furnished with extraordinary gifts, with special graces, with continual directions and asistance for the discharge of the apostolical office ? so were they ; for the promise was common of sending the Holy Spirit, to lead them into all truth, and, clothing them with the power from on high ;* and of endowing them with power to perform all sorts of mi- raculous works ; our Lord before his de- parture breathed into them, and said, re- ceive ye the Holy Ghost; All of them (saith St. Luke) were filled with the Holy Ghost ; all of them with confidence and truth could say, it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us ;‘ all of them did abundantly partake of that character * Τ]άντες κοινῇ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐμπιστευθέντες .----- Chrys. tom. vill. p. 115; tom. ν. Orat. 47, in 2 Cor. xi. 28. Pp Eph. iv. 11; Acts xx. 28; 1 Pet. v. 2. 4 2 Pet. in, 2. r Matt. xxviii. 19; Mark xvi. 15; Luke xxiv. 47, * Luke xxiv. 49; John xvi. 13, 14, 26. Δ John xx. 22; Acts ii. 4; xv. 28. ᾿ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. which St. Paul respected, when he did say, The signs of an apostle were among you, in signs and won- ders, and mighty deeds." Did St. Peter represent the church as receiving privileges in its behalf; as the Fathers affirm ?* so did they, according to the same. Fathers: “If therefore” saith St. Austin, citing the famous place, Sicut me misit Pater) “they did bear the person of the church, and this was said to them, as if it were said to the church itself, then the peace of the church remitteth sins.” . What singular prerogative then can imagined appertaining to St. Peter ? what substantial advantage could he pretend to beyond the other apostles? Nothing surely doth appear; whatever the pat- rons of his supremacy do claim for him is precariously assumed, without any fair colour of proof; he for it is beholden, not to any testimony of holy scripture, but to the invention of Roman fancy : we may well infer with Cardinal Cusa- nus ; “* We know that Peter did not re- ceive more power from Christ than the other apostles ; for nothing was said to Peter which was not also said to the oth- er: therefore” (addeth he) “ we rightly say that all the apostles were equal to Peter in power.” 8. Whereas St. Peter himself did write two Catholic Epistles, there doth not in them appear any intimation, any air or savour of pretence to this arch- apostoiical power. It is natural for per- sons endowed with unquestionable au- thority (howsoever otherwise prudent and modest), to discover a spice thereof in the matter or in the style of their writ- ing; their mind, conscious of such ad- vantage, will suggest an authoritative way of expression; especially when they earnestly exhort, or seriously reprove, in * Cui totins ecclesie figuram gerenti, &c.— Aug. Ep. 165. + Ergo si personam gerebant ecclesia, et sic eis hoc dictum est, tanquam ipsi ecclesie dice- retur, pax ecclesie dimittit peccata, &c.— Aug. de Bapt. cont. Dom. iii. 18. ¢ Scimus quod Petrus nihil plus potestatis a Christo recepit aliis apostolis; nihil enim dic- tam est ad Petram, quod aliis etiam dictum non est. Ideo recte dicimus omnes apostolos esse mquales cum Petro in potestate—Card, Cus. de Conc. Cath. ii. 13. « 2 Cor. xii. 12. 87 which cases their very authority isa considerable motive to assent or compli- ance, and strongly doth impress any other arguments ; but no critic perusing those Epistles would smell a pope in them. The speech of St. Peter, although press- ing his doctrine with considerations of this nature, hath no tang of such au- thority. The elders (saith he) which are among you, I exhort, who also am an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shail be revealed :* by such excellent but com- mon advantages of his person and office, he presseth on the clergy his advices. Had he been what they make him, he might have said, I, the peculiar vicar of Christ, and sovereign of the apostles, do not only exhort, but require this of you: this language had been very proper, and no less forcible: but nothing like this, nothing of the spirit and majesty of a pope, is seen in his discourse; there is no ὁ“ pagina nostre voluntatis et manda- ti,”” which now is the papal style; when he speaketh highest, it is in the common name of the apostles, Be mindful (saith he) of the command (that is, of the doc- trine and precepts) of us, the apostles of the Lord and Saviour. 9. In the apostolical history, the prop- er place of exercising this power (** where- in,’ as St. Chrysostom saith, “" we may see the predictions of Christ, which he uttered in the Gospels, reduced to act, and the truth of them shining in the things themselves,”)* no footstep thereof doth appear. We cannot there discern that St. Peter did assume any extraordinary authority, or that any deference by his brethren was rendered to him, as to their gover- nor or judge. No instance there doth occur of his laying commands on any one apostle, or exercising any act of ju- risdiction upon any one; but rather to the contrary divers passages are observable, which argue, that he pretended to no such thing, and that others did not under- stand any such thing belonging to him. * Kai γὰρ τὰς προῤῥήσεις ἃς ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελίοις δ Χριστὸς προαναφωνεῖ, ταύτας cis ἔργον ἐνταῦθά εο- τιν ἰδεῖν, καὶ ix’ αὐτῶν τῶν πραγμάτων διαλάμπουσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν. --- ΟἾΤΥ5. in Act. 1. * 1 Pet. v. 1. Ἢ τῆς ἐντολῆς.---ὦ Pet. iti. 2. 88 His temper indeed and zeal commonly did prompt. him to be most forward in speaking and acting upon any emergency for the propagation or maintenance of the gospel ;* and the memory of the par- ticular charge which our Lord departing had lately put on him, strongly might in- stigate him thereto; regard to his special gifts and sufficiency did incline the rest willingly to yield that advantage to him ; and perhaps because, upon the considera- tions before touched, they did allow some preference in order to him; but in other respects, as to the main administration of things, he “is but one among the rest.’”’t not taking upon him in his speech or be- havior beyond others. All things are transacted by common agreement, and in the name of all concurring; no appeal in cases of difference is made singly to him ; no peremptory decision or decree is made by him; no orders are issued out by him alone, or in a special way ; in ecclesiasti- cal assemblies he acteth but as one mem- ber; in deliberations he doth only pro- pound his opinion, and passeth a single vote; his judgment and practice are sometime questioned, and he is put to render an account of them: he doth not stand upon his authority, but assigneth reasons to persuade his opinion, and justi- fy his actions; yea sometimes he is mov- ed by the rest, receiving orders and em- ployment from them: these things we may discern by pamelgaring the instances which follow. In the designation of a new apostle to supply the place of Judas, he did indeed suggest the matter, and lay the case be- fore them ; he first declared his sense ; but the whole company did choose two, and referred the determination of one to lot, or to God’s arbitration.* * ‘Os θερμὸς, καὶ ὡς ἐμπιστευθεὶς παρὰ τοῦ Χρις- τοῦ τὸ ποιμνίον, και ὡς τοῦ χοροῦ πρῶτος ἀεὶ πρότερος ἄρχεται τοῦ λόγου.---ΟἾΓΥ 5. in Act. i. 15. As being ἃ man hot and earnest, and as intrusted with a flock by Christ, and as the foreman of the company, he ever begins to speak. Eixé- τως ταῦτα ἐγένετο διὰ τὴν ἀρετὴν τοῦ ἀνδρὸς . In Act. i.26. Probably so it fell out by reason of the signal virtue of the man. { "Erepds τις τῶν an’ ἐκείνου τοῦ xop0d.—Chrys. de Sacerd. Or. 4. t "Opa δὲ αὐτὸν μετὰ κοινὴς πάντα ποιοῦντα γνώ- μῆς" οὐδὲν αὐθεντικῶς, οὐδὲ ἀρχικῶς. —Chrys. in Act. i. 1@. Behold him doing all things by common consent; nothing authoritatively nor imperiously. * Acts i. 15, 26, 23, καὶ ἔστησαν die. Se A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. At the institution of deacons, the twelve did call the multitude of disciples, and directed them to elect the persons ; and the proposal being acceptable to them, it was done accordingly ; they chose Ste- phen, &c.¥ whom they set before the apostles, and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them.’’* In that important transaction about the observance of Mosaical institutions, a great stir and debate being started,t which St. Paul and St. Barnabas by disputation could not appease, what course was then taken? Did they appeal to St. Peter, as to the supreme dictator and judge of con- troversies ? Not so; but they sent to the apostles and elders at Jerusalem, to in- quire about the question; when those great messengers were arrived there, they were received by the church, and the apostles, and elders ; and having made their report, the apostles and elders did assemble to consider about that matter.” In this assembly, after much debate pass- ed, and that many had freely uttered their sense, St. Peter rose up, with apos- tolical gravity, declaring what his reason and experience did suggest conducing to a resolution of the point; whereto his words might indeed be much available, grounded, not only upon common reason, but upon special revelation concerning the case ; whereupon St. James, alleging that revelation, and backing it with rea- son drawn from scripture, with much authority pronounceth his judgment: Therefore (saith he) I judge (that is, saith St. Chrysostom, I authoritively sayt) that we trouble not them, who from among the Gentiles are turned to God ; but that we write unto them, &c.* And the result was, that according to the proposal of St. James, it was by general consent de- termined to send a decretal letter unto the Gentile Christians, containing a can- on, or advice directive of their practice in the case: It then seemed good to (or was decreed by) the apostles and elders, with the whole church, 1o send—and the * Acts vi. 5, καὶ ἤρεσεν ὃ λόγος ἐνώπιον παντὸς τοῦ πλήθους" καὶ ἐξελέξαντο Στέφανον, ke. 7 Acts xv. 2.—Devopéves στάσεως, καὶ συζητή- σεως οὐκ ὀλίγης. $ Διὸ ἐγὼ κρίνω. —Acts. xv. 19. Τί ἐστι κρί- vw ἐγώ ; ἀντὶ τοῦ per’ ἐξουσίας λέγω τοῦτο elvat.— Chrys. Y Acts vi. 2. * Acts xv. 13—18. 5. Acts xv. 2, 4, 6, 7. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. letterran thus: The apostles, and elders, and brethren, to the brethren of the Gen- tiles,* Now in all this action (in this leading precedent for the management of things in ecclesiastical synods and consistories), where can the gharpest sight descry any mark of distinction or pre-eminence which St. Peter had in respect to the other apostles? Did St. Peter there anywise behave himself like his pretended successors upon such oc- casions ? what authority did he claim or use before that assembly, or in it, or after it? Did he summon or convocate it? No; they met upon common agreement. Did he preside there ὃ No; but rather St. James, “ to whom” (saith St. Chry- sostom), “‘as bishop of Jerusalem, the government was committed.”+ Did he offer to curb or check any man, or to restrain him from his liberty of discourse there ὃ No; ‘* there was much disputa- tion,” every man frankly speaking his sense. Did he more than use his freedom of speech becoming an apostle, in argu- ing the case and passing his vote? No; for in so exact a relation nothing more doth appear. Did he form the definitions, or pronounce the decree resulting? No; St. James rather did that ; for (as anan- cient author saith) ““ Peter did make an oration, but St. James’ did enact the law.”{ Was, beside his suffrage in the debate, any singular approbation requir- ed from him, or did he by any bull con- firm the decrees ? No such matter; these were devices of ambition, creeping on and growing up to the pitch where they now are. In short, doth any thing cor- respondent to papal pretences appear as- sumed by St. Peter, or deferred to him ? If St. Peter was sucha man as they make him, how wanting then was he to himself, how did he neglect the right and dignity of his office, in not taking more * Τότε ἔδοξε rots dec.—Acts xv. 22. Ta déy- para τὰ κεκριμένα ὑπὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων, καὶ τῶν πρεσ- 6uripwy.— Acts XVi. 4. ἸΚρίναντες ἡμεῖς ἐπεστεί- Aapev.— Acts xxi. 25. + ᾿Ιάκωδυς ὃ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ Ἰζυρίου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν τότε ἑπεσκόπευεν ἐν ἀρχὴ τὴν ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις, καὶ τῶν ἐξ ᾿Ιουδαίων πιστευσάντων προειστήκει πάντων .---- Chrys. tom. v. Or. 59. 'Exeivos γὰρ ἦν τὴν dp- xiv ἐγκεχειρισμένος ἐν δυναστεία hy, — Chrys. in loc. For he had the government committed to him—he was empowered. $ Πέτρος drpmyopet, ἀλλ᾽ ᾿Ιάκωδος vopoOeret.— Hesych. apad Phot, Cod, 275. Vor. Il. 12 upon him, upon so illustrious an occasion, the greatest he did ever meet with ? How defective also were the apostolical college, and the whole church of Jerusa- lem, in point of duty and decency, yield- ing no more deference to their sovereign, the vicar of their Lord! Whatever ac- count may be framed of these defail- ances, the truth is, that St. Peter then did know his own place and duty better than men do know them now ; and the rest as well understood how it became them to demean themselves. St. Chrysostom’s reflections on those passages are very good ; that indeed then “there was no fastuousness in the church,” and “ the souls of those primitive Christians were clear of vanity : ἢ ἢ the which dispositions did afterward spring up and grow rankly to the great prejudice of religion, beget- ting those exorbitant pretences which we now disprove. Again, when St. Peter, being warned from heaven thereto, did receive Corne- lius, a Gentile soldier, unto communion ;° divers good Christians, who were igno- rant of the warrantableness of that pro- ceeding (as others commonly were, and St. Peter himself was, before he was informed by that special revelation), did not fear διακρίνεσθαι πρὸς αὐτὸν, to con- test with him about it ;° not having any notion (as it seemeth) of his supreme unaccountable authority (not to say of that infallibility, with which the canonists and Jesuits have invested him;) unto whom St. Peter rendereth a fair account, and maketh a satisfactory apology for his proceedings ;* not brow-beating those audacious contenders with his authority, but gently satisfying them with reason. But if he had known his power to be such, as now they pretend it to be, he should have done well to have asserted it, even out of good-will and charity to " * Οὕτως οὐδεὶς τῦφος ἣν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ" ofrws καθαρὰ δόξης ἣν αὐτῶν ἡ Woxh.—Chrys. ibid. t “Opa τὸ ἄτυφον καὶ dxevédogov,—épa πῶς ἀπολο- γεῖται, καὶ οὐκ ἀξιοῖ τῷ τοῦ διδασκάλου ἀξιώματι κε- χρῆσθαι.---ΟἼγγ5. See how free he is from pride and vain-glory ; see how he excuses himself, and thinks himself not worthy to have the hon- our of a master. > Acts x. 28. Kai ἐμοὶ ὁ θεὸς Mderke—Acts xi. 12 ὁ Acts xi. 2; Bell. de Pont, Rom. iv, 3, 4; Acts xi. 18. 90 those good brethren ;* correcting their error, and checking their misdemeanour ; shewing them what an enormous pre- sumption it was so to contend with their sovereign pastor and judge. Further ; so far was St. Peter from as- suming command over his brethren, that he was upon occasion ready to obey their orders ; as we may see by that passage, where, upon the conversion of divers per- sons in Samaria, it is said, that the apostles hearing it, did send to them Peter and John, who going down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost.’ The apostles sent him: that, had he been their sovereign, would have been some- what unseemly and presumptuous ; for subjects are not wont to send their prince, or soldiers their captain; to be sent be- ing a mark of inferiority, as our Lord himself did teach: A servant (saith he) is not greater than his lord; nor he that is sent greater than he that sent him.° St. Luke therefore should at least have so expressed this passage, that the apos- tles might have seemed to keep their dis- tance, and observed good manners; if he had said, they beseeched him to go, that had sounded well ; but they sent him is harsh, if he were dominus noster papa, as the modern apostles of Rome do style their Peter. The truth is, then, among Christians there was little standing upon punctilios ; private considerations and pretences to power then took small place; each one was ready to comply with that which the most did approve; the com- munity did take upon it to prescribe unto the greatest persons, as we see again in another instance, where the brethren at Antioch did appoint Paul and Barnabas (the most considerable persons among them) to go up unto Jerusalem. They were then ‘‘ so generous, so merciful, so full of charity, as, rather than to cause or foment any disturbance, to recede, or go whither the multitude pleased, and do what was commanded by it.”’+ * Ita ut Petrus quoque timens ne culparetur ab ipsis.—Jren. iil. 12, 15, p. 200. N. In the matter at Antioch, St. Peter did comply with St. James and the Judaizers, which did not be- seem such authority. + "Eragav dvaBaivew Ἰ]αῦλον καὶ Bapyabav.— Acts xv. 2 + ΧΙ, 2. Τίς οὖν ἐν ὑμῖν γενναῖος ; τίς εὔσπλαγχνος ; τίς πεπληροφορημένος ἀγάπης ; εἰπάτω, εἰ du’ ἐμὲ στάσις, καὶ ἔρις, καὶ σχίσματα, ἐκχωρῶ, 4. Acts viii. 14. * John xiii. 16. ᾿ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 10. In all relations which occur in serip- ture, about controversies incident of doc- trine or practice, there is no appeal made to St. Peter’s judgment, or allegation of itas decisive ; no argument is built on his authority : dissent from his opinion, or disconformity to his practice, or diso- bedience to his orders, are not mentioned as ground of reproof, as aggravation of any error, any misdemeanour, any dis- order; which were very strange, if then he was admitted or known to be the uni- versal prince and pastor of Christians, or the supreme judge and arbitrator of con- troversies among them: for then surely the most clear, compendious, and effectu- al way to confute any error, or check any disorder, had been to allege the au- thority of St. Peter against it: who then could have withstood so mighty a preju- dice against his cause? If now a ques- tion doth arise about any point of doc- trine, instantly the parties (at least some one of them, which hopeth to find most favour) hath recourse to the pope to de- fine it; and his judgment, with those who admit his pretences, proveth sufh- ciently decisive, or at least greatly sway- eth in prejudice to the opposite party. If any heresy, or any opinion disagreeing from the current sentiments, is broached, the pope presently doth roar, that his voice is heard through Christendom, and thundereth it down: if any schism or disorder springeth up, you may be sure that Rome will instantly meddle to quash it, or to settle matters as best standeth with its principles and interests : such in- fluence hath the shadow of St. Peter’s authority now: but no such regard was then had to poor Pope Peter himself; he was not so busy and stirring in such ca- ses: the apostles did not send heretics to be knocked down by his sentence, nor schismatics to be scourged by his cen- sure; but were fain to use the long way of disputation, striving to convince them by testimonies of scripture, and rational discourse. If they did use authority, it ἄπειμι οὗ ἐὰν βούλησθε, καὶ ποιῶ τὰ προστασσόμενα ὑπὸ τοῦ πλήθους. Ἰοτη. ad Cor. 54. Who among you is noble and generous ? who has bowels of compassion? who is full of charity ? Let him say, If for my sake there be sedition, and strife, and divisions, I will depart, and go whither you would have me, and do what shall be en- joined me by the multitude, | A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. was their own; which they challenge as given to them by Christ for edification, or upon account of the more than ordi- nary gifts and graces of the divine Spirit, conferred on them by God.‘ 11. St. Peter nowhere doth appear in- termeddling as a judge or governor para- mount in such cases; yea, where he doth himself deal with heretics and dis- orderly persons, confuting and reproving them (as he dealeth with divers notori- ously such), he proceedeth not asa pope decreeing, but as an apostle warning, ar- guing, and persuading against them. It is particularly remarkable how St. Paul, reproving the factions which were among Christians at Corinth, doth repre- sent the several parties, saying, I am of Paul, 1 am of Apollos, I am of Cephas, Iam of Christ.« Now supposing the case then had been clear and certain (and if it were not so then, how can it be so now ὃ) that St. Peter was sovereign of the apostles, is it not wonderful that any Christian should prefer any apostle or any preacher before him? as if it were now clear and generally acknowledged that the pope is truly what he pretendeth to be, would any body stand in competi- tion with him, would any glory ina rela- tion to any other minister before him? It is observable how St. Clemens re- flecteth on this contention: ‘ Ye were” (saith he) ‘ less culpable for that partiali- ty ; for ye did then incline to renowned apostles, and to a man approved by them: but now,” &c.* If it be replied, that Christ himself did come into the comparison; I answer, that probably no man was so vain as to compare him with the rest, nor indeed could any there pretend to haye been baptized by him (which was the ground of the emulation in respect of the others ;) but those who said they were of Christ were the wise and peaceable sort, who by saying so declined and disavowed faction ; whose behaviour St. Paul him- self in his discourse commendeth and * "AYN ἡ πρόσκλισις ἐκείνη ἧττον ἁμαρτίαν ὑμῖν προσήνεγκεν" προσεκλίθητε γὰρ ἀποστόλοις μεμαρτυρη- μένοις, καὶ ἀνδρὶ δεδοκιμασμένῳ rap’ αὐτοῖς" νυνὶ δὲ, &c.—Clem. ad Corinth. 47. f 2 Cor. xiii. 10; x. 8; xii. 21; 1 Cor, iv.2; 2 Thess. iii. 14; 1 Cor. vii. 25, 40; 1 Thess. iv. 8. © 1 Cor. i.12; iii. 21. 91 confirmeth, shewing that all indeed were of Christ," the apostles being only his ministers,to work faith and virtue in them. “None” (saith St. Austin) “of those contentious persons were good, except those who said, But lam of Christ.”* We may also here observe, that St. Paul, in reflecting upon these contentions, had a fair occasion of intimating some- what concerning St. Peter’s supremacy, and aggravating their blameable fond- ness, who compared others with him. 12. The consideration of the apostles proceeding in the conversion of people, in the foundation of churches, and in ad- ministration of their spiritual affairs, will exclude any probability of St. Peter’s ju- risdiction over them. They went about their business, not by order or license from St. Peter, but according to special instinct and direction of God’s Spirit (being sent forth by the Holy Ghost ; going by revelation), or according to their ordinary prudence, and the habitual wisdom given unto them ;' by those aids (without troubling St. Peter or themselves more) they founded socie- ties, they ordained pastors, they framed rules and orders requisite for the edifi- cation and good government of churches, reserving to themselves a kind of para- mount inspection and jurisdiction over them; which in effect was only πατρικὴ inwutheva, a paternal care over them ; which they particularly claimed to them- selves upon account of spiritual parent- age, for that they had begotten them to Christ: If (saith St. Paul to the Corin- thians) Iam not an apostle to others, I am however so to you:) why so? because he’ had converted them, and could say, As my beloved sons 1 warn you: for though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet ye have not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. ‘This paternal charge they did exercise without any de- pendence or regard to St. Peter, none * Falsum est quod illi boni erant, exceptis eis qui dicebant, Ego autem Christi.—Aug. Cont. Crescon. i. 27. © 1 Cor. iii. 5. ie ' ᾿Ἐκχπεμφθέντες ὑπὸ τοῦ πνεῦμ. dy—Acts ΧΗΣ. 4, 2; xvi. 6, 9. Gal.il. 2, κατ' ἀποκάλυψιν .----ῷ Pet. iii. δ. 1 Cor. vii. 17; xi. 34; xvi. 1; ἘΝ, ἡ δ; Isid. Pel.; 1 Thess. ii. 7, 11. } 1 Cor. ix. 2; Acts xvi. 1. « 1 Cor. iv. 14,15; Gal. iv. 19. 92 such appearing, it not being mentioned that they did ever consult his pleasure, or render him an account of their proceed- ings ; but it rather being implied in the reports of their actions, that they pro- ceeded absolutely, by virtue of their uni- versal office and commission of our Lord. If it be alleged, that St. Paul went to Jerusalem io St. Peter; I answer, that it was to visit him out of respect and love ;' or to confer with him for mutual edifica- tion and comfort; or at most to obtain approbation from him and the other apos- tles, which might satisfy some doubters, but not to receive his commands or au- thoritative instructions from him; it be- ing, as we shall afterwards see, the de- sign of St. Paul’s discourse to disavow any such dependence on any man what- ever. So doth St. Chrysostom note ; ‘* What” (saith he) ‘“ can be more hum- ble than this soul ? after so many and so great exploits, having no need at all of Peter, or of his discourse, but being in dignity equal to him (for I will now say no more), he yet doth go up to him, as to one greater and ancienter; anda sight alone of Peter is the cause of his journey thither.” And, “ He went” (saith he again) ‘not to learn any thing of him, nor to receive any correction from him, but for this only, that he might see him, and honour him with his presence.’”’* And indeed, that there was no such deference of the apostles to St. Peter, we may hence reasonably presume, be- cause it would then have been not only impertinent and needless, but inconven- ient and troublesome. For, 13. If we consider the nature of the apostolical office, the state of things at that time, and the manner of St. Peter’s life ; in correspondence to those things, he will appear uncapable, or unfit, to manage such a jurisdiction over the apos- tles as they assign him. The nature of the apostolical ministry * Τί ταύτης ταπεινοφρονέστερον γένοιτ᾽ ἂν τῆς ψυ fis; μετὰ τοσαῦτα καὶ τοιαῦτα κατορθώματα μη- δὲν Ilérpov δεόμενος, μηδὲ τῆς ἐκείνου φωνῆς, ἀλλ᾽ ἰσότιμος ὧν αὐτῷ (πλέον γὰρ οὐδὲν ἐρῶ τέως) ὅμως ἀνέρχεται ὡς πρὸς μείζονα, καὶ πρεσδύτερον" καὶ τῆς ἀποδημίας αὐτῷ τῆς ἐκεῖ γίνεται αἰτίας ἡ ἱστορία Πέτρου μόνη. οὐχ ὡς μαθησόμενός τι παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ, οὐδὲ ὡς διόρθωσίν τινα δεξάμενος, ἀλλὰ διὰ τοῦτο μό- νον, ὥστε ἰδεῖν αὐτὸν καὶ τιμῆσαι τῇ παρουσία .---- Chrys. in Gal. i. 18. ' Gal. 1. 18,—icropiiear. ΜΟΥ νυν " A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. was such, that the apostles were not fixed in one place of residence, but were con- tinually moving about the world, or in procinctu,™ ready in their gears to move whither divine suggestions did call them, or fair occasion did invite them, for the propagation or furtherance of the gos- pel.* The state of things was not favourable to the apostles, who were discountenanc- ed and disgraced, persecuted, and driven from one place to another (as our Lord foretold of them ;") Christians lay scat- tered about at distant places, so that op- portunities of despatch for conveyance of instructions from him, or of accounts to him, were not easily found. St. Thomas preaching in Parthia, St. Andrew in Scythia, St. John in Asia, Si- mon Zelotes in Britain, St. Paul in many piaces ;° other apostles and apostolical men in Arabia, in Ethiopia, in India, in Spain, in Gaul, in Germany, in the whole world, and in all the creation under heav- en," as St. Paul speaketh, could not well maintain correspondence with St. Peter ;t especially considering the manner of his life, which was not settled in any one known place, but moveable and uncer- tain; for he continually roved over the wide world, preaching the gospel, con- verting, confirming, and comforting Chris- tian people, as occasion starting up did induce : how then could he conveniently dispense all about his ruling and judging influence ? how in cases incident could direction be fetched from him, or refe- rence be made to him by those subordi- nate governors, who could not easily * ᾿Επειδὰν γὰρ ἤμελλον τῆς οἰκουμένης τὴν ἐπιτρο- πὴν ἀναδέξασθαι, οὐκ ἔδει συμπεπλέχθαι λοιπὸν ἀλλή- λοις ἢ γὰρ ἂν μεγάλη τοῦτο τῇ οἰκουμένῃ γέγονε ζη- pia.—Chrys. in Joh. xxi. 23. For seeing they were to take upon them the inspection and su- perintendency of ali the world, it behoved them not any longer to be mixed or conjoined togeth- er, for this had been a great loss and hinder- ance to the world. + Ὁ τὴν οἰκουμένην σταδιεύσας, καὶ τῷ περὶ πίστε- ws δρόμῳ τὸν κόσμον μικρὸν ἀποφῆνας.---Β 85. Se- leuc. Or. 2. He that run his race through the whole universe, and by his so eager running for the faith made the world, as it were, too narrow for him. m 2 Cor. xi. 25. » 1 Cor. iv.9; 2Cor.iv.8; vid; xi. 25; Matt. xxiv. 9; Luke xxi. 12. ° Euseb. iii. 1; Niceph. ii. 38, 39, 40; Ter- tul. ad Jud. cap. 7. P Col. i, 6, 33; Rom. x, 18, A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. know where to come at him, or whence to hear from him in any competent time ? To send to him had been to shoot at ro- vers; affairs, therefore, which should de- on his resolution and orders, must have had great stops ; he could but very lamely have executed such an office ; so that his jurisdiction must have been rath- er an extreme inconvenience and encum- brance, than anywise beneficial or use- ful to the church. Gold and silver he had none, ora very small purse, to maintain dependants and officers to help him (nuncios, !egates a latere, secretaries, auditors, &c.), infinity of affairs would have oppressed a poor helpless man; and to bear such a burden as they lay on him no one could be suffi- cient. 14. It was indeed most requisite, that every apostle should have a complete, absolute, independent authority in man- aging the concerns and duties of his office ; that he might not anywise be ob- structed in the discharge of them; not clogged with a need to consult others, not hampered with orders from those who were at distance, and could not well descry what was fit in every place to be done. The direction of him who had promis- ed to be perpetually present with them, and by his Holy Spirit to guide, to in- struct, to admonish them upon al! occa- sions, was abundantly sufficient; they » did not want any other conduct or aid beside that special light and powerful in- fluence of grace, which they received from him ; the which ἱκάνωσεναύτοὺς did (as St. Paul speaketh) render them suff- cient ministers of the New Testament. Accordingly their discourse and prac- tice do thoroughly savour of such an in- dependence; nor in them is there any appearance of that being true, which Bellarmine dictateth, that “ the apostles depended on St. Peter, as on their head and commander.’’* 15. Particularly the discourse and be- haviour of St. Paul toward St. Peter doth evidence, that he did not acknowledge any dependence on him, any subjection to him. * ——a quo illi tanquam a capite et impera- tore suo pendebant.— Bellarm. de Pont. i. 16 © Matt. xxviii. 20; John xvi. 13; xiv. 26. τ 2 Cor. iii. 5; Rom. xv. 15. j a St. Paul doth often purposely assert to himself an independent and absolute power, inferior or subordinate to none other, insisting thereon for the enforce- ment or necessary defence of his doc- trine and practice (I have become a fool in glorying ; ye have compelled me,* saith he ;) alleging divers pregnant arguments, to prove and confirm it, drawn from the manner of his call, the characters and warrants of his office, the tenor of his proceedings in the discharge of it, the success of his endeavours, the approba- tion and demeanour toward him of other apostles. As for his call and commission to the apostolical office, he maintaineth (asif he meant designedly to exclude those pre- tences, that other apostles were only cail- ed in partem solicitudinis with St. Pe- ter), that he was an apostle, not from men, nor by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father ;* that is, that he derived not his office immediately or me- diately from men, or by the ministry of any man, but immediately had received the grant and charge thereof from our Lord; as indeed the history plainly sheweth, in which our Lord telleth him, that he did “constitute him an officer, and a chosen instrument to him, to bear his name to the Gentiles.” Hence he so often is careful and cau- tious to express himself an apostle by the will and special grace, or favour and appointment, and command of God; and particularly telleth the Romans, that dy Christ he had received grace and apostle- ship.* For the warrant of his office, he doth not allege the allowance of St. Peter, or any other, but those special gifts and gra- ces which were conspicuous in him, and exerted in miraculous performances: Truly (saith he) the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in ail patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds ; and I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath not wrought by * Bell.i.9, 14, 16,—Od« dx’ ἀνθρώπων. οὐδὲ δι ἀνθρώπου .--- σα]. i. 1. Προχειρίσασθαί σε ὑπηρέτην, &c.—Acts ix. 15; χχὶϊ. 21; xxvi. 16. * 2 Cor. xii. 11; Rom. xi. 13. t Διὰ θελήματος Θεοῦ, 1 Cor i. 1: 2 Cor. i. 1; Eph i. 1 , Col. i. 1; 2 Tim.i. 1.—Xé ith, Rom. i.5; 1 Cor. xv. 10; Eph. iii. 7; 1 Tim. i. 12. - Κατ' ἐπιταγήν, 1 Tim. i. 1. 94 me,to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed, through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God." To the same purpose he allegeth his successful industry in converting men to the gospel: Am I not an apostle? (saith he) are ye not my work in the Lord? If I am not an apostle to others, Iam surely one to you: for the seal of mine apostle- ship are ye in the Lord. And, By the grace of God Iam what Iam: and his grace which was on me became not in vain: but I laboured more abundantly than they all.* In the discharge of his office, he im- mediately (after that he had received his call and charge from our Saviour), with- out consulting or taking license from any man, did vigorously apply himself to the work: Immediately (saith he) I confer- red not with flesh and blood: “neither went I up to Jerusalem to them that before me were apostles :* so little did he take himself to be accountable to any man. In settling order, and correcting irregu- larities in the church, he professed to act merely by his own authority, conferred on him by our Lord: Therefore (saith he) being absent, I write these things, that being present, Imay not use severity, according to the authority which the Lord hath given me for edification, not for destruction.* Such being the privileges which he did assert to himself with all confidence, he did not receive for it any check from oth- er apostles ; but the chief of them, know- ing the grace that was given unto him, gave unto him the right hand of fellow- ship ;¥ in token of their acknowledge- ment and allowance of his proceedings. Upon these considerations (plainly sig- nifying his absolute independence in the reception and execution of his office) he doth more than once affirm (and in a man- ner Joast) himself to be inferior in noth- ing to the very chief apostles :* in noth- ing; that is, in nothing pertinent to the authority or substantial dignity of his place ; for as to his personal merit, he professeth himself much less than the “ 2 Cor. xii. 12; Rom. xv. 18,19; 1Cor. ii. 4. ’ 1 Cor. ix. 1,2; xv. 10; 2 Cor. xi. 23. ~ Gal.i. 16, 17. τ Cor. xiii. 10; x. 8. Υ Gal. ii. 9. * 2 Cor. xi. 5; xii. 11. ΠΗ ν᾿ ~ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. least of the apostles ;* but as to the au- thenticness and authority of his office, he deemed himself equal to the greatest ; being by the grace of God what he was, a minister of the gospel, according to the gift of the grace of God, which was given him according to the effectual working of his power.” When he said he was behind none,: he could not forget St. Peter; when he said none of the chief, he could not but especially mean him: (he did indeed, as St. Chrysostom saith, intend ‘t to compare himself with St. Peter ;’)* when he said in nothing, he could not but design that which was most considerable, the au- thority of his place; which in the con- text he did expressly mention.‘ For when he objected to himself the sem- blance of fondness or arrogance in speak- ing after that manner, he declared that he did not speak rashly or vainly, but upon serious consideration, and with full assurance, finding it very needful or use- ful to maintain his authority, or to magnify his office,’ as he otherwhere speaketh. If things had been as now we are taught from the Roman school, itis strange that St. Paul should compare himself so generally, not excepting St. Peter; that he should express (nor by the least touch intimate) no special con- sideration for his, as they tell us, ‘* ordi- nary pastor :᾽ ἢ that he should not consid- er how liable such words were to be in- terpreted in derogation to St. Peter’s due prerogatives. But it is no wonder that St. Paul, in St. Peter’s absence, should thus stand on his own legs, not seeming to mind him, whenas in immediate transactions with him he demeaned himself as_ his fellow, yielding to him no respect or deference, as to his superior. For, When St. Paul went to Jerusalem, to have conference with St. Peterand other apostles, who were chief in repute, he professeth that they did not confer any thing to him,? so as to change his opin- ion, or divert him from his ordinary * TIpds τοὺς περὶ Πέτρον ποιούμενος τὴν σύγκρισιν. * 1Cor.xv. 9; Eph. iii. 8. > 1 Cor. xv. 10; Eph. iii. 7. ¢ 2 Cor. xi. 5. 4 Kara προδίορθωσιν, 2 Cor. xii. 11; i. 16, 17. * Rom. xi. 13, Bell. de Pont. i. 11. € Gal. ii. 2. ὰ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. course of practice, which was different from theirs: this was (it seemeth) hardly proper or seemly for him to say, if St. Peter had been his sovereign: but he seemeth to say it on very purpose to ex- cludeany prejudice that might arise to his doctrine from their authority or repute ; their authority being none over him, their repute being impertinent to the case ; for whatsoever (addeth he) they were, it mak- eth no matier to me; God respecteth no man’s person :* the which might well be said of persons greater in common es- teem, but not so well of οὔθ. who was his superior in office ; to whose opinion and conduct, as of his judge and pastor by God’s appointment, he did owe a spe- cial regard. Again, St. Paul at Antioch observing St. Peter, out of fear‘ and policy, to act otherwise than became the simplicity and sincerity of Christians, to the prejudice of evangelical truth, charity, and liberty, against his own judgment and former practice, drawing others by his pattern into the same unwarrantable course of behaviour, did withstand him to the face, did openly reprove him before ail, because he was blameable ;) did, as Pope Gelasius I. affirmeth (to excuse another pope mis- behaving himself), ‘ worthily confute him ;”* did (as St. Augustine often doth affirm and argue, in proof that great- est persons may sometimes err and fail) “correct him, rebuke him, chide him.”’+ * (Vide P. Pelag. II. apud Bin. tom. iv. p. 308, in Epist. ad Eliam.) Nunquid ideo aut ila ejus sequenda sunt, que merito ejus co- apostolus ejus facta redarguit.—Gelas. J. de Anath. (apud Bin. tom. iii. p. 645.) 7 Apostolo Paulo monstrante et. corrigente. —Aug. cont. Crescon. i. 32; ii. 32; Ep. 19, de Bayt. Cont. Don. ii. 1, 2 ; correptus, cont. Don. i. 1; objurgavit, Ep. 8; qui de minore causa conversationis ambigue Petro ipsi non pepercit.— Tert. v. 3, (contra Marc.) who fora smaller matter of doubtful conversation spared not Peter himself. Cum laudetur etiam Pauli minimi apostolorum sana ratio atque li- bertas, quod Petrum apostolorum primum ad- ductum in hypocrisin, et non recta via ince- dentem ad veritatem evangelii fidenter impro- bans, in faciem illi restitit, eamque coram om- nibus coram objurgavit.—Fac. Her. viii. 6. Whereas the sound reason and freedom even of Paul, the least of the apostles, is commend- ed, in that when Peter, the chief of the apostles, was carried away with dissimulation, and walked not in aright way, according to the ® Gal. ii. 6. ' Gal. ii. 12-14. ) Gal. ii. 11, 14. 95 Which behaviour of St. Paul doth not well consist with the “‘ supposition, that St. Peter was his superior in office ;*” If that had been, Porphyrius with good colour of reason might have objected procacity to St. Paul in taxing his bet- ters; for he then indeed shewed us no commendable pattern of demeanour to- wards our governors, in so boldly oppos- ing St. Peter, in so openly censuring him, in so smartly confuting him. More unseemly also it had been to re- port the business as he doth in writing to | the Galatians ; for to divulge the miscar- riages of superiors, to revive the memory of them, to register them, and transmit them down to all posterity, to set forth our clashing and contests with them, is hard- ly allowable ; if it may consist with jus- tice and honesty, it doth yet little savour of gravity and modesty: it would have been more seemly for St. Paul to have privately and humbly remonstrated to St. Peter, than openly and downrightly to have reprehended him ; at least it would have become him in cold blood to have represented his carriage more respeciful- ly, consulting the honour of the univer- sal pastor, whose reputation was like to suffer by such a representation of his proceedings. Pope Pelagius II. would have taught St. Paul better manners; who saith, that ‘they are not to be approved, but reprobated, who do reprove or accuse their prelates;”’* and Pope Gregory would have taught him another lesson, namely, that “‘ the evils of their superiors do so displease good subjects, that how- ever they doconceal them from others ;7’°+ and, “‘ subjects are to be admonished, that they do not rashly judge the life of their superiors, if perhaps they see them do blameably,” &c.i It is plain, that St. Paulewas more bold with St. Peter, than any man now must truth of the gospel, he boldly disliked, and withstood him to the face, and reproved him openly before all. * Non sunt consentiendi, sed reprobandi, qui prelatos suos, reprehendunt vel accusant.—Pe- lag. 11. Ep. 2. t Bonis subditis sic prepositoram svoram mala displicent. ut tamen hee ab aliis oceul- tent.—Greg. M. Moral. xxv. 15. $ Admonendi sunt subditi, ne praepositorum suorum vitam temere judicent, siquid eos for- tasse agere reprehensibiliter vident, &¢.— Greg. Past. part iii. cap. 1, Admon. 5. ) Hier. ad Aug. Ep. 11, in Prol. ad Gal. 96 be with the pope; for let the pope com- mit never So great crimes, yet should “no mortal” (saith the canon law) “ pre- sume to reprove his faults.”* But if St. Peter were not in office su- perior to St. Paul, but his colleague, and equal in authority, although preceding him in standing, repute, and other advan- tages; then St. Paul’s free proceeding toward him was not only warrantable, but wholesome, and deserving for edifi- cation to be recited and recorded; as implying an example how colleagues up- on occasion should with freedom and sincerity admonish their brethren of their errors and faults; St. Peter’s carriage in patiently bearing that correption also af- fording another good pattern of equanimi- ty, in such cases; to which purpose St. Cyprian (alleged and approved by St. Austin)‘ doth apply this passage: “ for” (saith he) “neither Peter, whom the Lord first chose, and upon whom he built his church, when Paul afterward contest- ed with him about circumcision, did in- solently challenge, or arrogantly assume any thing to himself, so as to say, that he did hold the primacy, and that rather those who were newer and later apostles ought to obey him; neither despised he St. Paul, because he was before a persecutor of the church; but he admitted the coun- sel of truth, and easily consented to the lawful course which St. Paul did main- tain; yielding indeed to us a document both of concord and patience, that we should not pertinaciously love our own things, but should rather take those things for ours which sometimes are profitably and wholesomely suggested by our breth- ren and colleagues, if they are true and lawful:”* this St. Cyprian speaketh, up- on supposition that St. Peter and St. Paul were equals, or (as he calleth them) col- leagues and brethren, in rank co-ordinate ; otherwise St. Cyprian would not have approved the action ; for he ofien severe- ly doth inveigh against inferiors taking upon them to censure their superiors : **W hat tumour” (saith he) ‘ of pride, what arrogance of mind, what inflation of heart, is it, to call our superiors and bish- * Nam nec Petrus, quem primum Dominus elegit, &c.—Cypr. Ep. 71. (ad Quint.) * Grat. Dist. xl. cap. 6. ' Aug. de Bapt. cont. Don ii. 2. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ops to our cognizance ?”* St. Cyprian, — therefore, could not conceive St. Peter to be St. Paul’s governor, or superior in power; he doth indeed plainly enough in the forecited words signify, that in his judgment St. Peter had done “ insolently and arrogantly,” if he had assumed any ‘“‘ obedience” from St. Paul. St. Austin also doth in several places of his writings make the like application of this passage." The ancient writer contemporary to St. Ambrose, and passing under his name, doth argue in this manner: * Who dar- ed resist Peter the first apostle, to whom the Lord did give the keys of the king- dom of heaven, but another such a one; who in assurance of his election knowing himself to be not unequal to him, might constantly disprove what he had unad- visedly done ὃ ἢ It is indeed well known, that Origen, and after him St. Chrysostom and St. Jerome, and divers of the ancients beside, did conceive that St. Pau] did not serious- ly oppose or tax St. Peter, but did only do it seemingly, upon confederacy with him, for promoting a good design." This interpretation, however strained and earnestly impugned by St. Austin, I will not discuss ; but only shall observe, that it being admitted, doth rather strengthen than weaken our discourse : for, if St. Peter were St. Paul’s governor, it maketh St. Peter to have consented to an act in all appearance indecent, irregular, and scandalous; and how can we imag- ine that St. Peter would have complotted to the impairing his own just authority in the eye of a great church ? doth not such a condescension imply in hima disavow- * Quis enim hic est superbie tumor, que arrogantia animi, que mentis inflatio ad cog- nitionem suam preepositos et sacerdotes vo- care ?—Cypr. Ep. 69. 7 Nam quis eorum auderet Petro primo apostolo, cui claves regni ceelorum Dominus dedit, resistere, nisi alius talis, qui fiducia elec- tionis suze, sciens se non imparem, constanter improbaret quod ille sine consilio fecerat ?— Ambr. in Gal. ii.9. Paulus Petram reprehen- dit, quod non auderet, nisi se non imparem sciret —( Hieron. vel alius quis ad Gal. citatus a Grat. Caus. ii. qu. 7. cap. 33.) Paul repre- hended Peter, which he would not have dared Ν do, had he not known himself to be equal to im. ™ Aug. cont. Don. dle Bapt. ii. 1, 2 Ep. 19. * S.Cyril. cont. Jul. lib. ix.(p. 325,) Chrys. ΜΝ v. Or. 59, οὐκ ἀπὸ Yuyiis—Aug. Ep. 11, e. _—————= SS OEE —— TS | A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 97 ing of superiority over St. Paul, ora conspiracy with him to overthrow good order? To which purpose we may observe, ‘that St. Chrysostom,* in a large and very elaborate discourse, wherein he professeth to endeavour “an aggravation” of the irregularity of St. Paul’s demeanour, if it were serious ; doth not lay the stress of that aggravation upon St. Paul’s op- posing his lawful governor, but his only so treating a co-aposile of such eminency: neither when to that end he designeth to reckon all the advantages of St. Peter beyond St. Paul, or any other apostle, doth he mention this, which was _ chiefly material to his purpose, that he was St. Paul’s governor; which observations if we do carefully weigh, we can hardly imagine that St. Chrysostom had any notion of St. Peter’s supremacy in re- lation to the apostles.t In fine, the drift of St. Paul, in report- ing those passages concerning himself, was not to disparage the other apostles, nor merely to command himself, but to fence the truth of his doctrine, and main- tain the liberty of his disciples, against any prejudice that might arise from any authority that might be pretended in any considerable respects superior to his, and alleged against them; to which purpose he declareth by arguments and matters of fact, that his authority was perfectly apostolical, and equal to the greatest ; even to that of St. Peter, the prime apos- tle; of St. John, the beloved disciple ; of St. James, the bishop of Jerusalem ; the judgment or practice of whom was no law to him, nor should be to them, further than it did consist with that doc- trine which he, by an independent au- thority, and by special revelation from Christ, did preach unto them: he might, as St. Chrysostom noteth, have pretend- ed “to some advantage over them,” in regard that he “had laboured more abundantly than they all;” but he for- * Chrys. tom. v. Or. 59.—Kat yap αὔξω τὴν en”: καὶ μεῖζονα ποιῶ, Kc. t ‘Qs οὐδέν μοι ἜΝ ἂν [lérpov τὴν κατηγορίαν ἀποσκευασαμένου, ὃ ἸΪαῦλος φαινηται θαρσαλέως καὶ ἀπερισκίπτως τοῦ συναποστόλου κατηγορῶν . So that itis no advantage to me, if, when Peter has confuted the charge, Paul appear to accuse his fellow apostle boldly and inconsiderately,. * Gal. i. 12. Vor. ΠῚ. 13 beareth to do so, “being contented to obtain equal advantages.’’* Well, therefore, considering the disad- vantage which this passage bringeth to the Roman pretence, might this history be called by Baronius “ a history hard to be understood, a stone of offence, a rock of scandal, a rugged place, which St. Austin himself, under favour, could not pass over without stumbling.”? It may also be considered,* that St. Paul particularly doth assert to himself an inde- pendent authority over the gentiles, co- ordinate to that which St. Peter had over the Jews ;7 the which might engage him so earnestly to contest with St. Pe- ter, as by his practice seducing those who belonged to his charge; the which also probably moved him thus to assert his authority to the Galatians, as being Gen- tiles under his care, and thence obliged especially to regard hisauthority. They (saith St. Paul) knowing that I was in- trusted with the gospel of uncircumcision as Peter was intrusted with that of cir- cumcision,— gave unto me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship :* the which words do clearly enough signify that he took himself, and that the other apostles took him to have, under Christ, an abso- lute charge, subordinate to no man, over the Gentiles; whence he claimeth to himself, as his burden, the care of all the churches :* he therefore might well con- test for their liberty, he might well insist upon his authority among them. Thus did St. Chrysostom understand the case; for “* Christ” (saith he) “ com- mitted the Jews to Peter, but set Paul over the Gentiles τ: and, ‘“ He” (saith that great father) “further doth shew himself to be equal to them in dignity, * Kai ταύτη μάλιστα τῶν ἀποστόλων πλεονεκτῆ- σας, τερισσότερον γὰρ αὐτῶν ἐκοπίασα, φησὶν, ἀλλὰ τέως οὐ κατασκευάζει τοῦτο, ἀλλ᾽ ἀγαπᾷ τὰ ἴσα φέρων. —Chrys. in Gal. i. 1. + Plena authoritas Petro in Judaismi predi- catione data dignoscitur, et Pauli perfecta au- thoritas in preedicatione Gentium invenitur.— Ambr. There is discerned a full authority giv- en to Peter of preaching to the Jews, and in Paul there is found a perfect power and author- ity of preaching to the Gentiles. $ Τοὺς piv οὖν ᾿Ιουδαίους ἐπέτρεψε τῷ Πέτρῳ, τοῖς δὲ "Εϊλλησι τὸν Παῦλον ἐπέστησεν ὃ ἰστός. το Chrys. tom. 5, Or. 59. » Baron. An. li. ᾧ 32-34, 35, ἄτα. « Rom. xi. 13. * Gal. ii. 7. * 2 Cor. xi, 28. 98 and compareth himself, not only to the others, but-even to the ringleader; shew- ing that each did enjoy equal dignity.”* It may also by any prudent considerer easily be discerned, that if St. Peter had really been as they assert him, so in au- thority superior to the other apostles, it is hardly possible that St. Paul should upon these occasions express nothing of it. 16. If St. Peter had been appointed sovereign of the church, it seemeth that it should have been requisite that he should have outlived all the apostles; for then either the church must have wanted a head, or there must have been an inex- tricable controversy about who that head was. St.Peter died long before St. John (as all agree), and perhaps before divers oth- ers of the apostles. Now, after his depart- ure did the church want a head? (then it might before and after have none; and our adversaries lose the main ground of their pretence.) Did one of the apostles become head? (which of them was it; upon what ground did he assume: the headship, or who conferred it on him; who ever did acknowledge any such thing, or where is there any report about it?) Was any other person made head ? (sup- pose the bishop of Rome, who only pre- tendeth thereto ;) then did St. John and other apostles become subject to one in degree inferior to them? then what be- cometh of St. Paul’s first apostles, sec- ondly prophets, thirdly teachers 2‘ What do all the apostolical privileges come to, when St. John must be at the command of Linus, and Cletus, and Clemens, and of I know not who beside? Was it not a great absurdity for the apostles to truc- kle under the pastors and teachers of Rome 35 The like may be said for St. James, if he (as the Roman church doth in its lit- urgies suppose) were an apostle who in many respects might claim the pre-emi- nence ; who therefore, in the Apostolical Constitutions, is preferred before Clement bishop of Rome. 17. Upon the same grounds, on which a supremacy of power is claimed to St. Peter, other apostles might also challenge * Δείκνυσιν αὐτοῖς ὁμότιμον ὄντα λοιπὸν, καὶ οὐ ne DA 5 ~ ~ ζ΄ ΄ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἑαυτὸν, ἀλλὰ τῷ κορυφαίῳ συγκρίνει, δεικνὺς ὅτι τῆς αὐτῆς ἕκαστος ἀπέλαυσεν ἀξίας.---- Chrys. in Gal. ii. 8. ‘ 1 Cor. xii. 28. « Eph. iv. 11. δι... A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. a superiority therein over their brethren ; but to suppose such a difference of power — among the rest is absonous; and _ there- fore the grounds are not valid upon which St. Peter’s supremacy is built. I instance in St. James and St. John, who upon the same probabilities had (af- ter St. Peter) a preference to the other apostles. For to them our Saviour de- clared a special regard; to them the apostles afterwards may seem to have yielded a particular deference ; they, in merit and performances, seem to have surpassed ; they (after St. Peter and his brother) were first called to the apostoli- cal office ; they (as St. Peter) were by our Lord new christened (as it were), and nominated Boanerges, by a name signifying the efficacy of their endeavour in their master’s service; they, together with St. Peter, were assumed to behold the transfiguration ; they were culled out to wait on our Lord in his agony ; they also, with St. Peter (others being exclud- ed, were taken to attest our Lord’s per- formance of that great miracle of restor- ing the ruler’s daughter to life; they, presuming on their special favour with our Lord, did pretend to the chief places in his kingdom.’ To one of them it is expressed that our Saviour did bear a peculiar affection, he being the disciple whom Jesus loved, and who leaned on his bosom:* to the other he particularly discovered himself after his resurrection, and first honoured him with the crown of martyrdom. They in blood and cognation did near- est touch our Lord ; being his cousin-ger- mans (which was esteemed by the an- cients a ground of preferment ;) as Hege- sippus reporteth.* Their industry and activity in propaga- tion of the gospel was most eminently conspicuous. To them it was peculiar, that St. James did first suffer for it, and St. John did * Tods δὲ ἀπολυθέντας ἡγήσασθαι τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν, ὡς ἂν δὴ μάρτυρας δμοῦ καὶ ἀπὸ γένους ὄντας τοῦ Kv- otov.—Hegesipp. apud Euseb. iii 20. They be- ing dismissed, and sent away to govern the churches, as being both witnesses, and also kinsmen of our Lord. ’ Matt. iv. 21; Luke v. 10; Mark ii. 17; Matt. xvii. 1,2; 2 Pet. i. 16; Matt. xxvi. 37; anata xiv. 33; Matt. xx. 20,21; Mark x. 38, 7) ν John xiii. 23; xxi. 7. 20; 1 Cor. xv. 7. a a ee “πὰ ὩΣ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. longest persist in the faithful confession of it;* whose writings in several kinds do remain as the richest magazines of Christian doctrine, furnishing us with the fullest testimonies concerning the divinity of our Lord, with special histories of his life, and with his divinest discourses ; with most lively incitements to piety and chari- ty ; with prophetical revelations concern- ing the state of the church. He there- fore was one of the στύλοι, chief pillars and props, of the Christian profession ; one of ὑπὲρ λίαν ἀπόστολοι, the superla- tive apostles.’ Accordingly inthe rolls of the apos- tles, and in reports concerning them, their names usually are placed after St. Peter.” Hence also some of the fathers do take them, as St. Peter was, to have been pre- ferred by our Lord :* “ Peter’ (saith St. Gregory Nazianzen) “and James and John, who both were indeed, and were reckoned, before the others—so indeed did Christ himself prefer them ;” and, “ Peter, James, and John,” saith Clemens Alexandrinus, “ did not, as being prefer- red by the Lord himself, contest for hon- our, but did choose James the Just, bish- op of Jerusalem” (or, as Ruffinus reads, ** bishop of the apostles.’’) Hence if by designation of Christ, by the concession of the apostolical college, by the profulgency of his excellent worth and merit, or upon any other ground, St. Peter had the πρωτεῖα, or first place ; the δευτερεῖα, or next place, in the same kind, by like means, upon the same grounds, seems to have belonged unto them; and if their advantage did imply difference, not in power, but in order only (not au- * Aabiw τοίνυν τους copvdatiovs.—Chrys. in Matt. xvii. 1. Taking therefore the chief and principal. Διὰ τὶ τούτους παραλαμθάνει μονους ; ὅτι οὗτοι τῶν ἄλλων ἦσαν ὑπερέχοντες .----ἰ ΤΥ 5. ibid. Wherefore taketh he these only with him? Because these were the chief and prin- cipal above the others. Πέτρος, καὶ ᾿άκωβος, καὶ Ἰωάννης, οἱ πρὸ τῶν ἄλλων καὶ ὄντες καὶ ἀριθμούῦμε- vot αὐτὴ μὲν ἡ Χριστοῦ π ortunots.—Greg. Naz. Or. 26. Πέτρον φησὶ καὶ ᾿ dxw6bov, καὶ ᾿Τωάν- νὴν ὡς ἂν καὶ ὑπὸ τοῦ υρίου προτετιμημένους μὴ ἐπιδικάζεσθαι δόξης, ἀλλὰ ᾿Ιάκωδον τὸν ὃ καιον ἐπίσ- κῦπον 'ἱεροσολύμων ἑλέσθαι. (Ruflinus reddit apostolorum episcopum.)—Clem. Alex. apud Eu- seb. ii. 1. = Acts ri. 2. Y Gal. ii. 9; 2 Cor. xii. 11; xi. 6. * Mark iii. 17; Acts i. 13. 99 thoritative superiority, but honorary pre- cedence), then can no more be allowed or concluded due to him. 18. The fathers, both in express terms, and implicitly or by consequence, do as- sert the apostles to have been equal or co-ordinate in power and authority. What can be more express than that of St. Cyprian? ‘The other apostles were indeed that which Peter was, en- dowed with equal consortship of honour and power;”* and again, ‘‘ although our Lord giveth to all the apostles after his resurrection an equal power, and saith, As the Father sent me, so I send you.”’t What can be more plain than that of St. Chrysostom? “St. Paul sheweth, that each apostle did enjoy equal dig- nity δ ἢ How again could St. Chrysostom* more clearly signify his opinion, than when comparing St. Paul to St. Peter, he call- eth St. Paul ἰσότιμον αὐτῷ, equal in hon- our to him; adding, πλέον γὰρ οὐδὲν ἐρῶ τέως, for I will not as yet say anything more,” as if he thought St. Paul indeed the more honourable ? How also could St. Cyril more plainly declare his sense to be the same, than when he called St. Peter and St. John ἰσοτίμους ἀλλήλοις, equal to one another in honour ?|| Did not St. Jerome also sufficiently de- clare his mind in the case, when he saith of the apostles, that “* the strength of the church is equally settled upon them ?”’§ * Hoc erant utique et ezteri apostoli quod fuit Petrus, pari consortio preediti et honoris et potestatis. T quamvis apostolis omnibus post res- urrectionem suam parem potestatem tribuat, ac dicat, &¢e.—Cypr. de Un. Eccl. Δεικνὺς, ὅτι τῆς αὐτῆς ἕκαστος ἀπέλαυσεν ἀξίας. —Chrys. in Gal. ii. 8. \| Πέτρος καὶ ᾿Ϊωάννης ἰσότιμοι ἀλλήλοις, καθὸ ναὶ ἀπόστολοι καὶ ἅγιοι pabnral.—Act. Con, Eph. part i. p. 209. Peterand John were equal in hon- our one to another, as were also the apostles and holy disciples. Did Tertullian think St. Paul inferior to St. Peter, when he said, “ It is wellthat Peter is even in martyrdom equalled to Paul?” Bene quod Petrus Paulo et in marty- rio adequatur.—Tert. de Preeser. 24. § At dicis super Petrum fundatur ecclesia, licet id ipsum alio loco super omnes apostolos fiat, οἱ ex aquo super eos ecclesiw® fortitudo solidetur.— Hieron. in Jovin. 1. 14, But you will say the church is founded upon Peter, * Chrys. in Gal. i. 8, * Vide Tert. de Prescr. cap. 20. 100 Doth not Dionysius (the supposed Areopagite) call “the decade of the apostles co-ordinate with their fore- man,”* St. Peter? in conformity, I sup- pose, to the current judgment of his age. What can be more full than that of Isidore (whose words shew how long this sense continued in the church :) ‘“* The other apostles did receive an equal share of honour and power; whoalso being dispersed in the whole world, did preach the gospel; and to whom depart- ing, the bishops did succeed, who are constituted through the whole world in the sees of the apostles ?”7 By consequence the Fathers do assert this equality, when they affirm (as we be- fore did shew) the apostolical office to be absolutely supreme ; when also they affirm (as afterwards we shall shew) all the apostles’ successors to be equal as such; and particularly that the Roman bishop, upon account of his succeeding St. Peter, hath no pre-eminence above his brethren; for, “‘ wherever a bishop be, whether at Rome, or at Eugubium ; at Constantinople, or at Rhegium ; at Alex- andria, or at Thanis; he is of the same worth, and of the same priesthood : the, force of wealth, and lowness of poverty doth not render a bishop more high or more low ; for that all of them are suc- cessors of the apostles.”’t 19. Neither is it to prudential esteem a despicable consideration, that the most ancient of the Fathers, having occasion sometimes largely to discourse of St. Peter, do not mention any such preroga- tives belonging to him. 20. The last argument which 1 shall use against this primacy, shall be the in- sufficiency of those arguments and _tes- timonies which they allege to warrant and prove it. If this point be of so great consequence though the same thing in another place is atfirmed of all the apostles, and that, &c. * Ἢ Ὁ τῶν μαθητῶν Kopvpatos, pera τῆς ὁμοταγοῦς αὐτῷ καὶ ἱεραρχικῆς dexados.—Dionys. de Eccl. Hier. cap. 9. + Ceteri apostoli cum Petro par consoriium honoris et potestatis acceperunt, qui etiam in toto orbe dispersi evangelium predicaverunt, quibusque decedentibus successerunt episcopi, qui sunt constituti per totum mundum in sedi- bus apostolorum. 1514. Πρ. de Off. ii. 5. ὁ Ubicunque fuerit episcopus, sive Rome sive Eugubu, &c.—Hier. ad Evagr. Ep. 85 ; Clem. ad Corinth. Iren. ili. 12; iii. 1, 3. ert On en A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. as they make it; if, as they would per- suade us, the subsistence, order, unity, and peace ofthe church, together with the salvation of Christians, do depend on it;* if, as they suppose, many great points of truth do hang on this pin; if it be, as they declare, a main article of faith, and “ not only asimple error, but a pernicious heresy, to deny this prima- cy ;’t then itis requisite, that a clear revelation from God should be produci- ble in favour of it (for upon that ground only such points can firmly stand ;) then it is most probable, that God (to prevent controversies, occasions of doubt, and ex- cuses for error about so grand a matter) would not have failed to have declared it so plainly, as might serve to satisfy any reasonable man, and toconvince any frow- ard gainsayer: butnosuch revelation doth appear ; for the places of scripture which they allege do not plainly express it, nor pregnantly imply it, nor can it by fair consequence be inferred from them: no man unprepossessed with affection. to their side would descry it in them ; with- out thwarting St. Peter’s order, and wresting the scriptures,° they cannot de- duce it from them. ‘This by examining their allegations will appear. I. They allege those words of our Saviour, uttered by him upon occasion of St. Peter’s confessing him to be the Son of God, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my church. Here, say they, St. Peter is declared the founda- tion, that is, the sole supreme governor of the church. To this Lanswer : 1. Those words do not clearly signify any thing to their purpose ; for they are metaphorical, and thence ambiguous, or capable of divers interpretations ; whence they cannot suffice to ground so main a * Agitur de summa rei Christiane, &c.— Bell. praf. ad lib. de Pontif. R. + Est enim revera non simplex error, sed perniciosa hzresis negare B. Petri primatum a Christo institutum.—Bell. de Pont. R. i. 10. ¢ S. Romana ecclesia nullis synodicis con- Stitutis ezteris ecclesiis pralata est, sed evan- gelica voce Domini et Salvatoris nostri prima- tum obtinuit; Zw es Petrus (inquiens) &c.— P. Gelas. i. Dist. 21, cap. 3. The holy church of Rome is not preferred before other churches by any synodical decrees, but has obtained the primacy by the voice of our Lord and Saviour in the gospel, saying, Thou art Peter, &c. * 2 Pet. iii. 16. 4 Matt. xvi. 18. i Ω a - -- - τ. τ΄ - ..........-...-----ς.ς -. ς-... -.-ϊ. a Sa er - --- A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. point of doctrine, or to warrant so huge a pretence; these ought to stand upon downright, evident, and indubitable testi- mony. It is pretty to observe how Bellarmine poseth this testimony: “ Of which words ” (saith he)‘ the sense is plain and obvious, that it be understood, that un- der two metaphors the principate of the whole church was promised ;’* as if that sense could beso plain and obvious, which is couched under two metaphors, and those not very pat or clear in applica- tion to their sense. 2. This is manifestiy confirmed from that the Fathers and divines, both ancient and modern, have much differed in ex- position of these words. [** Some” (saith Abulensis) “‘ say that this rock is Peter——others say, and bet- ter, that it is Christ——others say, and yet better, that it is the confession which Peter maketh.”* For some interpret this rock to be Christ himself, of whom St. Paul saith, Other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.‘ St. Austin telleth us in his Retracta- tions, that he ofien had expounded the words to this purpose, although he did not absolutely reject that interpretation which made St. Peter the rock ; leaving it to the reader’s choice which is the most probable.t Others (and those most eminent Fa- thers) do take the rock to be St. Peter’s faith, or profession: “" Upon the rock” (saith the prince of interpreters) “ that is, upon the faith of his profession ;{ and * Quorum verborum planus et obvius sen- sus est, ut intelligatur sub duabus metaphoris promissum Petro totius ecclesie principatum. — Bell. de Pont.i. 10. ἡ Scio me postea smpissime exposuisse, ut super hance Petrai intelligeretur quem confes- sus est Petrus; barum autem duarum senten- tiaram que sit probabilior eligat lector.— Ang. Retr. i. 21. Vide Aug. in Joh. tr. 124, de Verb. Dom. in Matt. Serm. 13. Super hanc. inquit, Petram quam confessus es, wedificabo ecclesiam meam.—Ang. in Joh. tr. 124, et de Verb. Dom. in Matt. Serm. 13 (tom. 10.) Su- per hanc Petram, id est, super me wdificabo ecclesiam meam.—Ans. in Matt. xvi. 18. t Τὴ Πέγρᾳ τουτέστι τῇ πίστει τῆς ag.—Chrys. in Matt. xvi. 18. * Tostat. in Matth. xvi. qu. 67. f | Cor. iii. 11. ὁμολογί- 101 again, ‘Christ saith that he would build his church on Peter’s confession ; ἢ and again (he, or another ancient writer un- der his name), “" Upon this rock, he said not upon Peter; for he did not build his church upon the man, but upon his faith.”’7 Our Lord” (saith Theodoret) ‘ did permit the first of the apostles, whose confession he did fix as a prop or founda- tion of the church, to be shaken.”’t [Whence Origen saith, that ‘ every disciple of Christ is the rock,”’|| in virtue of his agreement with Peter in that holy confession. | _ This sense even popes have embrac- ed. _ say,{] that as St. Peter did not speak for himself, but in the name of all the apostles, and of all faithful people, representing the pastors and people of the church ; so correspondently our Lord did declare, that he would build his church upon such faithful pastors and confessors. Others do indeed by the rock under- stand St. Peter’s person, but do not there- by expound to be meant his being su- preme governor of the apostles, or of the whole church.# * τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ἔφησεν ἐπὶ τὴν ὁμολογίαν οἰκοδομήσειν τὴν éxeivov.— Chrys. in Joh. i. 50. T ᾿Επὶ ταύτῃ τῇ Πέτρῳ οὐκ εἶπεν ἐπὶ τῷ Πέτρῳ" οὔτε γὰρ ἐπὶ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπὶ τὴν πίστιν τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ἐκκλησίαν Gxoddunoe.—Chrys. tom. v. Or. 163. Super hance igitur conlessionis Petram ecclesice edificatio est.— Hil. de Trin. 6. t ἀποστόλων τὸν πρῶτον, οὗ τὴν ὁμολογίαν οἷον τίνα κρηπῖδα, καὶ θεμέλιον τῆς ἐκκλησίας Karé- πηξε, συνεχώρησε cadevdijvar.—Theod. Ep. 77. Πέτρα γὰρ πᾶς ὃ Χριστοῦ μαθητὴς, &c.—Onig. in Matt. xvi. p. 275. § In vera fide persistite, et vitam vestram in petra ecclesie, hoc est in confessione B. Pe- tri apostolorum prineipis solidate.—Greg. M. Ep. iii. 33. Persist in the true faith, and es- tablish and fix your life upon the rock of the church, that is, upon the confession of blessed Peter, the prince of the apostles. Super ista confessione edificabo ecclesiam meam.— Felix III. Ep. 5. Vide Nic. I. Ep. ii. 6; Joh. VILL. Ep. 76. 1 Unus pro omnibus loquens, et ecclesia voce respondens.—Cypr. Ep. 55. One speak- ing for all, and answering in the name of the church. Cui ecclesie figuram gerenti Domi- nus ait, Super hanc Aug. Ep. 165.—To whom, representing the whole church, our Lord saith, Upon this rock, &c. Petrus ex per- sona omnium apostolorum profitetur.— Hier. in loc. Peter professes in the person of all the apostles. © Vide Rigalt. 73, 69. in Cypr. Ep. 27, 40, 70, 71 ’ 102 The divines, schoolmen, and canonists of the Roman communion, do not also agree in exposition of the words; and di- verse of the most learned among them do approve the interpretation of St. Chrysos- tom. Now then, how can so great a point of doctrine be firmly grounded on a place of so doubtful interpretation ὃ How can any one be obliged to understand the words according to their interpretation, which persons of so good sense and so great au- thority do understand otherwise ? With what modesty can they pretend that meaning to be clear, which so _perspi- cacious eyes could not discern therein ? Why may not I excusably agree with St. Chrysostom, or St. Austin, in understand- ing the place ? May I not reasonably op- pose their judgment to the opinion of any modern doctors, deeming Bellarmine as fallible in his conceptions as one of them? Why consequently may I not without blame refuse their doctrine, as built upon this place, or disavow the goodness of this proof? 3. It is very evident, that the apostles themselves did not understand those words of our Lord to signify any grant or prom- ise to St. Peter of supremacy over them ; for would they have contended for the chief place, if they had understood whose it of right was by our Lord’s own posi- tive determination? would they have disputed about a question, which to their knowledge by their Master was already stated ? Would they have troubled our Lord to inquire of him who should be the greatest in his kingdom, when they knew that our Lord had declared his will to make St. Peter viceroy ? Would the sons of Zebedee have been so foolish and presumptuous as to beg the place, which they knew by our Lord’s word and promise fixed on St. Peter?" Would St. Peter among the rest have fretted at that idle overture, whenas he knew the place by our Lord’s immutable purpose and infallible declaration assured to him ?* And if none of the apostles did understand the words to imply this Ro- man sense, who can be obliged so to un- * Matth. xx. 24,—’Axotcavres οἱ δέκα ἡγανάκ- rovv. And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation. » Luke xxii. 14; Mark ix. 33; Matt. xviii. 1. . A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. derstand them? Yea who can wisely, who can safely so understand them ? for surely they had common sense, as any man living now ὃ they had as much advantage as we can have to know our Lord’s meaning; their ignorance there- fore of this sense being so apparent, is not only a just excuse for not admitting this interpretation, but a strong bar against it. 4. This interpretation also doth not well consist with our Lord’s answers to the contests, inquiries, and petitions of his disciples, concerning the point of superiority : for doth he not (if the Ro- man expositions be good) seem upon those occasions, not only to dissemble his own word and promise, but to dis- avow them, or thwart them? Can we conceive, that he would in such a case of doubt forbear to resolve them, clearly to instruct them, and admonish them of their duty ? 5. Taking the rock, as they would have it, to be the person of St. Peter, and that on him the church should be built ; yet do not the words being a rock probably denote government? for what resemblance is there between being a rock and a governor ? at least, what as- surance can there be that this metaphor precisely doth import that sense ; seeing in other respects, upon as fair simili- tudes, he might be called so ? St. Austin saith, “the apostles were foundations, because their authority doth support our weakness.”’* St. Jerome saith, that they ‘‘ were foundations, because the’ faith of the church was first laid in them.” St. Basil saith, that ‘* St. Peter’s soul was called the rock, because it was firm- ly rooted in the faith, and did hold stiff, without giving way against the blows of temptation.”’t Chrysologus saith, that “ Peter had his name from a rock, because he first mer- * Quare sunt fundamenta apostoli et pro- phete, quia eorum auctoritas portat infirmita- tem nostram.—Aug. in Psal. 1xxxvi. + In illis erant fundamenta, ibi primum po- sita est fides ecclesiee.— Hier. in Psal. \xxxvi. t Πέτρα δὲ ὑψελὴ ἡ Ψυχὴ τοῦ μακαρίου Tlérpov ὠνόμασται, διὰ τὸ παγίως ἐνεῤῥιζῶσθαι τῇ πίστει, καὶ στεῤῥῶς καὶ ἐνενδότως ἔχειν πρὸς τὰς ἐκ πειρασμῶν ἐναγομένας πληγάς.----Β 85. in Is. ii. p- 809. = A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ited to found the church by firmness of faith.”’* These are fair explications of the met- aphor, without any reference to St. Pe- ter’s government. But, however, also admitting this, that being such a rock doth imply govern- ment and pastoral charge ; yet do they (notwithstanding these grants and sup- positions) effect nothing ; for they can- not prove the words spoken exclusively in regard to other apostles, or to import any thing singular to him above or be- side them: he might be ἃ governing rock, so might others be; the church might be built on him, so it might be on other apostles ; he might be designed a governor, a great governor, a principal governor, so might they also be; this might be without any violence done to those words. And this indeed was ; for all the other apostles in holy scriptureare called foun- dations, and the church is said to be built on them. “Tf” (saith Origen, the father of in- terpreters) ‘ you think the whole church to be only built on Peter alone, what will you say of John the son of thunder, and of each of the apostles ὃ 1 &c. large- ly to this purpose. “Christ” (as St. Jerome saith) “" was the Rock,’ and he bestowed it upon the apostles, that they should be called rocks."{ And ‘You say,” (saith he again), “that the church is founded on Peter; but the same in another place is done upon all the apostles.”’|| The twelve apostles, saith another an- cient author, “were the immutable pil- lars of orthodoxy, the rock of the church.” “The church” (saith St. Basil) * is built upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles ; Peter also was one of the * Petrus a petra nomen adeptus est. quia primus meruit ecclesiam fidei firmitate fundare. — Chrys. Serm. 53. t ΕΠ δὲ ἐπὶ τὸν ἕνα ἐκεῖνον Πέτρον νομίζεις ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ οἰκοδομεῖσθαι τὴν πᾶσαν ἐκκλησίαν μόνον, τί ἂν φήσαις περὶ ᾿Ιωάννου τοῦ τῆς βροντῆς υἱοῦ, ἣ ἐκάσ- ag ἀποστόλων, &e —Orig. in Matth. xvi. p. Ἐ Petra Christus est, qui donavit apostolis, ut 7 quoque Petre vocentur.— Hier. in Amos, ὡς. 18. __ || Dicis super Petrum fundatur ecclesia, licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes apostolos fiat.— Hier. in Jovin. i. 14. ' Eph. ii. 20. 103 mountains ; upon which rock the Lord did promise to build his church.”’* St. Cyprian’ in his disputes with Pope Stephen, did more than once allege this place, yet could he not take them in their sense to signify exclusively; for he did not acknowledge any imparity of power among the apostles or their suc- cessors. He indeed plainly took these words to respect all the apostles and their successors ; our Lord taking occa- sion to promise that to one, which he in- tended to impart to all for themselves and their successors : ** Our Lord,” saith he, ““ ordering the honour of a bishop, and the order of his church, saith to Pe- ter, I say to thee, ἄς. Hence, through the turns of times and successions, the ordination of bishops and the manner of the church doth run on, that the church should be settled upon the bishops, and every act of the church should be σον- erned by the same prelates:’*? as there- fore he did conceive the church to be built, not on the pope singularly, but on all the bishops; so he thought our Lord did intend to build his church, not upon St. Peter only, but on all his apostles. 6. It is not said that the apostles, or the apostolical office, should be built on him ; for that could not be, seeing the apostles were constituted, and the apos- tolical office was founded, before that promise ; the words only therefore can import, that according to some meaning he was a rock, upon which the church, afterward to be collected, should be built ; he was “ἃ rock of the church to be built,"t as Tertullian speaketh: the words therefore cannot signify any thing available to their purpose, in relation to the apostles. 7. If we take St. Peter himself for the rock, then (as I take it) the best * ᾿Εἰκκλησία----ἀκοδόμηται ἐπὶ τῷ θεμελίῳ τῶν ἀποσ- τόλων καὶ προφητῶν' ἕν τῶν ὄρεων ἣν καὶ Πέτρος, ἐφ᾽ ἧς καὶ πέτρας ἐπηγγείλατο ὃ ἰζύριος οἰκοδομῆσειν αὐτοῦ τὴν éxxAnofay.—Basil. in Isa. ii. p. S69. + Dominus noster episcopi honorem, et ec- clesia su rationem disponens, dicit Petro, Ego tibi dico Inde, per temporum et suc- cessionum vices, episcoporum ordinatio et ec- clesiw ratio becurrit, ut ecclesia super episco- pos constituatur, et omnis actus ecclesiw per eosdem prepositos gubernetur. Cypr. Ep. 27. et de Unit. Eccl. ¢ Latuit aliquid Petrum edificande eccle- sie Petram dictum. Tertull. de Preser. cap. 22. 1 Cypr. Ep. 71, 73. 104 meaning of the words doth import, that our Lord designed St. Peter for a prime instrument, (the first mover,* the most diligent and active at the beginning, the most constant, stiff, and firm) in the sup- port of his truth, and propagation of his doctrine, or conversion of men to the be- lief of the gospel; the which is called building of the church ; according to that of St. Ambrose, or some ancient homi- list under his name, “ He is called a rock, because he first did lay in the na- tions the foundations of faith :”t in which regard, as the other apostles are called foundations of the church (the church being founded on their labours), so might St. Peter signally be so called; who, as St. Basil saith, allusively interpreting our Saviour’s words, ‘* for the excellency of his faith did take on him the edifying of the church.”’¢ Both he and they also might be so termed, for that upon their testimonies concerning the life, death, and resur- rection of Christ, the faith of Christians was grounded; as also it stands upon their convincing discourses, their holy practice, their miraculous performances ; in all which St. Peter was most eminent; and in the beginning of Christianity dis- played them to the edification of the burch. This interpretation plainly doth agree with matter of fact and history ; which is the best interpreter of right or privi- lege in such cases ; for we may reason- ably understand our Saviour to have promised that, which in effect we see performed ; so “the event sheweth, the church was built on him, that is by him.”’|| saith ‘Tertullian. But this sense doth not imply any su- periority of power or dignity granted to St. Peter above his brethren ; however it may signify an advantage belonging to * Πέτρος ἐν ἀπόστολοις πρῶτος ἐκήρυξε τὸν Χρισ- rov.—Chrys. Peter first of all the apostles preached Christ. + Petra dicitur eo quod primus in nationibus fidei fundamenta posuerit.—Ambr. de Sanctis. Serm. 2. t Ὃ διὰ πίστεως ὑπεροχὴν ἐφ᾽ ἑαυτὸν τὴν οἱκοδο- μὴν τῆς ἐκκλησίας defapevos.—Bas. contra Eunom. jib. 2. Petra wdificande ecclesie.— Tertull. de Prescr. cap. 22. || Sic enim. exitus docet, in ipso ecclesia ex-~ tructa est, id est per ipsum, é&&¢.— Terl. de Pu- dic. cap. 21. ἫΝ ΠΤ ΠΥ ¥ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. him, and deserving especial respect; as St. Chrysostom notably doth set out in — these words: ‘* Although John, although James, although Paul, although any other whoever may appear performing great matters; he yet doth surpass them all, who did precede them in liberty of speech, and opened the entrance, and gave to them, as toa river carried with a huge stream, to enter with great ease :”* doing this, as, I say, it might signify his being a rock of the church, so it denoteth an excellency of merit, but not a superiority in power. 8. It may also be observed, that St. Peter before the speaking of those words by our Lord, may seem to have had a primacy, intimated by the evangelists, when they report his call to the apostoli- cal office ;* and by his behaviour, when in this confession, and before in the like, he undertook to be their mouth and spokesman ; when, ‘“ not being unmind- ful of his place” (saith St. Ambrose) ‘he did act a primacy ; a primacy” (ad- deth that father) ““ of confession, not of honour; of faith, not of order:”+ his primacy therefore (such as he had) can- not well be founded on this place, he being afore possessed of it, and, as St. Ambrose conceived, exercising it at that time. Il. They allege the next words of our Lord, spoken in sequel upon the same occasion : “ΤῸ thee will 1 give the keys of the kingdom of heaven;” that is, say they, ‘‘ the supreme power over all the church ;”t for he, say they, that hath the keys is master of the house. To this testimony we may apply di- vers of the same answers which were given to the former. For, 1. These words are figurative, and therefore not clear enough to prove their assertion. * Kay Ἰωάννης, κἂν ᾿Ιάκωδος,͵ κἂν Παῦλος, κἂν ἄλλος ὁστισοῦν μετὰ ταῦτα μέγα τι ποιῶν φαίνηται, ἁπάντων οὗτος πλεονεκτεῖ, ὃ πρωδοποιῆσας αὐτῶν τῇ παῤῥησιᾳ, καὶ διανοίξας τὴν εἴσοδον, καὶ δοὺς αὐτοῖς καθάπερ ποταμῷ πολλῷ φερομένῳ ῥεύματι μετὰ πολλῆς ἀδείας ἐπεισελθεῖν, &c.—Chrys. tom. v. Or. 59. + Loci non immemor sui primatum egit ;— primatum confessionis, non honoris; fidei, non ordinis.—Ambr. de Incarn. cap. 4. t Perclaves datas Petro intelligimus sum- mam potestatem in omnem ecclesiam,—Bell. de Pont. i. 3. ‘ Matt. x. 2; John vi. 69. Ἂν A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 2. They do admit, and have received, various interpretations. 3. It is evident, that the apostles them- selves did not understand these words as importing a supremacy over them; that St. Peter himself did not apprehend this sense ; that our Lord, upon occasion in- viting to it, did not take notice of his promise according thereto. 4. The words, “I will give thee,” cannot anywise be assured to have been exclusive of others, or appropriated to him. ‘*He said” (as a very learned man of the Roman communion noteth) “to Peter, I will give thee the keys ; but he said not, I will give them to thee alone :”** nothing therefore can be con- cluded from them to their purpose. 5. The fathers do affirm that all the apostles did receive the same keys. “Are” (saith Origen) “the keys of the kingdom of heaven given by the Lord to Peter alone, and shall none other of the blessed ones receive them? But if this, I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, be common, how also are not all the things common which were spoken before, or are added as spoken to Peter ὃ ἢ St. Jerome says in express words, that all “ the apostles did receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” ‘“‘ He” (saith Optatus) “did alone re- ceive the keys of the kingdom of heav- en,” (which were) “to be communi- ᾿ cated to the rest;” that is (as Rigaltius well expoundeth those words), ‘* which Christ himself would also communicate to the rest.””|| Theophylact. “ Although it be spok- * Dixit Petro, Dabo tibi claves; at non dixit, Dabo tibi soli.— Rigalt. in Epist. firmil. t "Apa δὲ τῷ Πέτρῳ μόνῳ δίδονται ὑπὸ τοῦ Kv- ρίου al κλεῖδες τῆς τῶν οὐρανῶν βασιλείας, καὶ οὐδεὶς ἕτερος τῶν μακαρίων αὐτὰς λήψεται ; εἰ δὲ κοινόν ἔστι καὶ πρὸς ἑτέρους, τὸ δώσω σοι τὰς κλεῖδας τῆς βασιλ- εἴας τῶν οὐρανῶν, πῶς οὐχὶ καὶ πάντα rare προειρημέ- | wa, καὶ τὰ ἐπιφερόμενα ὡς πρὸς Πέτρον λελεγμένα ;— Orig. in Mart. xvi. p. 275. ἔξ Quod Petro dicitur, apostolis dicitur.— Ambr. in Psal. xxxviii. What is said to Peter, is said to the apostles. Licet id ipsum in alio loco super omnes apostolos fiat, et cuncti claves regni celorum accipiant.—AHier. in Jov. i. 14. Though the same thing in another place is done = allthe apostles, and all receive the keys of the kingdom of heaven. ἢ Claves regni celorum communicandas | ewteris solus accepit.—Opt. lib. 7. Communi- candas ceteris dixit, quas ipse Christus com- Vor. ΤΠ. 14 105 en to Peter alone, J will give thee, yet it is given to all the apostles.”* It is part of St. John’s character in St. Chrysostom, “ He that hath the keys of the heavens.”’+ 6. Indeed, whatever (according to any tolerable exposition, or according to the current expositions of the Fathers) those keys of the kingdom of heaven do importt (whether it be a faculty of open- ing it by doctrine, of admitting into it by dispensation of baptism and absolu- tion, of excluding from it by ecclesiasti- cal censure, or any such faculty signifi- ed by that metaphorical expression), it plainly did belong to all the apostles, and was effectually conferred on them; yea, after them, upon all the pastors of the church in their several precincts and degrees ; who in all ages have claimed to themselves the power of the keys ; to be (as the Council of Compeigne call- eth all bishops) clavigeri, the “ key- bearers of the kingdom of heaven.”’|| So that in these werds nothing singu- lar was promised or granted to St. Pe- ter; although it well may be deemed a singular mark of favour, that what our Lord did intend to bestow on all pastors, that he did anticipately promise to him ; or, as the Fathers say, to the church and its pastors in him. In which respect we may admit those words of Pope Leo 1.$ 7. Indeed divers of the Fathers do con- ceive the words spoken to St. Peter, not as a single person, but as ἃ representa- tive of the church, or as standing in the municaturus erat et cxeteris.—Rigalt. in Cypr. de Un. Ecel. * Ei γὰρ καὶ πρὸς Πέτρον μόνον εἴρηται τὸ δώσω σοι, ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ᾿Αποστόλοις δέδοται.---- ΓΤ 6- oph in loc. Tt ὋὉ ras κλεῖς ἔχων τῶν otpavdy.—Chrys. in Pref. Evang. Joh. ¢ Clavis intelligit verbum Dei, evangelium Christi.—Rigalt. in Cyp. Ep. 73. || Episcopi quos constat esse vicarios Christi, et clavigeros regni ccolorum.—Conc. Comp. apud Bin. tom. vi. p. 361. § Transivit quidem in apostolos alios vis is- tius potestatis, sed non frustra uni commenda- tur quod omnibus intimetur. Petro ergo sin- gulariter hoc creditur, quia cunctis ecclesiz rectoribus Petri forma proponitur.—Leo I. in Nat. Petri et Pauli, Serm. 2. The efticacy of this power passed indeed upon all the apostles ; yet was it not in vain, that what was intimat to all, was commended to one. Therefore this is committed singly to Peter, because Peter’s pattern and example is propounded to all the governors of the church. 106 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. toom of each pastor therein ; unto whom our Lord designed to impart the power of the keys. ** All we bishops” (saith St. Ambrose) “have in St. Peter received the keys of the kingdom of heaven.”* 8. These answers are confirmed by the words immediately adjoined, equiva- lent to these, and interpretative of them: And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven ;*—the which doth import a power or privilege, soon after expressly, and in the very same words, promised or granted to all the apostles; as also the same power in other words was by our Lord conferred on them all after the resurrection.' If therefore the keys of the kingdom of heaven do import supreme power, then each apostle had supreme power. 9. If we should grant (that which nowise can be proved) that something peculiarly belonging to St. Peter is im- plied in those words, it can only be this, that he should be a prime man in the work of preaching and propagating the gospel, and conveying the heavenly ben- efits of it to believers ; which is an open- ing of the kingdom of heaven ; accord- ing to what Tertullian excellently saith of him: ‘So’ (saith he) “the event teacheth, the church was built in him, that is, by him ; he did initiate the key ; see which, Ye men of Israel, hear these * In B. Petro claves regni ccelorum cuncti suscepimus sacerdotes.— Ambr. de Dign. Sac. 1. Ecclesia que fundatur in Christo, claves ab eo regni ceelorum accepit, id est, potestatem ligan- di solvendique peccata.—Aug. Tract. 124, in Joh.: vide Tract.50. The church, which is founded upon Christ, received from him the keys of the kingdom of heaven, i. e. the power of binding and loosing sins. In typo unitatis Petro Dominus dedit potestatenm ——. Aug. de Bapt.iii. 17. Our Lord gave the power to Peter, as a type of unity. ’Ev προσώπῳ τοῦ Ko- ρυφαίου καὶ τοῖς λοιποῖς τῶν μαθητῶν ἡ τοιαύτη ἐξου- σία dédoratr—Phot. Cod. 280. Such authority was given to the rest of the apostles in the person of him who was the chief. Non sine causa inter omnes apostolos ecclesiz catholice per sonas sustinet Petrus ; huic enim ecclesie claves regni celorum datz sunt, cum Petro da-~ te sunt Aug. de Ag. Chr. cap. xxx, in Ps. eviii. Not without cause does Peter among the rest of the apostles sustain the per- son of the catholic church ; for to this church are the keys of the kingdom of heaven given, when they are given unto Peter. « Aug. supr. Matt. xviii. 18. ' John xx. 23. words, Jesus of Nazareth, a man ap- proved of God among you,” &c. “ He, in fine, in the baptism of Christ, did un- lock the entrance to the kingdom of heaven,”* &c. 10. It seemeth absurd, that St. Peter should exercise the power of the keys in respect to the apostles: for did he open the kingdom of heaven to them, who were by our Lord long before admitted into it? 11. In fine, our Lord (as St. Luke re- lateth it) did say to St. Peter, and pro- bably to him first, Fear not, from hence- forth thou shalt catch men:™ might it hence be inferred, that St. Peter hada peculiar or sole faculty of catching men ? why might it not by as good a conse- quence as this, whereby they would ap- propriate to him this opening faculty ? Many such instances might in like man- ner be used. Hil. They produce those words of our Saviour to St. Peter, Feed my sheep; that is, in the Roman interpretation, ‘Be thou universal governor of my church.” To this allegation I answer: 1. From words which truly and prop- erly might have been said to any other apostle, yea, to any Christian pastot whatever, nothing can be concluded to their purpose, importing a peculiar duty or singular privilege of St. Peter. 2. From indefinite words a definite conclusion (especially in matters of this kind) may not be inferred: it is said, Do thou feed my sheep; it is not said, Do thou alone feed all my sheep: this is their arbitrary gloss, or presumptuous improvement of the text; without suc- cour whereof the words signify nothing to their purpose, so far are they from sufficiently assuring so vast a pretence: for instance, when St. Paul doth exhort the bishops at Ephesus 7o feed the church of God; may it thence be collected, that each of them was: an universal go- * Sic enim exitus docet, in ipso ecclesia ex- tructa est, id est, per ipsum ; ipse clavem im- buit ; vide quam, Viri Israelite, auribus man- date que dico, Jesum Nazarenum virum ἃ Deo vobis destinatum, &c. Ipse denique pri- mus in Christi baptismo reseravit aditum co- lestis regni, &c.—Tert. de Pud. 21. m Luke v. 10; Matt. iv. 19. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. vernor of the whole church, which Christ had purchased with his own blood 3" 3. By these words no new power is (assuredly at least) granted or instituted by our Lord ;* for the apostles before this had their warrant and authority con- signed to them, when our Lord did in- spire them, and solemnly commissionate them, saying, As the Father did send me, so I send you:° to which commis- sion, these words (spoken occasionally, before a few of the disciples) did not add or derogate. At most, the words do only, as St. Cyril saith, ‘‘ renew the for- mer grant of apostleship,” after his great offence of denying our Lord. 4. These words do not seem institutive or collative of power, but rather only ad- monitive or exhortative to duty; imply- ing no more, but the pressing a common duty, before incumbent on St. Peter, upon a special occasion, in an advanta- geous season, that he should effectually discharge the office which our Lord had committed to him. Our Lord, I say, presently before his departure, when his words were like to have a strong impression on St. Peter, doth earnestly direct and warn him to express that special ardency of affection which he observed in him, in an answer- able care to perform his duty of feeding ; that is, of instructing, guiding, edifying, in faith and obedience, those sheep of his ; that is, those believers who should be converted to embrace his religion, as eyer he should find opportunity. 5. The same office certainly did be- long to all the apostles, who, as St. Je- rome speaketh, “‘ were the princes of our discipline, and chieftains of the Christian doctrine ;’’|| they at their first vocation had a commission and command Zo go unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel, that were scattered abroad like sheep not * Keyerporévnro μὲν ἤδη πρὸς τὴν θείαν drocro- λὴν ὁμοῦ τοῖς ἑτέροις μαθηταῖς Πέτρος.---ΟΥὙτ}}. in loc. Peter was ordained to the holy apostle- ship together with the rest of the disciples. ἡ Διὰ δὲ τοῦ φᾶναι τὸν Ἰζύριον βόσκε τὰ ἀρνία μοῦ, ἀνανέωσις ὥσπερ τις τῆς ἤδη δοθείσης ἀποστολῆς αὐτῷ γενέσθαι yoetrar.—Cyril. ibid. { Paulus apostolus boni pastoris implebat officiam, quando Christum predicabat.—Aug. in Joh. tr. 47, Paul fulfilled the office of a good pastor, when he preached Christ. || Principes discipline nostra, et Christiani dogmatis duces.—Hier. in Jovin. i. 14. = Acts xx, 28. * John xx. 21, 107 having a shepherd ;» they before our Lord’s ascension were enjoined to teach all nations the doctrines and precepts of Christ ; to receive them into the fold, to feed them with good instruction, to guide and govern their converts with good discipline; hence, “all of them,” as St. Cyprian saith, ‘‘ were shepherds ; but the flock did appear one, which was fed by the apostles with unanimous agree- ment.””* 6. Neither could St. Peter’s charge be more extensive, than was that of the other apostles ; for they had a general and unlimited care of the whole church ; that is, according to their capacity and opportunity, none being exempted from it, who needed or came into the way of their discharging pastoral offices for them. “* They were cecumenical rulers,” as St. Chrysostom saith, “‘ appointed by God, who did not receive several nations or cities, but all of them in common were entrusted with the world.” Hence particularly St. Chrysostom calleth St. John, “ a pillar of the churches over the world;” and St. Paul, “an apostle of the world,” who * had the care, not of one house, but of cities and na- tions, and of the whole earth: who ‘‘ undertook the world, and governed the churches ;” on whom “ὁ the whole world did look,’ and ** on whose soul the care of all the churches every where did hang; into whose hands were delivered the earth, and the sea, the inhabited and uninhabited parts of the world.’’; * Pastores sunt omnes, sed grex unus osten- ditur, qui ab apostolis omnibus unanimi con- sensione pascatur.—Cypr. de Un. Eccl. ἱ ‘Apyovrés εἰσιν ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ χειροτονηθέντες οἱ ἀπόστολοι" ἄρχοντες οὐκ ἔθνη καὶ πόλεις διαφόρους Aapbdvovres, ἀλλὰ πάντες κοινῆ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐμ- morev0évres.—Chrys. tom. viii. p. 118. Ὃ στύλος τῶν κατὰ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐκκλησιῶν. —Chrys. Pref. Comment. ad Joh. Καὶ γὰρ τὴς οἰκουμένης ἀπόστυλος ἣν.---ΟἾΓν8. in 1 Cor. ix. 2. Odros 6 οὐκ οἰκίας μιᾶς, ἀλλὰ καὶ πολέων, καὶ δήμων, καὶ ἐθνῶν, καὶ ὁλοκλήρου τῆς οἰκουμένης φροντίδα Exwv.—Chrys. in 2 Cor. xi. 28. ῆς οἰκουμένης ἀντιλαμθάνετο πάσης, καὶ διεκυδέρνα τὰς ἐκκλησίας.--- Chrys. tom, viii. p. 115. Ἢ οἰκουμένη πᾶσα πρὸς αὐτὸν ἔδλεπεν, al φροντίδες τῶν πανταχοῦ τῆς γῆς ἐκ- κλησιῶν τῆς ἐκείνου ψυχῆς ἣν ἐξηρτημέναι --------, Chrys. tom. v. Or. ὅθ. Ὁ Μιχαὴλ τὸ τῶν "Tov. δαίων ἔθνος ἐνεχειρίσθη" Ἰ]αῦλος ti γῆν, καὶ θάλατ- ταν, καὶ τὴν οἰκουμένην, καὶ τὴν doixnrov,——-Chrys, tom. viii. p. 89), P Matt. x. 6; ix. 30. 4 Matt. xxvii. 19, 20. τέ "" 108 And could St. Peter have a larger flock committed ‘to him? could this charge, Feed my sheep, more agree to him, than to those who no less than he were obliged to feed all Christian people every where ὃ 7. The words indeed are applicable to all Christian bishops and governors of the church; according to that of St. Cyprian to Pope Stephen himself: ‘“ We being many shepherds, do feed one flock, and all the sheep of Christ:°* for they are styled pastors ; they, in terms as indefi- nite as those in this text, are exhorted to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood ;* to them (as the Fathers commonly suppose) this injunction doth reach; our Lord, when he spake thus to St. Peter, intending to lay a charge on them all to express their love and piety toward him in this way, by feeding his sheep and people.t ** Which sheep” (saith St. Ambrose) * and which flock, not only then St. Pe- ter did receive, but also with him all we priests did receive it.’t “Our Lord” (saith St. Chrysostom) * did commit his sheep to Peter, and to those which came after him;”’|} that is, to all Christian pastors, as the scope of his discourse sheweth. ἐς When it is said to Peter’ (saith St. Austin) “it issaid to all, Feed my sheep."\ “And we’ (saith St. Basil) ‘ are taught this” (obedience to superiors) ‘‘by Christ himself constituting St. Peter pas- tor after himself of the church ( for Pe- ter, saith he, dost thou love me more than these? Feed my sheep ;) and conferring to all pastors and teachers continually af- * Pastores multi suamus, unum tamen gre- gem, et oves Christi universas pasciimus.— Cypr. Ep. 67, ad P. Steph. + Quanto magis debent usque ad mortem pro veritate certare, et usque ad sanguinem adversus peccatum, guibus oves ipsas pascen- das, hoc est docendas regendasque committit.— Aug. in Joh. Tract. 123. How much more ought they to contend for the truth even unto death, and against sin even unto blood, to whom he committeth his sheep to be fed, that is, to be taught and governed. $¢ Quas oves, et quem gregem non solum tunc B. suscepit Petrus, sed et cum eo nos sus- cepimus omnes.—Ambr. de Sacerd, 2. Π Ta rpé6ara, a τῷ Πέτρῳ, καὶ τοῖς μετ᾽ ἐκεῖνον éveyetorce.—Chrys. de Sacerd. 1, ¢ Cum dicitur Petro, ad omnes dicitur, Pasce oves meas.—Aug. de Agone Christ. 30. * Acts xx. 28. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. terward an equal power” (of doing so 5) ‘“‘ whereof itis a sign, that all do in like manner bind and do loose as he.”* St. Austin compriseth all these conside- rations in those words.t How could these great masters more clearly express their mind, that our Lord in those words to St. Peter did inculcate a duty nowise peculiar to him, but equally together with him belonging to all guides of the church; in such manner, as when a master doth press a duty on one ser- vant, he doth thereby admonish all his servants of the like duty? whence St. Austin saith, that St. Peter in that case ‘did sustain the person of the ehurch : ἢ that which was spoken to him belonging to all its members, especially to-his breth- ren the clergy. “ἢ was” (saith Cyril) ‘a lesson to teachers, that they cannot otherwise please the Arch-pastor of all, than by taking care of the welfare of the ration- al sheep.’’|| 8. Hence it followeth, that the sheep, which. our Saviour biddeth St. Peter to feed, were not the apostles, who were his fellow-shepherds, designed to feed others, and needing not to be fed by him; but the common believers, or people of God, which St. Peter himself doth call the flock of God: Feed (saith he to his * Kat τούτου παρ᾽ αὐτοῦ Χριστοῦ παιδευόμεθα, Πέτρον ποιμένα μεθ᾽ ἑαυτὸν τῆς ἐκκλησίας καθιστῶν- τος, Ἰ]έτρε, γὰρ φησὶ, φιλεῖς pe πλέον τούτων ; ποί- pave τὰ πρόθατά μου" καὶ πᾶσι δὴ τοῖς ἐφεξῆς ποιμέσι καὶ διδασκάλοις τὴν ἴσην παρέχοντος ἐξουσίαν" καὶ τούτου σημεῖον τὸ δεσμεῖν ἅπαντας byotws,, καὶ λύειν ὥσπερ éxetvos.—Bas. Const. Mon. cap. 22. + Et quidem, fratres, quod pastor est, dedit et membris suis; nam et Petrus pastor, et Paulus pastor, et ceteri apostoli pastores, et boni episcopi pastores.—Aug. in Joh. Tract. 47, And indeed, brethren, that which a pastor is, he gave also to his members ; for both Peter was a pastor,and Paula pastor, and the rest of the a- postles were pastors,andgood bishops are pastors. + Ut ergo Petrus quando ei dictum est, Tibi dabo claves, in figura personam gestabat ec- clesiz, sic et quando ei dictum est, Pasce oves meas, ecclesice quoque personam in figura ges~ tabat.—Aug. in Ps. cvili. Οὐ πρὸς ἱερέας δὲ τοῦτο μόνον εἴρηται, ἀλλὰ καὶ πρὸς ἔκαστον ημῶν τῶν καὶ μικρὸν ἐμπεπιστευμένων motuvtov.—Chrys. in Matt. xxiv. Or. 77. This was not spoken to those priests only, but to every one of us, who have the care even of a little flock committed to us. || Διδασκάλοις δὲ γνῶσις διὰ τῆς τῶν προκειμένων εἰσθέθηκε θεωρίας, ὡς οὐκ ἂν ἑτέρως εὐαρεστήσειεν τῷ πάντων ἀρχιποιμένι, εἰ μὴ τῆς τῶν λογικῶν προθάτων εὐρωστίας, καὶ τῆς εἰς τὸ εὖ εἶναι διαμονῆς ποιοῖντο φροντίδα.----ΟΥΤΊ]. ibid. __ ==” — - A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. fellow-elders) the flock of God which is among you; and St. Paul: Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers.® 9. ‘Take feeding for what you please ; for teaching, for guiding; the apostles were not fit objects of it, who were im- mediately taught and guided by God himself. Hence we may interpret that saying of St. Chrysostom, which is the most plausi- ble argument they can allege for them, that our Lord, in saying this, did commit to St. Peter “"" ἃ charge” (or presidency) * over his brethren ;’’* that is, he made him a pastor of Christian people, as he did others; at least, if προστασία τῶν ἀδελφῶν be referred to the apostles, it must not signify authority over them, but at most a primacy of orderamong them ; for that St. Peter otherwise should feed them, St. Chrysostom could hardly think, who presently after saith, that ‘* seeing the apostles were to receive the adminis- tration of the whole world, they ought not afterward to converse with one another ; for that would surely have been a great damage to the world.’’t 10. But they, forsooth, rust have St. Peter solely obliged to feed all Christ’s sheep; so they did impose upon hima vast and crabbed province; a task very incommodious, or rather impossible for him to undergo. How could he in duty be obliged, how could he in effect be able, to feed so many flocks of Christian people scattered about in distant regions, through all nations under heaven? He, poor man, that had so few helps, that had no officers or dependents, nor wealth to maintain them, would have been much put to it to feed the sheep in Britain and in Parthia; unto infinite distraction of thoughts such a charge must needs have engaged him. But for this their great champion hath a fine expedient: “St. Peter” (saith he) “did feed Christ’s whole flock, partly by * ‘Eeyxeupttec τὴν προστασίαν τῶν ἀδελφῶν.-το: Chrys. in Joh. xxi. 15, "Τὴν προστασίαν ἐνεπι- στεύθη τῶν ἀδελφῶν. In ver. 2). + ᾿Επειδὰν γὰρ ἔμελλον τῆς οἰκουμένης τὴν ἐπιτρο- πὴν ἀναδίξασθαι, οὐκ ἔδει συμπεπλέχθαι λοιπὸν ἀλλή- λοις" ἢ γὰρ ἂν μεγάλη τοῦτο τῇ οἰκουμένῃ γέγονε ζη- Μία..----ἰυἱά, ver. 23. * 1 Pet. v.2; Acts xx. 28. 109 himself, partly by others ;”* so that, it seemeth, the other apostles were St. Pe- ter’s curates, or vicars and deputies. This indeed were an easy way of feed- ing; thus, although he had slept all his time, he might have fed all the sheep un- der heaven; thus any man as well might have fed them. But this manner of feeding is, 1 fear, a later invention, not known so soon in the church; and it might then seem near as absurd to be a shepherd, as it is now (in his own ac- count) to be a just man by imputation; that would be a kind of putative pastor- age, as this a putative righteousness. However, the apostles, I dare say, did not take themselves to be St. Peter’s sur- rogates, but challenged to themselves to be accounted the ministers, the stewards, the ambassadors of Christ himself ;* from whom immediately they received their orders, in whose name they acted, to whom they constantly refer their authori- ty, without taking the least notice of St. Peter, or intimating any dependence on him. It was therefore enough for St. Peter that he had authority restrained to no place ; but might, as he found occasion, preach the gospel, convert, confirm, guide Christians every where to truth and duty : nor can our Saviour’s words be forced to signify more. In fine, this (together with the prece- dent testimonies) must not be interpreted so as to thwart practice and history ; ac- cording, to which it appeareth, that St. Peter did not exercise such a power, and therefore our Lord did not intend to confer such an one upon him. IV. Further, in confirmation of their doctrine, they do draw forth a whole shoal of testimonies, containing divers prerogatives, as they call them, of St. Pe- ter, which do, as they suppose, imply this primacy ;+ so very sharpsighted in- deed they are, that in every remarkable accident befalling him, in every action performed by him, or to him, or about * Respondeo, S. Petrum partim per se, par- tim per alios, universum Dominicum gregem ut sibi imperatum erat pavisse Bell. de Pont. R.i. 16. t P. Leo IX. Ep. 1.—Ad ejusdem primatus confirmationem, &c,— Bell. i. 17, ‘ 1Cor. iv.1; 2Cor. v.20; x.8; Gal. i. Ls Tit. i. 3, de. 110 him, they can descry some argument or shrewd insinuation of his pre-eminence ; especially being aided by the glosses of some fanciful expositor. From the change of his name; from his walking on the sea; from his miraculous draught of fish; from our Lord’s praying for him that his faith should not fail, and bidding him to confirm his brethren; from our Lord’s ordering him to pay the tribute for them both; from our Lord’s first wash- ing his feet, and his first appearing to him after the resurrection ; from the pre- diction of his martyrdom; from sick persons being cured by his shadow; from his sentencing Ananiasand Sapphira to death ; from his preaching to Corneli- us; from its being said that he passed through all ;‘ from his being prayed for by the church ; from St. Paul’s going to visit him: from these passages, I say, they deduce or confirm his authority. Now in earnest, is not this stout argu- ment? Is it not egregious modesty for such a point to allege such proofs ? What cause may not be countenanced by such rare fetches? Who would not suspect the weakness of that opinion, which is fain to use such forces in its maintenance ? In fine, is it honest or conscionable deal- ing, so to wrest or play with the holy scripture, pretending to derive thence proofs, where there is no show of con- sequence ? To be even with them, I might assert the primacy of St. John, and to that pur- pose might allege his prerogatives (which indeed may seem greater than those of St. Peter ;) namely, that he was the belov- ed disciple," that he leaned on our Lord’s breast ; that St. Peter, not presuming to ask our Lord a question, desired him to do it, as having a more special confidence with our Lord; that St. John did higher service to the church, and all posterity, by writing not only more Epistles, but also a most divine Gospel, and a sublime prophecy* concerning the state of the church; that St. John did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre’ (in which passage such acute devisers would find * Infinita futurorum mysteria continentem, — Hier. Containing infinite mysteries of future things. t Acts ix. 32. ¥ John xx. 4. “ John xiii. 24. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. out marvellous significancy;) that St. John was a virgin; that he did outlive all the apostles (and thence was most fit to be universal pastor;) that St. Jerome, comparing Peter and John, doth seem to prefer the latter; for ‘ Peter” (saith he) *¢ was an apostle, and John was an apostle ; but Peter was only an apostle ; John both an apostle and an evangelist ; and also a prophet ;—and” (saith he) ἐς that 1 may in brief speech comprehend many things, and slew what privilege belongeth to John—yea, virginity in John; by our Lord a virgin, his mother the virgin, is commended to the virgin dis- ciple.”* Thus I might by prerogatives and passages very notable infer the su- periority of St. John to St. Peter, in im- itation of their reasoning ; but lam afraid they would scarce be at the trouble to answer me seriously, but would think it enough to say 1 trifled: wherefore let it suffice for me in the same manner to put off those levities of discourse. V. They argue this primacy from the constant placing St. Peter’s name before the other apostles, in the catalogues and narrations concerning him and them. To this I answer : I. That this order is not so strictly ob- served, as not to admit some exceptions ; for St. Paul saith, that James, Cephas, and John, knowing the grace given unto him—so it is commonly read in the ordi- nary copies, in the text of ancient com- mentators, and in old translations ; and, Whether Paul, whether Apollos, whether Cephas, (saith St. Paul again ;) and, As the other apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas; and, Philip (saith St. John) was of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter ;~ and Clemens Alexandrinus in Eusebius saith, that «τῇ Lord, after his resurrection, deliv- ered the special knowledge to James the just, and to John, and to Peter : 1 post- * Petrus apostolus est, et Joannes apostolus, maritus et virgo; sed Petrus apostolus tantum, Joannes et apostolus et evangelista et propheta, &c.—Hier. in Jovin. i. 14. Et ut brevi sermo- ne multa comprehendam, doceamque cujus privilegii sit Joannes, imo in Joanne vir- ginitas ; a Domino virgine mater virgo virgini discipulo commendatur.—Hier. ibid. ἡ ᾿Ιακώθῳ τῷ δικαίῳ καὶ ᾿Ιωάννῃ καὶ Πέτρῳ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν παρέδωκε τὴν γνῶσιν ὃ ἸΚύριος.----1 8. Hist. ii. 1. : ~ Gal. ii. 9; 1 Cor. iii. 22; ix.5; Johni. 45. A TREATISE OF THE poning St. Peter, as perhaps conceiving him to have less of sublime revelations imparted to him: that order therefore is not so punctually constant. In the Apostolical Constitutions, St. Paul-and St. Peter being induced jointly prescribing orders, they begin, “ I Paul, and 1 Peter, do appoint:’ so little am- bitious or curious of precedence are they represented. 2. But it being indeed so constant, as not to seem casual, | further say, that po- sition of names doth not argue difference of degree, or superiority in power; any small advantage of age, standing, merit, or wealth, serving to ground such prece- dence, as common experince doth shew. 3. We formerly did assign other suffi- cient and probable causes why St. Peter had this place. So that this is no cogent reason. VI. Further (and this indeed is far their most plausible argumentation), they al- lege the titles and elogies given to St. Peter by the Fathers; who call him ἔξαρχον (the prince), κοργφαῖον (the ringleader), κεφαλὴν (the head), πρόεδρον (the president), ἀρχηγὸν (the captain), προήγορον (the prolocutor), πρωτοστάτην (the foreman), προστάτην (the warden), Exxgitov τῶν ἀποστόλων (the choice, or egregious apostle), majorem (the greater, or grandee among them), primum (the first, or prime apostle. )* To these and the like allegations I answer : 1. If we should say, that we are not accountable for everv hyperbolical flash or flourish occurring in the Fathers (it being well known that they in their en- comiastic speeches, as orators are wont, following the heat and gayety of fancy, do sometimes overlash), we should have the pattern of their greatest controvertists to warrant us;t+ for Bellarmine doth put off their testimonies by saying, that they do “sometimes speak in way of excess, less properly, less warily, so as to need benign exposition,” ὅσο. ἡ as Bishop An- * 'Eya ῦ ὡ Const eee yuan” πρό τὰ + The truth is, the best arguments of the pa- pists in other questions are some flourishes of orators, speaking hyperbolically and heedlessly. $ Per excessum loqui.—Bell. de Miss, ii. 10; minus proprie, ii. 4; benigna expositione opus * Chrys. tom. v. Or. 59; Chrys. in Joh. xxi. ; Cypr. cont. Jul. ix. (p. 325;) Aug. Ep. xi. 19. διατασσόμεθα ..---- lS Sh POPE’S SUPREMACY. 111 drews sheweth; and it isa common shift of Cardinal Perron, whereof you may see divers instances alleged by M. Daiile.” Which observation is especially appli- cable to this case ; for that eloquent men do never more exceed in their indulgence to fancy, than in the demonstrative kind, in panegyrics, in their commendations of persons ; and | hope they will embrace this way of reckoning for those expres- sions of Pope Leo, sounding so exorbi- tantly, that St. Peter was by our Lord ‘¢ assumed into consortship of his_indi- vidual unity ;”’ and that ‘* nothing did pass upon any from God, the fountain of good things, without the participation of Peter.* 2. We may observe, that such turgid elogies of St. Peter are not found in the more ancient Fathers; for Clemens Ro- manus, Ireneus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, Firmilli- an when they mention St. Peter, do speak more temperately and simply, ac- cording to the current notions and tradi- tions of the church in their time; using indeed fair terms of respect, but not such high strains of courtship, about him. But they are found in the latter Fathers, who being men of wit and eloquence, and af- fecting in their discourses to vent those faculties, did speak more out of their own invention and fancy. Whence, according to a prudent esti- mation of things in such a case, the si- lence or sparingness of the first sort is of more consideration on the one hand, than the speech, how free soever, of the latter is on the other hand: and we may rather suppose those titles do not belong to St. Peter, because the first do not give them, than that they do, because the other are so liberal in doing it. Indeed if we consult the testimonies of this kind alleged by the Romanists, who with their utmost diligence have raked all ancient writings for them, it is strange that they cannot find any very ancient ones ; that they can. find so few plausible ones ; that they are fain (to make up the habere.—de Amiss. Gr. iv. 12; minus caute; de Purg. i. 11. * Nunc enim in eonsortium individue uni- tatis assumptum id quod ipse erat voluit nomi- nari—P. Leo I. Ep. 89. Nihil a bonorum fonte Deo in quenquam sine Petri participati- one transire.—P. Leo de Assumpt. sua. Serm. 3. ¥ Tort. Tort. p. 338; Daill. de Us. P. lib. i. cap. 6, p. 158, (et p. 314.) 112 number) to produce so many, which evi- dently have no force or pertinency ; be- ing only commendations of his apostoli- cal office, or of his personal merits, with- out relation to others. 3. We say, that all those terms or ti- tles, which they urge, are ambiguous, and applicable to any sort of primacy or pre-eminency ; to that which we admit, no less than to that which we refuse ; as by instances from good authors, and from common use, might easily be demonstrat- ed; so that from them nothing can be in- ferred advantageous to their cause. Cicero calleth Socrates “ prince of the philosophers ;”* and Sulpitius, ‘ prince of all lawyers :” would it not be ridicu- lous thence to infer that Socrates was a sovereign governor of the philosophers, or Sulpitius of the lawyers? The same great speaker calleth Pompey ‘“ prince of the city in all men’s judgment:”* doth he mean, that he did exercise jurisdiction over the city. Tertullus calleth St. Paul πρωτοστάτην, a ringleader of the sect of the Naza- renes ;* and St. Basil calleth Eustathius Sebastenus “foreman of the sect of the Pneumatomachi:”’? did Tertullus mean that St. Paul had universal jurisdiction over Christians ? or St. Basil, that Eus- tathius was sovereign of those heretics ? So neither did ‘“ prince of the apos- tles,” or any equivalent term, in the sense of those who assigned it to St. Peter, import authority over the apostles, but eminency among them in worth, in merit, in apostolical performances, or at most in order of precedence. Such words are to be interpreted by the state of things, not the state of things to be inferred from them; and in un- derstanding them we should observe the rule of Tertullian. * Quem omnium judicio longe principem esse civitatis videbat. principem orbis ter- re virum Cic. pro. Domo sua. + Ipwroorarny τῆς TOV πνευματομάχων αἱρέσεωϊ. —Bas. Ep. 74. + Malo te ad sensum rei quam ad sonum vocabuli exerceas.— Tert. adv. Praz. cap.3. I had rather you would apply yourself to the sense of the thing, than to the sound of the word. Ov yap αἱ λέξεϊς τὴν φύσιν παραιροῦνται" ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἡ φύσις τὰς λέξεις εἰς ἑαυτὴῆν ἕλκουσα pera6iddec.—Atban. Orat. ill. adv. Ar (p. 373.) For words do not take away the nature of * Cic. de Nat. Deor. lib. 11. Cic. de clar. Orat. * Acts xxiv. 5. . A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 4. Accordingly the Fathers some- times do explain those elogies signify- ing them to import the special gifts and virtues of St. Peter, wherein he did ex- cel; so Eusebius calleth St. Peter ‘ the most excellent and great apostle, who for his virtue was prolocutor of the rest.”» 5. This answer is thoroughly con- firmed from hence ; that even those who give those titles to St. Peter, do yet expressly affirm other apostles in power and dignity equal to him. Who doth give higher elogies to him than St. Chrysostom? yet doth he as- sert all the apostles to be supreme, and ‘‘ equal in dignity ;” and particularly he doth often affirm St. Paul to be ἰσότιμον, equal in honour to St. Peter, as we be- fore shewed. The like we declared of St. Jerome, St. Cyril, ὅθ. And as for St. Cyprian, who did allow a primacy to St. Peter, nothing can be more evident than that he took the other apostles to be ‘equal to him in power and honour.” The like we may conceive of St. Aus- tin, who, having carefully perused those writings of St. Cyprian, and frequently alleging them, doth never contradict that his sentiment. Even Pope Gregory himself acknow- ledgeth St. Peter not to have been pro- perly the head, but only ‘ the first mem- ber of the universal church; all being members of the church under one head.”’* 6. If Pope Leo I. or any other an- cient pope, do seem to mean further, ‘we may reasonably except against their opinion as being singular, and proceed- ing from partial affection to their See ; such affection having influence on the mind of the wisest men ; according to that certain maxim of Aristotle, “* Every man is a bad judge in his own case.” 7. The ancients, when their subject doth allure them, do adorn other apostles with the like titles, equalling those of St. Peter, and not well consistent with them, things, but the nature rather changes the words, and draws them to itself. * Certe Petrus apostolus primum membrum S. et universalis ecclesize sub uno capite omnes membra sunt ecclesie.—Greg. 1. Ep. iv. 38. * Euseb. Hist. ii. 14. ——e Ὡπσῤρττ ὩΝ » A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. according to that rigour of sense which our adversaries affix to the commenda- tions of St. Peter. The Epistle of Clemens Romanus to St. James (an apocryphal but ancient writing), calleth St. James our Lord’s brother, ‘‘ the bishop of bishops ;” the Clementine Recognitions call him “ the prince of bishops;” Ruffinus, in his translation of Eusebius, “ the bishop of the apostles ;”’* St. Chrysostom saith of him, that he “did preside over all the Jewish believers ;”* Hesychius, pres- byter of Jerusalem, calleth him “ the chief captain of the new Jerusalem, the captain of priests, the prince of the apos- tles, the top among the heads,” &c.t The same Hesychius calleth St. An- drew “ the first-born of the apostolical choir, the first settled pillar of the church, the Peter before Peter, the foundation of the foundation, the first fruits of the be- ginning,” &c.|| St. Chrysostom saith of St. John, that he was “a pillar of the churches through the world, he that had the keys of the kingdom of heaven,” &c.§ But as occasion of speaking about St. Paul was more frequent, so the elogies of him are more copious, and indeed so high as not to yield to those of St. Peter. “He was” (saith St. Chrysostom) “the ringleader and guardian of the choir of all the βαϊηίβ5. “ He was the tongue, the teacher, the apostle of the world. He had the whole world put into his hands, and took care * Ἐλήμης ᾿Ιακώθῳ ἐπισκόπων ἐπισκόπῳ. Ja- cobum episcoporum principem sacerdotum princeps orabat. Clem. Rec. i. 68. Apostolo- rum episcopus.—Ruf. Euseb. ii. 1. - t It is likely that Ruffinus did call him so, by mistaking that in tae Apostolical Constitu- tions: Ὑπὲρ rod ἐπισκόπου ἡμῶν 'laxd6ov.—Apost. Const. viii. 10. Τῶν ἐξ ᾿Ιουδαίων. πιστευσάντων προειστήκει mavrwv.—Chrys. tom. v. Or. 59. t Tov τῆς νέας Ἱερουσαλὴμ ἀρχιστράτηγον, τῶν ἱερέων ἡγῆμονα, τῶν ἀποστύλων τὸν ἔξαρχον, τὸν ἐν κεφαλαῖς κορυφὴν, Sc.—Hesych. Presb. apud Phot. Cod, 275. (p. 1525.) || ‘O τοῦ χοροῦ τῶν ἀποστόλων πρωτότοκος, ὃ πρω- τοπαγὴς τῆς ἐκκλησίας στύλος, ὃ πρὸ Πέτρου Πέτρος, ὃ τοῦ θεμελίου θεμέλιος, ὁ τῆς ἀρχῆς drap yx} ‘ Hesych. apud Phot. Cod, 269, § Ὃ στύλος τῶν κατὰ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐκκλησιῶν, ὮΝ κλεῖς ἔχων τῶν οὐρανῶν, &c,—Chrys. in Joh, I Ὁ τῶν ἁγίων χοροῦ κορυφαῖος καὶ προστάτης ---- Chrys. in Rom. xvi. 24, Ὁ τῆς οἰκουμένῆς ἀπόσ- rokos.—Chrys. in 1 Cor. ix. 2. Vor. Til. 15 118 thereof, and had committed to bim all men dwelling upon earth.”* ‘“‘ He was the light of the churches, the foundation of faith, the pillar and ground of truth.” “ He had the patronage of the world committed into his hands.”’+ ‘“‘ Fle was better than all men, greater than the apostles, and surpassing them 4}}.} ‘“‘ Nothing was more bright, nothing more illustrious than he.”’|| ‘“* None was greater than he, yea none equal to him.’’$ Pope Gregory I. saith of St. Paul, that “he was made head of the nations, be- cause he obtained the principate of the whole church.’’{] These characters of St. Paul I leave οὐδῷ a! γλῶττα τῆς οἰκουμένης, τὸ φῶς τῶν ἐκκλη- σιῶν, ὃ θεμέλιος τῆς πίστεως, ὃ στῦλος καὶ ἐδραίωμα τῆς ἀληθείας. Thy οἰκουμένην ἅπασαν ἐγκεχειρισμέ- vos. He had the whole habitable world com- mitted to his charge. Τῆς oikoupévns διδάσκαλος ἂν τοὺς τὴν γῆν οἰκοῦντας ἅπαντας ἐπιτραπείς. He was the teacher of the world, and had all the inhabitants of the earth committed to his trust. t Τὴν τῆς σϊκουμένης προστασίαν ἐγκεχειρισμένος. —In Jud. Or. 6. Tis οἰκουμένης τὴν προστασίαν ἐπιδέξασθαι.----1 1 Cor. Or. 22. Οὐ τὴν οἰκουμέ- νὴν ἅπασαν εἰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ φέρων ἔθηκεν ὃ Θεός ; Tom. vii. p.2. Did not God put into his hands the whole world? Ὃ πάσης οἰκουμένης κρατήσας. —In 2 Tim. ii. 1. He had the charge of the whole world. 1 Πάντων ἀνθρώπων xpsirrwy.—De Sacerd. 4. Tis οὖν ἁπάντων ἀνθρώπων ἀμείνων ; ris δὲ ἕτερος, ἀλλ᾽ ἢ ὃ σκηνοποιὸς ἐκεῖνος, ὃ τῆς οἰκουμένης διδάσκα- λος εἰ τοῖνυν μείζονα τῶν ἀποστόλων λαμθάνει στέφανον, τῶν δέ ἀποστόλων ἴσος οὐδεὶς γέγονεν, οὖ- tos δὲ κἀκεῖνων μείζων, εὔδηλον ὅτι τῆς ἀνωτάτω ἀπολαύσεται τιμῆς καὶ προεδρίας.---- ΤΌ. ν΄. Or. 33. Who then was better than all other men? who else but that tent-maker, the teacher of the world ?——If_ therefore he receive a greater crown than the apostles, and none perhaps was equal to the apostles, and yet he greater than they, it is manifest, that he shall enjoy the highest honour and pre-eminence. || Παύλου λαμπρότερον οὐδὲν ἦν, οὐδὲ περιφανέστε- pov.—Tom. v. Or. 47. ᾧ Οὐδεὶς δὲ ἐκεΐνου μείζων, ἀλλ᾽ οὐδὲ ἴσος tori.— Tom, vi. Or. 9. Οὐδεὶς Παύλου ἴσος ἦν.---- Tim. iii. 156. Ὃ πάνσοφος, ὃ τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν, ἄριστος ἀρχ- iréxrwv.—Theod, Ep. 146. The most wise, and best architect, or chief builder of the churches. Ὁ μακάριος ἀπόστολος, ὃ τῶν πατέρων rarho.—Just. M. Resp. ad Orthod Qu. 119. The blessed apostle, the father of the fathers. { Caput effectus est nationum, quia obtinu- it totius ecclesie principatum.—Greg. M. in 1 Reg. lib. 4. Videsis. Paulus apostoloram prin- ceps —Ep. Spalat. in Lat. Syn. sub. P. Jul. 1]. Sess. i. p. 25. Te ee 114 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. them to interpret, and reconcile with those of St. Peter. 8. That the Fathers, by calling St. Peter prince, chieftain, &c. of the apos- tles, do not mean authority over them, may be argued from their joining St. Paul with him in the same appellations ; who yet surely could have no jurisdic- tion over them; and his having any would destroy the pretended ecclesiasti- cal monarchy. St. Cyril calleth them together, “ pa- trons, or presidents of the church.”* St. Austin (or St. Ambrose or Maxi- mus) calleth them ‘princes of the churches.” The Popes Agatho and Adrian (in their general synods) call them ‘ the ringleading apostles.’’t The Popes Nicholas I. and Gregory VIL, &c. call them ‘ princes of the apos- 1165. St. Ambrose, or St. Austin, or St. Maximus ‘T'aur. (choose you which), doth thus speak of them : ““ Blessed Pe- ter and Paul are most eminent among all the apostles, excelling the rest by a kind of peculiar prerogative : but whether of the two be preferred before the other is uncertain ; for | count them to be equal in merit, because they are equal in suf- fering,”’ &c.|| To all this discourse I shall only add, that if any of the apostles, or apostolical men, might claim a presidency or autho- ritative headship over the rest, St. James seemeth to have the best title thereto ;§ for ““ Jerusalem was the mother of all churches,”’' the fountain of the Christian * Πέτρος καὶ ἸΠαῦλος, οἱ τῆς ἐκκλησίας προστάται. —Cyril. Cat. 6. + Ecclesiarum principes.— Aug. de Sanct. 27. 1 ἸΚορυφαῖοι drocrékuv.—P. Agatho, in 6 Syn. Act. iv. p. 35; P. Adrian in 7 Syn. Act. ii. p. 554. || Beati Petrus et Paulus eminent inter uni- versos apostolos, et peculiari quadam preroga- tiva precellunt; verum inter ipsos quis cui preponatur incertum est, puto enim illos zqua- Jes esse meritis, quia squales sunt passione, &c.—Ambr. Serm. 66; Aug. de Sanct. 27. Maz. Taur. Serm. 54. ὁ He voces ecclesiw, ex qua habuit omnis ecclesia initium.—Zven. iii. 12. These are the words of the church, fram whence every church had its beginning. * Nicol. I. Ep. 7; Plat. in Greg. VIL. &c. 4 Isa. ii. 3; Luke xiv. 47. law and doctrine, the “ See” of our Lord himself, the chief Pastor.* He, therefore, who, as the Fathers tell us, was by our Lord himself constituted bishop of that city, and the “ first” of all bishops, might best pretend to be in spe- cial manner our Lord’s vicar or succes- sor:t ‘* He,” saith Epiphanius, “ did first receive the episcopal chair, and to him our Lord first did intrust his own throne upon earth.’’f He accordingly did first exercise the authority of presiding and moderating in the first ecclesiastical synod, as St. Chry- sostom in his notes thereon doth remark. He therefore probably by St. Paul is first named in his report concerning the passages at Jerusalem ; and to his orders it seemeth that St. Peter himself did con- form ; for it is said there, that before cer- tain came from St. James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew.* Hence in the Apostolical Constitutions, in the prayer prescribed for the church, and for all the governors of it, the bishops of the principal churches being specified by name, St. James is put in the first place, before the bishops of Rome and of Antioch: ‘ Let us pray for the whole episcopacy under heaven, of those who rightly dispense the word of thy truth ; and let us pray for our bishop James, with all his parishes; let us pray for our bishop Clemens, and all his parishes ; let us pray for Euodius, and all his par- ishes.”’||— Hereto consenteth the tradition of * Ecclesia in Hierusalem fundata totius orbis ecclesias seminavit.— Hieron. in Isa. ii. The church founded in Jerusalem was the sem- inary of the churches throughout the whole world.—Theod. v. 9; vide Tert. de Prescr. cap. 20. ᾿ ἡ “Ἕπειτα ὥφθη ᾿Ιακώβῳ, ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ" αὐτὸς γὰρ αὐτὸν λέγεται κεχειροτονηκέναι, καὶ ἐπίσκοπον ἐν “Ἱεροσολύμοις πεποιηκέναι πρῶτον.--- Chrys. in 1 ΟΟΥ. Or. 11. After that he was seen of James, I suppose to his brother ; for he is said to have ordained him, and made him the first bishop of Jerusalem. t IIpciros οὗτος εἴληφε τὴν καθέδραν τῆς ἐπισκο- ὦ πῆς, ᾧ πεπιστευκε Κύριος τὸν θρόνον αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ᾿ πρώτῳ.----Ἰὰ ῖΡἢ. Her. 78. \| Ὑπὲρ πάσης ἐπισκοπῆς τῆς ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανὸν τῶν ὀρθοτομούντων τὸν λόγον τῆς σῆς ἀληθείας δεηθῶμεν" καὶ ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἐπισκόπου ἡμῶν ᾿Ιακώθου, καὶ τῶν παροι- | κιῶν αὐτοῦ δεηθῶμεν' ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἐπισκόπον ἡμῶν ή- pevros, &c,.—Const. Ap. viii. 10. * Gal. 1. 9, 12. ΝΡ *-—- * Γ[ ™ er. —_- « ΝΟ ae Fr A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 115 those ancient writers afore cited, who call St. James “ the bishop of bishops, the bishop of the apostles,” &c. SUPPOSITION 1]. I proceed to examine the next supposition of the church monarchists, which is, That St. Peter’s primacy, with its rights and preroga- tives, was not personal, but derivable to his suc- cessors. Against which supposition I do assert, that admitting a primacy of St. Peter, of what kind or to what purpose soever, we yet have reason to deem it merely per- sonal, and not (according to its grounds and its design) communicable to any suc- cessors, nor indeed in effect conveyed to any such. It is a rule in the canon law, that “a personal privilege doth follow the person, and is extinguished with the person ;’* and such we affirm that of St. Peter; for, 1. His primacy was grounded upon personal acts (such as his cheerful fol- lowing of Chfist, his faithful confessing of Christ, his resolute adherence to Christ, his embracing special revelations from God ;) or upon personal graces, (his great faith, his special love to our Lord, his singular zeal for Christ’s service ;) or upon personal gifts and endowments, (his courage, resolution, activity, forwardness inapprehension and in speech ;) the which advantages are not transient, and conse- quently a pre-eminency built on them is not in its nature such. 2. All the pretence of primacy grant- ed to St. Peter is. grounded upon words directed to St. Peter’s person, character- ized by most personal adjuncts, as name, parentage, and which exactly were ac- complished in St. Peter’s personal act- ings ;° which therefore it is unreasonable to extend further. Our Lord promised to Simon, son of Jonas, to build his church on him :* ac- cordingly in eminent manner the church was founded upon his ministry, or by his first preaching, testimony, performances. * Privilegium personale personam sequitur, et cum persona extinguitur.—Reg. Juris, 7 in Sexto. { Matt. xvi. 17; John xxi. 15-17. © Matt. xvi. 17. ps Our Lord promised to give him the keys of the heavenly kingdom: this pow- er St. Peter signally did execute in con- verting Christians, and receiving them by baptism into the church, by confer- ring the Holy Ghost, and the like admin- istrations. Our Lord charged Simon, son of Jonas, to feed his sheep :" this he_per- formed by preaching, writing, guiding, and governing Christians, as he found op- portunity : wherefore, if any thing was couched under those promises or orders singularly pertinent to St. Peter, for the same reason that they were singular, they were personal ; for, These things being in a conspicuous manner accomplished in St. Peter’s per- son, the sense of those words is exhaust- ed; there may not with any probability, there cannot with any assurance, be any more grounded on them; whatever more is inferred must be by precarious assump- tion; and justly we may cast at those who shall infer it that expostulation of Tertullian, “ What art thou, who dost overturn and change the manifest inten- tion of our Lord, personally conferring this on Peter ?””* 3. Particularly the grand promise to St. Peter of founding the church on him, cannot reach beyond his person ; because there can be no other foundations of a society, than such as are first laid; the successors of those who first did erect a society, and establish it, are themselves but superstructures. 4. The apostolical office, as such, was personal and temporary ; and therefore, according to its nature and design, not successive or communicable to others in perpetual descendence from them. It was, as such, in all respects extra- ordinary, conferred in a special manner, designed for special purposes, discharged by special aids, endowed with special privileges, as was needful for the propa- gation of Christianity and founding of churches. To that office it was requisite that the person should have an immediate desig- nation and commission from God ; such * Qualis es evertens atque commutans man- ifestam Domini intentionem personaliter hoc Petro conferentem ?— Tertul. de Pud. 21. Ἀ John xxi. 15 116 as St. Paul so often doth insist upon for asserting his title to the office: Pauw/, an apostle, not from men, or by mani— ‘** Not by men” (saith St. Chrysostom ;) ‘“‘ this is a property of the apostles.”’* It was requisite that an apostle should be able to attest concerning our Lord’s resurrection or ascension, either immedi- ately, as the twelve, or by evident con- sequence, as St. Paul; thus St. Peter implied, at the choice of Matthias: Wherefore of those men which have com- panied with us——must one be ordained to be a witness with us of the resurrec- tion ; and, Am I not (saith St. Paul) an apostle? have I not seen the Lord? ac- cording to that of Ananias, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou Shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voiee of his mouth ; for thow shalt bear witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard. It was needful also that an apostle should be endowed with miraculous gifts and graces, enabling him both to assure his authority and to execute his office ; wherefore St. Paul calleth these the marks of an apostle, the which were wrought by him among the Corinthians in all patience (or perseveringly), in signs,and wonders, and mighty deeds.* It was also, in St. Chrysostom’s opin- ion, proper to an apostle, that he should be able, according to his discretion, in a certain and conspicuous manner to im- part spiritual gifts; as St. Peter and St. John did at Samaria; which to do, ac- cording to that Father, was “‘ the peculiar gift and privilege of the apostles.’”’+ It was also a privilege of an apostle, by virtue of his commission from Christ, to instruct all nations in the doctrine and law of Christ; he had right and warrant * TS δὲ οὐ dt’ ἀνθρώπων͵ τοῦτο ἴδιον τῶν ἀποστύ- Aw» —Chrys in Gal. i. 1. + Τοῦτο γὰρ τὸ δῶρον μόνων τῶν δώδεκα τοῦτο γὰρ ἣν τῶν ἀποστόλων ἐξαίρετον ..---ΟἾΓΥ 5. in Act. vili. 18. De solis apostolis le gitur, quorum vi- cem tenent episcopi, quod per manus impusiti- onem Spiritum 5. dabant.—P. Eugenius IV. in Instit. Arm. It is recorded of the apostles alone, in whose room the bishops succeed, that they gave the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. i Gal. i. 1. ) Acts i. 21,22; 1Cor.ix.1; xv.8; Acts xxii. 14, 15. « 2 Cor. xii. 12; Rom. xv. 18. Sn ΤΕΨὋΕΣ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. to exercise his function every where: ‘His charge was universal and indefi- nite; the whole world was his proyv- ince ;”* he was not affixed to any one place, nor could be excluded from any ; he was (as St. Cyril calleth him) an cecu- menical judge,” and “an instructor of all the subcelestial world.”’+ Apostles also did govern in an absolute manner, according to discretion, as being guided by infallible assistance, to the which they might upon occasion appeal, and affirm, Jt hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and us.' Whence their writings have passed for inspired, and therefore canonical, or certain rules of faith and practice. It did belong to them to found churches, to constitute pastors, to settle orders, to correct offences, to perform all such acts of sovereign spiritual power, in virtue of the same divine assistance, according to the authority which the Lord had given them for edification ; as we see practised by St. Paul. In fine, the ‘* apostleship was” (as St. Chrysostom telleth us) ‘‘a_ business fraught with ten thousand good things; both greater than all privileges of grace, and comprehensive of them.’’t Now such an office, consisting of so many extraordinnary privileges and mi- raculous powers, which were requisite for the foundation of the church, and the diffusion of Christianity, against the manifold difficulties and disadvantages which it then needs must encounter, was not designed to continue by derivation ; for it containeth in it divers things, which apparently were not communicated, and which no man without gross imposture and hypocrisy could challenge to him- self. Neither did the apostles pretend to communicate it; they did indeed appoint standing pastors and teachers in each church; they did assume fellow-labour- ers or assistants in the work of preach- ing and governance: but they did not * Ἐπειδὴ ἔμελλον τῆς οἰκουμένης τὴν ἐπιτροπὴν érdéfacOac.—Chrys. in Joh. xxi. 7 Ἰζριταὶ οἰκουμενικοὶ͵ καὶ τῆς ὑφ᾽ ἡλίῳ καθηγηταΐ, —Cyril. γλαφ. in Gen. vii. t Thy ἀποστολὴν, πρᾶγμα μυρίων ἀγαθῶν γέμον, τῶν χαρισμάτων ἁπάντων καὶ μεῖζον, καὶ περιεκτικόν. —Chrys. in Rom, i, Or. 1, tom. viii. p. 114, | Acts xv. 28. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. constitute apostles, equal to themselves in authority, privileges, or gifts; for, ‘“* Who knoweth not” (saith St. Austin) ‘ that principate of apostleship to be preferred before any episcopacy ?”* and “the bishops” (saith Bellarmine?) ‘ have no part of the true apostolical authority δ᾽} Wherefore St. Peter, who had no other office mentioned in scripture, or known to antiquity, beside that of an apostle, could not have properly and adequately any successor to his office; but it natu- rally did expire with his person, as did that of the other apostles. 5. Accordingly, whereas the other apostles, as such, had no successors, the apostolical office not being propagated, the primacy of St» Peter (whatever it were, whether of order or jurisdiction, in regard to his brethren) did cease with him; for when there were no apostles extant, there could be “ no head or prince of the apostles” in any sense. 6. If some privileges of St. Peter were derived to popes, why were not all ? why was not Pope Alexander VI. as holy as St. Peter? why was not Pope Honori- us as sound in his private judgment ? why is not every pope inspired? why is not every papal epistle to be reputed canoni- cal? why are not all popes endowed with power of doing miracles ? why doth not the pope by a sermon convert ihou- sands? (why indeed do popes never . preach ὃ) why doth not he cure men by his shadow? (he is, say they, himself his shadow:) what ground is there of distinguishing the privileges, so that he shall have some, not others? where is the ground to be found ? 7. If it be objected, that the Fathers commonly do call bishops successors of the apostles; to assoi! that objection we _ May consider, that whereas the apostoli- _ ehurch.—E ph. iv. 11; cal office virtually did contain the func- tions of teaching and ruling God’s peo- ple ; the which, for preservation of Chris- tian doctrine and edification of the church, * Quis nescit illum apostolatus principatum cuilibet episcopatui preeferendum?—Aug. de Bapt. cont. Don. ii. 1. ii Episcopi nullam babent partem verm apostolic auctoritatis.— Bell. iv. 25, ¢ The apostoles themselves do make the apostolate a distinct office from pastors and teachers, which are the standing offices in the 1 Cor, xii. 28. ee 117 were requisite to be continued perpetu- ally in ordinary standing offices, these indeed were derived from the apostles, but not properly in way of succession, as by univocal propagation, but by ordina- tion, imparting all the power needful for such offices ; which therefore were exer- cised by persons during the apostles’ lives concurrently, or in subordination to them ; even asa dictator at Rome might create inferior magistrates, who derived from him, but not as his suecessors; for, as Bellarmine himself telleth us, ‘* there can be no proper succession, but in re- spect of one preceding ; but apostles and bishops were together in the church.’* The Fathers therefore so in a large sense call all bishops successors of the apostles; not meaning that any one of them did succeed into the whole apos- tolical office, but that each did receive his power from some one (immediately or mediately) whom some apostle did constitute bishop, vesting him with au- thority to feed the particular flock com- mitted to him in way of ordinary charge ; according to the sayings of that apostoli- cal person, Clemens Romanus: ‘“ The apostles preaching in regions and cities, did constitute their first converts, having approved them by the Spirit, for bishops and deacons of those who should after- ward believe,” and “having constituted the foresaid” (bishops and deacons), “they withal gave them further charge, that if they should die, other approved men successively should receive their of- fice :" + thus did the bishops supply tne room of the apostles, “each in guiding his particular charge,”{ all of them to- gether, by mutual aid, conspiring to gov- ern the whole body of the church. 8. In which regard it may be said, that not one single bishop, but all bishops together through the whole church, do * Non succeditur proprie nisi praecedenti, at simul fuerunt in ecclesia apostoli et episeopi —. Bell.de Pont. R. iv. 25. Kara χώρας καὶ πόλεις κηρύσσοντες καθίστανον τὰς ἀπαρχὰς αὐτῶν, δοκιμάσαντες τῷ πνεύματι, εἰς ἐπισκόπους καὶ διακόνους τῶν μελλόντων πιστεύειν.--- Clem. ad Corinth. i. p. δ4. Karéerneay τοὺς προειρημένους, καὶ μεταξὺ ἐπινομὴν ἐπιδεδώκασι, ὅπως ἐὰν κοιμηθῶσι, διαδέξωνται ἕτεροι δεδοκιμασμένοι ἄν- dpes τὴν λειτουργίαν αὐτῶν .--- bid, Ρ. 57. t Singulis pastoribus portio gregis adscripta est, quam regat unusquisque et gubernet—__, Cypr. Ep. 55. 118 succeed St. Peter, or any other apostle ; for that alt of them, in union together, have an universal sovereign authority, commensurate to an apostle, 9. This is the notion which St. Cypri- an doth so much insist upon, affirming that the bishops do succeed St. Peter and the other apostles, ‘* by vicarious ordina- tions ;”’* that ‘“‘ the bishops are apostles;”’+ that there is but ‘* one chair by the Lord’s word built upon one Peter;i one undi- vided bishopric, diffused in the peaceful numerosity of may bishops, whereof each bishop doth hold his share ;|| one flock, whom the apostles by unanimous agree- ment did feed,” and “" which afterwards the bishops do feed ;” having “ a portion thereof allotted to each, which he should govern.” So the synod of Carthage, with St. Cyprian.4] So also St. Chrysostom saith, that ** the sheep of Christ were committed by him to Peter, and to those after him,’’** that is, in his meaning to all bishops. 10. Such, and no other power, St. Pe- ter might devolve on any bishop ordained by him in any church which he did con- stitute or inspect ; as in that of Antioch, of Alexandria, of Babylon, of Rome. The like did the other apostles commu- nicate, who had the same power with St. * Preepositos, qui apostolis vicaria ordinati- one succedunt Ep. 69, 42, 75. + Apostolos, id est, episcopos et przpositos Dominus elegit.— Ep. 65. $+ Cathedra una super Petram Domini voce fundata Ep. 40, et Ep. 73, et de Unit. Eccl. || Episcopatus unus, episcoporuam multorum concordi numerositate diffusus.— Ep. 52. Epis- copatus unus, cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur.—De Unit. Eccl. § Et pastores sunt omnes, sed grex unus ostenditur qui ab apostolis omnibus unanimi consensione pascatur—De Unit. Eccl. Nam etsi pastores multi sumus, unum tamen gre- gem pascimus, et oves universas, &c.— Ep. 67. For though we are many pastors, yet we feed one flock, and all the sheep, &c. 4“ Manifesta est sententia Domini nostri Jesu Christi apostolos suos mittentis, et ipsis solis potestatem a patre sibi datam permittentis qui- bus nos successimus, eadem potestate ecclesi- am Domini gubernantes. The mind and meaning of our Lord Jesus Christ is manifest in sending his apostles, and allowing the power given him of the Father to them alone, whose successors we are, governing the church of God by the same power. ** Ta πρόθατα ἃ τῷ Πέτρῳ καὶ τοῖς pea’ ἐκεῖ- vov ἐνεχείρισε.--- (ὮΤΥ5. de Sacerd. 1. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. Peter in founding and settling churches ;™ whose successors of this kind were equal to those of the same kind, whom St. Pe- ter did constitute ; enjoying in their seve- ral precincts an equal part of the apos- tolical power, as St. Cyprian often doth assert. by 11. It is in consequence observable, that in those churches, whereof the apos- tles themselyes were never accounted bishops, yet the bishops are called suc- cessors of the .aposties; which cannot otherwise be understood, than according to the sense which we have proposed ; that is, because they succeeded those who were constituted by the apostles; ac- cording to those sayings of Irenzeus and Tertullian, ‘* We can number those who were instituted bishops by the apostles and their successors ;”* and, “ΑἸ the churches do shew those, whom, being by the apostles constituted in the episcopal office, they have as continuers of the apostolical seed.”’+ . So, although St. Peter was never reck- oned bishop of Alexandria, yet because itis reported that he placed St. Mark there, the bishop of Alexandria is said to succeed the apostles. And because St. John did abide at Ephe- © sus, inspecting that church, and ‘ appoint- ing bishops there,” the bishops of that see did ‘* refer their origin to him.”’|| So many bishops did claim from St. Paul. So St. Cyprian and Firmillian do as- sert themselves ‘successors of the apos- 1165, ὃ who yet perhaps never were αἱ Carthage or Cesarea. * Habemus annumerare eos, qui ab aposto- lis instituti sunt episcopi, et successores eorum usque ad nos Tren. iii. 3 + Proinde utique et cxters exhibent, quos ab apostolis in episcopatum constitutos apostoli-= — ci seminis traduces habent. Tert. de Prescr. 32. t Τέταρτος ἀπὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων τὴν τῶν. αὐτόθι λειτουργίαν κληροῦται Πρῖμος.---Ἐ 8. Hist. iv. 1. Primus is the fourth from the apostles who was the bishop of that place, or obtained the minis- try there. || “Ὅπου μὲν ἐπισκόπους καταστήσων, ὅπου δὲ ὅλας ἐκκλησίας ἁομόσων, ὅτε —Clem. Alex. apud Eus, iii. 23. Ordo episcoporum ad originem recen= sus in Joannem stabit autorem:— ert. in Mare. iv. 5; Tert. de Pres. xxxii. : § Unitatem a Domino et per apostoles nobis successoribus. traditam.—Cypr. Ep. 42. Ad- versarii nostri qui apostolis successimus.— Firmil. In Cypr. Ep. 75. ™ Hier. ad Evagr. »“ t A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. So the church of Constantinople is of- ten, in the Acts of the Sixth General Council, called “this great apostolic church,” being such churches as_ those of whom Tertullian saith, that ‘ although they do not produce any of the apostles or apostolical men for their author, yet conspiring in the same faith, are no less, for the consanguinity of doctrine, reput- ed apostolical.””* Yea, hence St. Jerome doth assert a parity of merit and dignity sacerdotal to all bishops ; because, saith he, “all of them are successors to the apostles,’ having all alike power by their ordina- tion conferred on them. 7 12. Whereas our adversaries do pre-. tend that indeed the other apostles had an extraordinary charge as legates of Christ,° which had no succession, but was extinct in their persons ; but that St. Peter had a peculiar charge, as ordinary pastor of the whole church, which surviveth : To this it is enough to rejoin, that it is a mere figment, devised for a shift, and affirmed precariously : having no ground either in holy scripture or in ancient tra- dition ; there being no such distinction in the sacred or ecclesiastical’ writings ; no mention occuring there of any office which he did assume, or which was at- tributed to him, distinct from that extra- ordinary one of an apostle ; and all the pastoral charge imaginable being ascrib- ed by the ancients to all the apostles in regard to the whole church, as hath been sufficiently declared. . 13. In fine, if any such conveyance of power (of powerso great, so momentous, so mightily concerning the perpetual state of the church, and of each person there- in) had been made, it had been (for gene- ral direction and satisfaction, for voiding all doubt and debate about it, for stifling these pretended heresies and schisms) very requisite that it should have been expressed in some authentic record, that a particular law should have been extant concerning it, that all posterity should be * ab illis ecclesiis, que licet nullum ex apostolis, vel apostolieis auctorem suum profe- rant, ut multo posteriores, que denique quoti- die instituuntur, tamen in eadem fide conspi- rantes, non minus apostolice deputantur, pro consanguinitate doctrine .— Tert. de Prescr. 32. " Hier. ad Evagr. * Bell. iv. 25, &c, 119 warned to yield the submission grounded — thereon. Indeed a matter of so great conse- quence to the being and welfare of the church could scarce have scaped from being clearly mentioned somewhere or other in scripture, wherein so much is spoken touching ecclesiastical discipline ; it could scarce have avoided the pen of the first Fathers (Clemens, Ignatius, the Apostolical Canons and Constitutions, Tertullian, &c.), who also so much treat concerning the function and authority of Christian governors. Nothing can be more strange, than that in the Statute-book of the New Je- rusalem, and in all the original monu- ments concerning it, there should be such a dead silence concerning the suc- cession of its chief magistrate. Wherefore, no such thing appearing, we may reasonably conclude no such thing to have been, and that our adver- saries’ assertion of it is wholly arbitrary, imaginary, and groundless. 14. I might add, as a very convincing argument, that if such a succession had been designed, and known in old times, it is morally impossible that none of the Fathers (Origen, Chrysostom, Augus- tine, Cyril, Jerome, Theodoret, &c.), in their exposition of the places alleged by the Romanists for the primacy of St. Peter, should declare that primacy to have been derived and settled on St. Peter’s successor: a point of that mo- ment, if they had been aware of it, they could not but have touched, as a most useful application, and direction for duty. SUPPOSITION III. They affirm, “That St. Peter was Bishop of Rome.” ConcEerNING which assertion we say, that it may with great reason be denied, and thatit cannot anywise be assured ; as will appear by the following consider- ations. 1. St. Peter’s being bishop of Rome would confound the offices which God made distinct ; for God did appoint first apostles, then prophe/s, then pastors and teachers ;*” wherefore St. Peter, after he was an apostle, could not well become a Ρ 1 Cor. xii. 28; Eph. iv. 11. 120 bishop ; it would be such an irregularity as if a bishop should be made a deacon. 2. The offices of an apostle and of a bishop are not in their nature well con- sistent; for the apostleship is an extra- ordinary office, charged with instruc- tion and government of the whole world, and calling for an answerable care (‘* the apostles being rulers,”’ as St. Chrysostom saith, ““ ordained by God; rulers not taking several nations and cities, but all of them in common intrusted with the whole world;)* but episcopacy is an ordinary standing charge, affixed to one place, and requiring a special attendance there ; bishops being pastors, who, as St. Chrysostom saith, “‘do sit, and are employed in one place.”’+ Now he that hath such a general care can hardly discharge such a particular office ; and he that ts fixed to so particular attendance can hardly look well after so general a charge: either of those offices alone would suffice to take up a whole man, as those tell us who have considered the burden incumbent on the meanest of them ; the which we may see described in St. Chrysostom’s discourses concern- ing the priesthood. Baronius saith of St. Peter, that it was his office not to stay in one place, but, as much as it was possible for one man, to travel over the whole world, and to bring those who did not yet believe to the faith, but thoroughly to establish believers :”{ if so, how could he be bishop of Rome, which was an office inconsistent with such vagrancy ? 3. It would not have beseemed St. Peter, the prime apostle, to assume the charge of a particular bishop ; it had been a degradation of himself, and a disparagement to the apostolical majesty, for him to take upon him the bishopric of Rome; as if the king should become mayor of London; as if the bishop of London should be vicar of Pancras. * "Αρχοντές εἰσιν ὑπὸ τοῦ Θεοῦ χειροτονηθέντες οἱ ἀπόστολοι" ἄρχοντες οὐκ ἔθνη καὶ πόλεις διαφόρους Aapbavovres ἀλλὰ πάντες κοινῇ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐμπι- στευθέντες.---ΟἾΓΥ 5. tom. vill. p. L195. + Οἱ καθήμενοι καὶ περὶ ἕνα τόπον ἡσχολημένοι.----- Chrys. in Eph. iv. 11. Non erat ejus officii in uno loco consistere, sed quantum homini licuisset universum pera- grare orbem, et nondum credentes ad fidem perducere, credentes vero in fide penitus stabil- ire.—Baron. ann. lviii. ὁ 51. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 4. Wherefore it is not likely that St. Peter, being sensible of that superior charge belonging to him, which did ex- act a more extensive care, would vouch- safe to undertake an inferior charge. We cannot conceive that St. Peter did affect the name of a bishop, as now men do, allured by the baits of wealth and power, which then were none : if he did affect the title, why did he not in either of his Epistles (one of which, as they would persuade us, was written from Rome) inscribe himself bishop of Rome ? Especially considering that, being an apostle, he did not need any particular authority, that involving all power, and enabling him in any particular place to execute all kinds of ecclesiastical admin- istrations : there was no reason that an apostle (or universal bishop) should be- come a particular bishop. 5. Also St. Peter’s general charge of converting and inspecting the Jews, dis- persed over the world (his apostleship, as St. Paul ecalleth it, of the circumcis- ion),* which required much travel, and his presence in divers places, doth not well agree to his assuming the episcopal office at Rome. Especially at that time, when they first make him to assume it; which was in the time of Claudius, who, as St. Luke and other histories do report,’ did banish all the Jews from Rome, as Tiberius also had done before him : he was too skil- ful a fisherman to cast his net there, where there were no fish. 6. If we consider St. Peter’s life, we may well deem him uncapable of this office, which he could not conveniently discharge ; for it, as history doth repre- sent it, and may be collected from divers circumstances of it, was very unsettled ; he went much about the world, and therefore could seldom reside at Rome. Many have argued him to have never been at Rome; which opinion [ shall not avow, as bearinga more civil respect : to ancient testimonies and traditions; al- though many false and fabulous relations of that kind having crept into history and common vogue, many doubtful re- ports having passed concerning him," * 'N\ rocrod} meptropis,—Gal. ii. 8. 4 Acts xviii. 2; Sueton. in Claud. 25, in Tib. 36. r Euseb. iii. 3. eS - 0 ,,.- τῳσπττ---...ὕ.---- ------- -- Eee A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. many notorious forgeries having been vented about his travels and acts (all that is reported of him out of scripture having a smack of the legend), would tempt a man to suspect any thing touch- ing him which is grounded only upon hu- man tradition ; so that the forger of his Epistle to St. James might well induce him saying, “If while [ do yet survive, men dare to feign such things of me, how much more will they dare to do so after my decease δ᾽ ἢ But at least the discourses of those men have evinced, that it is hard to as- sign the time when he was at Rome ; and that he could never long abide there ; for, The time which old tradition assign- eth of his going to Rome is rejected by divers learned men, even of the Roman party.* He was often in other places; some- times at Jerusalem, sometimes at. Anti- och, sometimes at Babylon, sometimes at Corinth, sometimes probably at each of those places unto which he directeth his catholic Epistles : among which Epi- phanius saith, that ‘* Peter did often visit Pontus and Bithynia.”’+ And that he seldom was at Rome, may well be collected from St. Paul’s writings ; for he writing at different times one Epistle to Rome, and divers Epistles from Rome (that to the Gala- tians, that to the Ephesians, that to the Philippians, that to the Colossians, and the second to Timothy), doth never mention him, sending any salutation to him, or from him. Particularly St. Peter was not there when St. Paul mentioning Tychicus, Onesimus, Aristarchus, Marcus, and Jus- tus, addeth, These alone my fellow- workers unto the Iingdom of God, who have been a comfort unto me." He was not there when St. Paul said, * El δὲ ἐμοῦ ἔτι περίοντος τοιαῦτα τολμῶσιν κατα- ψεύδεσθαι, πόσει» γε μᾶλλον per’ ἐμὲ ποιεῖν of per’ ἐμὲ τολμήσουσι ;—Petr. ad Jacob. t sant: πολλάκις Πόντον καὶ Βιθυνίαν ἐπεσκί- Waro.—E piph. Her, 27. * Seal in Euseb, p. 189; Opuph. apad Bell. ii, 6; Vales in Euseb. ii. 15, * Acts xi. 2; xv. 7; Gal.i. 18; | 1,9, 11; |1Pet.v. 13; 1 Cor.i. 12; Euseb. ii.25; 2 | Pet. iii. 2; 1 Pet. it. * Col, iv. 11. Vou. Il. 16 | ῬΡΗΝ LS ΄΄56Π . ΄ο΄ο΄΄Π5565ὅ-“Π΄“-ρ΄ρ΄Πὖ.-.............0ὖϑ-..ϑνϑ...“.....-...........» 121 Ai my first defence no man stood with me, but ail men forsook me.’ He was not there immediately before St. Paul’s death (when the time of his departure was at hand,) when he telleth Timothy, that all the brethren did salute him, and naming divers of them, he omitteth Peter.” Which things being considered, it is not probable that St. Peter would assume the episcopal chair ef Rome, he being little capable to reside there, and for that other needful affairs would have forced him to leave so great a church destitute of their pastor. 7. It was needless that he should be bishop, for that by virtue of his apostle- ship (involving all the power of inferior degrees) he might, whenever he should be at Rome, exercise episcopal functions and authority. What need a sovereign prince to be made a justice of peace ? 8. Had he done so, he must have given a bad example of non-residence ;* a practice that would have been very ill relished in the primitive church, as we may see by several canons interdicting offences of kin to ἢ (it being, I think, then not so known as nominally to be censured), and culpable upon the same ground ; and by the savings of Fathers condemning practices approaching to it. Even later synods, in more corrupt times and in the declension of good order, yet did prohibit this practice.? * Oodas ἀναγνοὺς ris γραφὰς, ἡλίκον ἐστὶ δὴ ἔγκλημα καταλιμπάνειν ἐπίσκοπον τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, καὶ ἀμελεῖν τῶν τοῦ Θευῦ motuviwy.—Athan. Apol. 1. Having read the scriptures, you know how great an offence it is for a bishop to forsake his church, and to neglect ihe flocks of God. Opor- tei enim episcopos curis secularibus expeditos curam suorum agere populorum, nec ecclesiis suis abesse diutius.—P. Paschal. 11. Ep. 22. For bishops ought to be disentangled from sec- ular cares, and to take charge of their people, and not to be long absent from their churches. + Preeipimus ne conductitiis ministris ecele- sim committantur, et unaqueeque ecclesia, cui facultas suppetit, proprium habeat sacerdotem. —Conc. Lat. 2, (sub. lunoc. Il.) can. 10. We enjoin that charches be not committed to hired ministers, but that every church, that is of abil- ity, have its proper priest. Cum igitur ecclesia vel ecclesiasticum ministerium committi debu- erit, talis ad hoc persona queeratur, que resi- dere in loco, etcuram ejus per seipsum valet exercere; quod si aliter fuerit actam, et qui * 2Tim iv. 16. νυ 2 Tim. iv. 6, 21. * Conc. Nic. can, 16; Conc. Ant. can. 3; Conc. Sard. can. 11, 12; Cone. Trul. can. 80. 122 Epiphanius, therefore, did well infer, that it was needful the apostles should constitute bishops resident at Rome: ‘** It was’’ (saith he) ‘ possible, that, the apos- tles Peter and Paul yet surviving, other bishops should be constituted ; because the apostles often did take journeys into other countries, for preaching Christ: but the city of Rome could not be without a bishop.””* 9. If St. Peter were bishop of Rome, he thereby did offend against divers other good ecclesiastical rules, which either were in practice from the beginning, or at least the reason of them was always good, upon which the church did after- ward enact them; so that either he did ill in thwarting them, or the church had done it in establishing them, so as to con- demn his practice. 10. It was against rule,” that any bish- op should desert one church, and trans- fer himself to another ; and indeed against reason, such a relation and endearment being contracted between a bishop and his church, which cannot well be dis- solved. But St. Peter is by ecclesiastical histo- rians reported (and by Romanists admit- ted) to have been bishop of Antioch for seven years together.? He therefore did ill to relinquish that church, “that most ancient and_ truly apostolic church of Antioch”’{ (as the Constantinopolitan Fathers called 11). and to place his See at Rome. receperit, quod contra canctos canones accepit, amittat.—Conc. Lat. 3, (sub Alexandro III.) cap, 13. Therefore when a church,or the ec- clesiastical ministry, be to be committed to any man, let such a person be found out for this purpose, who can reside upon the place, and discharge the cure by himself: but if it prove otherwise, then let him who has received lose that which he has taken contrary to the holy canons. * Ἰ]λὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ οὕτως ἠδύνατο ἔτι περιόντων τῶν ἀποστόλων, φημὶ δὲ τῶν περὶ Πέτρον καὶ Ἰ]αῦλον, ἐπι- σκόπους ἄλλους καθίστασθαι, διὰ τὸ τοὺς ἀποστόλους πολλάκις ἐπὶ τὰς ἄλλας πατρίδας τὴν πορείαν στέλλεσ- θαι, διὰ τὸ κήρυγμα τοῦ Χριστοῦ" μὴ δύνασθαι δὲ τὴν τῶν Ρωμαίων πόλιν ἄνευ ἐπισκόπου elvat.—Epiph. Heer. 27. + Τοῦ μεγάλου Tlérpov θρόνον ἡ 'Ἀντιοχέων pe- γαλόπογις ἔχει.--- ΤΠ Θοάοῦ. Ep. 86. The great city of the Antiochians hath the throne of the great St. Peter. t Ti πρεσδυτάτην καὶ ὄντως ἀποστολικὴν ἐκκλη- otav.—Theod., v. 6. Y Apost. Can. 14. This practice was esteemed bad, and — of very mischievous consequence ; ear- nestly reproved, as heinously criminal, by great Fathers; severely condemned by divers synods. Particularly a transmigration from a lesser and poorer toa greater and more wealthy bishopric (which is the present case), was checked by them, as rankly savouring of selfish ambition or avarice. The synod of Alexandria (in Athana- sius), in its Epistle to all catholic bishops, doth say, that Eusebius, by passing from Berytus to Nicomedia, ‘ had annulled his episcopacy,” making it ‘an adultery,” worse than that which is committed by marriage upon divorce:* ‘ Eusebius” (say they) ‘did not consider the apos- tle’s admonition, Art thou bound to ὦ wife ὁ do not seek to be loosed: for if it be said of a woman, how much more of a church; of the same bishopric; to which one being tied, ought not to seek another, that he may not be found also an aduiterer, according to the holy scrip- ture?”+ Surely when they said this, they did forget what St. Peter was said to have done in that kind; as did also the Sardican Fathers in their synodical letter, extant in the same Apology of Athana- sius, condemning “ translations from les- ser cities unto greater dioceses.”’t The same practice is forbidden by the synods of Nice I., of Chalcedon, of An- tioch, of Sardica, of Arles I., &c.? In the synod under Mennas, it was laid to the charge of Anthimus, that having been bishop of Trabisond, he had * adul- terously snatched the see of Constantino- ple, against all. ecclesiastical laws and canons.”’|| Yea, great popes of Rome (little con- * A κυρώσας ad7qv.—Athanas. Apol. ii. p. 726. iii. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ἡ Οὐ συνορῶν τὸ παράγγελμα, δέδεσαι γυναικὶ, ph — ζήτει λύσιν' εἰ δὲ ἐπὶ γυναικὸς τὸ ῥητὸν, πόσῳ μᾶλλον ἐπὶ ἐκκλησίας ἐκ τῆς αὐτῆς ἐπισκυπῆς, ἡ ὃ συνδεθεὶς ἄλλην οὐκ ὀφείλει ζητεῖν, ἵνα μὴ καὶ μοιχὸς παρὰ ταῖς θείαις εὑρίσκεται yeapais.—Syn. Alex. apud A- than. ἢ. 727. t Tas μεταθέσεις ἀπὸ μικρῶν πόλεων εἰς μείζονας παροικίας.---ΤὈ]ά. Ρ. 700. | ἀρχιερατικὸν ὑφαρπάσαι θρόνον παρὰ πάντας τοὺς ἐκ- κλησιαστικοὺς θεσμοὺς καὶ xavévas—Conc. sub. Menn. p. 9. « Syn. Nic. can. 15; Syn. Chale. can. 5; | Syn. Ant. can. 21; Syn. Sard. can.1; Syn. Arel. can. 22; Grat. Caus. viii. qu. 1, cap. 4; P. Jul. 1. apud Athan. in Apol. ii. p. 744. ἠδυνήθη μοιχικῶς τὸν τῆσδε τῆς πόλεως | ᾿ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. sidering how peccant therein their pre- decessor Pope Peter was), Pope Julius and Pope Damasus, did greatly tax this practice ; whereof the latter, in his sy- nod at Rome, did excommunicate all those who should commit it.* In like manner Pope Leo L7 These laws were so indispensable, that in respect to them Constantine M., who much loved and honoured Eusebius, (ac- knowledging him in the common judg- ment of the world deserving to be bishop of the whole church), did not like that he should accept the bishopric of Antioch, to which he was invited; and commend- ed his waving it, as an act not only “‘ con- sonant to the ecclesiastical canons,” but * acceptable to God, and agreeable to apostolical tradition :”* so little aware was the good emperor of St. Peter being translated from Antioch to Rome. In regard to the same law,. Gregory Nazianzeft (a person of so great. worth, and who had deserved so highly of the church at Constantinople) could not be permitted to retain his bishopric of that church, to which he had been called from that small one of Sasima. “* The synod,” (saith Sozomen), ‘‘ observing the ancient laws and the ecclesiastical rule, did re- ceive his bishopric from. him, being wil- lingly offered, nowise regarding the great merits of the person :᾽ 1 the which synod ® Τοὺς δὲ ἀπὸ ἐκκλησιῶν eis ἑτέρας ἐκκλησίας με- τελθόντας ἄχρι τοσούτου ἀπὸ τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας ἀλλοτρίους ἔχομεν, ἄχρι ob πρὸς αὐτὰς ἐπανέλθωσι τὰς πόλεις, ἐν αἷς πρῶτον ἐχειροτονήθησαν.---- ΤΠ οί. v. 11. Those that pass (rom their own churches to other churches, we esteem so long excom- municate (or strangers from our communion), till such time as they return to the same cities where they were first ordained. + Si quis episcopus, mediocritate civitatis sue despecta, administrationem loci celebrioris ambierit, et ad majorem se plebem quacunque occasione transtulerit, non solum a cathedra quidem pellatur ‘aliena, sed earebit et propria, é&e—P. Lev. 1. Ep. ixxxiv. cap. 4. If any bishop, despising the meanness of his city, seeks for the administration of a more eminent place, and upon any occasion whatsoever trans- fers himself to a greater People, he shall not only be driven out of another’s see, but also lose his own, &c. t "AN ὅμως ἡ σύνοδος καὶ τοὺς πατρίους νύμους, καὶ τὴν ἐκκλησιαστικὴν τάξιν φυλάττουσα, ὃ δέδωκε nap’ ἑκόντος ἀπείληφε, μηδὲν αἰδεσθεῖσα τῶν τοῦ ἀγ- δρὸς m\covexrnpdrwv.—Sozom. vii, 7. * Euseb. de Vit. Const, iii. 61. 123 surely would have excluded St. Peter from the bishopric of Rome: and it is observable that Pope Damascus did ap- prove and exhort those Fathers to that proceeding.* We may indeed observe that Pope Pe- lagius II. did excuse the translation of bishops by the example of St. Peter: “For who ever dareth to say,” argueth he, “‘that St. Peter, the prince of the apostles, did not act well, when he chang- ed his see from Antioch to Rome ?”+ But I think it more advisable to excuse St. Peter from. being author of a practice judged so irregular, by denying the mat- ter of fact laid to his charge. 11. It was anciently deemed a very irregular thing, ‘‘ contrary” (saith St. Cyprian) ‘‘to the ecclesiastical disposi- tion, contrary to the evangelical law, contrary to the unity of catholic institu- tion ἢ ‘*asymbol” (saith another an- cient writer) ‘‘ of dissension, and disa- greeable to ecclesiastical law ;7’|| which therefore was condemned by the synod of Nice by Pope Cornelius, by Pope in- nocent I., and others, that two bishops preside together in one city.” This was condemned with good rea- son; for this on the church’s part would be a kind of spiritual polygamy; this would render a church a monster with two heads; this would destroy the end of episcopacy, which is unity and “ pre- vention of schisms.”§ But if St. Peter was bishop of Rome, * Yilud praterea commoneo dilectionem ves- tram, ne patiamini aliquem contra statuta ma- jorum nostrorum de civitate alia ad aliam transduci, et deserere plebem sibi commissam, é&c.—P, Damasi Epist: apud Holsten. p. 41, et Rh. Mare. ν. 21. Moreover this I advise you, that out of your charity you would not suffer any one, against the decrees of our ancestors, to be removed from one city to another, and to forsake the people committed to his charge, &e. ft Quis enim unquam audet dicere S. Petrum apostolorum principem non bene egisse, quan- do mutavit sedem de Antiochia in Romam ?— Pelag. Il. Ep. 1. ¢ Contra ecclesiasticam dispositionem, con- tra evangelicam legem, contra institutionis eatholice unitatem Cypr. Ep. 44, (αἱ οἱ Ep. 46, 52, 55, 58.) | ᾿Ὸ διχονοίας σύμβολόν ἐστι καὶ ἐκκλησιαστικοῦ θεσμοῦ ἀλλότριον .---ἶοΖ. iv. 15. Inremedium schismatis.— Hier, » Syn. Nic. can. 8; Corn. ap. Eus. vi. 43; Cypr. Ep. 46; P. Innoc. ap. Sozom. viii. 26; Opt. I. Cathedra una. 124 this irregularity was committed: for the same authority upon which St. Peter’s episcopacy of Rome is built, doth also | reckon St. Paul bishop of the same; the same writers do make both founders and planters of the Roman church, and the same call both bishops of it: wherefore | if episcopacy be taken in a strict and A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. there is any appearance, nor any proba- bility : non constat. . SUPPOSITION IV. They aftirm, “ That St. Peter did continue bishop of Rome afier his translation, and was so al his decease.” proper sense, agreeable to this controver- | sy, that rule must needs be infringed | thereby. Irenzeus saith, “ that the Roman chureb was founded and constituted by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul ;”* Dionysius of Corinth calleth tt * the plan- tation of Peter and Paul ;”+ Epiphanius saith, that ““ Peter and Paul were first at | Rome both apostles and bishops 1 50! Eusebius implieth, saying, that Pope Alexander ‘derived a succession in the fifth place from Peter and Paul.”’| Wherefore both of them were Roman bishops, or neither of them: in reason | and rule neither of them may _ be ealled so in a strict, and proper sense ; but in a larger and improper sense, both might be so styled. indeed, that St. Paul was in some ac- ception bishop of Rome (that is, had a supreme superintendence or inspection of it) is reasonable to afirin; because he did for a good time reside there, and dur- ing that residence could not but have the chief place, could be subject to no other: He, saith St. Luke) did abide 1wo | whole years in his own hired house, and received all that entered in unio him preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence, no man forbidding him.* it may be inquired, if St. Peter was bishop of Rome, how he did become such ? Did our Lord appoint him such ? did the apostles all or any constitute him ὃ did the people elect him? did he put himself into it? Of none of these things od a gloriosissimis duobus apostolis Pe- tro et Paulo Rome fundata et constituta eccle- sia.—Tren. iii. 3. ill. I. + Ti» ἀπὸ Πέτρου καὶ Παύλου φυτείαν onys. Corinth. apud Euseb. ii. 25. t ’Ev 'Popn γεγόνασι πρῶτοι ILérpos καὶ ]Παὖλος ἀπόστολοι αὐτοὶ καὶ éxtoxono.—Epiph. Heer. 27. \| Πέμπτην ἀπὸ [Lérpov καὶ Παύλου κατάγων δια- bo0xfv.—Euseb. iv. 1. * Acts xxvii, δῦ. . Di- Acatinst which assertions we may consider : 1. Ecclesiastical writers do affirm, that St. Peter (either alone, or together with St. Panl) did constitute other bishops ; wherefore St. Peter was never bishop, or did not continue bishop there. Treneus saith, that ‘* the apostles, founding and rearing that church, deliver- ed the episcopal office into the hands of Linus ;°* if so, how did they retain it in ther own hands, or persons? could they give, and have ἢ Tertullian saith, that “ St.*Peter did ordain Clement.”’+ In the Apostolical Constitutions (a very ancient book, and setting forth the most ancient traditions of the church), the apostles ordering prayers to be made for all bishops, and naming the princi- pal, do reckon, not St. Peter, but Cle- ment: ‘¢ Let us pray for our bishop James, | for our bishop Clemens, for our bishop | Euodius,” &c. These reports are consistent, and rec- onciled by that which the Apostolical | Constitutions affirm, that ** Linus was first ordained bishop of the Roman church by Paul; but Clemens after the death of Linus by Peter in the second place.”t Others between Linus and Clemens do interpose Cletus, or Anacletus (some tak- ing these for one, others for two persons), which doth not alter the case.|| * Θεμελιώσαντες οὖν καὶ οἰκοδομήσαντες οἱ μακά- οίοι ἀπόστολοι τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, Aivo τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς | λειτουργίαν ἐυεχείρισαν. Tren. apud Euseb. v. 6. + Romanorum ecclesize Clementem a Petro ordinatum edit.— Tert. de Prescr. 32. | Ex quibus electum magnum plebique probatum, | Hac cathedra, Petrus qua sederat ipse, locatum | Maxima Roma Linum primum considere jussit. Tert. in Mare. iii. 9. | £ Τῆς δὲ 'Ῥωμαίων ἐκκλησίας Aivos μὲν ὃ KAav- dias πρῶτος ὑπὸ Τ]αύλου, Ἰζλήμης δὲ μετὰ τὸν Λίνου θάνατον ὑπ᾽ ἐμοῦ ἸΠέτρου δεύτερος κε χειροτόνηται.---- Const. Ap. vil. 46. ' ἢ Euseb. iii. 4,193; Aug. Ep. 165; Epiph. Her. 27; Opt. 2; Tertull. poem. in Mare. iil. 9; Phot. Cod. 112, (p. 290.) N. Eusebius (iii. | 2.) saith, that Linas did sit bishop after the A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 125 Now hence we may infer, both that St. | Constantius would have procured Felix to Peter never was bishop ; and upon sup- sit bishop of Rome together with Pope position that he was, that he did not con- Liberius, at his return from banishment tinue so. For, (after his compliance with the Arians), 2. If he had ever been bishop, he could the people of Rome would not admit it, not well lay down his office, or subrogate | exclaming, “" One God, one Christ, one another, either to preside with him, or to succeed him; according to the séetent | rules of discipline, and that which pass- | ed for right in the primitive church. This practice Pope Innocent I. con- demned as irregular, and never known before his time :“* We” (saith he in his Epistle to the clergy and people of Con- stantinople) “‘ never have known these things to have been adventured by our fathers, but rather to have been hinder- ed ; for that none hath power given him to ordain another in the place of one living* :” he did not (it seems) consider, that St. Peter had used such a power. Accordingly "the synod of Antioch (to secure the tradition and practice of the church, which began by some to be in- bishop ;” and whereas Felix soon after that died, the historian remarketh it as ἐς a special providence of God, that Pe- ter’s throne might not suffer infamy, be- ing governed under two prelates ;”* he ‘never considered that St. Peter and St. Paul, St. Peter and Linus, had thus governed that same church. Upon this account St. Austin, being as- sumed by Valerius with him to be bishop of Hippo, did afterwards discern and ac- knowledge his error.t In fine, to obviate this practice, so many canons of councils (both general and particular) were made, which we before did mention. 4. In sum, when St. Peter did ordain others (as story doth accord in affirming), fringed) did make this sanction, that “it | either he did retain the episcopacy, and should not be lawful for any bishop to ‘then (beside need, reason, and rule) there constitute another in his room to succeed | were concurrently divers bishops of him; although it were at the point of | Rome, at one time; or he did quite re- death.”’+ 3. But supposing St. Peter were bishop once, yet, by constituting Linus or Cle- mens in his place, he ceased to be so, and divested himself of that place ; for it had been a great irregularity for him to con- tinue bishop together with another. That being, in St. Cyprian’s judgment, the ordination of Linus had been void and null; for, “ Seeing” (saith that holy mar- tyr) “there cannoi after the first be any second, whoever is after one, who ought to be sole bishop, he is not now second, but none.” Upon this ground, when the Emperor martyrdom of Si. Peter: bui this is not so prob- able, as that which the author of the Constitu- | tions doth aftirm, which reconcileth the disso- nancies Οἱ writers, * Oidi γὰρ πώποτε παρὰ τῶν πατέρων ταῦτα ttr- | ολμῆσθαι ἐγνώκαμεν" ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον κεκωλύσθαι. τῷ pn- devi εἰς τόπον ζῶντος χειροτονεῖν ἄλλον δεδόσθαι ἑξου- efav.—P. Inn |. apud Soz. viii. 96. ᾿ t ᾿Επισκόπο μὴ ἐξεῖναι ἀνθ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ καθίστασθαι | Png πᾷ ἣν τῇ τελευτῇ rod βίων roy ydvn.—Syn. ¢$ Cum post primum seeundus esse non pos- Sit; qUisquits post uatiM, qui solus esse debeat, non jam secundus ille, sed nullus est.— Cypr. Ep. 52. linquish, and finally divorce himself from the office, so that he did not die bishop of Rome, the which overturneth the main ground of the Romish pretence.i Or will they say that St. Peter, having laid aside the office for atime, did afterward before his death resume it? Then what became of Linus, of Cletus, of Cle- mens? were they dispossessed of their place, or deposed from their function ? would St. Peter ** succeed them in it ?” * Theod. Hist. it. 17.—Tatrn πὴ rod Θεοῦ δι- οἰκήσαντος. ὥστε τὸν Tlérpov θρόνον μὴ ἀδυξεῖν ὑπὸ | dio ἡγεμόσιν ἱθυνόμενον. + Adhne in corpore posito beate memorize patre et episcopo meo sene Valerio episcopus ordinatus sum, et sedi cum illo; quod coneihe Niceno prohibituin fuisse nesciebam, nec ipse sciebat.—Avg. Ep. 110. While my father and bishop of blessed memory old Valerius, was yet living, T was ordained bishop, and held the see with him; which I knew not, nor did he know, to be forbidden by the couneil of Nice. Ἐ Ipse sublimavit sedem, in qua etiam qui- escere, et praesentem vilam finire dignatus est, — Greg. I. Ep. vi. 37; Innoc. 1. Ep. 21; P. Nic. 1. Ep. ix. p. 509; Grat, Caus. viii. q i. cap. 1. He advanced that wherein he vouchsafed both to set up his rest, and also to end this present life.—Bell. ii. 12, At vero.— see, 126 This in Bellarmine’s own judgment “ had been plainly intolerable.”’* 5. To avoid all which difficulties in the case, and perplexities in story, it is rea- sonable to understand those of the an- cients who call Peter bishop of Rome, and Rome the place, the chair, the see of Peter, as meaning that he was bishop or superintendent of that church, in a large sense; because he did found the church by converting men to the Christian faith ; because he did erect the chair by ordain- ing the first bishops ; because he did, in virtue both of his apostolical office and his special parental relation to that church, maintain a particular inspection over it, when he was there: which notion is not new; for of old Ruffinus affirmeth that he had it, not from his own invention, but from tradition of others: ‘* Some” (saith he) “inquire how, seeing Linus and Cletus were bishops in the city of Rome before Clement, Clement himself, writing to James, could say, that the see was delivered to him by Peter: whereof this reason has been given us; viz. that Linus and Cletus were indeed bishops of Rome before Clement, but Peter being yet living; viz. that they might take the episcopal charge, but he fulfilled the of- fice of the apostleship.”’+ 6. This notion may be confirmed by di- vers observations. It is observable, that the most ancient writers, living nearest the fountains of tradition, do not expressly style St. Peter bishop of Rome, but only say that he did found that church, instituting and ordain- ing bishops there : as the other apostles did in the churches which they settled ; so that the bishops there in a large sense did succeed him, as deriving their pow- er from his ordination, and supplying his room in the instruction and governance * Petrum apostolum successisse in episco- patu Antiocheno alicui ex discipulis, quod est, plene intolerandum,— Beil. ii. 6. + Quidam enim requirunt quo modo, cum Linus et Cletus in urbe Roma ante Clementem hunc fuevint episcopi, ipse Clemens ad Jaco- bum scribens, sibi dicat a Petro docendi cathe- dram traditam ; cujus rei hance accepimus esse -Tationem, quod Linus et Cletus fuerund qui- dem ante Clementem episcopi in urbe Roma, sed superstite Petro; videlicet ut illi episcopa- tus curam gererent, ipse vero apostolatus 1m- A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. of that great church. Yea, their words, if we well mark them, do exclude the apostles from the episcopacy.* Which words the later writers (who did not fore- see the consequence, nor what an exor- bitant superstructure would be raised on that slender bottom, and who were will- ing to comply with the Roman: bishops, affecting by all means to reckon St. Pe- ter for their predecessor) did easily catch, and not well distinguishing, did call him bishop, and St. Paul also, so making two heads of one church. 7. It is also observable, that in the re- cencions of the Roman bishops, some- times the apostles are reckoned in, some- times excluded. So Eusebius calleth Clemens “ the third bishop of Rome,”* yet before him he reckoneth Linus and Anacletus. And of Alexander he saith, that ‘* he deduced his succession in the fifth place from Peter and Paul,’’t that is, excluding the apostles. ᾿ And Hygnius is thus accounted some- time the eighth, sometime the ninth bishop of Rome.’ ι" The same difference in reckoning may be observed in other churches; for in- stance, although St. Peter is called no less bishop of Antioch than of Rome by the ancients, yet Eusebius saith, that ἐς Fuodius was first bishop of Antioch ;” and another “ bids the Antiocheans re- member Euodius, who was first intrust- ed with the presidency over them by the apostles.”’t Other instances may be seen in the notes of Cotelerius upon the Apostolical Constitutions, where he maketh this gene- ral observation : “ΤῸ isan usual custom with the apos- tles, according to their power, ordinary or * Fundantes igitur, et instruentes beati apos- ioli ecclesiam Lino episcopatum administrandz ecclesic tradiderunt.—Jren. iii. 3. The bless- ed apostles therefore founding and instructing the church, delivered the episcopal power of ordering and governing the church to Linus. + Πέμπτην ἀπὸ Πέτρου καὶ Ἰ]αύλου κατάγων δια- δοχήν .--- Euseb. hat t ᾿Αντιοχέων ἐκκλησίας πρῶτος ἐπίσκοπος Kiéduos ἐχρημάτισε."--Ἐ 560. Chron. p. 7; Hist. iti. 22. Μνημονεύετε Εὐοδίου, ὃς πρῶτον ἐνεχειρίσθη ὑπὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων ὑμετέραν προστασίαν. Pscud. Ignat. ad Ant. Eusebius counteth Annianus the first pleret officium.— Ruffin. in Pref.ad Clem Re-| bishop of Alexandria, iii. 21. cogn. . 4 Const. Apost. vii. 46; Iren. 111. 3; Tertull. * Euseb. iii. 4, 13, 15; Iren. iii. 3. f Tren. i. 28; iii. 3, 4; Euseb. iv. 10. , ἧς ᾿ d A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. extraordinary, episcopal or apostolical, to prefix,’* &c.: but it was needless to suppose these two powers when one was sufficient, it virtually containing the other. This is an argument that the ancients were not assured in opinion that the apos- tles were bishops, or that they did not esteem them bishops in the same notion with others. 8. It is observable, that divers churches did take denomination from the apostles, and were called “ apostolical thrones” or “ chairs,” not because the apostles them- selves did sit bishops there, but because they did exercise their apostleship in teaching, and “in constituting bishops there,” who, as Tertullian saith, ‘* did propagate the apostolical seed.”’t So was Ephesus esteemed,}|| because St. Paul did found it, and ordained Timo- thy there; and. because St. John did govern and appoint bishops there. So was Smyrna accounted, because Polycarpus “was settled there by the apostles, or by St. John.”’§ So Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, ‘“ had a controversy about metropolitical rights * Celebris mos est apostolos pro potestate eorum ordinaria vel extraordinaria, episcopali vel apostolica indiculis antistitum prefigere, aut ex iis eximere —Cotel. Not. p. 299. ¥ Apostolice Ecclesive.—Tert. de Preser. 32. *Amocrodxot Op6v01..—Soz i. 17; 2 Tim. i. 6. ¢ In canonicis autem scripturis ecclesiarum catholicarum quamplurium auctoritatem se- quatur, inter quas sane ille sunt, que aposto- heas sedes habere, et epistolas accipere merue- rant.—Aug. de Doc. Ch.ii. 8. Let him follow the authority of those many catholic churehes in the canonical scriptures, among which sure- ly are those which had the honour to have apostolical sees, and to receive epistles from the apostles. Proinde utique et cetere exhi- bent quos ab apostolis in episcopatum constitu: tos apostolici seminis traduces habent.—Tér- tull. de Prascr. 32. || Sed et quee est Ephesi ecclesia a Paulo quidem fundata, Johanne autem permanente apud eos usque ad Trajanitémpora, d&c.—lIren. iil. 3. And slso the church of Ephesus, which was founded by St. Paul, St. John continuing with them till the time of Trajan, &e. Ordo episcoporum ad originem recensus in Johan- nem stabit auctorem.— Tertull. in Mare. iv. δ. Τῆς δὲ 'Eptoov Τιμόθεος μὲν ὑπὸ Παύλου, 'Ιωάννης δὲ én’ ἐμοῦ ‘lwdvvov.—Apost. Const. vii. 46. _§ Ab apostolis in ea que est Smyrnis eccle- Sia constitutus episcopus,—Jren. iii, 3. Smyr- neorum ecclesia habens Polycarpum ab Jo« hanne conlocatum.—Tertull. de Preser. 32 ; Buseb. iii. 36. Tis κατὰ Σμύρναν ἐκκλησίας πρὸς τῶν αὐτοπτῶν, καὶ ὑπηρετῶν rod ζυρίου τὴν ἐπισκο- why ἐγκεχειρισμένος .--- Εἰ ἀ56Ὁ. iii. 36. 127 with Acacius, bishop of Czesarea, as pre- siding in an apostolical see.””* So Alexander was deemed, because St. Mark was supposed by the appoint- meni of St. Peter to sit there. So were Corinth, Thessalonica, Phil- lippi, called by Tertullian, because St. Paul did found them, and furnish them with pastors ; in which respect peculiarly the bishops of those places were called successors of the apostles.: So Constantinople did assume the title of an apostolical church,? probably be- ‘cause, according to tradition, St. Andrew did found that church, although Pope Leo I. would not allow that appellation. Upon the same account might Rome at first be called an apostolical see; al- though afterward the Roman bishops did rather pretend to that denomination, upon account of St. Peter being bishop there: and the like may be said of Antioch.t 9. It is observable, that the author of the Apostolical Constitutions, reciting the first bishop’s constituted in several churches, doth not reckon any of the apos- tles; particularly not Peter, or Paul, or John." 10. Again, any apostle, wherever he did reside by virtue of his apostolical οἵ- fice, without any other designation or as- sumption of a more special power, was qualified to preside there, exercising a superintendency comprehensive of all episcopal functions ; so that it was need- less that he should take upon himself the character or style of a bishop. This (beside the tenor of ancient doc- trine) doth appear from the demeanour of St. John, who never was reckoned “ bish- * ἸΠερὶ μητροπολιτικῶν δικαίων διεφέρετο πρὸς ᾿Ακάκιον τὸν Καισαρείας, ὡς ἀποστολικοῦ θρόνου hy otpevos. —Sozom, iv. 25. T ᾿Αποστολικοῦ τούτου θρόνου xaradpovets.—Syn. Chale. Act. x. p. 379, 284. Thou despisest this apostolical throne. 'E@’ ᾧ καὶ πρῶτον ἐπίστοπον τὸν θεῖον Στάχυν καταστῆσας, ἐν ἐκκλησιᾳ ἣν ἐκεῖσε πρῶτος οὗτος éxf~aro.—Niceph. ii. 39. Bevtaningh as having appointed holy Stachys the first bishop, in the church which he first settled there. Non dedignetur regiam civita- tem, quam apostolicam non potest facere se- dem ——. P. Leo. 1. Ep. 54. Let him not disdain the royal city, which he cannot make an apostolic see. ¢ Memento quia apostolicam sedem regis —. Greg. M. Ep. iv. 37. Remember you rule an apostolic see. Tertull. de Praeser. 36. Const. Apost. vii. 46. 128 op of Ephesus ;” nor could be, without displacing Timothy, who by St. Paul was constituted bishop there, or succeeding in his room; yet he, abiding at Ephesus, did there discharge the office of a me- tropolitan ;*—* governing the churches, and in the adjacent churches here consti- tuting bishops, there forming whole churches, otherwhere allotting to the cler- gy persons designed by the Spirit.”+ Such functions might St. Peter execute in the parts of Rome or Antioch, without being a bishop; and as the bishops of Asia did, saith Tertullian, ‘ refer their original to St. John,” so might the bishops of ltaly, upon the like ground, “ refer their original to St. Peter.”’¢ It is observable, that whereas St. Peter is affirmed to have been bishop of Anti- och seven years before his access to Rome, that is, within the compass of St. Luke’s story, yet he passeth over a mat- ter of so great moment ;' as St. Jerome observeth.|| I cannot grant, that if St. Luke had thought Peter sovereign of the church, and his episcopacy of a place a matter of such consequence, he would have slipped it over, being so obvious a thing, and coming in the way of his story. He therefore, I conceive, was no bish- op of Antioch, although a bishop at An- tioch.§ 11. If in objection to some of. these discourses it be alleged, that St. James, our Lord’s near kinsman, although he * And τοῦ ἁγίου Ttpoddov μέχρι νῦν κζ΄ ἐπίσκο- ποι ἐγένοντο᾽ πάντες ἐν ᾿Εφέσῳ χειροτονήθησαν .---- Syn. Chal. Act.11; 2 Tim.i.6. From holy Timothy till now there have been seven and twenty bishops, and all ordained at Ephesus. Johanne autem permanente apud eos, &c.— Tren. iii. 3. + Τὰς αὐτόθι διεῖπεν ἐκκλησίας ὅπου μὲν ἐπι- σκόπους καταστήσων᾽ ὅπου δὲ ὅλας ἐκκλησίας ἁρμόσων"" ὕπου δὶ κλήρῳ Eva ye τινὰ κληρώσων τῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ Πνεύματος σημπινομένων.---- 56}, Hist. iii. 23. t Ordo episcoporum ad originem recensus | in Joannem stabit auctorem.— Tertull. in Marc. iv. 5. || Denique primum episcopum Antiochene ec- | clesice Petrum fuisse accepimus, et Romam exinde translatum, quod Lucas penitus omisit. | —Hier.in Gal. 2. Wastly, we have received by tradition that Peter was the first bishop of Antioch, and from thence translated to Rome: which Luke has altogether omitted. § It is the distinction of a pope. riz, et rex in Etruria. ' An. Ch. 39, Baron.§ 8; Acts ix. 32; xi. 20. Rex Etru- a. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. was an apostle, was made bishop of Jeru- salem; and that for the like reason St. Peter might assume the bishopric of Rome ; I answer: 1. Itisnot certain that St. James the bishop of Jerusalem wasan apostle (mean- ing an apostle of the primary rank ;) for Eusebius (the greatest antiquary of the old times) doth reckon him “one of the seventy disciples.”* So doth the author of the Apostolical Constitutions in divers places suppose.t Hegesippus (that most ancient _histori- an) was of the same mind, who saith that * there were many of this name,” and that this ““ James did undertake the church with the apostles.” + Of the same opinion was Epiphanius,! who saith, that St. James was the son of Joseph by another wife. The whole Greek church doth sup- pose the same, keeping three distinct so- lemnities for him and the two apostles of the same name. Gregory Nyssen, St. Jerome, and di- vers other ancient writers, do concur herein, whom we may see alleged by Grotius, Dr. Hammond (who themselves did embrace the same opinion), Valesius, Blondel,* &c. Salmasius (after his confident manner) saith, ‘it is certain that he was not one of the twelve :”|| | may at least say, itis not certain that he was, and consequent- ly the objection is grounded onan uncer- tainty. 2. Granting that St. James was one of the apostles (as some of the ancients seem to think,§ calling him an apostle ; and as divers modern divines conceive, * Ele δὲ καὶ οὗτος τῶν φερομένων τοῦ σωτῆρος μαθητῶν, ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ ἀδελφῶν ἣν.---. ἢ 156}}. 1. 12. + Apost. Const. vi. 12, 14; ii, 55; vii, 46, &e. Ἡμεῖς οἱ δώδεκα ἄμα τῷ ᾿Ιακώθῳ ωπον ΠΝ We the twelve apostles together with James. "ἡ Διαδέχεται δὲ τὴν ἐκκλησίαν μετὰ τῶν ἀποστό- λων ὃ ἀδελφὸς τοῦ Ἰζυρίου 'laxw6os.—Euseb. il. 28, || Certum est non fuisse unum ex duodecim. —WSal. Mess. Ὁ. 20. § Hierosolymitanam, quam primus aposto- lus Jacobus episcopatu suo rexit—Amg. Cont. Cresc. ii. 372. The church of Jerusalem, which James the apostle first governed by his episco- pal power. ‘) Epiph. Her. 78. k Grot. in Jac. i. 1; Hamm. Dissert. Ignat. iv.3; Vales. in Euseb. i, 12; Blondel. in_ Epist. Clem. ad Jacob. grounding chiefly upon these words of St. Paul, But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother,' and taking apostles there in the strictest sense), I answer: That the case was peculiar, and there ) ) doth appear a special reason, why one of | | the apostles should be designed to make aconstant residence at Jerusalem, and consequently to preside there like a bish- op. For Jerusalem was the metropolis, the fountain, the centre of the Christian religion, where it had birth, where was greatest matter and occasion of propa- gating the gospel, most people - disposed to embrace it resorting thither; where the church was very numerous, consist- ing, as St. Luke (or St. James in him) doth intimate, of divers myriads of be- lieving Jews ; whence it might seem ex- pedient, that a person of greatest au- thority should be fixed there for the con- firming and improving that church, to- gether with the propagation of religion among the people, which resorted thither ; the which might induce the apostles to settle St. James there, both for discharg- ing the office of an apostle, and the sup- plying the room of a bishop there. According to him, saith Eusebius, “The episcopal throne was committed by the apostles;”* or, ‘Our Lord” (saith Epiphanius) “ did intrust him with his own throne.”’+ But there was no need of fixing an apostle at other places ; nor doth it ap- pear that any was so fixed; especially St. Peter was uncapable of such an em- ployment, requiring settlement and con- stantattendance, who, beside his general apostleship, had a peculiar apustleship of the dispersed Jews committed to him; who therefore was much engaged in tray- el for propagation of the faith, and edi- fying his converts every where. 3. The greater consent of the most ancient writers making St. James not to have been one of the twelve apostles, it is thence accountable, why (as we before noted) St. James was called by sdme an- cient writers “ the bishop of bishops, the * Ὧι πρὸς τῶν ἀποστόλων ὁ τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς ἐγκεχ- εἴριστο θρόνος ----Ἐ 56 Ὁ. ii. 23. Epph, Hor, 78 Ἰζύριος τὸν θρόνον atrot.— εἶ, 19, ™ Acts xxi. 20. Vor. ΤΠ 17 I A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. / 129 prince of bishops,’’ &c. because he was the first bishop of the “ first See,’’ the mother church; the apostles being ex- cluded from the comparison. Upon these considerations we have great reason to refuse the assertion or scandal cast on St. Peter, that he took on him to be bishop of Rome, in a strict sense, as it is understood in this contro- versy. SUPPOSITION V. A further assertion is this, superstructed by consequence on the former, “ That the bish- ops of Rome (according to God’s institution, and by original right derived thence) should have an universal supremacy and jurisdic- tion” (containing the privileges and preroga- tives formerly described) “over the Chris- tian church.” Tuis assertion to be very uncertain, yea, to be most false, I shall by divers considerations evince. 1. If any of the former suppositions be uncertain or false, this assertion, stand- ing on those legs, must partake of those defects, and answerably be dubious or false. If either Peter was not monarch of the apostles, or if his privileges were not successive, or if he were not proper- ly bishop of Rome at his decease, then farewell the Romish claim; if any of those things be dubious, it doth totter; if any of them prove false, then down it falleth. But that each of them is false, hath, I conceive, been sufficiently declared ; that all of them are uncertain, hath at least been made evident. The structure therefore cannot be firm which relieth on such props. 2. Even admitting all those supposi- tions, the inference from them is not as- suredly valid. For St. Peter might have an universal jurisdiction, he might derive it by succession, he might be bishop of Rome ; yet no such authority might hence accrue to the Roman bishop, his succes- sor in that see. For that universal jurisdiction might be derived into another channel, and the bishop of Rome might in other respects be successor to him, without being so in this. As for instance in the Roman empire, 130 before any rule of succession was estab- lished therein, the emperor was sovereign governor, and he might die consul of Rome, having assumed that place to him- self; yet when he died, the supreme au- thority did not lapse into the hands of the consul who succeeded him, but into the hands of the senate and people ; his con- sular authority only going to his succes- sorin that office. So might St. Peter’s universal power be transferred unto the ecclesiastical college of bishops and of the church; his episcopal inferior au- thority over the singular παροικία, or province of Rome, being transmitted to his followers in that chair. 3. That in truth it was thus, and that all the authority of St. Peter, and of all other apostles, was devolved to the church, and to the representative body thereof, the Fathers did suppose ; affirm- ing the church to have received from our Lord a sovereign power. “This” (saith St. Cyprian) “is that one church, which holdeth and possess- eth all the power of its Spouse and Lord ; in this we preside ; for the hon- our and unity of this we fight”**——-saith he, in his Epistle to Jubianus, wherein he doth impugn the proceedings of Pope Stephanus ;" the which sentence St. Aus- tin appropriateth to himself, speaking it absolutely, without citing St. Cyprian. To this authority of the church St. Basil would have all that confess the faith of Christ to submit: “To which end we exceedingly need your assistance, that they who confess the apostolic faith would renounce the schisms which they have devised, and submit themselves henceforth to the authority of the church.” They (after the holy scripture, which saith, that each bishop hath a care of God's church, and is obliged to feed the church of God and is appointed to edify the body of Christ)* do suppose the * Hec est una que tenet et possidet omnem Sponsi sui et Domini potestatem, in hac presi- demus, pro honore ejus et unitate pugnamus Cypr. Ep. 73. ἡ Ἔφ᾽ ἅπερ καὶ μάλιστα τῆς rap’ ὑμῶν χρήζομεν βοηθείας, ὥστε τοὺς τὴν ἀποστολικὴν ὁμολογουντας πίστιν͵, ἅπερ ἐπένδησαν, σχίσμάτα διαλύσαντας, ὑπο- ταγῆναι ποῦ λοιποῦ τῇ αὐθεντίᾳ τῆς ἐκκλησίας .---- 8.5. Epist. 69. " Aug. de Bapt. cont. Don. iv. 1. 41 Tim. iii. 5,15; Acts xx. 28; Eph. iv. 12. i A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. administration of ecclesiastical affairs concerning the public state of the church, the defence of the common faith, the maintenance of order, peace, and unity, jointly to belong unto the whole body of pastors ;* according to that of St. Cypri- an to Pope Stephanus himself, ‘ There- fore, most dear brother, the body of priests is copious, being joined together by the glue of mutual concord, and the bond of unity, that if any of our college should attempt to make heresy, and to tear or waste the flock of Christ, the rest may come to succour; and like useful and merciful shepherds may re-collect the sheep into the flock.”+ And again, “ Which thing it concerns us to look after and redress, most dear brother, who bear- ing in mind the divine clemency, and holding the scales of the church-govern- ment,’*i &e. So even the Roman clergy did ac- knowledge, ‘* For we ought all of us to watch for the body of the whole church, whose members are digested through several provinces. ’’|| *“‘ Like the Trinity, whose power is one and undivided, there is one priesthood among divers bishops.’’§ So in the Apostolical Constitutions, the apostles tell the bishops, that ‘an uni- versal episcopacy is entrusted to them.” So the council of Carthage with St. Cyprian ‘Clear and manifest is the mind and meaning of our Lord Jesus Christ, sending his apostles, and affording * Collegium sacerdotum.—Cypr. Ep. Ixvii. 52. “Ὑπὲρ πάσης ἐπισκοπῆς τῆς ὑπὸ τὸν οὐρανόν .---- Apost. Const. vill. 10. + {dcirco enim, frater charissime, copiosum corpus est sacerdotum, concordie mutue glu- tino atque unitatis vinculo copulatum, ut siquis ex collegio nostro hzresin facere, et gregem Christi lacerare et vastare tentaverit, subveni- ant ceteri, et quasi pastores utiles et miseri- cordes oves Domini in gregem colligant.—Cypr. Ep. 67. t Cui rei nostrum est consulere, et subvenire, frater charissime, qui divinam clementiam co- gitantes, et gubernande ecclesie libram tenen- tes, &c.—Ihid. | Omhes enim nos decet pro corpore totius ecclesia, cujus per varias quasque provincias membra digesta sunt, excubare.—Cler. Rom. apud Cypr. Ep. 30. ᾧ Ad Trinitatis instar, cujus una est atque in- dividua potestas, unum esse per diversos antis- tites sacerdotium.—P. Symmachus ad onium Arelat. 4 Eis éxcornpty pov ὑμῶν, τῶν τὴν καθόλον ém- σκοπὴν wemtorevpévov.—Const. Apost. vi. 14. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. to them alone the power given him of the Father; in whose room we succeeded governing the church of God with the same power.’’* “Christ our Lord and our God going to the Father, commended his spouse to us.”’7 A very ancient instance of which ad- ministration is the proceeding against Paulus Samosatenus ; when “ the pastors of the churches, some from one place, some from another, did assemble together against him as a pest of Christ’s flock, all of them hastening to Antioch : ὦ where they deposed, exterminated, and deprived him of communion, warning the whole church to reject and disavow him. “ Seeing the pastoral charge is com- mon to us all, who bear the episcopal of- fice, although thou sittest in a higher and more eminent place.”’|| “Therefore for this cause the holy church is committed to you and to us, that we may labour for all, and not be slack in yielding help and assistance to αἰ}. ὁ Hence St. Chrysostom said of Eusta- thius his bishop: ‘ For he was well in- structed and taught by the grace of the Holy Spirit, that a president or bishop of a church ought not to take care of that church alone, wherewith he is intrusted by the Holy Ghost, but also of the whole church dispersed throughout the world.’ ἢ * Manifesta est sententia Domini nostri Jesu Christi apostolos suos mittentis, et ipsis solis otestatem a Petro sibidatam permittentis, qui- US NOS successimus, eadem petestate ecclesi- am Domini gubernantes.—Conc. Carth. apud Cypr. p. 405. Christus Dominus et Deus noster ad Pat- Tem proficiscens, sponsam suam nobis com- mendavit Ibid. p. 404. $ Οἱ λοιποὶ τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ποιμένες ἄλλοι ἄλλοθεν ὡς ἐπὶ λυμεῶνα τῆς τοῦ Χριστου ποίμνης συνίεσαν, 6i πάντες ἐπὶ τὴν ᾿Αντιόχειαν onxcicavres.—Euseb. vii. 27. || Cum communis sit omnibus nobis, qui fungimur episcopatus officio, quamvis ipse in eo pramineas celsiore fastigio, specula pasto- ralis ——. Aug. ad Bonif. contra duas Epist. Pelag. i. 1. § Hujus ergo rei gratia vobis et nobis sancta commissa est ecclesia, ut pro omnibus labore- mus, et cunctis opem ferre non negligamus . PP. Joh. 1. Ep. 1, (ad Zachar.) apud Bin, tom. iii. p. 812. Ἵ Kat yap ἣν πεπαιδευμένος καλῶς mapa τῆς τοῦ πνεύματος χάριτος, ὅτι τῆς ἐκκλησίας προεστῶτα οὐκ ἐκείνης μόνης κήδεσθαι δεῖ τῆς παρὰ τοῦ πνεύματος 131 They consequently did repute schism, or ecclesiastical rebellion, to consist in (ἃ departure from the consent of the body of the priesthood,”’* as St. Cypri- an in divers places doth express it in his epistles to pope Stephen and others.’ They deem all bishops to partake of the apostolical authority, according to that of St. Basil to St. Ambrose: ‘* The Lord himself hath translated thee from the judges of the earth unto the prelacy of the apostles.”+ They took themselves all to be vicars of Christ, and judges in his stead; ac- cording to that of St. Cyprian: ‘ For heresies are sprung up, and schisms grown from no other ground nor root but this, because God’s priest was not obeyed, nor was there one priest or bishop for a time in the church, nor a judge thought on for a time to supply the room of Christ.”{ Where that by church is meant any particular church, and by priest a bishop of such church, any one not bewitched with prejudice by the tenor of St. Cyprian’s discourse will easily discern.|| They conceive that our Saviour did promise to St. Peter the keys in behalf of the church, and as representing it.? They suppose the combination of bishops in peaceable consent and mutual aid, to be the rock on which the church is built. They allege the authority granted to St. Peteras a ground of claim to the same in all bishops jointly, and in each bishop singly, according to his rata pars, or allotted proportion. ‘* Which may easily be understood by the words of our Lord, when he says to ἐγχειρισθείσης αὐτῷ, ἀλλὰ καὶ πάσης κατὰ τὴν olxov- μίνην κειμένης.----Ο rys. tom. v. Or. 93. * A corpore nostri, et sacerdotii consensi- one discesserit Cypr. Ep. 67. Qui se ab ecclesie vinculo, atque a sacerdotum colle- gio separat.—Cypr. Ep. 52. Tt Αὐτός ce ὃ Κύριος ἀπὸ τῶν κριτῶν τῆς γῆς ἐπὶ τὴν προεδρίαν τῶν ἀποστόλών μετέθηκεν. ---- Basil. Ep. 56. 6 Neque enim aliunde hereses oborte sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quam inde quod sa- cerdoti Dei non obtemperetur, nec unus in ec- clesia ad tempus sacerdos, et ad tempus judex vice Christi cogitatur.—Cypr. Ep. 55. || Episcopus personam habet Christi, et vi- carius Domini est.—Ambr. in 1 Cor, 11. The bishop sustains the person of Christ, and is the vicar of our Lord. P Cypr. Ep. 27. 132 biessed Peter, whose place the bishops supply, Whatsoever,”* &c. 1 have the sword of Constantine in my hands, you of Peter,”? said our great King Edgar. They do therefore in this regard take themselves all to be successors of St. Peter, that his power is derived to them all, and that the whole episcopal order ** is the chair by the Lord’s voice found- ed on St. Peter:” Thus St. Cyprian in divers places (before touched) dis- courseth ; and thus Firmilian from the keys granted to St. Peter inferreth, dis- puting against the Roman bishop: “Therefore” (saith he) ‘the power of remitting sins is given to the apostles, and to the churches, which they being sent from Christ did constitute, and to the bishops, which do succeed them by Vicarious ordination.”’t 4. The bishops of any other churches founded by the apostles, in the Fathers’ style are successors of the apostles, in the same sense, and to the same intent, as the bishop of Rome is by them ac- counted successor of St. Peter ; the apos- tolical power, which in extent was uni- versal, being in some sense, in reference to them, not quite extinct, but transmit- ted by succession: yet the bishops of apostolical churches did never claim, nor allowedly exercise, apostolical jurisdic- tion beyond their own precincts; ac- cording to those words of St. Jerome, “Tell me, what doth Palestine belong to the bishop of Alexandria ?”’|| This sheweth the inconsequence of their discourse ; for in like manner the pope might be successor to St. Peter, and St. Peter’s universal power might be successive, vet the pope have no singu- lar claim thereto, beyond the bounds of his particular church. 5. So again, for instance, St. James * Quod ex verbis Domini facile intelligi po- test, quibus B. Petro, cujus vicem episcopi ge- runt, ait, Quodeunque, &c. Capit. Caroli M. lib. v. cap. 163. + Ego Constantini, vos Petri gladium habe- tis in manibus. t Potestas ergo remittendorum peccatorum apostolis data est, et ecclesiis quas illi a Christo missi constituerunt, et episcopis qui eis ordina- tione vicaria succedunt.—Firmil. apud Cypr. Ep. 75. || Responde mihi, ad Alexandrinum episco- pum Palestina quid pertinet?—Hier. ad Pam- mach. Fp. \xi. 15, (tr sg Sessile sss sions sip . i A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. (whom the Roman church, in her litur-_ gies, doth avow for an apostle) was bish- op of Jerusalem more unquestionably than St. Peter was bishop of Rome ; Je- rusalem also was the root, and ‘“ the mother of all churches’”’* (as the Fathers of the second general synod, in their let- ter to Pope Damasus himself, and the occidental bishops did call it, forgetting the singular pretence of Rome to that title.) Yet the bishops of Jerusalem, succes- sors of St. James, did not thence claim | know not what kind of extensive juris- diction; yea, notwithstanding their suc- cession, they did not so much as obtain a metropolitical authority in Palestine, which did belong to Cesarea (having been assigned thereto in conformity to the civil government), and was by spe- cial provision ‘ reserved thereto” in the Synod of Nice ;+ whence St. Jerome did not stick to affirm, that the bishop of Jerusalem was: subject to the bishop of Ceesarea ;¢ for, speaking to John bishop of Jerusalem, who for compurgation of himself from errors imputed to him had appealed to Theophilus bishop of Alex- andria, he saith, ** Thou hadst rather cause molestation to ears possessed, than render honour to thy, metropolitan,’ || that is, to the bishop of Ceesarea. By which instance we may discern what little consideration sometimes was had of personal or topical succession to the apostles in determining the extent of jurisdiction : and why should the Roman bishop upon that score pretend more va- lidity than others ? 6. St. Peter, probably ere that he came at Rome, did found divers other churches, whereof he was paramount bishop, or did retain a special superin- tendency over them ;" particularly ‘* An- * Τῆς μητρὸς ἁπασῶν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν, τῆς ἐν ‘Tepo- codbpors.—Theodor. v. 9. Mater Christiani no- minis —Jmper. Just. ad P. Hormisd. apud Bin. tom. 1. p. 794. The mother of the Christian name. + Th μητροπόλει σωζομένου τοῦ ο͵κείου ἀξιώματος. —Conc. Nic. Can. 7. ΝΣ t Ibi decernitur, ut Palestince metropolis Cz- sarea sit.— Hier. Ep. Ixi. 15. It is there de- creed, that Caesarea should be the metropolis of Palestine. || Maluisti occupatis auribus molestias fa- cere, quam debitum metropolitano tuo hono- rem reddere.—Hier. ad Pammach. Ep. ᾿χὶ. 15. 4“ Hier. ad Galat. 2; P. Pelag. Il. Ep. 1. -““ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. tioch was anciently called his See,’’* and he is acknowledged to have sat there seven years before he was bishop of Rome. Why therefore may not the bishop of Antioch pretend to succeed Peter in his universal pastorship, as well as his youn- ger brother of Rome? why should Eu- odius, ordained by St. Peter at Antioch, yield to Clemens, afterward by him or- dained at Rome ? Antioch was the firstborn of Gentile churches, where the name of Christians was first heard : Antioch was (as the Constantinopolitan Fathers called it) ** the most ancient and truly apostolical church.”’+ Antioch, by virtue of St. Peter’s sit- ting there, or peculiar relation to it, was (according to their own conceits) the principal See.t Why therefore should St. Peter be so unkind to it,as not only to relinquish it, but to debase it; not only transferring his See from it, but divesting it of the privilege which it had got? Why should he prefer before it the city of Rome, the mystical Babylon, the mother of abominations of the earth, the throne of Satan’s empire, the place which did then most persecute the Chris- tian faith, and was drunk with the blood of the saints ?\\* 7. The ground of this preference was, say they, St. Peter’s will: and they have reason to say so; for otherwise if St. Peter had died intestate, the elder son of Antioch would have had the best right to all his goods and dignities.¢ * —— ρρόνον τῆς ae μεγαλοπόλεων, τὸν = ἁγίου Ulérpov.—Syn. Chalced. Act. vii. p. t Tloec6urarn kai ὄντως ἁροστολικὴ ixxAnola.— Theod. v. 9. τ Ubi imperator, ibi Roma. peror is, there is Rome. || Sie et Babylon apud Joannem nostrum Romane urbis figura est, proinde et magne et regno superba, et sanctorum debellatricis.— Tertull. adv. Jud cap.9.- So also Babylon in our St. John is a type of the city of Rome, and therefore of a great, royal, and proud city, and asubduer of the saints. , § Potuisset Petrus nullam sedem particula- rem sibi unquam eligere, sicut fecit primis quinque annis lhid. Peter might have chosen to himself no particular city, as he did the first five years. ® Acts xi, 26. * Rev. xvii. 5, 6. Where the em- * Bell. ii. 12. 133 But how doth that will appear? in what tables was it written ? in what reg- isters is itextant ? in whose presence did he nuncupate it? it is nowhere to be seen or heard of. Neither do they otherwise know of it, than by reasoning it out; and in effect they say only that it was fit he should will it: but they may be mistaken in their divinations; and perhaps, notwith- standing them, St. Peter might will as well to his former See of Antioch, as to his latter of Rome. 8. Indeed Bellarmine sometimes posi- tively and briskly enough doth affirm, that ** God did command St. Peter to fix his see at Rome :’* but his proofs of it are so ridiculously fond and weak, that I grudge the trouble of reciting them; and he himself sufficiently confuteth them, by saying otherwhere, ‘ It is not unprobable, that our Lord gave an ex- press command, that Peter should so fix his See at Rome, that the bishop of Rome should absolutely succeed him.”’+ He saith it is not improbable ; if it be no more than so, it is uncertain ; it may be a mere conjecture or a dream. It is much more not unprobable, that if God had commanded it, there would have been some assurance of a command so very important. 9. Antioch hath at least a fair plea for ashare in St. Peter’s prerogatives; for it did ever hold the repute of an apostoli- cal church, and upon that score some deference was paid to it: why so, if St. Peter did carry his see with all its pre- rogatives to another place? But if he carried with him only part of his prerog- ative, leaving some part behind at Anti- och, how much then, I pray, did he leave there ὃ why did he divide une- qually, or leave less than half? If per- chance he did leave half, the bishop of Antioch is equal to him of Rome. 10, Other persons also may be found, who according to equal judgment might have a better title to the succession of Peter in his universal authority than the pope ; having a nearer relation to him * Jubente Domino, ii. |. Deus ipse jussit Rome figi apostolicam Petri sedem. iv 4, t Nonest improbabile Dominum etiam aper- te jussisse, ut sedem suam Petrus ita figeret Rome, ut Romanus episcopus absolute ei suc- cederet.— Bell. ii. 12, ᾧ Et quoniam. 134 than he (although his successor in one charge), or upon other equitable grounds. For instance, St. John, or any other apostle who did survive St. Peter: for if St. Peter was the father of Christians (which title yet our Saviour forbiddeth any one to assume), St. John might well claim to be his eldest son; and it had been a very hard case for him to have been postponed in the succession ; It had been a derogation to our Lord’s own choice, a neglect of his special affection, a disparagement of the apostolical office, for him to be subjected to any other; neither could any other pretend to the like gifis for management of that great charge. 11. The bishop of Jerusalem might with much reason have put in his claim thereto, as being successor of our Lord himself, who unquestionably was the High Priest of our profession, and Arch- bishop of all our souls ; whose See was the mother of all churches; wherein St. Peter himself did at first reside, ex- ercising his vicarship: if our Lord, upon special accounts out of course, had put the sovereignty into St. Peter’s hands, yet after his decease it might be fit that it should return into its proper channel. This may seem to have been the judg- ment of the times, when the author of the Apostolical Constitutions did write, who reporteth the apostles to have ordered prayers to be made first for James, then for Clement, then for Euodius. 12. Equity would rather have required, that one should by common consent and election of the whole church be placed in St. Peter’s room, than that the bishop of Rome, by election of a few persons there, should succeed into it. As the whole body of pastors was highly concerned in that succession, so it was reasonable that all of them should concur in designation of a person there- to; it is not reasonable to suppose that either God would institute, or St. Peter by will should devise a course of pro- ceeding in such a case so unequal and unsatisfactory. If therefore the church, considering this equity of the case, together with the expediency of affairs in relation to its good, should undertake to choose for it- self another monarch (the bishop of anoth- er See, who should seem fitter for the i A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. place), to succeed into the prerogatives of St. Peter, that person would have a fairer title to that office than the Pope; for such a person would have a real title, grounded on some reason of the case; whenas the Pope’s pretence doth only stand upon a positive institution, whereof he cannot exhibit any certificate. This was the mind of a great man among them- selves; who saith, *that “* if possibly the bishop of Triers should be chosen for head of the church. For the church has free power to provide itself a head.” Bellarmine himself confesseth, that “if St. Peter” (as he might have done if he had pleased) ““ should have chosen no par- ticular See, as he did not for the first five years, then after Peter’s death, neither the bishop of Rome nor of Antioch had succeeded, but he whom the church should have chosen for itself.”+ Now if the church upon that supposition would have had such a right, it is not probable that St. Peter ‘* by his fact’? would have deprived it thereof, or willingly done any thing in prejudice to it; there being ap- parently so much equity, that the church should have a stroke in designation of its pastor. In ancient times there was not any small church which. had not a suffrage in. the choice of its pastor; and was it fitting that all the church should have one imposed on it without its consent ?f If we consider the manner in ancient time of electing and constituting the Ro- * Quod si per posibile Trevirensis eligeretur pro capite e@lesia. Habet enim ecclesia po- testatem liberam sibi de capite providendi ——, Card. Cus. de Conc. Cath. ii. 13 ——. + Nam potuisset Petrus nullam sedem par- ticularem sibi unquam eligere, sicut fecit pri- mis quinque annis, et tunc moriente Petro, non episcopus Romanus, neque Antiochenus suc- cessisset, sed is quem ecclesia sibi elegisset.— Bell. ii. 12. t Nulla ratio sinit, ut inter episcopos habe- antur, qui nec aclericis sunt electi, nec a ple- bibus expetiti, nec a comprovincialibus episco- piscum metropolitani judicio consecrati.—P. Leo I. Ep. 92. No reason will adinit, that they should be esteemed bishops, who are neither chosen by the clergy, nor desired by the people, nor consecrated by the bishops of the same province, with the consent of the metropolitan. Nullus invitis detur episcopus: cleri, plebis, et ordinis consensus requiratur,—P. Celest. 1. Ep. 2. Grat. Dist. 61, cap. 13. Let there be no — bishop imposed on any against their wills: let the consent of the clergy and people, and his own order be required. , A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 135 man bishop, we may thence discern not; And that the Roman elections in that only the improbability, but iniquity of this ce: how was he then chosen ὃ was it by a general synod of bishops, or _ by delegates from all parts of Christen- dom, whereby the common interest in him might appear, and whereby the world might be satisfied that one was elected fit for that high office ? No; he was chosen, as usually then other particu- lar bishops were, by the clergy and peo- ple of Rome; none of the world being conscious of the proceeding, or bearing any share therein. Now was it equal that such a power of imposing a sovereign on all the grave bishops, and on all the good people of _the Christian world, should be granted to one city ? _ Was it fitting that sucha charge, im- porting advancement above all pastors, /and being intrusted with the welfare ‘of _all souls in Christendom, should be the result of an election liable to so many | defects and corruptions ; which assuredly often, if not almost constantly, would be procured by ambition, bribery, or partial- ity ; would be managed by popular fac- tion and tumults ? It was observed generally of such elec- tions by Nazianzen, that “ prelacies were not got rather by virtue then by naughti- ness ; and that episcopal thrones did not rather belong to the more worthy, than ᾿ἴο the more powerful.’’* | And declaring his mind or wish, that elections of bishops should * rest only or chiefly in the best men; not in the wealth- /iest and mightiest ; or in the impetuous- ness and unreasonableness of the people, "πὰ among them in those who are most κω bought and bribed ;” whereby he | | intimateth the common practice, and sub- joineth, “* But now I can hardly avoid fow-osiny that the popular (or civil) gover- jnanees are better ordered than ours, which are reputed to have divine grace | attending them.”’*+ * Οὐ γὰρ ἐξ ἀρετῆς, μᾶλλον, ἣ κακουργίας ἡ προε- | δρία, οὐδὲ τῶν ἀξιωώτέρων μᾶλλον, ἢ δυνατωτέρων of Op6voi.—Naz. Or. xx. p. 335. t ‘Eg’ ols ἔδει τὰς τοιαῦτας προδολὰς κεῖσθαι μό- vows, ἣ ὅτι μᾶλιστα ἀλλὰ μὴ τοῖς εὐπορωτάτοις τε | καὶ δυνατωτάτοις, ἢ pop? δήμου καὶ ἀλογία, καὶ τοῦ- | τῶν αὐτῶν μάλιστα τοῖς εὐωνοτάτοις" νῦν δὲ κινδυνεύω be πον ἀρχὰς εὐτακτωτέρας ὑπολαμδάνειν τῶν "ἡμετέρων. αἷς ἡ θεία χάρις ἐπιφημίζεται.--Οτορ. feeds pn ιν, 3 | | | ii time were come into that course, we may see by the relation and reflections of an honest pagan historian concerning the election of Pope Damasus (contemporary of Gregory Nazianzen:) “" Damasus” (saith he) “‘ and Ursinus, above human measure burning with desire to snatch the episcopal See, did, with divided parties, most fiercely conflict :* in which con- flict, upon one day, in the very church, an hundred and thirty persons were slain ;" so did that great pope get into the chair: thus, as the historian reflecteth, ‘** the wealth and pomp of the place nat- uarlly did provoke ambition”? by all means to seek it, and did cause fierce contentions to arise in the choice; whence commonly, wise and modest persons be- ing excluded from any capacity thereof, any ambitious and cunning man, who had the art or the luck to please the multitude, would by violence obtain it: which was a goodly way of constituting a sovereign to the church. Thus it went within three ages after our Lord; and afterwards, in the de- clensions of Christian simplicity and in- tegrity, matters were not like to be mend- ed, but did indeed rather grow worse ; as beside the reports and complaints of his- torians, how that commonly by ambi- tious prensations, by simoniacal corrup- tions, by political bandyings, by popular factions, by all kinds of sinister ways, men crept into the place, doth appear by those many dismal schisms, which gave the church many pretended heads, but not one certain one ; as also by the result of them, being the choice of persons very unworthy and horribly flagitious.t * Damasus et Ursinus supra hamanum mo- dam ad rapiendam episcopalem sedem arden- tes scissis studiis acerrime conflictabantur—. Am. Marcell. \ib. 27. + Neque ego ab uno ostentationem rerum eonsiderans urbanaram, hujus rei cupidos, &e. —Id. Ibid. t Damasus 11. pontificatum per vim occupat, nullo cleri populique consensu ; adeoenim in- oleverat hic mos, ut jam cuique ambitioso lice- ret Petri sedem invadere.—Plat. (p. 314.) Da- masus IT. invades the popedom by force, with- ont any consent of the clergy and people; for so Was it now grown into custom, that any am- bitious man might invade Peter’s see. Eo enim tum pontificatus devenerat, ut qui plus largitione et ambitione, non dico sanctitate vite * Sozom. vi. 23. 136 If it be said that the election of a pope in old times was wont to be approved by the consent of all bishops in the world, according to the testimony of St. Cyprian, who saith of Cornelius, that “* he was known by the testimony of his fellow bishops, whose whole number through all the world did with peaceful unanimity consent : ἢ I answer, that this consent was not in the election, or antecedently to it; that it was only by letters or messages declar- ing the election, according to that of St. Cyprian ;7 that it was not anywise pecu- et doctrina valeret, is tantummodo dignitatis gradum bonis oppressis et rejectis obtineret : quem morem utinam aliquando non retinuis- sent nostra tempora.— Plat. in Silv. 3 For the business of the papacy was come to that pass, that whoever by bribery and ambition, I say not by holiness of life and learning, got the start of others, he alone obtained that degree of dignity, good men in the mean being de- pressed and rejected: which custom | would to God our times had not retained. Cum jam eo devenissent ecclesiastici, ut non coacti ut antea, sed sponte et largitionibus pontificium munus obirent. —Plat. in Steph. 6. Baron. ann. 112. § 8. Whenas now ecclesiastical persons are come to that pass, that they execute the papal office, not being compelled unto it, as hereto- fore, but of their own accord, and by bribing for it. Videbat enim Imperator eo licentize factiosum quemque et potemtem, quamvis ig- nobilem devenisse, ut corruptis suffragiis tan- tam dignitatem consequeretur, &c.—Plat in Clem. ii. (p. 313.) For the emperor saw that every factious and powerful person, though base and ignoble, was grown to that height of licentiousness, that he obtained so great digni- ty by corruption and buying of suffrages. Om- ne papale negotium manus agunt: quem dabis mihi de tota maxima urbe, qui te in papam re- ceperit, pretio seu spe pretii non interveniente ? —Bern. de Consid. iv. 2. _The whole business of making a pope is managed by gifts: whom can you shew me, in all this great city, who took you into the papacy without being bribed and corrupted with reward, or at least with hope of it? ω co-episcoporum testimonio, quorum numerus universus per totum mundum con- cordi unanimitate consentit—. Cypr. Ep. 52. Cum Fabiani locus, id est cum locus Petri, et gradus cathedre sacerdotalis vacaret, quo oc- cupato de Dei voluntate atque omnium nos- trum consentione . Ibid. When Fabia- nus’s place, 7. 6. when the place of Peter, and the degree of the sacerdotal chair was vacant, which being obtained by the will of God and all our consents ——. + Satis erat ut tu te episcopum factum literis nunciares, 4cc.—Cypr. Ep. 42. It was enough that you declared by letters that you were made bishop. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. liar to the Roman bishop, but such as was yielded to all Catholic bishops, each of whom “ was to be approved” (as St. Cyprian saith) ‘ by the testimony and judgment of his colleagues;”* that it was in order only to the maintaining fraternal communion and_ correspon- dence, signifying that such a bishop was duly elected by his clergy and people, was rightly ordained by his neighbour bishops, did profess the Catholic faith, and was therefore qualified for com- munion with his brethren; such a con- sent to the election of any bishop of old was given (especially upon occasion, and when any question concerning the right of a hishop did intervene), where- of now inthe election of a pope no foot- step doth remain. We may also note, that the election of Cornelius being contested, he did more solemnly acquaint all the bishops of the world with his case, and so did obtain their approbation in a way more than or- dinary.* 13. If God had designed this deriva- tion of universal sovereignty, it is prob- able that he would have prescribed some certain, standing, immutable way of election, and imparted the right to certain — persons, and not left it at such uncertain- ty tothe chances of time, so that the manner of election hath often changed, and the power of it tossed into divers) hands. ‘‘And though in several times there have been observed several ways as to the election of the Roman pontiffs, ac- cording as the necessity and expediency) of the church required.”’+ Of old it was (as other elections) man- aged by nomination of the clergy, and. suffrage of the people. Afterward the emperors did assume to themselves the nomination or approba- tion of them. “For then nothing was done by the clergy in the choice of the pope, unless) * Episcopo semel facto, et collegarum ac plebis testimonio et judicio comprobato —. Cypr. Ep. 41. ( + Et licet diversis temporibus diversi modi vati sunt, prout necessitas, et utilitas ecclesia@ exposcebat Conc. Bas, sess. Xxxvil. P. 98. Vide Grat. Dist. 63. per tot. τ Euseb. | 1 super electione Romanorum pontificum obser- . A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. the emperor had approved his elec- | tion.”* i “But he, seeing the prince’s consent was required, sent messengers with let- _ ters, to entreat Mauritius that he would not suffer the election made by the cler- gy and people of Rome in that case to _ be valid.”’+ | “Leo ὙΠ]. being tired out with the in- | constancy of the Romans, transferred the _whole power and authority of choosing the pope from the clergy and people of | Rome to the emperor.” _ At some times the clergy had no hand In the election; but popes were intruded | by powerful men or women at their plea- | sure. || Afterwards the cardinals (that is, some of the chief Roman clergy) did appro- priate the election to themselves, by the _ decree of Pope Nicholas II. in his Lateran synod. Sometimes, out of course, general syn- ods did assume the choice to themselves ; as at Constance, Pisa, and Basil. 14, From the premises, to conclude the pope’s title to St. Peter’s authority, it is requisite to show the power demised by him to be according to God’s institution and intent, immutable and indefectible; for power built upon the like, but far more certain principles, hath in course | of times, and by worldly changes, been quite lost, or conveyed into other chan- nels than those wherein it was first put; ᾿ and that irrecoverably, so that it cannot | anywise be retrieved, or reduced into the | first order. For instance, Adam was by God con- | stituted universal sovereign of mankind ; * Nil eniin tam a clero in eljgendo pontifice actum erat, nisi ejus electionem imperator ap- | probasset.—Plat. in Pelag. 11. + Is autem, cum principis consensus requi- | Teretur, nuncios cura literis miserat qui Mauri- lium obsecrarent, ne pateretur electionem cleri | et popali Romani ea in re valere.—Plat. in Greg. M. Vide Grat. Dist. 63 A ¢ Conc, tom. vii. p. 182. Leo VIII. Roma- norum inconstantiam pertesus, auctoritatem omnem eligendi pontificis a clero, propuloque | Romano ad imperatorem transtulit.—Plat. in Leo VIII. (p. 291.) || Nasquam cleri eligentis, vel postea con- sentientis aliqua mentio.—Baron. ann. 112, 5, | 8; ann. 131, 5.1. There was nowhere any mention of the clergy electing, or afterwards consenting. * Grat. Dist, xxii. cap. 1, Plat. in Nic. II. Vou. UI 18 137 and into that power his eldest son of right did succeed; and so it of right should have been continually propagated. Yet soon did that power fail, or was diverted into other courses; the world being cantonized into several dominions ; so that the heir at law among all the de- scendants of Adam cannot so easily be found, as a needle in a bottle of hay, he probably is a subject, and perhaps is a peasant. So might St. Peter be monarch of the church, and the pope might succeed him ; yet by revolutions of things, by several defaults and incapacities in himself, by divers obstructions incident, by forfeiture upon encroaching on other men’s rights, according to that maxim of a great pope, “He loseth his own, who coveteth more than his due,”* his power might be clip- ped, might be transplanted, might utterly decay and fail; to such fatalities other powers are subject; nor can that of the pope be exempt from them, as other- where we shall more largely declare. 15. Indeed that God did intend his church should perpetually subsist united in any one political frame of govern- ment, isa principle which they do as- sume and build upon, but can nowise prove. Nor indeed is it true. For, If the unity of the church designed and instituted by God were only an unity of faith, of charity, of peace, of frater- nal communion and correspondence be- tween particular societies and pastors, then in vain it is to seek for the subject and seat of universal jurisdiction. Now that God did not intend any other unity, than such as those specified, we have good reason to judge, and shall, we hope, otherwhere sufficiently prove. 16. We may consider, that really the sovereign power (such as itis pretended) hath often failed, there having been for long spaces of time no Roman bishops at all, upon several accounts; which is a sign that the church may subsist without it. As, 1. When Rome was desolated by the Goths, Vandals, and Lombards. 2. In times when the Romans would not suffer popes to live with them.* * Propria perdit qui indebita concupiscit.— P. Leo I. Ep. 54. * Vide Bern. Ep. 242, 243 ; Bell. iv. 4, 188 3. In case of discontinuance from Rome, when the popes (so calling them- selves) did for above seventy years abide in France ; when they indeed, not being chosen by the Roman people, nor exer- cising pastoral care over them, were on- ly titular, not real bishops of Rome (they were popes of Avignon, not of Rome; and successors of God knows who, not of St. Peter;) no more than one contin- ually living in England can be bishop of Jerusalem. 4. In times of many long schisms (twenty-two schisms), when either there was no true pope, or, which in effect was the same, no certain one.* . 5. When popes were intruded by vio- lence, whom Baronius himself positive- ly affirmeth to have been no popes: how then could a succession of true popes be continued from them by the clergy, which they in virtue of their pa- pal authority did pretend to create ? 6. When elections had a flaw in them, were uncanonical, and so null. 7. When popes were simoniacally chosen ; who by their own rules and laws are no true popes; being heretics, here- siarchs.t The which was done for long courses of time very commonly, and in a man- ner constantly.{ 8. When popes have been deposed (as some by the emperors, others by general councils ;) in which case, according to papal principles, the successors were ille- gal; for the pope being sovereign, he * Inopem me copia fecit. + P. Greg. VIL. Ep. iii. 7; P. Jul. in Conc. Lat. sess. v. p. 57. Non solum hujusmodi electio vel assumptio eo ipso nulla existat écc.—Vide sup.s. 12. Such an election or as- sumption, let it not only be upon that account void and null. + Vide queso quantum isti degeneraverint a majoribus suis; illi enim utpote viri sanctissi- mi dignitatem ultro oblatam contemnebant, orationi et doctrinze Christiane vacantes; hi vero largitione et ambitione pontificatum quee- rentes, et adepti, posthabito divino cultu, &e.— Plat. in Serg. 3 (p.279;) vide in Bened. IV. Ὁ. 277. See, I beseech you, how much they have degenerated from their ancestors ; for they as being very holy men did contemn that dignity when freely offered, giving them- selves wholly to prayer and the doctrine of Christ; but these by bribery and ambition seek and obtain the papacy. y Baron. ad an. 112, 5. 8. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. could not be judged or deposed ; and his _ successor is an usurper. . 9. When popes were heretical, that is — (say they) no popes. 10. When atheists, sorcerers, Elections in some of these cases being null, and therefore the acts consequent to them invalid, there is probably a defail- ance of right continued to posterity.* And probably, therefore, there is now no true pope. For (upon violent intrusion, or simoni- acal choice, or any usurpation) the car- dinals, bishops, &c. which the pope cre- ateth, are not truly such; and conse- quently their votes not good in the choice of another pope ; and so successively. These considerations may suffice to declare the inconsequence of their dis- courses, even admiting their assertions, which yet are so false, or so apparently uncertain. I shall in the next place level some ar- guments directly against their main con- clusion itself. | !. My first argument against this pre- tence shall be, that it is destitute of any good warrant, either from divine or hu- man testimony; and so is groundless. As will appear by the following consider- ations. 1. If God had designed the bishop of Rome to be for the perpetual course of times sovereign monarch of his church, it may reasonably be supposed that he would expressly have declared his mind in the case ;t it being a point of greatest importance of all that concern the ad- ministration of his kingdom in the world. Princes do not use to send their viceroys unfurnished with patents, clearly signify- ing their commission, that no man, out of ignorance or doubt concerning that point, excusably-may refuse compliance ; * Plat. in Joh. x (p. 275.) Pontifices. ipsi a Petri vestigiis discesserant. The popes had swerved from the examples ef Peter. Posses- sor male fidei ullo tempore non prescribit.— Reg. Jur. 2, in Sexto. He that has no right to the thing he possesses, cannot prescribe or plead any length of time to make his posses- sion lawful. + Nec vero simile sit, ut rem tam necessari- am ad ecclesiz unitatem continendam Christus Dominus apostolis suis non revelarit.—Melch. can. vi. 8. Neither is it likely that our Lord Christ would not have revealed to his apostles a thing so necessary for preserving the unity — of the church. 2 tet! te Ἰὼ δὲ ~ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. and in all equity promulgation is requisite to the establishment of any law, or ex- acting obedience. But in all the pan- dects of divine revelation, the bishop of Rome is not so much as once mentioned, either by name, or by character, or by probable intimation; they cannot hook him in otherwise, than by straining hard, and framing a long chain of conse- quences, each of which is too subtle for to constrain any man’s persuasion: they have indeed found the pope in the first chapter of Genesis; for (if we believe Pope Innocent III.) he is one of the “ two great luminaries” there ;* and he is as plainly there, as any where else in the Bible. Wherefore, if upon this account we should reject this pretence, we might do it justly; and for so doing we have the allowance of the ancient Fathers; for they did not hold any man obliged to admit any point of doctrine, or rule of manners, which is not in express words, or in terms equivalent, contained in holy scripture ; or which at least might not thence be deduced by clear and certain inference: this their manner of disput- ing with heretics and heterodox people doth shew; this appeareth by their way of defining and settling doctrines of faith ; this they often do avow in plain words applicable to our case : for, ‘ If” (saith St. Austin) “ about Christ, or about his church, or about any other thing, which concerneth our faith and life, I will not say we, who are nowise com- parable to him who said, Al/hough we ; but’even as he going on did add, Jf an angel from heaven should tell you, beside what you have received in the legal and evangelical scriptures, let him be anathe- για; in which words we have St. * Ad firmamentum igitur ceeli, hoc est uni- versalis ecclesim, fecit Deus duo magna lumi- naria, id est, duas instituit dignitates, que sunt pontificalis auctoritas, et regalis potestas; sed illa que preest diebus, id est, spiritualibus, major est; que vero carnalibus, minor, &c.— Innoc. 11]. in Decret.Greg. I. xxxiii.6. For the firmament therefore of heaven, i. ¢. of the uni- versal church, God made two great lights ; i. 6. he ordained two dignities or powers, which are the pontifical authority, and the regal power : but that which rules the days, i. e. spiritual matters, is the greater ; but that which governs carnal things is the lesser, &c. T Proinde sive de Christo, sive de ejus ec- clesia, sive de quacunque alia re, que pertinet δ. ὦ 139 Austin’s warrant, not only to refuse, but to detest this doctrine, which being no- where extant inlaw or gospel, is yet obtruded on us, as nearly relating both to Christ and his church, as greatly concern- ing both our faith and practice. 2. To enforce this argument, we may consider that the evangelists do speak about the propagation, settlement, and continuance of our Lord’s kingdom ; that the apostles do often treat about the state of the church and its edification, order, peace, unity ; about the distinction of its officers and members; about the qualifi- cations, duties, graces, privileges of spiritual governors and guides; about prevention and remedy of heresies, schisms, disorders: upon any of which occasions how is it possible that the men- tion of such a spiritual monarch (who was to have a main influence on each of those particulars) should wholly escape them, if they had known such an one instituted by God. In the Levitical law, all things con- cerning the high priest, not only his de- signation, succession, consecration, duty, power, maintenance, privileges, but even his garments, marriage, mourning, &e. are punctually determined and described:* and is it not wonderful, that in the many descriptions of the new law, no mention should be made concerning any duty or privilege of its high priest, whereby he might be directed in the administration of his office, and know what observance to require ? 3. Whereas also the scripture doth inculcate duties of all sorts, and doth not forget frequently to press duties of respect and obedience toward particular governors of the church, is it not strange, that it never should bestow one precept whereby we might be instructed and ad- monished to pay our duty to the univer- sal pastor; especially considering, that God, who directed the pens of the apos- tles, and who intended that their writings should continue for the perpetual instruc- tion of Christians, did foresee how re- ad fidem vitamque nostram, non dicam nos, nequaquam comparandi ei qui dixit, Licet st nos, sed Omnino quod sequutus adjecit, Si an- gelus de calo vobis annunciaverit, preterquam quod in scripturis legalibus ac evangelicis ac- cepistis, anathema sit.—Aug. Contr. Petil. iii.6 * Exod. xxviii. 1,4; Levit. xxi. 140 quisite such a precept would be to secure that duty ἢ for if but one such precept did appear, it would do the business, and void all contestation about it. 4. They who so carefully do exhort to honour and obey the temporal sovereign- ty, how come they so wholly to wave urging the no less needful obligations to obey the spiritual monarch? while they are so mindful of the emperor, why are they so neglectful of the pope; insomuch, that divers popes afterward, to ground and urge obedience to them, are fain to borrow those precepts which command obedience to princes, accommodating them by analogy and inference to them- selves ?* 5. Particularly St. Peter, one would think, who doth so earnestly enjoin to obey the king as supreme, and to honour him,” should not have been unmindful of his successors ; or quite have forborne to warn Christians of the respect due to them: surely the popes afterward do not follow him in this reservedness ; for in their Decretal Epistles they urge no- thing so much as _ obedience to the apos- tolical see. 6. One might have expected some- thing of that nature form St. Paul him- self, who did write so largely to the Romans, and so often from Rome; that at least some word, or some intimation, should have dropped from him concern- ing these huge rights and privileges of this see, and of the regard due to it. Particularly then, when he _ professedly doth enumerate the offices, instituted by God, for standing use and_ perpetual duration ; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the ed- ifying of the body of Christ ; till we all come in the unity of faith,** &c. He commendeth them for their faith, which was spoken of through the whole world ; yet “ giving them no advantage above others ;”’+ as St. Chrysostom ob- serveth on those words, for obedience to * Quarum laudum et glorize degenerem fu- isse, maximum crimem est.—Cl/. Rom. ad Cypr. Ep. 31. To degenerate from which praise and glory is an exceeding great crime. t+ Οὐδὲν πλέον αὐτοῖς δίδωσι τῶν λοιπῶν ἐθνῶν. * P. Nic. I. Ep. 10; P. Leo IX. Ep. 1; P. Greg. VII. Ep. 4, 22. > 1 Pet. ii. 13- 11. © Eph. iv. 11, 12, 13; 1 Cor. xii. 28. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. the faith among all nations, among whom _ also are ye.’ ** This” (saith St. Chry- sostom) “he saith to depress their con- ceit, to void their haughtiness of mind, and to teach them (to deem others equal in dignity with them).’”* When he writeth to that church (which was some time after St. Peter had settled the popedom), he doth only style them κλητοὶ ἅγιοι (called saints), and ἀγαπητοὶ Θεοῦ (beloved of God), which are com-— mon adjuncts of all Christians ;* he saith, their faith was spoken of generally, but of the fame of their authority being so spread he taketh no notice; that their obedience had come abroad to all men,‘ but their commands had not (it seemeth) come anywhere. He wrote divers Epistles from Rome, wherein he resolveth many cases debat- ed, yet never doth urge the authority of the Roman church for any point, which now is so ponderous an argument. 7. But, however, seeing the scripture is so strangely reserved, how cometh it to pass that tradition is also so defective, and staunch in so grand a case ? We have in divers of the Fathers (particular- ly in Tertullian, in St. Basil, in St. Jerome) catalogues of traditional doc- trines and observances, which they recite to assert tradition in some cases sup- plemental to scripture :5 in which their purpose did require that they should set down those of principal moment; and they are so punctual as to insert many of small consideration: how then came they to neglect this, concerning the papal authority over the whole church, which had been most pertinent to their design, and in consequence did vastly surpass all the rest which they do name ? 8. The designation of the Roman bishop by succession to obtain so high a degree in the church, being above all others a most remarkable and noble piece of history, which it had been a horrible fault in an ecclesiastical history to slip over, without ‘careful reporting and re- * Tatra δὲ ποιεῖ καθαιρῶν αὐτῶν τὸ φρόνημα, καὶ κενῶν τὸ φύσημα τῆς διανοίας, καὶ διδάσκων αὐτοὺς ὌΝ πρὸς ἄλλους ἰσοτιμίαν. tom. i. 5, 8. © (Vide Chrys., Theo. Hier.) !aron. an. 58, § 46, &c.; Rom. i. 7, 8. f Rom, xvi. LY. « Tertull. de Cor. Mil. 3; Basil. de Sp. S. 27; Hier. advers. Lucif. 4. - = yt Ν ee ee ee eee a «ἶΟ- ὀ--Ἑς.-ὕἕ--..Ἅ..... -- Ξ. Ὀὥ ὀ ὀΟὀ.-.--Ξ-ς-ς--.ὕ-..---. ὠς. -ΦἝἝ«ὦὦὦὦ«(ἴ(. ς-. ....,.ὕΨὕ...«.-.- , —— a le i i ee - | | | ‘A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ΘΨΌΝΝ it; yet Eusebius, that most diligent compiler of all passages relating to the original constitution of the church, and to all transactions therein, hath not one word about it! who yet studiously doth report the successions of the Roman bishops, and all the notable occurrences he knew concerning them, with favour- able advantage. 9. Whereas this doctrine is pretended to be a point of faith, of vast consequence to the subsistence of the church and to the salvation of men, it is somewhat strange that it should not be inserted into any one ancient summary of things to be believed (of which summaries divers remain, some composed by public con- sent, others by persons of eminency in the church), nor by fair and forcible consequence should be deducible from any article in them ;" especially consid- ering that such summaries were framed upon occasion of heresies springing up which disregarded the pope’s authority, and which by asserting it were plainly confuted. We are therefore beholden to Pope Innocent III. and his Lateran synod, for first synodically defining this point, together with other points no less new and unheard of before.' The creed of Pope Pius IV., formed the other day, is the first, as I take it, which did con- tain this article of faith. 10. It is much that this point of faith should not be delivered in any of those ancient expositions of the creed (made by St. Austin, Ruffin, &c.), which en- large it to necessary points of doctrine connected with the articles therein, es- pecially with that of the catholic church, to which the pope’s authority hath so close a connection ; that it should not be touched in the catechetical discourses of Cyril, Ambrose, &c. ; that in the systems of divinity composed by St. Austin, oR ape &ec. it should not be treated : the world is now changed ; Bitechiom of Trent doth not overlook so material a point; and it would pass for a lame body of theology which should omit to treat on this subject. 11. It is more wonderful, that this point should never be defined, in down- _* Const. Apost. vii, 41. (a full Creed at bap- tism.) ' Cone. Lat. iv. cap. 5, an. 1215. for the. 141 right and full terms, by any ancient synod ; it being so notoriously in those old times opposed by divers who dissented in opin- ion, and discorded in practice from the pope ; it being also a point of that conse- quence, that such a solemn declaration of it would have much conduced to the ruin of all particular errors and _ schisms, which were maintained then in opposition to the church. 12. Indeed had this point been allow- ed by the main body of orthodox bishops, the pope could not have been so drowsy or stupid as not to have solicited for such a definition thereof; nor would the bish- ops have been backward in compliance thereto; it being in our adversaries con- ceit socompendious and effectual a way of suppressing all heresies, schisms, and disorders (although indeed later experi- ence hath shewed it no less available to stifle truth, justice, and piety :) the popes after Luther were better advised, and so were the bishops adhering to his opin- ions. 13. Whereas also it is most apparent, that many persons disclaimed this au- thority, not regarding either the doctrines or decrees of the popes, it is wonderful that such men should not be reckoned in the large catalogues of heretics, wherein errors of less obvious consideration, and of far less importance, did place men ; if Epiphanius, Theodoret, Leontius, &c. were so negligent or unconcerned, yet St. Austin, Philastrius——western men, should not have overlooked this sort of desperate heretics: Aerius, for question- ing the dignity of bishops, is set among the heretics ; but who got that name for disavowing the pope’s supremacy, among the many who did it? (it is but lately that such as we have been thrust in among heretics.) 14. Whereas πὸ point avowed by Christians could be so apt to raise offence and jealousy in pagans against our re- ligion as this, which setteth up a power of so vast extent and huge influence; whereas no novelty could ‘be more sur prising or startling than the erection of an universal empire over the consciences and religious practices of men; whereas also this doctrine could not but be very conspicuous and glaring in ordinary practice, it is prodigious that all pegans should not loudly exclaim against it. 142 It is strange that pagan historians (such as Marcellinus, who often speaketh of popes, and blameth them for their luxurious way of living and pompous garb ;* as Zozimus, who bore a great spite at Christianity ; as all the writers of the imperial history before Constantine) should not report it, as a very strange pretence newly started up. It is wonderful, that the eager adver- saries of our religion (such as Celsus, Porphyry, Hierocles, Julian himself) should not particularly level their dis- course against it, asa most scandalous position and dangerous pretence, threat- ening the government of the empire. It is admirable, that the emperors themselves, inflamed with emulation and suspicion of such an authority (the which hath been so terrible even to Christian princes), should not in their edicts ex- pressly decry and impugn it; that indeed every one of them should not with ex- tremest violence implacably strive to ex- tirpate it. In consequence of these things it may also seem strange, that none of the ad- vocates of our faith (Justin, Origen, Tertullian, Arnobius, Cyril, Austin) should be put to defend it, or so muchas forced to mention it, in their elaborate apologies for the doctrines and practices which were reprehended by any sort of adversaries thereto. We may add, that divers of them, in their apologies and representations con- cerning Christianity, would have appear- ed not to deal fairly, or to have been very inconsiderate, when they profess for their common belief, assertions repugnant to that doctrine ;t as when Tertullian saith, ** We reverence the emperor as a man ω procedantque vehiculis insidentes, circumspecte vestiti, epulas curantes profusas, adeo ut eorum convivia regales superent men- sas.— Marcell. lib. xxvii. p. 338. They travel sitting in chariots, curiously apparalleled, pro- curing profuse dainties, insomuch as their meals exceed the feasts of kings. + Sentiunt enim Deum esse solum, in cujus solins potestaie sunt, a quo sunt secundi, post quem primi, ante omnes et super omnes deos. Quidni? cum super omnes homines, qui utique Vivunt, et mortuis antistant—Tertull. Apolog. cap. 30. For they think it is God alone in whose power they are, next to whom they are the chief, before all, and above all gods. And why not? when they are above all men alive, and surpass the dead. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. second to God, and less only than God ;?* ; when Optatus affirmeth, that ‘‘ above the emperor there is none beside God, who made the emperor ;”’+ and, that ““ Dona- tus by extolling himself” (as some now do) ‘* above the emperor, did in so doing, as it were, exceed the bounds of men, that he did esteem himself as God, not as a man.”t When St. Chrysostom as- serteth ‘‘ the emperor to be the crown and head of all men upon earth,”|| and_ saith, that “‘ even apostles, evangelists, prophets, any men whoever,’’§ are to be subject to the temporal powers; when St. Cyril calleth the emperor ‘“‘ the supreme top of glory among men, elevated above all others by incomparable difference,’ ] &c. When even popes talk at this rate ; as Pope Gregory I., calling the emperor his “lord, and lord of ali :”’** telling the emperor, that his competitor, by assum- ing the title of universal bishop, ‘ did set himself above the honour of his im- perial majesty ;” which he supposeth a piece of great absurdity and arrogance : and even Pope Gregory II. doth call that emperor (against whom he afterward re- belled”) ‘the head of Christians.” +t * Colimus imperatorem ut hominem a Deo secundum, et solo Deo minorem.— Tertull. ad Scap. 2. + Cum super imperatorem non sit nisi solus Deus qui fecit imperatorem.—Opz?. lib. 3. + ——dum se Donatus. super imperatorem extollit, jam quasi hominum excesserat modum, ut se ut Deum, non hominem estimaret.—Id. 114. || Βασιλεὺς γὰρ κορυφὴ καὶ κεφαλὴ τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἐστιν arévrov.Chrys. ’Avdp. il. p 463. ᾧ Kav ἀπόστολος ἧς, Kav εὐαγγελιστὴς, κἂν προ- φήτης, κἂν οστισοῦν, &c.—Chrys. in Rom. xiii. 1. Οὐ γὰρ ἐστιν ὁ ὑδρισθεὶς δμότιμόν τινα ἔχων ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, βασιλεὺς γὰρ . Chrys. supra. For he that is thus wronged has not his equal upon earth, for he is king, &e. Ἵ Τῆς piv ἐν ἀνθρώποις εὐκλείας τὸ ἀνώτατον' Kai ἀσυγκρίτοις διαφοραῖς τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων ἀνεστη χὸς καὶ ὑπερκείμενον, ὑμεὶς, ὦ φιλόχριστοι βασιλεῖς, καὶ κλῆρος ὑμῖν ἐξαίρετός τε καὶ πρέπων παρὰ Θεοῦ τῆς ἐνούσης αὐτῶ κατὰ πάντῶν trepoyiis.—Cyril. ad Teod..in Cone. Eph. part. i. cap. 3, p. 20. ** P. Greg. M. Ep. ii 62. Quia sereniss. domine ex illo jam tempore dominus meus fu- isti, quando adhuc dominus omnium non eras Ego quidem jussioni subjectus . Lhid. Ad hoc enim potestas dominoram meorum pie- tati ceelitus data est super omnes homines, &c. —Ibid. Ego indignus famulus vester.—Jbid. Qui honori quoque imperii vestri se per priva- ae πον superponit.—P. Greg. J. Ep. iv. 32, tt 'ῶς Baciredo καὶ κεφαλὴ τῶν Χριστιανῶν .---Ῥ. Greg. II. in Epist. 1; ad Leon. Isaur. apud ὰ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. Whereas, indeed, if the pope be monarch of the church, endowed with the regali- ties which they now ascribe fo hin, it is plain enough that he is not inferior to any man living in real power and digni- : wherefore the modern doctrines of me are far more sincere or conside- rate in their heraldry than were those old fathers of Christendom, who now stick not downrightly to prefer the pope before all princes of the world ; not only in doctrine and notion, but in the sacred offices of the church: for to the very ca- non of their mass, the pope (together wiih the bishop of the diocese, one of his ministers) is set. before all Christian princes ;* every Christian subject being thereby taught to deem the pope superior to his prince. Now we must believe for one pope hath written it, another hath put it in his decretals, and it is current law) that the papal authority doth no less surpass the royal than the sun doth outshine the moon.t Now it is abundantly “declared” by papal ‘definition, as a point necessary to salvation,” that “‘ every human crea- ture” (neither king nor Cesar excepted) “is subject to the Roman high priest.”’t Now the mystery is discovered, why popes, when summoned by emperors, declined to go in person to general synods ; because “‘ it was not tolerable that the em- peror” (who sometime would be present in synods) ““ should sit above the pope ;”’|| as in the pride of his heart he might per- Bin. tom. v. p. 502. Christians. * —— una cum famulo tuo papa nostro N. et antistite nostro N. et rege nostro N. et om- nibus orthodoxis, ὅσο, Together with thy ser- vant our pope N.and our bishop N. and our king N. and all orthodox, &c. + Fiat autem oratio pro dignitate regia post orationem factam pro papa quia potestas su- prema sacerdotalis excedit regiam antiquitate, dignitate, et utilitate, &e.—Gab. Biel. in Can. mis. Let prayer be made for the king after prayer made for the pope; because the su- preme sacerdotal power exceeds the kingly in antiquity, dignity, and utility, ἄτα. Φ Subesse Romano pontifiei omni humane creature declaramus, dicimus, definimus et pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate salu- tis—P. Bonif. Vill. in Extrav. com. lib. i. tit. 38. || At quamvis utcunque tolerabile sit, ut Principes seculares in concilio sedeant ante alios episcopos, tamen nullo modo convenil, ut Ante ipsum suimmum pontificem, &c.— Bell. de Conc. i. 19. As king and head of ἂν. 148 haps offer to do. (I cannot forbear to note what an ill conceit Bellarmine had of Leo I. and other popes, that they did forbear coming at synods out of their villanous pride and haughtiness.) 15. One would admire, that Constan- tine, if he had smelt this doctrine, or any thing like it in Christianity, should be so ready to embrace it; or that so many emperors should in those times do so; some princes then probably being jealous of their honour, and unwilling to admit any superior to them. It is at least much, that emperors should with so much indulgence foster and cherish popes, being their so dan- gerous rivals for dignity ; and that it should be true, which Pope Nicholas doth affirm, that ‘* the emperors had. extolled the Roman See with divers privileges, had enriched it with gifts, had enlarged it with benefits ;°* had done I know not how many things more for it: surely they were bewitched thus to advance their concurrent competitor for honour and power; one who pretended to be a better man than themselves. Βε]- larmine (in his Apology against King James) saith, that “the pope was (ved/et, nollet) constrained to be subject to the emperors, because his power was not known to them ;”” it was well it was not: but how could it be concealed from them, if it were a doctrine commonly avowed by Christians? [t is hard keeping so practical a doctrine from breaking forth into light. But to leave this considera- tion. Furthermore, we have divers ancient writings, the special nature, matter, scope whereof did require, or greatly invite giving attestation to this power, if such an one had been known and allowed in those times; which yet do afford no countenance, but rather much prejudice thereto. 16. The apostolical Canons, and the Constitutions of Clement,* which describe * Quapropter attendat clementia vestra; quantus fuerit erga sedis apostolice reverenti- am antecessorum vestrorum, piorum duntaxat imperatorum ——~ amor, et studium; qualiter eam diversis privilegiis extulerint, donis dita- verint, beneficiis ampliaverint; qualiter eam literis suis honoraverint, ejus volis annuerint, ke.— P. Nich. 1. Epist. ad Mich. Imp. ) Apoll. Beil. p. 202. * Const. Apost. viii. 4, &e. 144 the state of the church, with its laws, cus- toms, and practices current in the times of those who compiled them (which times are not certain, but ancient, and the less ancient the more it is to our purpose), wherein especially the ranks, duties, and privileges of all ecclesiastical persons are declared or prescribed, do not yet touch the prerogatives of this universal head, or the special respects due to him, nor mention any laws or constitutions framed by him: which is no less strange, than that there should be a body of laws, or description of the state of any king- dom, wherein nothing should be said con- cerning the king, or the royal authority : itis not soin our modern canon law, wherein the pope doth make utramque paginam; we read little beside his au- thority, and decrees made by it. The Apostolical Canons particularly do prescribe, that “ the bishops of each nation should know him that is first among them, and should esteem him the head, and should do nothing considera- ble” (or extraordinary) ‘ without his advice ;” as also that “each one” (of those head bishops) “ should only med- die with those affairs which concerned his own precinct, and the places under it: also, that ‘‘ no such primate should do any thing without the opinion of all ; that so there may be concord.”* Now, what place could be more opportune to mention the pope’s sovereign power? How could the canonist, without strange neglect, pass it over? Doth he not in- deed exclude it, assigning the supreme disposal (without further resort) of all things to the arbitration of the whole body of pastors, and placing the mainte- nance of concord in that course ? 17. So also the old writer, under the name of Dionysius the Areopagite, treat- ing in several places about the degrees of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, was mon- strously overseen in omitting the sover- eign thereof :f in the fifth chapter of his * ods ἐπισκόπους ἑκάστου ἔθνους εἰδέναι χρὴ τὸν ἐν αὐτοῖς πρῶτον, καὶ ἡγεῖσθαι αὐτὸν ὡς κεφαλὴν, καὶ μηδέν τι πράττειν περιττὸν ἄνευ τῆς ἐκείνου γνώμης" ἐκεῖνα δὲ μόνα πράττειν ἕκαστον, ὅσα τῇ αὐτοῦ παροι- kia ἐπιβάλλει, καὶ ταῖς ὑπ᾽ αὐτὴν χώραις" ἀλλὰ μεδὲ ἐκέϊνος ἄνευ τῆς πάντων γνώμης ποιείτω τι" οὕτω γὰρ ὁμόνοια éorau.—Ap. Can. 34. 1 Ἢ θεία τῶν ἱεραρχῶν τάξις πρώτη μέν ἐστι τῶν θεοπτικῶν τάξεων, ἀκροτάτη δὲ καὶ ἐσχάτη ἡ αὐτῆ" καὶ γὰρ εἰς αὐτὴν ἀποτελεῖται καὶ ἀποπληροῦται πᾶσα ΨΥ a ee ὌΨΙ A ‘ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ecclesiastical hierarchy he professeth — carefully to speak of those orders, but — hath not a word of this supereminent | rank, but averreth “‘ episcopacy to be © the first and highest of divine orders, in which the hierarchy is consummated ;’”* and in his Epistle to Demophilus, there is a remarkable place, wherein he could hardly have avoided touching the pope, had there been then one in such vogue as now: for advising that monk to gen- tleness and observance toward his su- periors, he thus speaketh: ‘* Let passion and reason be governed by you; but you by the holy deacons, and these by the priests, and the priests by the bish- ops, and the bishops by the apostles, or by their successors” (that is, saith, Maxi- mus, those which we “ now call patri- archs ;””) ‘*and if perhaps any one of them shall fail of his duty, let him be corrected by those holy persons who are co-ordinate to him.”+ Why not in this case let him be corrected by the pope, his superior ? But he knew none of an order superiorto the apostles’ succes- sors. 18. Likewise, Ignatius in many Epis- tles frequently describeth the several ranks of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, ex- tolleth their dignity and authority to the highest pitch, mightily urgeth the respect due to them, yet never doth he so much as mention or touch this sovereign de- gree, wherein the majesty of the clergy did chiefly shine. ' In his very Epistle to the Romans he doth not yield any deference to their bi- shop, nor indeed doth so much as take notice of him. Is it not strange he should so little mind the sovereign of the church ? or was it, for a sly reason, because being bishop of Antioch he had a pique to his brother Jacob, who bad supplanted him, and got away his birthright ? | τῆς καθ’ ἡμᾶς tepapyias draxéopnots.—Dionys. de Hier. Eccl. cap. 3. * ᾿Ἐπειδὴ τὰς ἱερατικὰς τάξεις καὶ ἀποπληρώσεις, δυνάμεις τε αὐτῶν καὶ ἐνεργείας εἰρήκαμεν ὡς ἡμῖν pret Eccl. Hier. cap. δ. ΠΝ ἡ ἡ Αὐτὸς μὲν οὖν ἐπιθυμίᾳ καὶ θυμῷ καὶ λόγῳ τὰ κατ᾽ ἀξίαν ἀφόριζε" σοὶ δὲ οἱ θεῖοι λειτουργοί" καὶ τοῦ- τοις οἱ ἱερεῖς" ἱεράρχαι δὲ τοῖς ἱερεῦσι" καὶ τοῖς ἱεράρ- χαις οἱ ἀπόστολοι καὶ οἱ τῶν ἀποστόλων διάδοχοι" καὶ εἴπου τις καὶ ἐν ἐκείνοις τοῦ προσήκοντος ἀποσφαλείη, παρὰ τῶν ὁμοταγῶν ἁγίων ἐπανορθωθήσεται, &C.— Dionys. Ar. Ep. 8, ᾿Αποστόλων δὲ διαδόχους τοὺς νῦν πατριάρχους ἡγοῦμαι etvat.— Max. Schol. ibid. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. The counterfeiter therefore of Ignatius did well personate him, when he saith, that “in the church there is nothing greater than a bishop ;”* and that “a bishop is beyond all rule and authori- ty ;’+ for in the time of Ignatius there was no domineering pope over all bish- ops. 19. We, have some letters of popes (though not many ; for popes were then not very scribatious, or not so pragmati- cal; whence, to supply that defect, lest popes should seem not able to write, or to have slept almost four hundred years, they have forged divers for them, and those so wise ones, that we who love the memory of those good popes disdain to acknowledge them authors of such idle stuff; we have yet some letters of), and _ to popes, to and from divers eminent persons in the church, wherein the for- mer do not assume, nor the latter ascribe any such power; the popes do not ex- press themselves like sovereigns, nor the bishops address themselves like subjects ; but they treat one another in a familiar way, like brethren and equals: this is so true, that it is a good mark of a spurious epistle (whereof we have good store, devised by colloguing knaves, and fath- ered on the first popes), when any of them talketh in an imperious strain, or arrogateth such a power to himself. 20. Clemens, bishop of Rome, in the apostolical times unto the church of Co- rinth, then engaged in discords and _fac- tions, wherein the clergy was much af- fronted (divers presbyters, who had well and worthily behaved themselves, were ejected from their office in a seditious manner), did write a very large Epistle ; wherein, like a good bishop, and charita- ble Christian brother, he doth earnestly, by manifold inducements, persuade them to charity and peace ;{ but nowhere doth he speak imperiously, like their prince : * Οὔτε Θεοῦ τις κρείττων, ἣ παραπλήσιὸς ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς οὖσιν, οὐδὲ δὲ ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ ἐπισκόπου τι petCov.— Pseud. Ignat. ad Smyrn. t Ti γάρ ἐστιν ἐπίσκοπος. ddd’ ἣ racns ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας ἐπέκεινα, &c.—Id. ad Trall. Ἢ 'Ορῶμεν γὰρ ὅτι ἐνίους ὑμεῖς pernydyere καλῶς πολιτευομένους ἐκ τῆς ἀμέμπτως αὐτοῖς τετιμημέἕνης λειτουργίας.---ΟἸοτη. ad Corinth. Ep. i. p. 58, Jun. For we see that you have removed some, who behaved themselves well in their of- fice, out of their ministry blamelessly discharg- ed by them. Lractd{ew πρὸς τοὺς rpcoburé pons. Vor. ΠῚ. 19 7 145 in such a case one would think, if ever, for quashing such disorders and quelling so “ perverse folks,” who spurned the clergy, it had been decent, it had been expedient, to employ his authority, and to speak like himself, challenging obedi- ence, upon duty to him, and at their per- il.* How would a modern pope have ranted in such a case? how thundering a bull would he have despatched against such outrageous contemners of the ec- clesiastical order? how often would he have spoken of the apostolic see and its authority ? We should infallibly have heard him swagger in his wonted style, ‘* Whoever shall presume to cross our will, let him know that he shall incur the indignation of Almighty God, and his blessed apostles Peter and Paul.”+ But our popes, it seemeth, have more wit or better mettle than Pope Clement; that good pope did not know his own strength, or had not the heart to use it. 21. Among the Epistles of St. Cypri- an there are divers Epistles of him to several popes (to Cornelius, to Lucius, to Stephanus),' in the which, although writ- ten with great kindness and respect, yet no impartial eye can discern any special regard to them, as to his superiors in power, or pastors in doctrine, or judges of practice :ἰ he reporteth matters to them, he conferreth about points with all freedom; he speaketh his sense and giveth his advice without any restraint or awe; he spareth not upon occasion to reprove their practices, and to reject their opinions ; he, in his addresses to them, and discourses of them, styleth them “brethren” and ‘colleagues ;” and Re continually treateth them as such upon even terms: ‘* When,” saith he to the clergy of Rome, “ dearest brethren, there was among us an uncertain rumour con- * ΤΠρόσωπα προσπετῆ καὶ αὐθάδη. Ὁ. 2. ἡ Si quis voluntati nostra contraire pre- sumpserit, indignationem omnipotentis Dei, ac beatorum Petri et Pauli apostoli se noverit in- cursurum. In such terms usually the pope’s bulls do end. ¢{ Et quamquam sciam, frater charissime, pro mutua dilectione, quam debemus et exhi- bemus invicem nobis, florentissimo illic clero tecum presidenti, &c.—Ep. 58. And although I know, most dear brother, out of the mutual love and respect which we owe and yield one to another, &c. ' Cypr. Ep. 41, 42, 43, 45, 47, 49, 54, 55, 57, $8, 67, 72. 146 cerning the decease of the good man my colleague,. Fabianus:”* upon which words Rigaltius had cause to remark, ** How like an equal and fellow-citizen doth the bishop of Carthage mention the bishop of Rome, even to the Roman cler- gy ΕἾ But would not any man now be deemed rude and saucy, who should talk in that style of the pope? Pope Cornelius also to St. Cyprian hath some Epistles," wherein no glimpse doth appear of any superiority assumed by him. But of St. Cyprian’s judgment and demeanour towards popes, we shall have occasion to speak more largely, ina way more positively opposite to the Roman pretences. Eusebius citeth divers long passages out of an Epistle of Cornelius to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, against Novatus :" wherein no mark of this supremacy doth appear; although the magnitude and flourishing state of the Roman church is described, for aggravation of Novatus’s schism and ambition. Pope Julius hath a notable long Epistle, extant in one of Athanasius’s Apologies, unto the bishops assembled at Antioch ; wherein he had the fairest occasion that could be to assert and insist upon this sov- ereign authority, they flatly denying and impugning it; questioning his proceed- ings as singular, supposing him subject to the laws of the church no less than any other bishop ; and downrightly affirming each of themselves to be his equal ; about which point he thought good not to contend with them ; but waving pre- tences to superiority, he justifieth his agtions by reasons grounded on the merit of the cause, such as any other bishop might allege: but this Epistle I shall have more particular occasion to discuss. Pope Liberius hath an Epistle to St. Athanasius, wherein he not only (for his direction and satisfaction) doth inquire his opinion about the point; but profess- eth, in compliment perchance, that he shall obediently follow it: “ Write,” saith * Cum de excessu boni viri college mei, ru- mor apud nos incertus esset, college charissi- mi——. Cypr. Ep. 4. + Quam ex equo, et civilis mentio episcopi Romani ab 5 gia Carthaginis apud clerum ? —Rigalt. ibid. m Cypr. Ep. 46, 48. » Euseb. vi. 43. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. he, ‘‘ whether you do think as we do, and just so, about the true faith, that | may — be undoubtedly assured about what you think good to command me.’”’* Was not that spoken indeed like a courteous sove- reign, and an accomplished judge in mat- ters of faith?’ The same pope in the head of the western, doth write toa knot of eastern bishops, whom they call ‘their beloved brethren and fellow ministers ;” and in a brotherly strain, not like an em- peror. In the time of Damasus, successor to Liberius, St. Basil hath divers Epistles to the western bishops,7” wherein, hav- ing represented and bewailed the wretch- ed state of the eastern churches, then overborne with heresies and unsettled by factions, he craveth their charity, their prayers, “ their sympathy, their comfort, their brotherly aid ;” by affording to the orthodox and sound party the. counten- ance of theircommunion, by joining with them in contention for truth and peace; for that the communion of so great churches would be of mighty weight to support and strengthen their cause; giving credit thereto among the people, and inducing the emperor to deal fairly with them, in respect to such a multitude of adherents ; especially of those which were at such a distance, and not so im- mediately subject to the eastern emperor ; for, ‘ If” (saith he) ‘very many of you do concur unanimously in the same opin- ion, itis manifest that the multitude of consenters will make the doctrine to be * Todor, εἰ οὕτω φρονεῖς καθὸ καὶ ἡμεῖς, καὶ τὰ ἴσα ἐν ἀληθινῇ πίστει" ἵνα κἀγὼ πεποιθὼς ὦ ἀδιακρί- τως περὶ ὧν ἀξιοῖς κελεύειν pot.—Liber. ad Ath. tom. i. p. 249. εἰ 'Y pas παρακαλοῦμεν συμπαθεῖσα ἡμῶν rats διαι- ρέσεσι.---- Ep. 61. Birt οὖν παραμύθιον ἀγάπης, εἴ- τις κοινωνία πνεύματος, εἴτινα σπλάγχνα καὶ οἰκτιρ- μοὶ, κινήθητε πρὸς πὴν ἀντίληψιν ἡμῶν.---ΤὈ]ά, We beseech you to have a ftellow-feeling of our distractions. If there be any comfort of love, any fellowship of the Spirit, any bowels and mercies, be ye moved with pity and commise- ration to help us. Δότε χεῖρα τοῖς eis γόνυ κλι- θεῖσι, συγκινηθήτω ἐφ᾽ ἡμῖν τὰ ἀδελφικὰ ὑμῶν σπλαγχ- να, προχυθήτω δάκρυα συμπαθείας.---ρ. 690. "Em- βοησάμεθα τὴν ὑμετέραν ἀγάπην εἰς τὴν ἀντίληψιν ἡμῶν καὶ συμπάθειαν.---ἘΡ,. 70. Ἐλθεῖν τινὰς παρ᾽ ὑμῶν εἰς ἐπίσκεψιν καὶ παραμυθίαν τῶν θλιδομένων. —Ibid. Vide Ep. 74. (ef μὲν διορθοῖντο, εἶναι κοινωνικοὺς, &C.) * Socr. iv. 12. » Ep. 61, 69, 70, 74, 182. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. received without contradiction ;’* and, “| know” (saith he again, writing to Athanasius about these matters, ‘* but one way of redress to our churches, the con- spiring with us of the western bishops ;”’+ the which being obtained, ‘ would prob- ably yield some advantage to the public, the secular power revering the credibility of the multitude, and the people all about following them without repugnance ;”f and, *“* You,” saith he to the western bishops, ‘the further you dwell from them, the more credible you will be to the people.”’|| This indeed was according to the an- cient rule and practice in such cases, that any church being oppressed with error, or distracted with contentions, should from the bishops of other churches re- ceive aid to the removal of those incon- yveniences. That it was the rule, doth appear from what we have before spoken, and of the practice there be many in- stances ; for so did St. Cyprian send two of his clergy to Rome, to compose the schism there, moved by Novation against Cornelius ; so was St. Chrysostom called to Ephesus (although out of his jurisdic- tion), to settle things there ; so (to omit divers instances occurring in history) St. Basil himself was called by the church of Iconium, “to visit it, and to give ita bishop ;” although it did not belong to his ordinary inspection; and he doth tell the bishops of the coasts (παραλεώται), that they should have done well “ in send- ing” some to “ visit” and assist his churches “in their distresses.” ὃ * "av δὲ καὶ συμφώνως πλείονες buod τὰ αὐτὰ δογματίσητε, δῆλον ὅτι τὸ πλῆγος τῶν δογματισάντων ἀναντίῤῥητον πᾶσι τὴν παραδοχὴν κατασκευάσει τοῦ δόγματος.---ρ. 74. (Ep. 293.) μίαν ἐπιγνοὺς bddv βαηθείας ταῖς καθ' ἡμᾶς ἐκκλησίαις, τὴν παρὰ τῶν δυτικῶν ἐπισκόπων σύμπνοι- av t Τάχα ἄν τι γένοιτο τοῖς κοινοῖς ὄφελος, τῶν τε κρατούντών τὸ ἀξιόπιστον τοῦ πλήθους δυσωπουμένων, καὶ τῶν ἑκασταχοῦ λαῶν ἀκολοθούντων αὐτοῖς ἀναν- ripporws.—Ib. Ϊ Ὑμεῖς δὲ ὅσον μακρὰν αὐτῶν ἀπωκισμένοι τυγ- ἄνετε, τοσοῦτον πλέον παρὰ τοῖς λαοῖς ἀξιόπιδξον δι... Ἐν. 74. ' ὁ Quod servis Dei, et maxime sacerdotibus justis et pacificis congruebat, frater charissime, miseramus nuper collegas nostros Caldonium et Fortunatum, ut non tantum persuasione lite- rarum nostrarum, sed preesentia sua, et consilio omnium vestrum eniterentur, quantum pos- sent, et elaborarent, ut ad catholic ecclesie Unitatem scissi corporis membra componeret 147 But now how, I pray, cometh it to pass, that in such a case he should not have a special recourse to the pope; but in so many addresses should only wrap him up in a community ὁ Why should he not humbly petition him to exert his sover- eign authority for the relief of the eastern churches, laying his charge, and inflicting censures on the dissenters? Why should he lay all the stress of his hopes on the consent of the western bishops? Why doth he not say a word of the dominion resident in them over all the church ? These things are unconceivable, if he did take the pope to be the man our adver- saries say he is. But St. Basil had other notions :* for indeed, being so wise and good a man, if he had taken the pope for his sover- eign, he would not have taxed him as he doth, and so complain of him: when speaking of the western bishops (whereof the pope was the ringleader, and most concerned), he hath these words (occa- sioned, as I conceive, by the bishop of Rome’s rejecting that excellent person, Meletius, bishop of Antioch :) “ What we should write, or how to join with those that write, 1am in doubt—for lam apt to say that of Diomedes, You ought not to request, for he is a haughty man; for in truth observance doth render men of proud manners more contemptuous than otherwise they are.”*—* For if the Lord be propitious to us, what other addition do we need? but ifthe anger of God continue, what help can we have from the western superciliousness? who in truth neither know nor endure to learn; but being prepossessed with false suspic- ions, do now do those things which*they . Cypr. Ep. 42, ad Cornel. Pallad. As it becomed the servants of God, especially righte- ous and peaceable priests, most dear brother, we lately sent our colleagues Caldonius and Fortunatus, that they might, not only by the persuasion of our letters, but also by their presence, and the advice of you all, endeavour to their utmost and strive to reduce the mem- bers of that divided body tothe unity of the catholic church. Αὕτη καλεῖ καὶ ἡμᾶς εἰς ἐπίσκε- Ψψιν, ὥστε αὐτῇ δουναι éricxorov.—Bas. Ep. 8. ᾿Ακόλουθον ἣν παρὰ τῆς ὑμετέρας ἀγάπης καὶ τῶν γνησίων τινὰς ἀποστέλλεσθαι συνεχῶς, εἰς ἐπίσκεψιν ἡμῶν τῶν καταπονουμένων .---- Ὁ. (‘xe * TO ὄντι γὰρ θεραπευόμενα τὰ ὑπερήφανα ἤθη ἑαυτῶν ὑπεροπτικώτερα γίνεσθαι πέφυκε.---- Βα. Ep. 10, ab Euseb. Samos. Ep. a Vide Epist. 272, 273, 321, 325, 349. 148 did before in the cause of Marcellus ; affecting to contend with those who re- port the truth to them; and establishing heresy by themselves.”’* Would that ex- cellent person (the greatest man of his time in reputation for wisdom and piety) have thus, unbowelling his mind in an epistle to a very eminent bishop, smartly reflected on the qualities and procedings of the western clergy, charging them with pride and haughtiness, with a suspi- cious and contentious humour, with incor- rigible ignorance, and indisposition to learn; if he had taken him, who was the leader in all these matters, to have been his superior and sovereign? Would he have added the following words immedi- ately touching him: “I would in the com- mon name have written to there ringlead- er, nothing indeed about ecclesiastical affairs, except only to intimate, that they neither do know the truth of things with us, nor do admit the way by which they may understand it; but in general about their being bound not to set upon those who were humbled with afflictions ; nor should judge themselves dignified by pride, a sin which alone sufficeth to make one God’senemy.”+ Surely this great man knew better what belonged to gov- ernment and manners, than in such rude terms to accost his sovereign: nor would he have given him that character, which he doth otherwhere ; where speaking of his brother, St. Gregory Nyssen, he saith he was an unfit agent to Rome, because, ‘although his address with a sober man would find much reverence and esteem ; yet toa haughty and reserved man, sitting I know not where above, and thence not able to hear those below speaking the truth to him, what profit can there be to the public from the converse of such a man, whose disposition is averse from ω Ποία βοήθεια ἡμῖν τῆς δυτικῆς ὀφρύος : of τόγε ἀληθὲς οὔτε ἴσασιν οὔτε μαθεῖν ἀνέχονται, ψευ- δέσι δὲ ὑπονοίαις προειλημμένοι, ἐκεῖνα ποιοῦσι νῦν, ἃ πρότερον ἐπὶ Μαρκέλλῳ" πρὸς μὲν τοὺς τὴν ἀλήθειαν αὐτοῖς ἀπαγγέλλοντας φιλονεικήσαντες" τὴν δὲ αἵρεσιν δι’ ἑαυτῶν Bebardoavres.—Ibid. t Ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ αὐτὸς ἄνευ τοῦ κοινοῦ σχήματος ἐβουλόμην αὐτῶν ἐπιστεῖλαι τῷ κορυφαίῳ, περί μὲν τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν οὐδὲν, εἰ μὴ ὅσον παραινίξασθαι, ὅτι οὔτε ἴσασιν τῶν παρ᾽ ἡμὶν τὴν ἀλήθειαν, οὔτε τὴν bddv du’ ἧς ἂν μάθοιεν καταδέχονται' καθόλου δὲ περὶ τοῦ μὴ δεῖν τοῖς ὑπὸ τῶν πειρασμῶν ταπεινωθεῖσιν ἐπιτίθεσθαι, μηδὲ ἀξίωμα κρίνειν ὑπερηφανίαν, ἁμάρ- τημα, καὶ μόνον ἀρκοῦν ἔχθραν ποιείσθαι εἰς Θεόν ..---- A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. illiberal flattery ?”* But these speeches suit with that conceit which St. Basil (as Baronius, I know not whence, reporteth) expressed by saying, “I hate the pride of that church ;’” which humour in them that good man would not be guilty of fostering by too much obsequiousness. St. Chrysostom: having, by the prac- tices of envious men, combined against him ina packed assembly of bishops, upon vain surmises, being sentenced and driven from his see, did thereupon write an epistle: to Pope Innocent I. bishop of Rome, together with his brethren the bishops of Italy ;t therein representing his case, complaining of the wrong, vin- dicating his innocency, displaying the iniquity of the proceedings against him, together with the mischievous conse- quences of them toward the whole church, then requiring his succour for redress: yet (although the sense of his case, and care of his interest, were like- ly to suggest the greatest deference that could be) neither the style, which is very respectful, nor the matter, which is very copious, do imply any acknowiledg- ment of the pope’s supremacy: he doth not address to him as toa governor of all, who could by his authority command justice to be done, but as to a brother, and a friend of innocence, from whose endeavour he might procure relief ;7 he had “recourse,” not to his sovereign power, but “to his brotherly love;” he ‘‘ informed his charity,” not appealed to his bar;i he in short did no more than implore his assistance in an ecclesiastical way; that he would express his resent- ment of so irregular dealings; that he would ayow communion with him, as with an orthodox bishop innocent and abused ; that he would procure his cause to be brought to a fair trial in a synod of bishops, lawfully called and indifferently * Kat εὐγνώμονι piv ἀνδρὶ αἰδέσιμον αὐτοῦ καὶ πολλοῦ ἀξίαν τὴν συντυχίαν" ὑψηλῷ δὲ καὶ μετεώρῳ, ἄ ὦ που καγημένῳ καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἀκούειν τῶν χαμόθεν αὐτῷ τὴν ἀλήθειαν φθεγγομένων μὴ δυναμένῳ, τί ἃν γίνοιτο ὄφελος τοῖς κοινοῖς, παρὰ τῆς τοῦ τοιούτου ἀνδρὸς ὁμιλίας, ὃς ἀλλότριον ἔχει θωπείας ἀνελευθέρου τὸ ἦθος - Bas. Ep. 250. + Πρὸς τὴν ὑμετέραν ἀναδραμεῖν ἀγάπην. t Διδάξομεν ὑμῶν τὴν ἀγάπην. τ Anast. ad Joh. Hier. apud Hier. * Tom. vii. Epist. 122. ‘ Vide Laun. Epist. i. 3. affected.* Had the good man had any conceit of the pope’s supremacy, he would, one would think, have framed his address in other terms, and sued for another course of proceeding in his be- half: but it is plain enough that he had no such notion of things, nor had any ground for such aone. For indeed Pope Innocent, in his answer to him, could do no more than exhort him to patience ; in another, to his clergy and people, could only comfort them, declare his dislike of the adversaries’ proceedings and grounds; signify his intentions to procure a gener- al synod, with hopes of a redress thence ; his sovereign power, it seems, not avail- ing to any such purposes: * But what” (saith he) ‘‘can we do in such eases? A synodical cognizance is necessary, which we heretofore did say ought to be ealled; the which alone can allay the motions of such tempest.’’+ It is true, that the later popes (Siricius, Anastasius, Innocent, Zozimus, Bonifa- cius, Celestinus, &c.) after the Sardican Council, in their epistles to the western bishops, over whom they had encroached, and who were overpowered by them. &c., do speak in somewhat more lofty strain ; but are more modest toward those of the east, who could not bear, ὅσο. 22. Further; it is most prodigious, that in the disputes managed by the Fa- thers against heretics (the Gnostics, Val- entinians, Marcionites, Montanists, Mani- chees, Paulianists, Arians, &c.) they should not, even in the first place, allege and urge the sentence of the universal pastor and judge, as a most evidently con- clusive argument, as the most efficacious and compendious method of convincing and silencing them. Had this point been well proved and pressed, then, without any more concertations from Scripture, tradition, reason, all heretics * "Hpas δὲ τοὺς ody ἁλόντας, οὐκ ἐλεγχο- μένους, οὐκ ἀποδει χθέντας ὑπευθύνους, τῶν γραμμάτων τῶν ὑμετέρων δότε ἀπολαύειν συνεχῶς, καὶ τῆς ἀγά- mS, καὶ πάντων τῶν ἄλλων, ὧνπερ καὶ ἔμπροσθεν. But as for us, we who are not condemned, nor convicted, nor proved guilty, let us continually enjoy the benefit of your letters, and love, and all other things as before. T ᾿Αλλὰ τί κατὰ τῶν τοιούτων νῦν ἐν τῶ παρόντι ποιήσωμεν ; ἀναγκαία ἐστι διάγνωσις συνοδικὴ ἣν καὶ πάλαι ἔφημεν συναθροιστέαν' μονὴ γάρ ἐστιν, ἥτις δύ- varat τὰς κινήσεις τῶν τοιούτων καταστεῖλαι καταιγί- dar ——. Soz. viii. 96. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 149 had been quite defeated; and nothing then could more easily have been prov- ed, if it had been true, when the light of tradition did shine so brightly ; nothing indeed had been to sense more conspicu- ous than the continual exercise of such an authority. We see now among those who admit such an authority, how surely, when it may be had, it is alleged, and what sway it hath, to the determination of any con- troversy: and so it would have been then, if it had been then as commonly known and avowed. 23. Whereas divers of the Fathers purposely do treat on methods of confut- ing heretics, it is strange they should be so blind or dull, as not to hit on this most proper and obvious way of referring de- bates to the decision,ef him to whose of- fice of universal pastor and judge it did belong: particularly, one would wonder at Vincentius Lirinensis, that he on set purpose, with great care, discoursing about the means of settling points of faith, and of overthrowing heresies, should not light upon this notable way, by having recourse to the pope’s magis- terial sentence; yea, that indeed he should exclude it; for he (‘after most intense study, and diligent inquiry, con- sulting the best and wisest men),”* could find but two ways of doing it: “1 (saith he) “did always, and from almost every one, receive this answer—That if | or any other would find out the frauds and avoid the snares of upstart heretics, and continue sound and upright in the true faith, he should guard and strengthen his faith, God helping him, by these two means: viz. first, by the authority of the divine law, and then by the tradition of the catholic church.”+ And again, ‘We before have said that this hath al- ways been, and is at present, the custom of catholics, that they prove their faith * Sxpe igitar magno studio, et summa at- tentione perquirens a quamplurimis sanctiiate et doctrina preestantibus viris, &c. p. 316, (in edit. Balus.) + Hujusmodi semper responsum ab omni- bus fere retuli, quod sive ego, sive quis alius vellet exurgentium hereticorum fraudes depre- hendere, laqueosque vitare,et in fide sana sanus atque integer permanere, duplici modo munire fidem suam Domino adjavante deberet ; primo scilicet divine legis anctoritate, tum deinde ec- clesie catholice traditione —p. 317. a 150 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. by these two ways: first, by authority of the divine canon; then by the tradition of the universal church.”’* Is it not strange, that he (especially being a western man, living in those parts where the pope had got much sway, and who doth express great reverence to the apostolic see) should omit that way of determining points, which of all (ac- cording to the modern conceits about the pope) is most ready and most sure ἢ 24. In like manner Tertullian profess- eth the catholics in his time to use such compendious methods of confuting here- tics: ** We,” saith he, ** when we would despatch against heretics for the faith of the gospel, do commonly use these short ways, which do maintain both the order of times prescribing against the lateness of .impostors, and the authority of the churches patronising apostolical tradi- το. But why did he skip over a more compendious way than any of those ; namely, standing to the judgment of the Roman bishop ?¢ 25. It is true, that both he, and St. Irenzeus before him, disputing against the heretics of their times,|| who had intro- duced pernicious novelties of their own devising, when they allege the general consent of churches (planted by the apostles, and propagated by continual suc- cessions of bishops from those whom the apostles did ordain) in doctrines and prac- tices opposite to those devices, as a good argument (and so indeed it then was, next toa demonstration) against them, do produce the Roman church as a prin- cipal one among them, upon several ob- vious accounts; and this indeed argueth the Roman church to have been then one competent witness, or credible retainer of tradition; as also were the other * Diximus in superioribus hanc fuisse sem- per et esse hodie catholicorum consuetudinem ut fidem veram duobus his modis adprobent ; primum divini canonis auctoritate, deinde ec- ‘clesice catholice traditione.—p 364. + His fere compendiis utimur, quum de evangelii fide adversus hereticos expedimur, defendentibus et temporum ordinem posteritati falsariorum prescribentem, et auctoritatem ec- clesiarum traditioni apostolorum patrocinan- tem.— Tertull. in Mare. iv. 5. t Solemus hereticis compendii gratia de posteritate rea oO ἀμοι ie νιαρορηιῇ contra LHer- mog. cap. || The like discourse against heretics doth Clemens Alexandrinus use.— Strom. vii. p. 549. apostolical churches, to whose testimony they likewise appeal. But what is this to the Roman bishop’s judicial power in such cases? Why do they not urge that in plain terms? hey would certainly — have done so, if they had known it, and thought it of any validity. Do but mark their words, involving the force of their argumentation: ‘* When” (saith Irenzeus) “‘ we do again” (after al- legation of scripture) “appeal to that tra- dition which is from the apostles, which by successions of presbyters is preserv- ed in the churches :’* and, *“* That” (saith Tertullian) “ will appear to have been delivered by the apostles, which hath been kept as holy in the apostolical churches: let us see what milk the Co- rinthians did draw from Paul; what the Philippians, the Thessalonians, the Ephe- sians do read: what also the Romans, our nearer neighbours, do say, to whom both Peter and Paul did leave the gospel sealed with their blood: we have also the churches nursed by John,”t+ &c. Again, “It is therefore manifest” (saith he, in his Prescriptions against Heretics) ‘ that every doctrine which doth conspire with those apostolical churches, in which the faith originally was planted, is to be ac- counted true; as undoubtedly holding that which the churches did receive from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, and Christ from God ; but all other doc- trine is to be prejudged false, which doth think against the truth of the churches, and of the apostles, and of Christ, and of God.”’¢ Their argumentation then, in * Cum autem ad eam iterum traditionem, quz est ab apostolis, que per successores pres- byterorum in ecclesiis custeditur, provocamus ———.. ren. ii. 2. + Constabit id esse ab apostolis traditum quod apud ecclesias apostolicas fuerit sacro- sanctum; videamus quod lace a Paulo Corin- thii hauserint ; quid legant Philippenses, Thes- salonicenses, Ephesii; quid etiam Romani de proximo sonent; quibus evangelium et Petrus et Paulus sanguine quoque suo signatum reli- querunt ; habemus et Johannis alumnas eccle- sias, &c.—Adv. Marc. iv. 5. ¢t Constat proinde omnem doctrinam, que cum illis ecclesiis apostolicis matricibus et ori- ginalibus fidei conspiret, veritati deputandam, id sine dubio tencutem quod ecclesiz ab apos- tolis, apostoli a Christo, Christus a Deo susce- pit; reliquam vero doctrinam de mendacio preejudicandam, que sapiat contra veritatem ecclesiarum, et apostolorum, et Christi, et Dei. —Tert. de Preser. 21. — A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. short, is plainly this: that the conspiring of the churches in doctrines contrary to those which the heretics vented, did ir- refragably signify those doctrines to be apostolical: which digcourse doth nowise favour the Roman pretences, but indeed, if we do weigh it, is very prejudicial thereto; it thereby appearing, that Chris- tian doctors then, in the canvassing of points and assuring tradition, had no pe- cular regard to the Roman church’s testi- mony, no deference at all to the Roman bishop’s authority (not otherwise at least than to the authority of one single bishop yielding attestation to tradition.) 26. It is odd, that even old popes them- selves, in elaborate tracts disputing against heretics (as Pope Celestine against Nes- torius and -Pelagius, Pope Leo against Eutyches—), do content themselves to urge testimonies of scripture, and argu- ments grounded thereon; not alleging their own definitive authority, or using this parlous argumentation : “I, the su- preme docior of the church, and judge of controversies, do assert thus; and therefore you are obliged to submit your assent.” 27. It is matter of amazement, if the pope were such as they would have him to be, that in so many bulky volumes of ancient Fathers, living through many ages after Christ, in those vast treasuries of learning and knowledge, wherein-all sorts of truth are displayed, all sorts of duty are pressed, this momentous point of doctrine and practice should nowhere be expressed in clear and peremptory terms ([ speak so, for that by wresting words, by impertinent application, by straining consequences, the most ridicu- lous positions imaginable may be deduc- ed from their writings.) It is strange, that somewhere or other, at least incidentally, in their commenta- ries upon the scripture, wherein many places concerning the church and its hie- rarchy do invite to speak of the pope ; in their treatises about the priesthood, about the unity and peace of the church, about heresy and schism ; in their epistles con- cerning ecclesiastical affairs; in their historical narrations about occurrences in the church; in their concertations with heterodox adversaries, they should not frequently touch it, they should not sometimes largely dwell upon it. ii 151 Is it not marvellous, that Origen, St. Hilary, St Cyril, St. Chrysostom, St. Je- rome, St. Austin, in their commentaries and tractates upon those places of scrip- ture [ Tu es Petrus. Pasce oves] whereon they now build the papal authority, should be so dull and drowsy as not to say a word concerning the pope ? That St. Austin, in his so many elabo- rate tractates against the JDonatists (wherein he discourseth so prolixly about the church, its unity, communion, disci- pline), should never insist upon the duty of obedience to the pope, or charge those schismatics with their rebellion against him, or allege his authority against them? If we consider that the pope was bish- op of the imperial city, the metropolis of the world; that he thence was most eminent in rank, did abound in wealth, did live in great splendour and reputa- tion; had may dependencies, and great opportunities to gratify and relieve many of the clergy ; that of the Fathers whose volumes we have, as well affected to- wards him, divers were personally oblig- ed to him for his support in their distress (as Athanasius, Chrysostom, Theodoret ;) or as to their patrons and benefactors (as St. Jerome ;) divers could not but highly respect him as patron of the cause where- in they were engaged (as Basil, Gregory, Nazianzen, Hilary, Gregory Nyssen, Ambrose, Austin ;) some were his parti- sans in a common quarrel (as Cyril ;) di- vers of them lived in places and times wherein he had got much sway (as all the western bishops ;) that he had then improved his authority much beyond the old limits ; that all the bishops of the western or Latin churches had a peculiar dependence on him (especially after that by advantage of his station, by favour of the court, by colour of the Sardican ca- nons, by voluntary deferences and sub- missions, by several tricks, he had wound himself to meddle in most of their chief affairs ;)* that hence divers bishops were tempted to admire, to court, to flatter him ; that divers aspiring popes were apt * Τῆς Ῥωμαίων ἐπισκοπῆς ὁμοίως τῇ ᾿Αλεξανδρέ- wv πέρα τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἐπὶ δυναστείαν ἤδη πάλαι προ- ehOotees.—Socr. vii. 11. The bishopric of Rome is like to that of Alexandria, having now long ago arrived to that height of power above and beyond the priesthood. 152 to encourage the commenders of their authority, which they themselves were apt to magnify and inculcate; consider- ing, I say, such things, it is a wonder that in so many volumjnous discourses so little should be said favouring this pre- pretence, so nothing that proveth it [so much that crosseth it, so much in- deed, as I hope to shew, that quite over- throweth it. ] If it be asked how we can prove this, I answer, that (beside who carefully pe- ruseth those old books, will easily see it) we are beholden to our adversaries for proving it to us, when they least intend- ed as such a favour: for that no clear and cogent passages for proof of this pre- tence can be thence fetched, is sufficient- ly evident from the very allegations which, after their most diligent raking in old books, they produce; the which are so few, and fall so very short of their purpose, that without much stretching they signify nothing. 28. It is monstrous, that in the code of the catholic church (consisting of the de- crees of so many synods, concerning ecclesiastical order and discipline) there should not be one canon directly declar- ing his authority ; nor any mention made of him, except thrice accidentally ;t once upon occasion of declaring the authority of the Alexandrine bishop, the other upon occasion of assigning to the bishop of Constantinople the ‘ second place of honour,” and ‘equal privileges” - with him. If it be objected, that these discourses are negative, and therefore of small force ; | answer, that therefore they are most proper to assert such a negative proposition: for how can we otherwise better shew a thing not to be, than by shewing it to have no footstep there, where it is supposed to stand ? How can we more clearly argue a matter of right to want proof, than by declaring it not to be extant in the laws grounding such right; not taught by the masters who profess to instruct in such things; not testified in records concerning the exer- cise of it? Such arguments indeed in such cases are not merely negative, but ‘ Cone. Nic. can.6; Cone. Const. can. 2 Conc. Chalc. can. 28. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. rather privative ; proving things not to be, because not affirmed there, where in rea- son they ought to be affirmed; standing therefore upon positive suppositions, that holy scripture, δΝΝ general tradition are not imperfect and lame toward their de- sign; that ancient writers were compe- tently intelligent, faithful, diligent; that all of them could not conspire in perpetual silence about things, of which they had often fair occasion and great reason to speak : in fine, such considerations, how- ever they may be deluded by sophistical wits, will yet bear great sway, and often will amount near to the force of demon- stration, with men of honest prudence. However, we shall proceed to other dis- courses more direct and ns against the popish doctrine. Il. Secondly, we shall reed that this pretence, upon several accounts, is con- trary to the doctrine of holy scripture. 1. This pretence doth thwart the holy scripture, by assigning to another the prerogatives and peculiar titles appropri- ated therein to our Lord. The scripture asserteth him to be our only Sovereign Lord and King: To us, saith it, there is one Lord; and, One King shall be king over them; who shall reign over the house of David for ever ; and of his kingdom there shall be no end ; who is the only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords; the one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy." The scripture speaketh of one Arch- pastor, and great Shepherd of the sheep, exclusively to any other; for, J wiil (said God in the prophet) set up one shepherd over them, and he shail feed the sheep; and, There (saith our Lord himself) shall be one fold, and one shepherd : who that shall be he express- eth, adding, Lam the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep’ (by Pope Boniface’s good leave, who maketh St. Peter or himself this shepherd.) The scripture telleth us, that we have "1Cor. vili.6; xii. 5; Eph. iv.5; Ez. xxxvii. 22; Luke i. 33; 1 Tim. vi. 15; James iv. 12, Y 1 Pet. v. 4; ii. 25; Heb. xiii. 20; Ezek. xxxiv. 23; John x. 16, 11, 14. ~ Extrav. Com. lib. i. tit. 8, 6. 1. ᾿ j one High Priest of our profession,* an- swerable to that one in the Jewish church, | liga The scripture informeth us, that there is but one supreme Doctor, Guide, Father of Christians, prohibiting us to acknowl- edge any other for such: Ye are all brethren: and call ye not any one father upon earth ; for one is your Father, even he that is in heaven: neither be ye called masters; for one is your Master, even Christ.» Good Pope Gregory (not the seventh of that name) did take this fora d argument ; for, “‘ What, therefore, dearest brother,” said he to John of Constantinople, “wilt thou say in that terrible trial of the Judge who is coming ; who dost affect to be called not only Fa- ther, but general Father in the world ὃ ἢ The scripture representeth the church as a building whereof Christ himself is the chief corner-stone ;* as a family, whereof he being the Pater-familias, all others are fellow-servants ; as one body, having one head; whom God hath given to be head over ail things to the church, which ts his body.* He is the one spouse of the church; which title one would think he might leave peculiar to our Lord ; there being no vice-husbands ; yet hath he been bold even to claim that, as may be seen in the Constitutions of Pope Gregory X. in one of their general synods.° It seemeth therefore a sacrilegious ar- rogance (derogating from our Lord’s hon- our) for any man to assume or admit those titles of ““ Sovereign of the Church, Head of the Church, our Lord, Arch- pastor, highest Priest, chief Doctor, Master, Father, Judge of Christians ;” upon what pretence, or under what dis- tinction soever: these ‘“ pompatic, fool- * Quid ergo, frater charissime, in illo terri- bili examine venientis Judicis dicturus es, qui non solum Pater, sed etiam generalis Pater in mundo vocari appetis ?— Greg. M. Epist. iv. 38. * Heb. iii. 1; ix. 7, 24. ¥ Matt. xxiii. 8, 9. * Eph. ii. 20; 1 Pet. ii. 4. * Heb. iii. 6; Matt. x. 25; Eph. iv. 4; ii. 16; Rom. xii.5; 1 Cor. xii. 13; Eph. i. 22; iv. 15; v.23; Col.i. 18; Hos.i. 11; One head, John iii. 29; Eph. v. 23; 2Cor. xi. 2, ἑνὶ ἀνδρί. Ὁ Sext. Decret. lib. i. tit. vi. cap. 3; Baron. an. 34, § 208; vide Greg. I. Epist. lib. iv. Ep. 32, 34, 36, 38, 39; lib. vi. Ep. 24, 28, 30, 31; ib. vii. Ep. 70. Vo. Ill. 20 ia A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 153 ish, proud, perverse, wicked, profane words ;” these “names of singularity, elation, vanity, blasphemy” (to borrow the epithets with which Pope Gregory I. doth brand the titles of ““ Universal Bish- op,” and ‘C&cumenical Patriarch,” no less modest in sound, and far more inno- cent in meaning, than those now ascribed to the pope), are therefore to be rejected ; not only because they are injurious to all other pastors, and to the people of God’s heritage, but because they do encroach upon our only Lord, to whom they do only belong; much more to usurp the things which they do naturally signify, isa horrible invasion upon our Lord’s prerogative. Thus hath that great pope taught us to argue, in words expressly condemning some, and consequently all of them to- gether with the things which they signi- fy : “ What’* (saith he, writing to the bishop of Constantinople, who had ad- mitted the title of Universal Bishop or Patriarch) “ wilt thou say to Christ, the head of the universal church, in the trial of the last judgment, who by the appella- tion of Universal dost endeavour to sub- ject all his members to thee? Whom, I pray, dost thou mean to imitate in so perverse a word, but him who, despising the legions of angels constituted in fel- lowship with him, did endeavour to break forth unto the top of singularity, that he might both be subject to none, and alone be over all? who also said, I will ascend into heaven, and will exalt my throne above the stars for what are thy brethren, all the bishops of the univer- sal church, but the stars of heaven; to whom while by this haughty word thou desirest to prefer thyself, and to trample on their name in comparison to thee, * Tu quid Christo universalis ecclesiw capiti ‘n extremi judicii dicturus examine, qui cuncta ejus membra tibimet coneris Universalis appel- latione supponere ? Quis rogo in hoc tam per- verso vocabulo nisi ille ad imitandum proponi- tur, qui despectis angelorum legionibus secum socialiter constitutis ad culmen conatus est sin- gularitatis erumpere, ut et nulli subesse, et so- lus omnibus preesse videtur? qui etiam dixit, In ecelum conscendam, super astra coli exal- tabo solium meum quid enim fratres tui omnes universalis ecclesiw episcopi, nisi astra e@li sunt? quibus dum cupis temetipsam vo- cabulo elationis preponere, eoramque nomen tui —— calcare Greg. Ep. iv. 38. 154 what dost thou say, but, I will climb into heaven ?” And again, in another epistle to the bishops of Alexandria and Antioch, he taxeth the same patriarch for “ assuming to boast so that he attempteth to ascribe all things to himself, and studieth by the elation of pompous speech to subject to himself allthe members of Christ, which do cohere to one sole head, namely to Christ.”* Again, “I confidently say, that who- ever doth call himself Universal Bishop, or desireth to be so called, doth in his elation forerun Antichrist, because he pridingly doth set himself before all others.” If these argumentations be sound, or signify any thing, what is the pretence of universal sovereignty and pastorship but a piece of Luciferian arrogance ? Who can imagine that even this pope could approve, could assume, could ex- ercise it? If he did, was he not mon- strously senseless, and above measure impudent, to use such discourses, which so plainly, without altering a word, might be retorted upon him; which are built upon suppositions, that it is unlawful and wicked to assume superiority over the church, over all bishops, over all Chris- tians; the which indeed (seeing never pope was of greater repute, or did write in any case more solemnly and seriously) have given to the pretences of his suc- cessors so deadly a wound, that no balm of sophistical interpretation can be able to heal it. We see that according to St. Gregory M. our Lord Christ is the one only head of the church;’* to whom for * Jactantiam sumpsit ita ut universa sibi tentet adscribere, et omnia que soli uni capiti coherent, videlicet Christo. per elationem pom- patici sermonis ejusdem Christi sibi studeat membra subjugare.—Gr. M. Ep. iv. 36. The same words we have in the epistle of pope Pe- lagius (predecessor of St. Gregory) tothe bish- ops of Constantinople. (P. Pelagii Ep. 8.) + Ego autem fidenter dico, quia quisquis se Universalem Sacerdotem voca:, vel vocari de- siderat, in elatione sua Antichristum preecurrit quia superbiendo se ceteris pra ponit.—( Greg. I. lib. vi. Ep. 30.) Mec dispari superbia ad errorem ducitur; quia sicut perversus ille De-~ us videri vult super omnes homines ; ita quis- quis est, qui solus sacerdos appellari appetit, super ceeteros sacerdotes se extollit—(ad Mau- ric. Aug.) * Vide P. Pelag. Ep. 3. δ... A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. company let us adjoin St. Basil M. (that — we may have both Greek and Latin for it), who saith, that (according to St. Paul) ‘we are the body of Christ, and mem- bers one of another, because it is mani- fest that the one and sole truly head, which is Christ, doth hold and connect each one to another unto concord.”* To decline these allegations of scrip- ture, they have forged distinctions, of several kinds of churches, and several sorts of heads; the which evasions I shall not particularly discourse, seeing it may suffice to observe in general, that no such distinctions have any place or any ground in scripture, nor can well consist with it; which simply doth re- present the church as one kingdom, @ kingdom of heaven, a kingdom not of this world ; all the subjects whereof have their πολίτευμα in heaven,’ or are con- sidered as members of a city there ; so that itis vain to seek for a sovereign thereof in this world: the which also doth to the catholic church sojourning on earth usually impart the name and attri- butes properly appertaining to the church most universal (comprehensive of all christians in heaven and upon earth),° because that isa visible representative of this, and we by joining in offices of piety with that do communicate with this; whence that which is said of one (concerning the unity of its king, its head, its pastor, its priest) is to be under- * ἸΚρατούσης δηλονότι καὶ συναπτούσης ἕκαστον τῷ ἄλλῳ πρὸς ὁμόνοιαν τῆς λιᾶς καὶ μόνης ἀληθῶς κε- Paris, ἥτις ἐστιν ὃ Xo:erés.—Bas. M. de Jud. Div. tom. 11. p. 261. Totus Christus caput et corpus est; caput unigenitus Dei Filius, et cor- pus ejus ecclesiz, sponsus et sponsa, duo in carne una. Quicungue de ipso capite ab scrip- turis sanctis dissentiunt, etiamsiin omnibus locis inveniantur in quibus ecclesia designata est, non sunt in ecclesia, &c.—Aug. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 4; vide contra Petil. iii. 42. Whole Christ is the head and the body; the head the only begotten Son of God, and and his body the church, the bridegroom and the spouse, two in one flesh. Whoever disagree about the head itself from the holy scriptures, though they are found in all places in which the church is designed, they are not in thechurch, &c. It was unhappily expressed by Bellarmine —— Ecclesia secluso eiam Christo unum caput ha- bere debet.—De pont. R.i.9§, Ac ne forte. The church, even Christ himself, being set aside, ought to have one head. 4 Jehn xviii. 36; Phil. iii. 20; Heb. xii. 22. 9 Acts xx. 28; Matt. xvi. 18; 1 Cor xii. 28; xv. 9; Gal. i. 13. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. stood of the other ;‘ especially consider- ing that our Lord, according to his promise, is ever present with the church here, governing it by the efficacy of his Spirit and grace, so that no other cor- poreal or visible head of this spiritual body is needful.* — It was to be sure a visible headship which St. Gregory did so eagerly im- pugn and exclaim against; for he could not apprehend the bishop of Constanti- nople so wild, as to affect a jurisdiction over the church mystical, or invisible. 2. Indeed, upon this very account, the Romish pretence doth not well ac- cord with holy scripture,: because it transformeth the church into another kind of body than it was constituted by God, according to the representation of it in scripture : for there it is represented as a spiritual and heavenly society, com- pacted by the bands of one faith, one hope, one spirit of charity :* but this pretence turneth it into a worldly frame ; united by the same bands of interest and design; managed in the same man- ner, by terror and allurement; support- ed by the same props of force, of policy, of wealth, of reputation and splendour, as all other secular corporations are.t You may call it what you please : but it is evident, that in truth the papal mon- archy is a temporal dominion, driving on worldly ends by worldly means; such as our Lord did never mean to institute : so that the subjects thereof may with far more reason than the people of Con- stantinople had, when their bishop Nes- torius did stop some-of their priests from contradicting him, say, ‘‘We have a king; a bishop we have not:”i so that * Christus arbitrio et nutu ac presentia sna et prepositos ipsos, et ecclesiam cum przpositis gubernat.—Cypr. Ep. 69. Christ, by his own arbitrement, and power, and presence, governs both the hishops themselves, and the church with the bishops. + Caput nostrum, quod Christus est, ad hoc 508 esse membra nos voluit, ut per compagem charitatis et fidei unum nos in se corpus effice- ret.— Greg. M. Ep. vii. 111. Our head, which is Christ, would therefore have us to be his members, that by the conjunction of charity and faith he might make us to be one body. $ Βασιλέα ἔχομεν, ἐπίσκοπον οὐκ Eyopnsv.—Conc. Eph. Part. cap. 30. f Matt. xxviii. 20. & John xviii. 36. δ Eph. iv. 4,5; 2 Cor. x. 4. 155 upon every pope we may charge that whereof Anthimus was accused, in the synod of Constantinople, under Menas : ‘** That he did account the greatness and dignity of the priesthood to be, nota spiritual charge of souls, but asa kind of politic rule.”* This was that which seeming to be affected by the bishop of Antioch, in encroachment upon the church of Cy- prus, the Fathers of the Ephesine synod did endeavour to nip; enacting a canon against all such invasions, ‘lest under pretext of holy discipline the pride of worldly authority should creep ἴῃ." And what pride of that kind could they mean beyond that which now the popes do claim and exercise ?i Now, dol say, after that the papal empire hath swollen to such a bulk: whereas so long ago, when it was but in its bud and stripling age, it was observed of it by a very honest historian, “ that the Roman episcopacy had long since advanced into a high degree of power beyond the priesthood.”’|| 3. This pretence doth thwart the scrip- ture by destroying that brotherly co-ordi- nation and equality, which our Lord did appoint among the bishops and chief pas- tors of hischurch: he did (as we before shewed) prohibit all his apostles to as- sume any domination, or authoritative su- periority over one another; the which command, together with others concern- ing the pastoral function, we may well suppose to reach their successors: so did St. Jerome suppose, collecting thence that all bishops by original institution are equals, or that no one by our Lord’s order may challenge superiority over another: ‘* Wherever” (saith he) “a bishop is, whether at Rome or at Eugu- bium, at Constantinople or at Rhegium, at Alexandria or at Thanis, he is of the * Τὸ ris ἀρχιερωσύνην μέγεθος καὶ ἀξίωμα οὐ πνευματικὴν Ψυχῶν ἐπιστασίαν εἶναι λογισάμενος, ἀλλ᾽ οἷόν τινα πολιτικὴν ἀρχὴν, &c.—Conc. sub. Men. Act. i. pag 99. + Μηδὲ ἐν ἱερουργίας προσχήματι ἐξουσίας κοσμι- κῆς τῦφος rapecodénrarc.—Can. Eph. i. can. 8. ¢ This was that which, about the same time, the Fathers of the African synod do request P. Celestine to forbear ; nec permittere, ut fu- mosum mundi fastum Christi ecclesiw inducere videamur.—Conc. Afr. ad P. Celest. 1. \| Τῆς Ῥωμαίων ἐπισκοπῆς ὁμοίως τῇ ᾿Αλεξαν- ὁρέων πέρα τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἐπὶ δυναστείαν πάλαι προ- ἐλθούσης .---ϑοογ. vii. 11. 156 same worth, and of the same priesthood ; the power. .of wealth or lowness of pov- erty do not make a bishop higher or low- er; but all are successors of the apos- tles.”* Where doth not he plainly deny the bishop of Eugubium to be inferior to him of Rome, as being no less a succes- sor of the apostles than he? Doth he not say these words in way of proof, that the authority of the Roman bishop or church was of no validity against the practice of other bishops and churches ?7 (upon occasion of deacons there taking upon them more than in other places, as cardinal deacons do now;) which ex- cludeth such distinctions, as scholastical fancies have devised, to shift off his tes- timony; the which he uttered simply, never dreaming of such distinctions. This consequence St. Gregory did sup- pose, when he therefore did condemn the title of Universal Bishop, because it did ‘imply an affectation of superiority” and dignity in one bishop above others; of “‘abasing the name of other bishops _ = ~o. ΎΎΥΨΥΥΟ ee Ἂ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. that they did affect superiority, they did sometimes disclaim it: so did Pope Ge- lasius 1. (a zealous man for the honour of his See.) 4. This pretence doth thwart the holy scripture, not only by trampling down the dignity of bishops (which according to St. Gregory doth imply great pride and presumption), but as really infring- ing the rights granted by our Lord to his church, and the governors of it.? For to each church our Lord hath im- posed a duty, and imparted a power of maintaining divine truth, and so approv- ing itself a pillar and support of truth ;' of deciding controversies possible and proper to be decided with due temper, ul- timately without further resort; for that he, who will not obey or acquiesce in its decision, is to be as a heathen or publi- can; of censuring and rejecting offend- ers (in doctrine or demeanour;) Those within (saith St. Paul to the church of Corinth) do not ye judge? But them that are without, God judgeth: where- in comparison of his own,” of extolling} fore put away from among yourselves “himself above the rest of priests,”{ &c. This the ancient popes did remember, when usually in their compellation of any bishop they did style them ‘“ breth- ren, colleagues, fellow-ministers, fellow- bishops,”’|| not intending thereby compli- ment or mockery, but to declare their sense of the original equality among bishops; notwithstanding some differ- énces in order and privileges, which their See had obtained. And that this was the general sense of the Fathers we shall afterward shew. Hence, when it was objected to them, * Ubicunque fuerit episcopus sive Rome, sive Eugibii, sive Constantinopoli, sive Rhegii, sive Alexandriz, sive Thanis, ejusdem meriti, ejusdem et sacerdotii; potentia divitiarum et paupertatis humilitas vel sublimiorem vel infe- riorem episcopum non facit; ceterum omnes apostolorum successores sunt.—Hier. Ep. 85. (ad Evagr.) ἡ Si auctoritas queritur, orbis major est ur- be ; Ubicunque, &c. + Illud appetunt unde omnibus digniores vi- deantar.—Gr. Ep. iv. 34, Quia superbiendo se cwteris preponit.—Ep. vi. 38. Super cete- ros sacerdotes se extollit—Jid. Cupis epis- coporum nomen tui comparatione calcare.— Ep. iv. 38. Cuncta ejus membra tibimet cona- ris supponere.—Ibid. || (Invigiletur ergo ut omnibus coepiscopis nostris et fratribus innotescat.—P. Cora. apud Cyp. Ep. 48.) that wicked person: of preserving order and decency, according to that rule pre- scribed to the church of Corinth, Let adl things be done decently and in order :i of promoting edification; of deciding causes. All which rights and privileges the Roman bishop doth bereave the churches of, snatching them to himself; pretend- ing that he is the sovereign doctor, judge, regulator of all churches ; overruling and voiding all that is done by them, accord- ing to his pleasure. The scripture hath enjoined and em- * Hic non tam optamus preponi aliis (sicut preedicas), quam cum fidelibus cunctis sanc- tum et Deo placitum habere consortium.—P. Gelas. I. Ep. 9. (ad-Euphem. Ep. CP.) Here we do not so much desire to be advanced above others, as together with all the faithful to make up a consort holy and well-pleasing to God. Vobis subtrahitur, quod alteri plus quam ratio exigit preebetur.—Greg. vii. 30. (p. 451.) What is yielded to another more than reason requires, is taken from you. IIpdypa τῆς πάντων ἐλευθερίας dnrépevov.—Syn. Eph. ΤΙ. can. 8. A thing that entrencheth upon the freedom of all others. ' Rev. ii. etiii.; 1 Tim, iii. 15; Matt. xviii. 17, ἐὰν δὲ παρακούσῃ, &c. Οὐχὶ rods ἔσω ὑμεῖς κρίνετε ; | 1 Cor. ν. 12, καὶ ἐξαίρε---εὐΐα v. 4,5; Rev. ii. 20; 1 Cor. xiv. 40; 1 Thess v. 14; Rom. xiv. 19; 1 Cor. vi. 1. powered all bishops to feed, guide, and rule their respective churches, as the ministers, stewards, ambassadors, angels of God; for the perfecting of the saints, r the work of the ministry, for the ed- ification of the body of Christ:* to whom God hath committed the care of their people, so that they are responsible for their souls. All which rights and privileges of the episcopal office the pope hath invaded, doth obstruct, cramp, frustrate, destroy ; pretending (without any warrant) that their authority is derived from him ; forc- ing them to exercise it no otherwise than as his subjects, and according to his plea- sure.* But of this point more after- ward. 5. This pretence doth thwart the scrip- ture, by robbing all Christian people of the liberties and rights’ with which by that divine charter they are endowed, and which they are obliged to preserve inviolate. St.. Paul enjoineth the Galatians to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and not to be entang- led again with the yoke of bondage.’ There is therefore a liberty which we must maintain, and a power to which we must not submit: and against whom can we lave more ground to do this, than against him who pretendeth to dogma- tize, to define points of faith, to impose doctrines (new and strange enough) on our consciences, under a peremptory ob- ligation of yielding assent to them; to prescribe laws, as divine and necessary to be observed, without warrant, as those * Dei et apostolic sedis gratia.—Vide post. Superbum nimis est et immoderatum ultra fi- nes proprios tendere, et antiquitate calcata ali- enum jus velle preripere, atque ut unius cres- cat dignitas, tot metropolitanoram impugnare primatus, &c.—P, Leo I. Ep. 55. It is too proud and unreasonable a thing for one to Stretch himself beyond his bounds, and mau- gre all antiquity to snatch away other men’s right; and that the dignity of one may be en- hanced, to oppose the primacies of so many metropolitans. + Sancte ecclesie universali injuriam facit. —Greg. 1. Ep. i. 24. It does wrong to the holy catholic church. Plebis majestas.—Cypr. Ep. 55. (ad Corn. P.) p. 117. ® Acis xx. 28; Heb. xiii. 17; 1 Pet. v. 2. 1 Tim. iii. 15; Tit.i.7; 1 Cor. xii. 28; Eph. «- 11; Rev. ιἱ. &c.; Eph. ἱν. 12; Heb. xiii. ' Gal. τι 1. ie A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 157 dogmatists did, against whom St. Paul biddeth us to maintain our liberty ?™ (so that if he should declare “ virtue to be vice, and white to be black, we must be- lieve him,” some of his adherents have said, consistently enough with his pre- tences :) for,— Against such tyrannical invaders we are bound to maintain our liberty, accord- ing to that precept of St. Paul; the which if a pope might well allege against the proceedings of a general synod," with much more reason may we thereby justify our non-submission to one man’s exorbitant domination. This is a power which the apostles themselves did not challenge to them- selves; for, We (saith St. Paul) have not dominion over your faiih, but are help- ers of your joy.° They did not pretend that any Chris- tian should absolutely believe them in cases wherein they had not revelation (general or special) from God; in such cases referring their opinion to the judg- ment and discretion of Christians.” They say, Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel un- to you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed: If any man, &c.; which precept, with many others of the like purport (enjoining us to examine the truth, to adhere unto the received doctrine, to decline heterodox- ies and novelties), doth signify nothing, if every Christian hath not allowed to him a judgment of discretion, but is tied blindly to follow the dictates of another. St. Austin (Iam sure) did think this liberty such, that without betraying it, no man could be obliged to believe any thing not grounded upon canonical authority : for to a Donatist, his adversary, citing the authority of St. Cyprian against him, he thus replieth: “Βαϊ now seeing it is not canonical which thou recitest, with that liberty to which the Lord hath called us, I do not receive the opinion, differing from scripture, of that man whose praise I cannot reach, to whose great learning Ido not compare my writings, whose wit I love, in whose speech 1 delight, ™ Gal. v. 1; Col. ii. 16, 18. ΒΡ Leo I. Ep. 28. 9 2 Cor. i. 94. P1 Cor. x. 15; vii. 12, 25, 40. 4 Gal. i.8. 158 whose charity I admire, whose martyr- dom I reverence.””* This liberty, not only the ancients, but even divers popes, have acknowledged to belong to every Christian ; as we shall hereafter shew, when we shall prove, that we may lawfully reject the pope, as a patron of error and iniquity. 6. It particularly doth thwart scripture by wronging princes, in exempting a nu- merous sort of people from subjection to their laws and judicature; whereas, by God’s ordination and express command, every soul is subject to them;‘ not ex- cepting the popes themselves (in the opin- ion of St. Chrysostom, except they be greater than any apostle.) By pretending to govern the subjects of princes without their leave; to make laws without his permission or confirma- tion; to cite his subjects out of their ter- ritories, &c.; which are encroachments upon the rights of God’s unquestionable ministers. lil. Further, becasue our adversaries do little regard any allegation of scripture against them (pretending themselves to be the only masters of its sense, or of com- mon sense, judges and interpreters of them), we do allege against them, that this pretence doth also cross tradition, and the common doctrine of the Fathers. For, 1. Common usage and practice is a good interpreter of right ; and that shew- eth no such right was known in the prim- itive church. 2. Indeed the state of the primitive church did not admit it. 3. The Fathers did suppose no order in the church, by original right or divine in- stitution, superior to that of a bishop; whence they commonly did style a bishop the highest priest, and episcopacy the top of ecclesiastical orders.* ** The chief priest,’ saith Tertullian, * Nune vero quoniam canonicum non est quod recitas, ea libertate ad quam nos vocavit Do- minus, ejas Vivi, cujus laudem consequi non valeo, cujus multis literis scripta mea non com- paro, cujus ingenium diligo, cujus ore delector, cujus charitatem miror, eujus martyrium vene- ror. hoc quod aliter sapuit non accipio.—Aug. contr. Cres. ii. 32. * 'And rod Ἰζυρίου διδαχθέντες ἀκολουθίαν moay- μάτων rots piv ἐπισκόποις τὰ τῆς ἀρχιερωσύνης ἐνεί- μᾶμεν, &c.—Const. Apost. vill. 46. © Rom. xiii. 1. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. “that is, the bishop, hath the right of giving baptism.”* - * Although” (saith St. Ambrose) * the presbyters also do it, yet the beginning of the ministry is from the highest priest.” ἡ Optatus calleth bishops “‘ the tops and princes of 4}}. 8 ‘The divine order of bishops” (saith Dionysius) “is the first of divine orders ; the same being also the extreme and last of them ; for into it all the frame of our hierarchy is resolved and accomplish- ed.”’|| This language is common even among popes themselves, complying with the speech then current ;§ for, ‘* Presbyters,” saith Pope Innocent L, “ although they are priests, yet have they not the top of high-priesthood.” ) “ΝΟ man,” saith Pope Zozimus I., “ὁ against the precepts of the Fathers, should presume to aspire to the highest priesthood of the church.’ “ It is decreed” (saith Pope Leo. 1.) ‘that the chorepiscopi, or presbyters, who figure the sons of Aaron, shall not presume to snatch that which the princes of the priests (whom Moses and Aaron * Dandi quidem jus habet sammus sacerdos, qui est episcopus.— Tert. de Bapt. cap. 17. ἡ Licetenim et presbyteri faciant,tamen exor- dium ministerii est asummo sacerdote.—Ambr. de Sacr. iii. 1. Suscepisti gubernacula summi sacerdotii.—Jd. Ep. 5. . t Apices et principes omnium sacerdotes.— Opt. 1. Ecclesie salus in summi sacerdotis dignitate pendet.— Hier. contr. Lucif. 4. The safety of the church depends upon the dignity of the high priest. Ego dignus summo sacer- dotio decernebar.—Id. Ep. 99. (ad Asell.) In episcopo omnes ordines sunt, quia primus sa- cerdos est, hoe est princeps sacerdotum, et pro- pheta et evangelista, et caetera adimplenda offi- cia ecclesiw in ministerio fidelium.—Ambr. in Eph. iv. 11. In the bishop there are all orders, because he is the first priest; 7. e. the prince of priests, and prophet, and evangelist, and all other offices of the church, to be fulfilled in the ministry of the faithful. : . || Ἢ θεία τῶν ἱεραρχῶν τάξις, &c. supr. Pon- tifex princeps sacerdotum est, quasi via se- quentium; ipse et summus sacerdos, ipse et pontifex maximus nuncupatur.—Isid. Hisp. apud Grat. Dist. xxi. cap. 1. § Nam presbyteri, licet sint sacerdotes, pon- tificatus tamen apicem non habent.—P. Innoc. I. Ep. 1. (ad Decent.) —— dum facile impo- nuntur manus, dum negligenter summus sa- cerdos eligitur.—Id. Ep. 12, (ad Aurel.) 4 Ne quis contra Patrum pracepta —— ad summum ecclesie sacerdotium aspirare pre- sumeret.—P. Zos. 1. Ep. 1. (ad Hesych.) —— --ς--- A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 159 did typify) are commanded to do.’* [Note, by the way, that seeing, accord- ing to this pope’s mind (after St. Jerome), Moses and Aaron did in the Jewish policy represent bishops, there was none there to prefigure the pope. | In those days the bishop of Nazianzum (a petty town in Cappadocia) was an high priest (so Gregory calleth his fa- ther).¢ And the bishop of a poor city in Afric is styled “" Sovereign Pontiff of Christ, most blessed Father, most blessed Pope ;”i and the very Roman clergy doth call St. Cyprian “" most blessed and most glorious pope:”|| which titles the pope doth now so charily reserve and appropriate to himself. But innumerable instances of this kind might be produced: I shall only there- fore add two other passages, which seem very observable, to the enforcement of this Discourse. St. Jerome, reprehending the discipline of the Montanists,§ hath these words: ** With us the bishops do hold the places of the apostles ; with them a bishop is in the third place: for they have for the first rank the patriarchs of Pepusa in Phrygia ; for the second, those whom they call cenones; so are bishops thrust down in- to the third, that is, almost the last place ; as if thence religion became more sstate- ly, if that which is first with us be the last with them.” Now doth not St. Jerome here affirm, that every bishop hath the place of an apostle, and the first rank in the church? Doth not he tax the advancement of any order above this ? May not the popish hierarchy most patly be compared to that of the Mon- tanists, and is it not equally liable to the censure of St. Jerome? Doth it not place the Roman pope in the first place, and the cardinals in the second, detrud- ing the bishops into a third place? Could the Pepusian patriarch, or his cenones, either more overtop in dignity, or sway by power over bishops, than doth the Roman patriarch and his car- dinals ? Again, St. Cyprian telleth Pope Cor- -nelius, that in episcopacy doth reside ‘‘ the sublime and divine power of gov- erning the church ;” it being ‘ the sublime top of the priesthood.”* ‘* He” (saith the blessed man concerning Pope Corne- lius) **did not suddenly arrive to episco- pacy ; but being through all ecclesiasti- cal offices promoted, and having in di- vine administrations often merited of God, did by all the steps of religion mount to the sublimest pitch of priesthood.” Where it is visible, that St. Cyprian doth not reckon the papacy, but the episco- pacy of Cornelius, to be that top of priesthood (above which there was no- thing eminent in the church), unto which he passing through the inferior degrees of the clergy had attained. In fine, it cannot well be conceived that the ancients constantly would have spoken in this manner, if they had allow- ed the papal office tobe such as_ now it doth bear itself; the which indeed is an order no less distant from episcopacy than the rank of a king differeth from that of the meanest baron in his kingdom. Neither is it prejudicial to this discourse (or to any preceding), thatin the primi- tive church there were some distinctions and subordinations of bishops (as of pa- * Ideoque id quod tantum facere principibus Sacerdotum jussum est, quorum typum Moses et Aaron tenucrunt, omnino decretum est, ut chorepiscopi vel presbyteri qui fillorum Aaron gestant figuram, arripere non presumant.—P. Lew Ep. 88. Pontificatus apicem non habent. —Ilhid. vide Ep. \xxxiv. cap.5; 5. Hier. ad Evagr. Ut sciamus traditiones apostolicas Sumptas de Veteri Testamento, Quod Aaron et filii ejus atque Levite in templo fuerunt, hoc Sibi episcopi, presbyteri et diaconi vindicant in ecclesia.—Or. xix. p. 309. t A bishop called ἀρχιερεύς.. Apost. Const. viii. 10, 12. Sammus Christi pontifex Augustinus.— (Paulin. apud Aug. Ep. 36;) Aug. Ep. 35. tissigo pape Augustino.—Hieron. (Aug. Ep. 11, 13, 14, &c.) _ |_Optamus te beatiss. et gloriosissime papa in Domino semper valere.—£p. 31. + actum est de episcopatus vigore, et § Apud nos apostoloram locum episcopi te-| de ecclesie gubermande sublimi ac divina po- Ment, apud eos episcopus tertias est; habent| testate.—Cypr. Ep. 55. (ad P. Cornel.) enim primos de Pepusa Phrygie patriarchas, ἡ Non iste ad episcopatum subito pervenit, secundos quos appellant cenones ; atque ita in| sed per omnia ecclesiastica officia promotus, et tertium, id est pene ultimum locum episcopi| in divinis administrationibus Dominum seepe devolyuntur ; quasi exinde ambitiosior religio| promeritus, ad sacerdotii sublime fastigium , Siquod apud nos primum est, apud illos| cunctis religionis gradibus ascendit.—Cypr. hovissimum sit.— Hier. (ad Marcellam), Ep.54.| Ep. 52. 160 triarchs, primates, metropolitans, com- mon bishops),* for, These were according to prudence constituted by the church itself for the more orderly and peaceable administra- tion of things. These did not import such a difference among the bishops, that one should domi- neer over others, to the infringing of primitive fraternity, or common liberty ; but a precedence in the same rank, with some moderate advantages for the com- mon good. These did stand under authority of the church; and might be changed or corrected, as was found expedient, by common agreement. By virtue of these, the superiors of this kind could do nothing over their-sub- ordinates in an arbitrary manner, but according to the regulation of canons, established by consent in synods; by which their influence was amplified or curbed.t When any of these did begin to domi- neer, or exceed his limits, he was liable to account and correction; he was ex- claimed against as tyrannical. When primates did begin to swell and encroach, good mendeclared their dis- pleasure at it, and wished it removed ; as is known particularly by the famous wish of Gregory Nazianzen.|| But we are discoursing against a supe- riority of a different nature, which found- eth itself in the institution of Christ, im- poseth itself on the church, is not altera- ble or governable by it, can endure no check or control, pretendeth to be en- dowed with an absolute power to act Without or against the consent of the church, is limited by no certain bounds but its own pleasure, &c.§ * The Africans had a particular care. that this primacy should not degenerate into tyrany. + Cone. Ant. can. 9; vide Apost. can. 34; Conc. Carth. apud Cypr. Cod. Afr. can. 39; Nestorius, Dioscorus. £ O04 rn τυπαννίδας τὰς φιλαρχίας ἐκθύμως διεκ- δικοῦντες.---- ἘΠ 56 Ὁ. villi. 1. So Eusebius com- plaineth of the bishops in his time. So Isidor. Pelusiot.—Ep. xx. 125; iv. 219. || 'Ὡς ὄφελον ye μηδὲ ἦν προεδρία, μηδὲ τις τόπου προτίμησις, καὶ τυραννικὴ mpovoyia.—Greg. Naz. Orat. 28. Othat there were not at all any presidency, or any preference in place, and ty- rannical prerogative ! § So Socrates of the bishop (not only of Rome, but) of Alexandria.—Liv. vil. cap 11, So St. Chrysostom in 1 Tim. iii. 1, in Ep. Orat, A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. IV. Further, this pretence may be im- pugned by many arguments springing from the nature and reason of things ab- stractedly considered ; according to which the exercise of such an authority may appear unpracticable, without much in- iquity and great inconvenience, in preju- dice to the rights of Christian states and people, to the interests of religion and piety, to the peace and welfare of man- kind: whence it is to be rejected, as a pest of Christendom. 1. Whereas all the world in design and obligation is Christian (the utmost parts of the earth being granted in pos- session to our Lord; and his gospel ex- tending to every creature under heaven),* and may in effect become such, when God pleaseth, by acceptance of the gospel; whereas it may easily happen, that the most distant places on the earth may embrace Christianity ; whereas real- ly Christian churches have been and are dispersed all about the world ; itis thence hugely incommodious, that all the church should depend upon an authority resident in one place, and to be managed by one person: the church, being such, is too immense, boundless, uncircumsceribed, unwieldy a bulk, to be guided by the in- spection, or managed by the influence, of one such authority or person. If the whole world were reduced un- der the government of one civil monarch, it would necessarily be ill governed, as to policy, to justice, to peace : the skirts, or remoter parts from the metropolis or centre of the government, would ex- tremely suffer thereby; for they would feel little light or warmth from majesty shining at such a distance: they would live under small awe of that power, which was so far out of sight: they must have very difficult recourse to it, for redress of grievances, and relief of oppressions ; for final decision of causes, and composure of differences ; for cor- rection of offences, and dispensgtion of justice, upon good information, with tol- erable expedition: it would be hard to preserve peace, or quell seditions, and suppress insurrections, that might arise in distant quarters. 11. So Greg. Naz. complained of τυραννικὴ προνομίᾳ.----Ἰ 14, | ‘ Psal. ii.8; Col. i. 23; Luke xxiv. 47; Matt. xxviii. 19. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. What man could obtain the knowledge or experience needful skilfully and justly to give laws or administer judgment to so many nations different in humour, in language, and customs? What mind of man, what industry, what leisure, could serve to sustain the burden of that care, which is needful to the wielding such an office? How and when should one man be able to receive all the addresses, to weigh all the cases, to make all the re- solutions and dispatches requistie for such acharge?* If the burden of one small kingdom be so great that wise and good princes do groan under its weight, what must that be of all mankind? To such an extent of government there must be allowed a majesty, and power corres- pondent, the which cannot be committed to one hand, without its degeneration in- to extreme tyranny. The words of Zosimus to this purpose are observable ; who saith, that the Romans, by admit- ting Augustus Cesar to the government, did do very perilously ; for “ If he should choose to manage the government right- ly and justly, he would not be capable of applying himself to all things as were fit, not being able to succour those who do lie at greatest distance; nor could he find so many magistrates as would not be ashamed to defeat the opinion con- ceived of them; nor could he suit them to the differences of so many manners : or if, transgressing the bounds of royal- ty, he should warp to tyranny, disturbing the magistracies, overlooking misdemean- ours, bartering right for money, holding the subjects for slaves (such as most emperors, or rather near all, have been, few excepted ;) then it is quite necessary that the brutish authority of the prince should be a public calamity: for then flatterers being by him dignified with gifis and honours, do invade the greatest commands; and those who are modest and quiet, not affecting the same life with them, are consequently displeased, not enjoying the same advantages ; so that from hence cities are filled with sedi- tions and troubles. And the civil and military employments being delivered up to avaricious persons, do both render a peaceable life sad and grievous to men * Cum tot sustineas, et tanta negotia solus, &c.— Hor. Ep. ii. 1. Vor. glll. 21 fil 161 of better disposition, and do enfeeble the resolution of soldiers in war.”* Hence St. Austin was of opinion, that “1 were happy for mankind if all king- doms were small, enjoying a peaceful neighbourhood.”+ It is commonly observed by historians, that ‘Rome, growing in bigness, did labour therewith,’ and was not able to support itself; many distempers and disor- ders springing up in so vast a body, which did throw it into continual pangs, and at length did bring it to ruin; for “Then” (saith St. Austin concerning the times of Pompey) ““ Rome had subdued Afric, it had subdued Greece ; and wide- ly also ruling over other parts, as not able to bear itself, did ina manner by its own greatness break itself.” || Hence that wise prince, Augustus Cesar, did himself forbear to enlarge the Roman dominion, and did in his tes- tament advise the senate to do the like.§ * Elre γὰρ ὄρθως, &c.—Zos. Hist. i., (p. 4. Ste.) 7 Felicioribus sic rebus humanis, omnia regna parva essent, concordi vicinitate letan- tia.— Aug. de Civ. D.iv. 15. Ἔστι re καὶ πόλεσι μεγέθους μέτρον, ὥσπερ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πάντων, ζώων, φυτῶν, ὀργάνων καὶ γὰρ τούτων ἕκαστον οὔτε λίὰν μικρὸν, οὔτε κατὰ ἔγεθος ὑπερθάλλον ἕξει τὴν αὑτοῦ dévayitv.— Arist. Pol. vii. 4. There is a certain measure of greatness fit for cities and com- monwealths, as well as for all other things, living creatures, plants, instruments ; for every one of these hath its proper virtue and faculty, when it is neither very little, nor yet exceeds in bigness. Τίς γὰρ στρατηγὸς ἔσται τοῦ λίαν ὑπερ- θάλλοντος πλήθους, ἤ τις κήρυξ μὴ στεντόρειος -"---- Ibid. For who would be a captain of an ex- cessive huge multitude? &c. t Suis et ipsa Roma viribus ruit.—Hor. Ep. 16. que ab exiguis initiis creverit, ut jam magnitudine laboret sua.—ZLiv. J. Ac nescio an satius fuerit populo Romano Sicilia et Africa contentos fuisse, aut his etiam ipsis carere dominanti in Italia sua, quam eo mag- nitudinis crescere, ut viribus suis conficeretur. —Fior. iii. 12. || Tunc jam Roma subjugaverat Africam, subjugaverat Greciam, lateque etiam aliis par- tibus imperans tanquam seipsam ferre non va- lens, se sua quodammodo magnitudine frege- rat.— Aug. de Civ. 1). xviii. 45; Tac. Hist. ii. p. 476. ᾧ Γνώμην re αὐτοῖς ἔδωκε rots re παροῦσιν doxee- θῆναι, καὶ μεδαμῶς ἐπὶ τὸ πλεῖον τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐπαυξῆ- σαι ἐθέλῆσαι' δυσφύλακτόν τε γὰρ αὐτὴν ἔσεσθαι ἔφη" τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ αὐτὸς ὄντως del ποτε οὐ λόγῳ μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἔργῳ ἐτήρησε' παρόν γοῦν αὐτῷ πολλὰ ἐκ τοῦ Bapha (kod προσκτήσασθαι, οὐκ ἡθέλησε.----Ὠίοη, lib. lvi. Tac. Ann. 1. He advised them to be con- tent with what they had, and by no means to endeavour the enlargement of their empire ; for, said he, it will be hardly kept: and this he 162 To the like inconveniences (and much greater in, its kind; temporal things be- ing more easily ordered than spirtual, and having secular authority, great ad- vantages of power and wealth, to aid itself) must the church be obnoxious, if it were subjected to the government of one sovereign, unto whom the mainte- nance of faith, the protection of discipline, the determination of controversies, the revision of judgments, the discussion and final decision of causes upon appeal, the suppression of disorders and factions, the inspection over all governors, the correc- tion of misdemeanours, the constitution, relaxation, and abolition of laws, the re- solution of all matters concerning re- ligion and the public state, in all coun- tries must be referred.. Τίς πρὸς ταῦτα ἱπανός ; What shoulders can bear such ἃ charge without perpetual miracle? (and yet we do not find that the pope hath any promise of miraculous assistance, nor in his demeanour doth appear any mark thereof.) What mind would not the care of so many affairs utterly distract and overwhelm? who could find time to cast a glance on each of so numberless particulars? What sagacity of wit, what variety of learning, what penetrancy of judgment, what strength of memory, what indefatigable vigour of industry, what abundance of experience, would suffice, for enabling one man to weigh exactly all the controversies of faith and cases of discipline perpetu- ally starting up in so many regions ?* What reach of skill and ability would serve for accommodation of laws to the different humours and fahsions of so many nations? Shall a decrepit old man, in the decay of his age, parts, vigour (such as popes usually are), un- dertake this? May we not say to him, as Jethro did to Moses, Ultra vires tuas est negotium; The thing thou doest is not good: thou wilt surely wear away, both thou and this people that is with himself observed, not in word only, but in deed : for when he might have gotten more from the barbarous nations, yet he would not. Ipsa nocet moles, utinam remeare liceret Ad veteres fines, et moenia pauperis anci, ὅσα. Claud. de Bello Gildon. * The synod of Basil doth well describe the duty of a pope; but it is infinitely hard to practise it in any measare.—(Conc. Bas. sess. xxiii. p. 64, &c.——) A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. thee: for this thing is too heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform i thyself alone.* If the care of a small diocese hath made the most able and industrious bish- ops (who had a conscience and sense of their duty) to groan under its weight, how insupportable must such ἃ. charge be ! ᾿ The care of his own particular church, if he would act the part of a bishop in- deed, would sufficiently take up the pope ; especially in some times; whenas Pope Alexander saith, ‘Ut intestina nostree specialis ecclesize negotia vix pos- semus yentilare, nedum longinqua ad plenum extricare.””" If it be said that St. Paul testifieth of himself, that he had a care of all the churches incumbent on him ἢ 1 answer, that he (and other apostles had the like) questionless had a pious solicitude for the welfare of all Christians, especially of the churches which he had founded, being vigilant for occasions to edify them. But what is this, to bearing the charge of a standing government over all the churches diffused through the world? That care of a few churches then was burdensome to him: what is the charge of so many now ; to one sel- dom endowed with such apostolical graces and gifts as St. Paul was ἢ How weak must the influence of such an authority be upon the circumferential parts of its cecumenical sphere ! How must the outward branches of the churches faint and fade for want of sap from the root of discipline, which must be conveyed through so many ob- structions to such a distance ! How discomposed must things be in each country for want of seasonable re- solution, hanging in suspense till informa- tion do travel to Rome, and determina- tion come back thence !* * Tanta me occupationum onera deprimunt, ut ad superna animus nullatenus erigatur, ὅζα. —Greg. 1. lib. i. Ep. 7, 25, 5. Such a weight of employment presses me down, that my mind can by no means be raised to things above. Si administratio illius temporis mare fuit, quid de presenti papatu dicendum erit ?— Calv. Inst. iv. cap. 7,22. If the ordering of ι Exod xviii. 17, 18. ἃ Ῥ᾽ Alex 11. (Epist. ad Ger. Rhem. Bin. p. 284.) τ 2 Cor, xi 28. How difficult, how impossible will it be for him there to receive faithful in- formation or competent testimony, where- upon to ground just decisions of causes! How will it be in the power thence of any malicious and cunning person to raise trouble against innocent persons! for any like person to decline the due correction laid on him, by transferring the cause from home to such a distance! How much cost, how much trouble, how much hazard, must parties concern- ed be at to fetch light and justice thence ! ᾿ Put case a heresy, ἃ schism, a doubt or debate of great moment, should arise in China: how should the gentlemen in Italy proceed to confute that heresy, to quash that schism, to satisfy that doubt, to determine that cause! how long must it be ere he can have notice thereof! to how many cross accidents of weather and way must the transmitting of inform- ation be subject! how difficult will it prove, to get a clear and sure knowledge concerning the state of things ! How hard will it be to get the opposite parties to appear, so as to confront testi- monies and probations requisite to a fair and just decision! how shall witnesses of infirm sex or age ramble so far! how easily will some of them prepossess and abuse him with false suggestions and mis- representations of the case! how slip- pery therefore will the result be, and how prone he to award a wrongful sen- fence !* - How tedious, how expensive, how troublesome, how vexatious, how hazard- ous, must this course be to all parties !7 Certainly causes must needs proceed slowly, and depend long; and'in the end the resolution of them must be very un- certain. What temptation will it be for any one (how justly soever corrected by his im- mediate superiors) to complain; hoping thereby to. escape, to disguise the truth, affairs in those times was a boundless sea, what shall we say of the present papacy ? * Nunquid mirandum est de tam longinquis ferris episcopos tuos tibi narrare impune quod volunt?—Ang. contra Crescon. iii. 31. What marvel if the bishops from so remote countries ae δ what they please without check or con- tro ¢ De lungas vias luengas mentiras.—Hisp. Prov. Syn. Basil. sess. xxxi. p. 86. i A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 163 &c. who being condemned will not ap- peal to one ata distance, hoping by false suggestions to delude him ? This necessarily will destroy all disci- pline, and induce impunity or frustration of justice.” Certainly much more convenient and equal it should be, that there should be near at hand a sovereign power, fully ca- pable, expeditely and seasonably to com- pose differences, to decide causes, to re- solve doubts, to settle things, without more stir and trouble. Very equal it is, that laws should rath- ‘er be framed, interpreted, and executed in every country, with accommodation to the tempers of the people, to the circum- stances of things, to the civil state there, by persons acquainted with those partic- ulars, than by strangers ignorant of them, and apt to mistake about them. How often will the pope be imposed upon, as he was in the case of Basilides, of whom St. Cyprian saith, “" Going to Rome he deceived our colleague Ste- phen, being placed at distance, and igno- rant of the fact, and concealed truth, as- piring to be unjustly restored to the bish- opric, from which he was justly remov- δ. Ὁ As he was inthe case of Marcellus, who gulled Pope Julius by fair profes- sions, as St. Basil doth often complain. As he was in aiding that versatile and troublesome bishop, Eustathius of Sebas- tla, to the recovery of his bishopric.* As he was in rejecting “the man of God, and most admirable bishop, Mele- tius;"t and admitting scandalous reports about him, which the same saint doth of- ten resent; blaming sometimes the falla- cious misinformation, sometimes the wil- ful presumption, negligence, pride of the Roman church in the case.|| * Romam pergens Stephanum collegam nostrum longe positum, et gest rei, ac tacite veritatis ignarum fefellit ; ut exambiret reponi 856 injuste in episcopatum, de quo fuerat juste depositus.—Cypr. Ep. 67. T ᾿Εκεῖνα ποιοῦσι viv, ἃ πρότερον ἐπὶ Μαρκέλλῳ, πρὸς μὲν τὴν ἀλήθειαν αὐτοῖς ἀπαγγέλλοντας ῥιλονει- κήσαντες͵ X&c.—Basil Ep. 10. $ Τοῦ ἀνθρώπου τοῦ Θεοῦ Μελετίου τὸν θαυμασιώτατον ἐπίσκοπον τῆς ἀληθινῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκ- κλησίας Μελέτιον Bas. Ep. 349. ! Οἱ μὲν γὰρ ἀγνοοῦσι παντελῶς τὰ ἐνταῦθα’ of δὲ κ ὶ δοκοῦντες εἰδέναι φιλονεικότερον μᾶλλον ἣ ἀληθέσ- τ Vide Bern. Ep. 178, de Consid. * Bas. Ep. 73, 74. 164 As he was in the case of Pelagius and Celestius, who did cajole Pope Zosimus to acquit them, to condemn Eros and Lazarus their accusers, to reprove the African bishops for prosecuting them.” How many proceedings should we have like to that of Pope Zosimus I. con- cerning that scandalous priest, Apiarius ; whom, being for grievous crimes excom- municated by his bishop, that pope did admit to communion, and undertake to patronise ; but was baffled in his enter- prise.* This hath been the sense of the Fa- thers in the case. St. Cyprian therefore saith, that ‘‘ see- ing it was a general statute among the bishops, and that it was both equal and just that every one’s cause should be heard there, where the crime was com- mitted; and that each pastor had a por- tion of the flock allotted to him, which he should rule and govern, being to ren- der unto the Lord an account of his do- ing.””” St. Chrysostom thought it ‘improper that one out of Egypt should administer justice to personsin Thrace.”+ (And why not, as well as one out of Italy ?) τερον αὐτοῖς éinyotvrat.—Ibid. Some are alto- gether ignorant of what is here done; others, that think they know them, declare them unto us more contentiously than truly. ᾿Ελύπει ἡμας λέγων τοῖς ᾿Αρειομανίταις συγκαταριθμεῖσθαι τοὺς θεοφιλεστάτους ἀδελφοὺς ἡμῶν ἹΜελέτιον καὶ Ἐϊὐσέ- 6ov.— Epist. 321, ad Pet. Alex. He grieved ῃξ when he said, that our godly brethren, Meleti- us and Eusebius, were reckoned among the Arians. Ilaja βόηθεια ἡμῖν τῆς δυτικῆς ὀφρύος, of τόγε ἀληθὲς he ἴσασιν, οὔτε μαθεῖν ἀνέχονται ;— Bas. Ep. 10. What help can we have from the pride of the Africans, who neither know the truth, nor endure to learn it ? * Deinde quod inter tantam hominum mul- titudinem adeo pauci sunt episcopi, et ample singulorum parochie, ut in subjectis plebibus curam episcopalis officii nullatenus exequi, aut rite administrare valeant.—P. Greg. VII. Ep. ii. 73. And then because in so great a rnulti- tude of people there are so few bishops, and every one’s diocese very large, that they are in no wise able to execute or rightly perform the charge of thejepiscopal office among the people over whom they are set, + id: γὰρ ἀκόλουθον ἦν τὸν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου τοῖς ἐν Θράκῃ duxafew.—Chrys. Ep. 102. (ad P. Ἰπηοο. 1.) El yap τοῦτο κρατήσειε τὸ ἔθος, καὶ ἐξὸν γένοιτο τοῖς θουλομένοις, εἰς ἀλλοτρίας ἀπιέναι παροικίας ἐκ τοσούτων διαστημάτων, καὶ ἐκδάλλειν οὖς ἂν ἐθέλοι τις, ἴστε ὅτι πάντα οἰχήσεται, &c. For if this y Pf. Zos. 1. Ep. 3, 4. * Cypr. Ep. lv. (p. 116.) A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. The African synod thought ‘the Ni- cene Fathers had provided most prudent- ly and most justly that all affairs should be finally determined there where they did arise.’’* | They thought “a transmarine judg- ment could not be firm,”’ because ‘the necessary persons for testimony, for the infirmity of sex or age, or for many oth- er infirmities, could not be brought thith- ert Pope Leo himself saw how dilatory this course would be; and that “ long- inquity of region doth cause the examin- ation of truth to become over dilato- γγ.᾽}} 4 Pope Liberius for such reasons did re- quest Constantius, that Athanasius’s cause should be tried at Alexandria ; where— (saith he||) ‘* he that is accused, and the accusers are, and the defender of them ; and so we may, upon examination had, agree in our sentence about them.” Therefore divers ancient canons of sy- nods did prohibit that any causes should be removed out of the bounds of prov- inces or dioceses; as otherwhere we show.§ custom prevail, and if they that will may goto other men’s dioceses at so great a distance and eject whom any man pleases, know that all will go to wrack, d&c. ‘ * Decreta Nicena sive inferioris gradus cler- icOs, Sive ipsOS episcopos suis metropolitanis apertissime commiserunt ; prudentissime enim justissimeque viderunt (providerunt) queecun- que negotia in suis locis, ubi orsa sunt, finien- da.— Ep.» Cone. Afric. ad P. Celest. 1. (in fine Cod. Afric.) vel apud Dion. Exig. + Aut quomodo ipsum transmarinum judici- um ratum erit, ad quod testium necessariz persone vel propter sexus, vel propter senectu- tis infirmitatem, vel multis aliis impedimentis adduci non poterunt.—Jbid. { Ne ergo (quod inter longinquas regiones aceidere solet) in nimias dilationes tender nt veritatis examina P. Leo 1. Ep. 34. || Tore ἐπὶ τὴν ᾿Αλεξανδρέων of πάντες ἀπαντέσ- avres ἕνθα ὃ ἐγκαλούμενος καὶ ol ἐγκαλοῦντές εἰσι, καὶ ὃ ἀντιποιούμενος αὐτῶν, ἐξετάσαντες τὰ περὶ αὐτῶν cuprepteve yevopev.— Theod. ii. 16. § Inoleverunt autem hactenus intolerabilium vexationum abusus permulti, dum nimium fre- quenter a remotissimis etiam partibus ad Ro- manam curiam, et interdum pro parvis et mi- nutis rebus ae negotiis quamplurimi citari ac evocari consueverunt, &c.—Vide Conc. Bus, sess. xxxi. (p. 86.) But hitherto very many intolerable vexatious abuses have prevailed, while too often men have been used to be cited and called out even from the remotest parts to the court of Rome, and sometimes for slight and trivial businesses and occasions. i A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 2. Such an authority, as this pretence claimeth, must necessarily (if not with- held by continuai miracle) throw the church into sad bondage. All the world must become slaves to one city, its wealth must be derived thither, its quiet must depend on it. For it (not being re- strained within any bounds of place or time, having no check upon it of equal or co-ordinate power, standing upon di- vine institution, and therefore immutably settled) must of its own nature become absolute and unlimited.* Let it be, however, of right limited by divine laws or human canons, yet will it be continually encrvaching and stretch- ing its power until it grows enormous and boundless. It will not endure to be pinched by any restraint. It will draw to itself the collation of all prefer- ments, &c.* It will assume all things to itself, tram- pling down all opposite claims of right and liberty; so that neither pastor nor people shall enjoy or do any thing other- wise than in dependence on it, and at its pleasure. It will be always forging new prerog- atives, and interpreting all things in fa- vour of them, and enacting sanctions to establish them; which none must pre- sume to contest.7 It will draw to itself the disposal of all places; the exaction of goods. All princes must become his ministers, and executors of his decrees.i {t will mount above all law and rule; not only challenging to be uncontrollable and unaccountabie, but not enduring any reproof of its proceedings, or contradic- tion of its dictates: a blind faith must be yielded to all its assertions as infallibly * Vide Hist. Conc. Trid. p.61. Privilegia istius sedis perpetua sunt, divinitus radicata, atque plantata, impingi possunt, transferri non unt; trahi possunt, evelli non possunt.— . Nich. I. ad Mich. Imp. The privileges of this see are perpetual, rooted, and founded upon divine authority ; they may be dashed against, they cannot be removed; they may be drawn aside, they cannot be plucked up. + Licet apostolica prerogativa possimus de qualibet ecclesia clericum ordinare.—P. Steph. apud Grat. Caus. 9, qu. iii. cap. 20. Though pd our apostolical prerogative we may ordaina man of any church. ¢ Hist. Conc. Trid. p. 60, so they pretend.— Conc. Later. 4. (sub Innoc. 111.) * Vide Conc. Bas. sess. xxxi. p. 87. 165 true; and a blind obedience to all its de- crees as unquestionably holy : whosoev- er shall any wise cross it in word or deed, shall certainly be discountenanced, con- demned, ejected from the church;* so that the most absolute tyranny that can be imagined will ensue: all the world hath groaned and heavily complained of their exactions, particularly our poor na- tion; it would raise indignation in any man to read the complaints.® This is consequent on such a pretence, according to the very nature of things; and so in experience it hath happened.? For, It is evident, that the papacy hath de- voured all the privileges and rights of all orders in the church, either granted by God, or established in the ancient ca- nons.i The royalties of Peter are become immense ; and, consistently to his prac- tice, the pope doth allow men to tell him to his face, ‘that all power in heaven and in earth is given unto him.” It belongeth tohim ‘to judge of the whole church.”’|| He hath “a plenitude” (as he calleth it) “of power,” by which he can in- fringe any law, or do any thing that he pleaseth.§ It is the tenor of his bulls, ** that who- ever rashly dareth to thwart his will shall incur the indignation of Almighty God, * Sitque alienus a divinis et pontificalibus officiis, qui noluit preceptis apostolicis obtem- perare.—Greg. IV. (Dist. xix. cap. 5.) And let him have nothing at all to do with divine and pontifical offices, who would not obey apos- tolical precepts. Oportet autem gladium esse sub gladio, et temporalem authoritatem spiri- tuali subjici potestati—Bonif. Vill. Extrav. Com. i. 8,1. But there must bea sword under a sword, and temporal authority subject to spir- itual. + chesia piu officio di pontefici aggiur- gere con |’armi, et col sorgue de Christian, &e. Guice. xi. p. 858. t Quid hodie erant episcopi, nisi umbra que- dam? quid plus eis restabat quam baculus et mitra? &c.—An. Sylv. de Gesiis. Syn. Bas. lid. i. What were bishops now but a kind of shadows? what had they left more than a staff and amitre? &c. || Cone. Lat. v. sess. 11, p. 129. De omni ecclesia jus habet judicandi.—(P. Gelas. Grat. Caus. ix. q. 3, cap. 18.) ᾧ Secundum plenitudinem potestatis de jure ssumus supra jus dispensare.—Greg. Deeret. ib. iii. tit. 8, cap. 4. ® Vide Mat. νυ. A 166 and” (as if that were not enough) “οὗ St. Peter and St. Paul also.” ΝΟ man must presume to tax his faults, or to judge of his judgment.”* “It is idolatry to disobey his com- mands,” against their own sovereign lord.t There are who dare in plain terms call him omnipotent, and who ascribe infinite power to him. And that he is infallible is the most common and plausi- ble opinion: so that at Rome the ‘contra- ry ‘“‘is erroneous, and within an inch of being heretical.”’i We are now told, that “if the pope should err by enjoining vices or forbidding virtues, the church should be bound to believe vices to be good, and virtues evil, unless it would sin against conscience.” || The greatest princes must stoop to his will; otherwise he hath power to cashier and depose them. Now what greater inconvenience, what more horrible iniquity can there be, than that all God’s people (that /ree people, who are called to freedom’) should be subject to so intolerable a yoke and mise- rable a slavery ? That tyranny soon had crept into the Roman church, Socrates telleth us.§ They have rendered true that definition of Scioppius: ‘the church is a stall, * Hujus culpas isthic redarguere presumit mortalium nullus.—Grat. Dist. xl. cap. 6. (Si papa—) Neque cuiquam licere de ejus judi- care judicio.—Caus. ix. qu 3, cap. 10: + Cum enim obedire apostolice sedi su- perbe contemnunt, scelus idololatriz, teste Sa- muele, incurrunt.—Greg. 171]. Ep. iv. 2. Nulli fas est vel velle, velposse transgredi apostolicze sedis precepta—Greg. 1V. apud Grat. Dist. xix.cap.5. No man may nor can transgress the commands of the apostolic see. ab omnibus quicquid statuit, quicquid ordinat, perpetuo et irrefragabiliter observandum est.— Thid. cap 4. (P. Steph.) -—— Whatever he de- crees, whatever he ordains, must always and inviolably be observed by all. ¢ Erronea, et hxresi proxima.—Bell. de P. iv. 2 || Si autem papa erraret precipiendo vitia, vel prohibendo virtutes, teneretur ecclesia cre- dere vitia esse bona, et virtutes malas, nisi vel- let contra conscientiam peccare.-— Bell. de Pont. iv. 5. § Papa occupavit omnia jura inferiorum ec- clesiarum, ita quod inferiores preelati sunt pro nihilo—Card. Zab. de Sch.Innoc. VII, p. 560, The pope hath invaded all the rights of inferior churches, so that all inferior prelates are noth- ing set by. Φ Gal. v. 1, 13; 1 Pet. ii. 16. ora herd, or multitude of beasts, or 85565. ὃ “ They bridle us, they harness us, they spur us, they lay yokes and laws upon us.”’t The greatest tyranny that ever was in- vented in the world is the pretence of in- fallibility : for Dionysius and Phalaris did leave the mind free (pretending only to dispose of body and goods according to their will:) but the pope, not content to make us do and say what he pleaseth, will have us also to think so; denounc- ing his imprecations and spiritual mena- ces, if we do not. 3. Such an authority will inevitably produce a depravation of Christian doc- trine, by distorting it in accomodation of it to the promoting its designs and inte- rests. It will blend: Christianity with worldly notions and policies. It certainly will introduce new doc- trines, and interpret the old ones so as may serve to the advancement of the power, reputation, pomp, wealth, and pleasure, of those who manage it, and of their dependents. That which is called καπηλεύειν τὸν λόγον τοῦ Θεοῦ," to make a trade of reli- gion will be the great work of the teach- ers of the church. It will turn all di- vines into mercenary, slavish, designing fiatterers.t This we see come to pass, Christianity by the papal influence being from its original simplicity transformed into quite another thing than it was? froma divine philosophy designed to improve the rea- son, to moderate the passions, to correct the manners of men, to prepare men for conversation with God and angels, ,mod- elled toa system of politic devices (of notions, of precepts, of rights), serving to exalt and enrich the pope, with his court and adherents, clients and vassals. || What doctrine of Christian theology, * Ecclesia est mandra sive grex aut multi- tudo jumentorum sive asinorum.— Eccl. cap, 47. + Illi nos franant, nos lore alligant, nos stimulant, nobis jugum et onus imponunt,— Ibid. : t 1 Tim. vi. 5; Nopegsvrwv πορισμὸν εἶναι τὴν εὐσέθειαν. Supposing that gain is godliness. Ἔν προφάσει rreovetias,—1 Thess. ii. 5. A cloke of covetousness ; κυδεία. Eph. iv. 14. || Pasce, id est, regio more impera. duos gladios. Oravine deficeret. i.e. ruleas a king. Behold two swords. 4 2 Cor. ii, 17. Ecce Feed, ὰ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ; . oie » lee ee = : A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. as it is interpreted by their schools, hath not a direct aspect, or doth not squint that way? especially according to the opinions passant and in vogue among them. To pass over those concerning the pope (his universal pastorship, judgeship in controversies, power to call councils, presidency in them,superiority over them ; right to confirm or annul them; his in- fallibility ; his double sword, and domin- ion (direct or indirect) over princes; his dispensing in laws, in oaths, in vows, in matrimonial cdses, with all other the monstrous prerogatives, which the sound doctors of Rome, with encouragement of that chair, do teach.) What doth the doctrine concerning the exempting of the clergy from secular ju- risdiction, and immunity of their goods from taxes, signify, but their entire de- pendence on the pope, and their being closely tied to his interests ? What is the exemption of monastical places from the jurisdiction of bishops, but listing so mang soldiers and adyo- cates to defend and advance the papal empire ? What meaneth the doctrine concern- ing that middle region of souls, or clois- ter of purgatory, whereof the pope hold- eth the keys; opening and shutting it at his pleasure, by dispensation of pardons and indulgences; but that he must be master of the people’s condition, and of their purse ? What meaneth the treasure of merits and supererogatory works, whereof he is the steward, but a way of driving a trade, and drawing money from simple people to his treasury ? Whither doth the entangling of folks in perpetual vows tend, but to assure them in a slavish dependence on their in- terests, eternally, without evasion or rem- edy ; except by favourable dispensation from the pope ? Why is the opus operatum in sacra- ments taught to confer grace, but to breed a high opinion of the priest, and all he doth ? Whence did the monstrous doctrine of transubstantiation (urged with so furious zeal) issue, but from design to magnify the credit of those, who by saying of a few words can make our God and Sa- viour ὃ and withal to exercise a notable 7 167 instance of their power over men, in making them to renounce their reason and senses ἢ Whither doth tend the doctrine con- cerning the mass being a propitiatory sac- rifice for the dead, but to engage men to leave in their wills good sums to offer in their behalf? Why is the cup withholden from the laity, but to lay it low by so notable a distinction, in the principal mystery of our religion, from the priesthood ? Why is saying private mass (or cele- brating the communion in solitude) al- lowed, but because priests are paid for it, and live by it ? At what doth the doctrine concerning the necessity of auricular confession aim, but that thereby the priests may have a mighty awe on the consciences of all pecple, may dive into their secrets, may manage their lives as they please ? And what doth a like necessary par- ticular absolution intend, but to set the priest in a lofty state of authority above the people, as a judge of his condition and dispenser of his salvation ? Why do they equal ecclesiastical tra- ditions with scripture, but that on the pretence of them they may obtrude whatever doctrines advantageous to their designs ? What drift hath the doctrine concern- ing the infallibility of churches or coun- cils, but that, when opportunity doth in- vite, he may calla company of bishops together to establish what he liketh, which ever after must pass for certain truth, to be contradicted by none ; so en- slaving the minds of all men to his dic- tates, which always suit to his interest. What doth the prohibition of holy scripture drive at, but a monopoly of knowledge to themselves, or a detaining of people in ignorance of truth and du- ty; so that they must be forced τὸ rely on them for direction, must believe all they say, and blindly submit to their dic- tates; being disabled to detect their er- rors, or contest their opinions ὃ Why must the sacraments be celebrat- ed, and public devotions exercised, in an unknown tongue, but that the priests may seem to have a peculiar interest in them, and ability for them ? Why must the priesthood be so indis- pensably forbidden marriage, but that i 168 may be wholly untacked from the state, and rest addicted to him, and governable by him; that the persons and wealth of priests may be purely at bis devotion ? To what end is the clogging religion by multiplication of ceremonies and for- malities, but to amuse the people, and maintain in them a blind reverence ἴο- ward the interpreters of the dark mys- teries couched in them ;° and by seem- ing toencourage an exterior show of piety (or form of godliness) to gain re- putation and advantage, whereby they might oppress the interior virtue and reality of it, as the Scribes and Pharisees did, although with less designs ? Why is the veneration of images and relics, the credence of miracles and le- gends, the undertaking of pilgrimages and voyages to Rome, and other places, more holy than ordinary; sprinklings of holy water, consecrations of baubles (with innumerable foppish knacks and trinkets), so cherished, but to keep the people in a slavish credulity and dotage, apt to be led by them whither they please, by any sleeveless pretence, and in the mean while to pick various gains from them by such trade ? What do all such things mean, but ob- scuring the native simplicity of Chris- tianity, whereas it being represented in- telligible to all men, would derogate from that high admiration, which these men pretend to from their peculiar and profound wisdom? And what would men spend for these toys, if they under- stood they might be good Christians, and get to heaven without them ? What doth all that pomp of religion serve for, but for ostentation of the digni- ty of those who administer it? It may be pretended for the honour of religion, but it really conduceth to the glory of the priesthood, who shine in those pa- geantries. Why is monkery (although so very different from that which was in the ancient times) so cried up as a superlative state of perfection, but that it filleth all places with swarms of lusty people, who are vowed servants to him, and have little else to do but to advance that au- thority by which they subsist in that dronish way of life ? © Vide Sleid. p. 673. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. In fine, perusing the controversies of Bellarmine, or any other champion of Romanism, do but consider the nature and scope of each doctrine maintained by them; and you may easily discern that scarce any of them but doth tend to advance the interest of the pope, or of his sworn vassals. Whereas, indeed, our Lord had never any such design, to set up a sort of men in such distance above their brethren; to perk over them, and suck them of their goods by tricks ; it only did charge people to allow their pastors a competent maintenance for a sober life, with a mod- erate respect, as was needful for the com- mon benefit of God’s people; ‘whom they were, with humility and meekness, to instruct and guide in the plain and simple way of piety. This is a grievous inconvenience; there being nothing wherein the church is more concerned, than in the preservation of its doctrine pure and incorrupt from the leaven of hurtful errors, influential on practice. 4. The errors in doctrine, and miscar- riages in practice, which this authority in favour to itself would introduce, would be established immoveably, to the irre- coverable oppression of truth and piety ; any reformation becoming impossible while it standeth, orso far as it shall be able to oppose and obstruct it. While particular churches do retain their liberty, and pastors their original co-ordination in any measure, if any church or bishop shall offer to broach any novel doctrine or practice of bad import, the others may endeavour to stop the settlement or progress of them; each church at least may keep itself sound from contagion. But when all churches and bishops are reduced into subjection to one head, supported by the guards of his authority, who will dare to contest, or be able to withstand, what he shall say or do? It will then be deemed high presumption, contumacy, rebellion, to dissent from his determinations, how false soever, or tax the practices countenanced by him, how- ever irregular and culpable. He will assume to himself the priv- ilige not to be crossed in any thing; and soon will claim ““ infallibility, the mother of incorrigibility.” A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. No error can be so palpable which that authority will not protect and shroud from confutation ; no practice so enorm- ous, which it will not palliate, and guard from reproof. There will be legions of mercenary tongues to speak, and stipendiary pens to write, in defence of its doctrines and practices ; so that whoever will under- take to oppose it shall be voted down and over-whelmed with noise, and shall incur all the discouragement and per- secution imaginable. So poor truth will become utterly defenceless, wretched virtue destitute of succour or patronage. This is so in speculation, and we see it confirmed by experience: for when, from, the influence of this power (as Pope Adrian VI. did ingenuously con- fess) an apparent degeneracy in doctrine, in discipline, in practice, had seized on Christendom, all the world feeling it, and crying out loudly for reformation, yet how stiffa repugnance did the ad- herents to this interest make thereto ! with what industry and craft did popes endeavour to decline all means of rem- edy !° What will not this party do rather than acknowledge themselves mistaken ΟΥ̓ liable to error?* what palliations, what shifts, do not they use ? what evidence of light do they not outface? 5. The same will induce a general corruption of manners. For the chief clergy, partaking of its growth, and protected by its interest (re- ciprocally supporting it, and being shel- tered by it from any curb or control), will swell into great pride and haughti- ness; will be tempted to scrape and hoard up wealth by rapine, extortion, simony; will come to enjoy ease and sloth; will be immersed in sensuality and luxury, and will consequently neglect their charge. The inferiors will become enamoured and ambitious of dignity, and will use all means and arts to attain it.t * Centum gravamina. + Vide ipsum Greg. VII. Ep. i. 42; ii. 45. See the description of them in 8. Bernard. in Cant. Serm. 33 : Guicciard.in Suppl. f Sleid. lib. iv. p. 82; lib. xii. p. 322; Hist. — Trid. p. 24; vide Riv. in Castig. Nol. p. Vor. ΠῚ. 22 ΠΝ 169 Thence emulation, discord, sycophant- ry will spring. Thence all ecclesiastical offices will become venal ; to be purchased by bribes, flattery, favour. The higher ranks will become fastu- ous, supercilious, and domineering. The lower will basely crouch, cog. What then must the people be, the guides being such ? Were such guides like to edify the people by their doctrine? Were they not like to damnify them by their ex- ample 7 That thus it hath happened, experi- ence doth shew, and history doth abund- antly testify. This was soon observed by a pagan historian, Am. Marcellin. By St. Basil, ὄφρυς δυτική, What mischief this, what scandal to religion, what detriment to the church, what ruins of souls it produceth, is vis- ible. The descriptions of Rome and of that church, by Mantuan, do in a lively man- ner represent the great degeneracy and corruptions of it. 6. This authority, as it would induce corruption of manners, so it would per- petuate it; and render the state of things incorrigible. For this head of the church, and the supporters of his authority, will often need reformation, but never will endure it That will happen of any pope, which the Fathers of Basil complained of in Pope Eugenius.* If the pope would (as Pope Adrian VI.), yet he will not be able to reform ; the interests of his dependents crossing it. If there hath happened a good pope, who desired to reform ; yet he hath been ridiculous when he endeavoured it; and * Nulla unquam monitione, nulla ex- hortatione induci jam largo tempore potuit, ut aliquam errorum emendationem Christo pla- centem, aut notissimorum abusuum correctio- nem in ecclesia sancta Dei efficere satageret.— Conc. Bas. sess, xxiii. (p. 76), sess. XXXi. p. 89. He could never be brought in this long time by any advice or exhortation, seriously to Set upon any amendment of errors or correc- tion of the most gross abuses in the holy church of God. * Alv. Pelag. in Riv. Castig. N. cap. 8 ; vide Bern. Convers. S. Paul. Serm, i. p. 87. * Vide Conc. Trid. p. 22. 170 found it impossible to reform even a few particulars in his own house, the in- corrigible Roman court. The nature and pretended foundation of this spiritual authority doth encourage it with insuperable obstinacy to withstand all reformation: for whereas, if any temporal power doth grow intolerable, God’s providence by wars and revolu- tions of state may dispense a redress, they have prevented this by supposing that in this case God hath tied his own hands; this authority being immoveably fixed in the same hands, from which no revolution can take it: whence from its exorbitances there can be no rescue or relief. 7. This authority will spoil him in whom it is seated; corrupting his mind and manners; rendering him a scandal to religion, and ἃ pernicious instrument of wickedness, by the influence of his example.* To this an uncontrollable power (bri- dled with no restraint) and impunity doth naturally tend, and accordingly hath it been How many notorious reprobates, mon- sters of wickedness, have been in that See !7 If we survey the lives of popes, writ- ten by historians most indifferent, or (as most have been) partial in favour to them, we shall find, at first good ones, martyrs, confessors, saints; but after this exorbitant power had grown, how few good ones! how many extremely bad! The first popes before Constantine were holy men: the next were tolerable, while the papacy kept within bounds of modesty ; but when they having shaken off their master, and renounced allegi- * It will certainly render him a tyrant, accord- ing to the definition of Aristotle.—Pol. iv. 10. Cui plus licet quam par est, plus vult quam li- cet. Unde sicut languescente capite, reliqauum postea corpus morbus invadat.—Conc. Bas. sess. xxiii. (p. 64.) Whence it comes to pass, that if the head be sick, the rest of the body after- ward grows diseased— Vide Conc. Bas. p. 87; Conc. Const. p. 1110. + Vide Dist. xl. cap. 6, (hujus culpas, etsi.) —Vide Alv. Pelag. apud Riv. Cath. Orth. p 141. Baron. Pope Marcellus II. doubted wheth- er a pope could be saved.— Thuan. \ib. xv. (p. 566.) From John VIII. to Leo IX. what a rabble of rake-hells and sots did sit in that chair!—Machiavel, Hist. lib. xvi. p. 1271; Ba- yon. ann. 912, ὁ 8. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ance to the emperor (i. 6. after Gregory — i ‘ II.), few tolerable ; generally they were — either rake-hells, or intolerably arrogant, insolent, turbulent, and ravenous. Bellarmine and Baronius do bob off this, by telling us, that hence the provi- dence of God is most apparent.* But do they call this preserving the church ; the permission of it to continue so long in such a condition, under the prevalence of such mischiefs? When hath God deserted any people, if not then when such impiety more than pagan doth reign in it δὲ But what in the meantime became of those souls which by this means were ruined ? what amends for the vast dam- age which religion sustained? for the introducing so pernicious customs hardly to be extirpated ἢ To what a pass of shameless wicked- ness must things have come, when such men as Alexander VI., having visibly such an impure brood, should be placed in this chair ! Even after the reformation began to curb their impudence, and render them more wary, yet had they the face to set Paul the Third there. How unfit must such men be, to be the guides of all Christendom ; to breath oracles of truth, to enact laws of sancti- ty! How improper were those vessels of Satan to be organs of that holy spirit of discipline, which will flee deceit, and re- move from thoughts that are without un- derstanding, and will not abide where unrighteousness cometh in fi It will engage the pope to make the ecclesiastical authority and engine of ad- vancing the temporal concerns of his * Baron. ann. 897. § 5.—It was said of Ves- pasian, Solus imperantium melior so apt is power to corrupt men. Solus omnium ante se principum in melius mutatus est.—Tac. Hist. i. (p. 451.) + How vain is that which Pope Gregory VII. citeth out of Pope Symmachus, B. Petrus pe- rennem meritorum dotem cum hereditate in- nocentiz misit ad posteros.—Greg. VII. Ep. viii, 21. + Quod Romanus pontifex, si canonice fuerit ordinatus, meritis B. Petri indubitanter efficitur sanctus; was one of Pope Gregory VII.’s dic- tates. That the Roman pontiff, if canonically elected, is undoubtedly made holy by the mer- its of blessed Peter. | Wisd. i. δ. , ee ee A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMIACY. own relations (his sons, his nephews.) What indeed is the popedom now, but a ladder for a family to mount unto great estate ?/ What is it, but introducing an old man into a place, by advantage whereof a family must make hay while the sun shines ?* 8. This pretence, upon divers obvious accounts, is apt to create great mischief in the world, to the disturbance of civil societies, and destruction or debilitation of temporal authority, which is certainly God’s ordinance, and necessary to the well-being of mankind; so that suppos- ing it, we may in vain pray for kings, and all that are in authority ; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.* For suppose the two powers (spiritual and temporal) to be co-ordinate, and in- dependent each of other; then must all Christians be put into that perplexed state of repugnant and incompatible obli- gations, concerning which our Lord saith, No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other ; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.' They will often draw several ways, and clash in their designs, in their laws, in their decisions ; one willing and com- manding that which the other disliketh and prohibiteth. It will be impossible by any certain bounds to distinguish their jurisdiction, so as to prevent contest between them ;™ all temporal matters being in some re- spects spiritual (as being referrible to spiritual ends, and in some manner allied to religion), and all spiritual things be- coming temporal, as they conduce to the secular peace and prosperity of states : there is nothing which each of these powers will not hook within the verge of * —___Cum non ob religionem, et Dei cultum appetere pontificatum nostri sacerdotes videan- tur, sed ut fratrum vel nepotum, vel familia- rium ingluviem et avaritiam expleant.—Plat. in Joh. XVI. (p. 298.) Whereas our priests Seem to desire the popedom, not for religion and the worship of God, but that they may fill the ravening appetite and covetousness of their brethren, or nephews, or familiars. ) Vide Guicciard. Machiav. Hist. ΕἸ. p. 19; Conc. Bas. (p. 65.) © 1 Tim. ii. 1, 2. ™ Bell. v. 6. (p. 1415.) ' Matt. vi. 24. ~ ὙΜΉΝ 171 its cognizance and jurisdiction; each will claim a right to meddle in all things ; one pretending thereby to further the good of the church, the other to secure the interest of the state: and what end or remedy can there be of the difference hence arising; there being no third pow- er to arbitrate or moderate between them ? Each will prosecute its cause by its advantages ; the one by instruments of temporal power, the other by spiritual arms of censures and curses. And in what a case must the poor peo- ple then be! how distracted in their consiences, how divided in their affec- tions, how discordant in their practices! according as each pretence hath influence upon them, by its different arguments or peculiar advantages. How can any man satisfy himself in performing or refusing obedience. to either? How many (by the intricacy of the point, and contrary pulling) will be withdrawn from yielding due compliance on the one hand or the other! What shalla man do, while one in case of disobedience to his commands doth brandish a sword, the other thunder- eth outa curse against him ; one threaten- eth death, the other excision from the church ; both denounce damnation ἢ What animosities and contentions, what discomposures and confusions must this constitution of things breed in every place! and how cana kingdom so di- vided in itself stand, or not come into desolation 2" Such an advantage infallibly will make popes affect to invade the temporal pow- er. It was the reason which Pope Paschal alleged against Henry IV. because he did ecclesia regnum auferre.° It is indeed impossible that a co-ordina- tion of these powers should subsist ; for each will be continually encroaching on the other ; each for its own defence and support will continually be struggling and clambering to get above the other: there will never be any quiet, tll one come to subside and truckle under the other; whereby the sovereignty of the one or the other will be destroved. Each of them soon will come to claim " Matt. xii. 25. * P. Pasch. II. Ep. 7. 172 a supremacy in all causes, and the power of both swords ; and one side will carry it. It is indeed necessary, that men fora time continuing possessed with a rev- erence to the ecclesiastical authority, as independent and uncontrollable, it should at last overthrow the temporal, by reason of its great advantages above it; for, The spiritual power doth pretend an establishment purely divine ; which can- not by any accidents undergo any change, diminutions, or translation, to which temporal dominions are subject: its power therefore being perpetual, ir- reversible, depending immediately of God, can hardly be checked, can never be conquered. id It ighteth with tongues and pens, which are the most perilous weapons. It can never be disarmed, fighting with Weapons that cannot be taken away, or deprived of their edge and vigour. It worketh by most powerful consider- ations upon the consciences and affec- tions of men, upon pain of damnation, promising heaven, and threatening hell ; which upon some men have an _ infinite sway, upon all men a considerable in- fluence ; and thereby will be too hard for those who only can grant temporal rewards or inflict temporal punishments. It is surely a notable advantage that the pope hath above all princes, that he com- mandeth not only asa prince, but asa guide ; so that whereas we are not other- wise bound to obey the commands of princes, than as they appear concordant with God’s law, we must observe his commands absolutely, as being therefore lawful, because he commandeth them, that involving his assertion of their law- fulness, to which (without further inquiry or scruple) we must submit our under- standing, his words sufficiently author- izing his commands for just. We are not only obliged to obey his commands, but to embrace his doctrines. It hath continual opportunities of con- versing with men ; and thereby can insin- uate and suggest the obligation to obey it, * Vide Mach. Hist. Flor. p. 18. Impeti possunt humanis presumptionibus quae divino sunt judicio constituta, vinei autem quorumli- bet potestate non possunt.—P. Gel. Ep. 8 ; Fe- liz. P. Ep. i. (p. 597.) A TRBATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. with greatest advantage, in secrecy, in the tenderest seasons. It claimeth a power to have its instruc- tion admitted with assent: and will it not instruct them for its own advantage ? All its assertions must be believed—is not this an infinite advantage ? By such advantages the spiritual pow- er (if admitted for such as it pretendeth) will swallow and devour the temporal ; which will be an extreme mischief to the world. ἡ The very pretence doth immediately crop and curtail the natural right of prifices, by exempting great numbers of persons (the participants and dependents of this hierarchy) from subjection to them ; by withdrawing causes from their jurisdiction; by commanding in their territories, and drawing people out of them to their judicatories; by having influence on their opinion ὁ by draining them of wealth, &c.* To this discourse experience abundant: ly doth yield its attestation ;+ for, how often have the popes thwarted princes in the exercise of their power, challenging their laws and administrations as preju- dicial to religion, as contrary to ecclesi- astical liberty "ἢ Bodin (|. 9.) observeth, that if any prince were a heretic (that is, if the pope could pick oceasion to call him so,) or a tyrant (that is, in his opinion), or anywise scandalous, the pope would ex- communicate him; and would not re- ceive him to favour, but upon his ac- knowledging himself a feudatory to the pope: so he drew in most kingdoms to depend on him.? How often have they excommuni- * Non enim volumus aut propter principum potentiam ecclesiasticam minui dignitatem, aut pro ecclesiastica dignitate principum potentiam mutilari.—P. Pasch. 11. Ep. 28, 29. For we will not that either the ecclesiastical dignity should be diminished, by reason of the prince’s power, or that the prince’s power should be curtailed for the eccclesiastical dignity. + Arietes furiosos.—Bell. v. 7. ¢ In vain did St. Bernard (de Consid. 1.), cry, Quid fines alienos invaditis? quid faleem vesiram in allenam messam extenditis? Why do you invade other men’s territories ? why thrust you your sickle into other men’s harvest ? » Vide Tort. T. p. 216; Greg. VII. Ep. i. 7; exii 13, 63. = s=*”" =" +3 as ὼ ] Ω π᾿ ‘ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. cated them, and interdicted their people from entertaining communion with them ! How many commotions, conspiracies, rebellions, and insurrections against princes, have they raised in several countries !* How have they inveigled people from their allegiance! How many massacres and assassinations have they caused ! How have they depressed and vilified the temporal power! Have they not assumed to themselves superiority over all princes? The em- peror himself (the chief of Christian princes) they did call their vassal, ex- acting an oath from them, whereof you have a form in the canon law, and a dec- laration of Pope Clement V. that it is an oath of fealty. Have they not challenged propriety in both swords ; Ecce duo gladii ? How many princes have they pre- tended to depose, and dispossess of their authority !7 Consider the pragmatical sanctions, provisors, compositions, concordats, &c. which princes have been forced to make against them, or with them, to secure their interest. Many good princes have been forced to oppose them, as Henry the Second of England, King Lewis the Twelfth of France (that just prince, pater patria), Perdam Babylonis nomen." How often have they used this asa pretence of raising and fomenting wars ! confiding in their spiritual arms ; inter- dicting princes that would not comply with their designs, for advancing the in- * Vide Plat. de Bonif. VIII. p. 467, Jul. 2.— Non sine suspicione, quod illoram temporum pontifices, qui bella extinguere, discordias tol- lere debuissent, suscitarent ea potius atque nu- trirent—Episc. Modrus.in Conc. Lat. V. sess. 6. (p. 72.) Not without suspicion, that the popes of those times, who ought to have extin- guished wars, and put an end to dissensions, did rather raise them up and cherish them.— See Greg. VII. Ep. iv. 2; viii. 21. + Auctoritate apostolica de fratruam nostro- Tum consilio declaramus illa juramenta prae- dicta fidelitatis existere et censeri debere.— Clement. \ib. ii. tit. 9, cap. unicum. We declare out of our apostolical authority, by the advice of our brethren, that the foresaid oaths of feal- ty ought to be, and be so esteemed. 4 Vide Conc. Lugd. p. 851. τ Thuan. lib. i. 173 terests not only of their See, but of their private families !* Bodin observeth,' that Pope Nicholas I. was the first who excommunicated princes. Platina doth mention some be- fore him: but it is remarkable, that al- though Pope Leo I. (a high-spirited pope, fortissimus Leo,) as Liberatus calleth him) was highly provoked against Theo- dosius junior ; Pope Gelasius, and divers of his predecessors and followers ; Pope Gregory II. against Leo ; Vigilius against Justinian, &c.; yet none of them did presume to excommunicate the empe- rors. All these dealings are the natural re- sult of this pretence; and, supposing it well grounded, are capable of a plausi- ble justification: for is it not fit (seeing one must yield) that temporal should yield to spiritual ? Indeed, granting the papal supremacy in spirituals, I conceive the high-flying zealots of the Roman church, who sub- ject all temporal powers to them, have great reason on their side ; for co-ordi- nate power cannot subsist, and it would be only an eternal seminary of perpetual discords., The quarrel cannot otherwise be well composed, than by wholly disclaiming the fictitious and usurped power of the pope: for, Two such powers (so inconsistent and cross to each other, so apt to interfere, and consequently to breed everlasting mischiefs to mankind between them) could not be instituted by God. He would not appoint two different vicegerents in his kingdom at the same time. But it is plain that he hath instituted the civil power, and endowed it witha sword.t ‘That princes are his lieuten- ants.t * Abutente Christianorum pastore Christiano- rum principum viribas, ut private ambitioni, et suorum libidini inserviret.— Thuan. lib. 1. p. 42. The pastor of Christians abusing the power of Christian princes, that he might grat- ify his private ambition, and the will and lust of his friends. + P. Anast. calleth the emperor Anast.— Vi- carium. Epist. (p. G70), Eccl. Leod. p. 522. * Observ. t Tort. T. p. 210. 174 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. That in ancient times the popes did not claim such authority, but avowed themselves subjects to princes. 9. Consequently this pretence is apt to engage Christian princes against Chris- tianity ; for they will not endure to be crossed, to be depressed, to be trampled on. This popes often have complained of ; not considering it was their own inso- lence that caused it. 10. Whereas now Christendom is split into many parcels, subject to divers civil sovereignties, it is expedient that correspondently there should be distinct ecclesiastical governments, independent of each other, which may comply with the respective civil authorities in pro- moting the good and peace both of church and state.* It is fit that every prince should in all things govern all his subjects ; and none should be exempted from subordination to his authority: as philosophers, and physicians of the body ; so priests and physicians of the soul ; not in exercising their function, but in taking care that they do exercise it duly for the honour of God, and in consistence with public good ; otherwise many grievous incon- veniences must ensue. It is of perilous consequence that for- eigners should have authoritative influ- ence upon the subjects of any prince, or have power to intermeddle in affairs. Princes have a natural right to deter- mine with whom their subjects shall have intercourse : which is inconsistent with a right of foreigners to govern or judge them in any case, without their leave. Every prince is obliged to employ the power intrusted to him, to the further- ance of God’s service, and encourage- ment of all good works; as a supreme power, without being liable to obstruc- tion from any other power. It would irritate his power, if another should be beyond his coercion. It is observable, that the pope, by in- termeddling in the affairs of kingdoms, did so wind himself into them as to get * Secundum mutationes temporum transfe- runtur etiam regna terrarum; unde etiam ec- clesiasticaram parochiarum fines in plerisque provinciis mutari expedit et transferri.—P. Pasch. II. Ep. 19. a pretence to be master of each; princes being his vassals and feudatories.* 11. Such an authority is needless and useless ; it not serving the ends which it pretendeth; and they being better com- passed without it. It pretendeth to maintain truth; but indeed, it is more apt to oppress it. Truth is rather (as St. Cyprian wisely observeth) preserved by the multitude of bishops, whereof some will be ready to relieve it, when assaulted by others. Truth cannot be supported merely by human authority ; especially that author- ity isto be suspected which pretendeth dominion over our minds. What contro- versy, being doubtful in itself, will not after his decision continue doubtful ? His sentence may be eluded by inter- pretation, as well as other testimonies or authorities. The opinion of a man’s great wisdom or skill may be the ground of assent, in defect of other-more cogent arguments ; but authority of name or dignity is not proper to convince a man’s understand- ing. Men obey, but not believe princes more than others, if not more learned than others. It pretendeth to maintain order: but how ? by introducing slavery ; by de- stroying all rights : by multiplying disor-_ ders; by hindering order to be quietly administered in each country. : It pretendeth to be the only means of unity and concord in opinion, by deter- mining controversies: which its advo- cates affirm necessary.t But bow can that be necessary which * Vide Bod. de Rep. i. 9. (p. 195.) Car les princes Chretiens avoient presque tous opinion, que le pape etoit absolument seigneur souve- rain de tous les royaumes de la Chretiente.— Bod. Ibid. p. 196 ;.~ Tort. Tort. Ὁ. 216, &¢.—— Greg. VII. Ep. 1,7, 2,13; Atez. IL. Ene Ἢ τοσαύτη διαφωνία καὶ μάχη τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ γίνεται, ἑκαστοῦ τῆς μὲν τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν I. X. δὲ δασταλίας ἀφισταμένου, λογιςμοὺς dé τινας Kai ὅρους ἰδίους ἐκδικοῦντος ἐξ αὐθεντίας, καὶ μᾶλλον ἄρχειν ἀπ᾽ ἐναντίας τοῦ Ἰζυρίον, ἣ ἄρχεσθαι ὑπὸ τοῦ Ἰζυρίου βουλομένου. --- Βα 5. de Jud. Dei, 1. ii. p. 209. So great a dissonancy and jarring there is among men in the church, while every one swerves from the doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ, and asserts certain conceits and rules of his own by his own authority, and had rather rule. contrary to the lord, than be ruled by the Lord. t Necesse est, ut omnes fideles idem senti- ant.—Bell.i.9. It is necessary that all the faithful should be of the same opinion. δ A TREATISE OF THE never was de facto, not even in the Roman church ? Hath the pope effected this? Do all his followers agree in all points? Do they agree about his authority ? Do not they differ and dispute about infinity of questions? Are all the points frivolous, about which their divines and schoolmen dispute? Why did not the council of Trent itself, without more ado, and keep- ing such a disputing, refer all to his orac- ular decision ? Necessary points may and will, by all honest people, be known and determined without him, by the clear testimony of scripture, by consent of Fathers, by gen- eral tradition.*—And other points need not be determined. That he may be capable of that office, he must be believed appointed by God thereto; which is a question itself to be decided without him, to satisfaction. His power is apt no otherwise to knock down controversies, than by depressing truth ; not suffering any truth to be asserted, which doth not favour its interests. Concord was maintained, and contro- yersies decided, without them in the an- cient church; in synods, wherein he was not the sole judge, nor had observable in- fluence. - The Fathers did not think such author- ity needful, otherwise they would have made more use of it.? A more ready way to define contro- versies is for every one not to prescribe to others, or to persecute ; for then men would more calmly see the truth, and consent. It pretendeth to maintain peace and unity. But nothing hath raised more fierce dissensions, or so many _ bloody wars in Christendom, as it. It is apt, by tyranical administration, to become intolerable, and so to break the ecclesiastical state ; to raise schisms and troubles. It is like to extinguish genuine charity, which is free and uncompelled. All the peace and charity which it en- dureth is by force and compulsion, not out of choice and good affection. V. The ancients did assert to each bishop a free, absolute, independent au- ἘΞ 'Ikavwripa ἡ θεία yoaph.—Ath. t Nemini prescribentes. POPE’S SUPREMACY. 175 thority, subject to none, directed by none, accountable to none on earth, in the ad- ministration of affairs properly concern- ing his particular church. This is most evident in St. Cyprian’s writings; out of which it will not be amiss to set down some passages, mani- festing the sense and practice of the church in his time, to the satisfaction of any ingenuous mind. ““The bond of concord abiding, and the sacrament” (or doctrine) “οἵ the Catholic church persisting undivided, ev- ery bishop disposeth and directeth his own acts, being to render an account of his purpose to the Lord.”* writeth when he was pleading the cause of Pope Cornelius against Novatian ; but then, it seemeth, not dreaming of his su- premacy over others. This he ‘** But we know that some will not lay down what once they have imbibed, nor will easily change their mind; but the bond of peace and concord with their colleagues being preserved, will retain some peculiar things, which have once been used by them; in which matter neither do we force any, or give law; whenas every prelate hath in the admin- istration of his church the free power of his will, being to render unto the Lord an account of his acting.”+ ‘This saith he, writing to Pope Stephanus, and in a friendly manner, ‘out of common re- spect and single lovey (not out οἵ ser- vile obeisance), acquainting him what he and his brethren in a synod, ** by common consent and authority,”’|| had established concerning the degradation of clergy- men who had been ordained by heretics, or had lapsed into schism. * Manente concordiw vinculo, et perseve- rante catholice ecclesiz individuo sacramento, actum suum disponit et dirigit unusquisque episcopus, rationem propositi sui Domino red- diturus.—Cypr. Ep, 52. (ad Antonianum.) + Ceterum scimus quosdam quod semel im- biberint nolle deponere, nec propositum suum facile mutare, sed salvo inter collegas, pacis et concordiz vinculo quedam propria, que apud se semel sint usurpata, retinere ; qua in re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus, aut legem damus; cum habeat in ecclesia administratione volun- tatis sue liberam arbitrium unusquisque pre- positus, rationem actus sui Domino redditurus, — Cypr. Ep. 72. (ad Stephanum.) wc ad conscientiam tuam, frater charis- sime, et pro honore comimuni et pro simplici di- lectione pertulimus, &c. || Consensu et auctoritate communi. 176 ‘‘For seeing it is ordained by us all, and it is ‘likewise equal and just, that each man’s cause should be there heard where the crime is committed; and to each pastor ἃ portion of the flock is as- signed, which each should rule and gov- ern, being to render an account to his Lord: those indeed over whom we pre- side ought not to ramble about.”* This saith he in his Epistle to Pope Cornelius, upon occasion of some factious clergy- men addressing themselves to him with factious suggestions, to gain his counte- nance. “These things I have briefly written back, according to our meanness, dear brother; prescribing to none, nor pre- judging, that every bishop should not do what he thinks good, having a free pow- er of his will.”t ‘In which matter our bashfulness and modesty doth not prejudge any one; so that every one may not judge as he thinketh, and act, as he judgeth:’’f{_ pre- scribing to none, “50 that every bishop may not resolve what he thinks good, be- ing to render an account to the Lord,” &c. || “It remaineth that each of us do utter his opinion about this matter, judging no man, nor removing any man, if he dis- senteth, from the right of communion; for neither doth any of us constitute him- self bishop of bishops, or by tyrannical terror driveth his colleagues to a necessi- ty of obeying; whenas every bishop hath upon account of his liberty and au- thority his own free choice, and is no * Nam cum statutum sit omnibus nobis, et equum sit pariter ac justum, ut uniuscujusque causa illic audiatur, ubi est crimen admissum, et singulis pastoribus portio gregis sit adscrip- ta, quam regat unusquisque et gubernet, rati- onem actus sui Domino redditurus, oportet uti- que eos quibus preesumus, non circumcursare, &c. —Cypr. Ep. 55. (ad Cornelium.) + Hec tibi breviter pro nostra mediocritate rescripsimus, frater charissime ; nemini pre- scribentes, aut prejudicantes, quo minus unus- quisque episcoporum quod putat faciat, habens arbitrii sui liberam potestatem.—Cypr. Ep. 73. (ad Jubahaianum.) + Qua in parte nemini vericundia et modes- tia nostra prajudicat, quo minus unusquisque quod putat sentiat, et quod senserit faciat.— Cypr. Ep. 76. (ad Magnum.) || Nemini preescribentes, quo minus statuat quod putat unusquisque prepositus, actus sui rationem Domino redditurus; secundum quod apostolus, &c.—Jbid. " A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. less exempted from being judged by another, than he is uncapable to judge another; but let us all expect the judg- ment of Lord Jesus Christ, who, and who alone, hath power both to prefer us to the government of his church, and to judge of our acting.””* These words did St. Cyprian speak as prolocutor of the great synod of bishops at Carthage: and what words could be more express, or more full, in assertion of the episco- pal liberties and rights, against almost every branch of Romish pretences ? He disavoweth the practice of one bishop excluding another from commun- ion for dissent in opinion about disputa- ble points; he rejecteth the pretence that any man can have, to be a ‘bishop of bishops, or superior to all his brethren ; he condemneth the imposing opinions upon bishops, and constraining them to obedience ; he disclaimeth any power in one bishop to judge another ; he assert- eth to each bishop a full liberty and pow- er to manage his own concerns accord- ing to his discretion ; he affirmeth every bishop to receive his power only from Christ, and to be liable only to his judg- ment. We may observe, that St. Austin, in his reflections upon the passages in that synod, doth approve, yea admire that preface, passing high commendations on the smartest passages of it, which assert common liberty, professing his own con- formity in practice to them :—‘ In this consultation,” saith he, “15 showed a pacific soul, overflowing with plenty of charity ;°" and, ‘* We have therefore a free choice of inquity granted to us, by the most mild and most veracious speech * Superest ut de hac re singuli quid sentia- mus proferamus, neminem judicantes, aut a jure communionis aliquem si diversum senserit amoventes; neque enim quisquam nostrum episcopum se esse episcoporum constituit, aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem collegas suos adigit; quando habeat omnis episcopus pro licentia libertatis et potestatis sue arbitrium proprium, tamque judicari ab alio non possit, quam nec ipse potest alterum judicare; sed expectemus universi judicium Domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui unus et solus, habet potestatem et preponendi nos in ecclesiw sux gubernatione, et de actu nostro judicandi, —Cypr. in Praf. Conc. Carthag. “ Aug. de Bapt. cont. Donat. lib. ii. 3, ὅσο. » of St. Cyprian* himself;” and ‘ Now if the proud and tumid minds of heretics dare to extol themselves ugainst the holy humility of this speech—than which what can be more gentle, more humble ?”+ Would St. Austin have swallowed those sayings, could he have so much ap- plauded them, if he had known a just power then extant and radiant in the world, which they do impeach and sub- vert? No, I trow; he did not know, nor so much as dream of any such; al- though the pope was under his nose while he was discussing that point, and he could hardly talk so much of St. Cy- prian without thinking of Pope Stephen. However, let any man of sense hon- estly read and weigh those passages, con- sidering who did write them, to whom he writ them, upon what occasions he writ them, when he writ them; that he Was a great primate of the church, a most holy, most prudent, most humble and meek person; that he addresed di- vers of them to bishops of Rome; that many of them were touching the con- cerns of popes; that he writ them in times of persecution and distress, which produce the most sober and _ serious thoughts: then let him, if he can, con- ceive that all Christian bishops were then held subject to the pope, or owned such a power due to him as he now claimeth. We may add a contemporary testimo- ny of the Roman clergy, addressing to St. Cyprian these words: “ Although a mind well conscious to itself, and sup- ported by the vigour of evangelical dis- cipline, and having in heavenly doctrines become a true witness to itself, is wont to be content with God for its only judge ; and not to desire the praises, nor to dread the accusations of another; yet they are worthy of double praise, who when they know they owe their con- sciences to God only as judge, yet desire also their actions to be approved by their brethren themselves; the which it is no wonder that you, brother Cyprian, should * Habemus ergo querendi liberum arbitri- um ipsius Cypriani nobis mitissimo et veracis- Simo sermone concessum.—Lib. 111. cap, 3. + Nunc si se audent superbe et tumide cer- Vices hereticorum adversus sanctam humilita- tem hujus sententie extollant. Lib. ii. cap. 3. ἐμ mansuetius, guid humilius?—Lib. iii. cap. 3. Von. ΠῚ. 23 Ε A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 177 do, who, according to your modesty and natural industry, would have us not so much judges as partakers of your coun- sels’——.* Then, it seems, the college of cardinals, not so high in the instep as they are now, did take St. Cyprian to be free, and not accountable for his actions to any other judge but God. That this notion of liberty did con- tinue a good time after in the church, we may see by that canon of the Antiochene synod, ‘“ordaining that every bishop have power of his own bishopric, govern it according te the best of his care and discretion, and provide for all the coun- try belonging to his city, so as to ordain priests and deacons, and dispose things aright.”+ The monks of Constantinople, in the synod of Chalcedon, said thus: ‘ We are sons of the church, and have one father, after God, our archbishop :”’} they forgot their sovereign father the pope. The like notion may seem wo have been then in England, when the church of Canterbury was called ‘“ the common mother of all under the disposition of its spouse Jesus Christ.”’|| VI. The ancients did hold all bisbops, as to their office, originally according to divine institution, or abstracting from hu- man sanction framed to preserve order and peace, to be equal: for that all are successors of the apostles; all derive their commission,and power in the same tenor from God ; all of them are ambas- * Quanquam bene sibi conscius animus, et evangelice discipline vigore subnixus, et verus sibi in decretis ccelestibus testis eflectus, soleat solo Deo judice esse contentus, nec alterius aut laudes petere, aut accusationes pertimescere ; tamen geminata sunt laude condigni, qui cum conscientiam sciant Deo soli debere se judici, actus tamen suos desiderant etiam ab ipsis suis fratribus comprobari: quod te, frater Cypriane, facere non mirum est, qui pro ua verecundia, et ingenita industria consilioram tuoruam nos non tam judices voluisti, quam participes inve- niri . Cler. Rom. ad Cypr. Ep. 31. + "Exacroy γὰρ ἐπίσκοπον ἐξουσίαν ἔχειν τῆς ἑαυ- τοῦ παροικίας, διοικεῖν κατὰ τῆν ἑκάστῳ ἐπιδάλλουσαν εὐλάδειαν, καὶ πρόνοιαν ποιεῖσθαι πάσης τῆς χώρας τῆς ὑπὸ τὴν ἑαυτοῦ πόλιν ; ὡς καὶ χειροτονεῖν πρεσ- βυτέρους καὶ διακόνους, καὶ μετὰ κρίσεως ἕκαστα δια- λαμδϑάνειν . Syn. Ant, Can. 9. t Ἡμεῖς δὲ καὶ τέκνα τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἔσμεν, καὶ ἕνα πατέρα μετὰ τὸν Θεὸν, τὸν ἀρχιεπίσκοπον ἔχομεν.--: Syn. Chale. Act. i. p. 114. || Omnium nostrum mater communis sub sponsi sui Jesu Christi dispositione.—Gervas Dorob. (p. 1663), apud Twisd. p. 72, 7 ] = ~=_——s- = 178 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. sadors, stewards, vicars of Christ, in- trusted with the same divine ministries of instructing, dispensing the sacraments, ruling and exercising discipline ; to which functions and privileges the least bishop hath right, and to greater the biggest cannot pretend.” One bishop might exceed another in splendour, in wealth, in reputation, in extent of jurisdiction, as one king may surpass another in amplitude of territory ; but as all kings, so all bishops are equal in office and essentials of power derived from God. Hence they applied to them that in the Psalm, Instead of thy fathers shall be thy children, whom thou mayest make princes in all the earth. This was St. Jerome’s doctrine in those famous words: ‘ Wherever a bishop be, whether at Rome or at Eugu- bium, at Constantinople or at Rhegium, at Alexandria or at Thanis, he is of the same worth and of the same priesthood ; the force of wealth and lowness of pov- erty doth not render a bishop more high or more low; for that all of them are successors of the apostles:”* to evade which plain assertion, they have forged distinctions, whereof St. Jerome surely did never think, he speaking simply con- cerning bishops, as they stood by divine institution, not according to human mod- els, which gave some advantages over other. That this notion did continue long in the church, we may see by the elogies of bishops in later synods ; for instance, that in the synod of Compeigne: “‘ It is con- venient all Christians should know what kind of office the bishop’s is,—who, it is plain, are the vicars of Christ, and keep the keys of the kingdom of heaven.”+ And that of the synod of Melun: * And though all of us unworthy, yet are the vicars of Christ, and successors of the apostles.’’} * Ubicunque fuerit episcopus, sive Rome sive Eugubii, &c.—Hveron. ad Evagr. Ep. 85. + Omnibus in Christiana religione constitutis scire convenit quale sit ministerium episcopo- rum —quos constat esse vicarios Christi, et clavigeros regni coelorum, &c.— Syn. Compend. ann. Dom. 833. (apud Bin. tom. vi. p. 361.) + Nos omnes licet indigni, Christi tamen vi- τ Vide Ep. P. Celest. 1. in Cone. Eph. Act. ii. (p. 324.) ; ~ Baron, an. 57, § 30; Psal. xlv. 16. In contemplation of which verity, St. Gregory Nazianzen, observing the de- | clension from it introduced in his times by the ambition of some prelates, did vent that famous exclamation: “Ὁ that there were not at all any presidency, or any preference in place, and tyrannical enjoyment of prerogatives!””*—which earnest wish he surely did not mean to level against the ordinance of God, but against that which lately began to be in- truded by men. And what would the good man have wished, if he had been aware of those pretences about which we discourse ; which then did only begin to bud and peep up in the world ? 1. Common practice is a good inter- preter of common sentiments in any case; and it therefore sheweth, that in the primitive church the pope was not deemed to have a right of universal sovereignty : for if such a thing had been instituted by God, or established by the apostles, the pope certainly, with evident clearness, would have appeared to have possessed it; and would have sometimes (I might say frequently, yea, continually) have exercised it in the first ages: which that he did not at all, we shall make, I hope, very manifest, by reflecting on the chief passages occurring then; whereof, indeed, there is scarce any one which, duly weighed, doth not serve to overthrow the Roman pretence : but that matter I reserve to another place ; and shall propound other con- siderations, declaring the sense of the Fathers; only I shall add, that indeed, 2. The state of the most primitive church did not well admit such an uni- versal sovereignty. For that did consist of smal] bodies incoherently situated, and Scattered about in very distant places, and consequently unfit to be model- led into one poiitical society, or to be governed by one head. Especially con- sidering their condition under persecution and poverty. What convenient resort for direction or justice could a few dis- tressed Christians in Egypt, Ethiopia, Parthia, India, Mesopotamia, Syria, Ar- carii, et apostolorum ipsius successores.— Syn. Meldens. ann. Dom. 845. (apud Bin. tom. vi. p. 402.) * 'Os bperov ye μηδὲ ἣν προεδρία, μηδέ τις τόπου προτίμησις, καὶ τυραννικὴ προνομία Greg. Naz. Orat. 28. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. menia, Cappadocia, and other parts, have to Rome! What trouble, what burden had it been, to seek instruction, succour, decision of cases thence! Had they been obliged or required to do so, what offences, what clamours, would it have raised! seeing that afterward, when Christendom was connected and compact- ed together, when the state of Christians was flourishing and prosperous, when passages were open, and the best of op- portunities of correspohdence were af- forded, yet the setting out of these pre- tences did cause great oppositions and stirs ; seeing the exercise of this authori- ty, when it had obtained most vigour, did produce so many grievances, so many complaints, so many courses to check and curb it, in countries feeling the incon- veniences and mischiefs springing from it. The want of the like in the first ages is a good argument that the cause of them had not yet sprung up; Christen- dom could not have been so still, if there had been then so meddlesome a body in it as the pope now is. The Roman clergy, in their epistle to St. Cyprian, told him, that “ because of the difficulty of things and times, they could not constitute a bishop who might moderate things”* immediately belong- ing to them in their own precincts: how much more in that state of things would a bishop there be fit to moderate things over all the world; when, as Rigaltiust truly noteth, ‘‘ the church being then op- pressed with various vexations, the com- munication of provinces between them- selves was difficult and unfrequent.”’ Wherefore Bellarmine himself doth confess, that in those times, before the Nicene synod, “the authority of the pope was not a little hindered, so that because of continual persecutions he could not freely exercise 11. ἢ * Nobis, post excessum nobilissime memo- ria viri Fabiani, nondum est episcopus propter rerum et temporum difficultatem constitutus, qui omnia ista moderetur . Cl. Rom. ad Cypr. Ep 31. τ Viriis tunc ecclesia vexationibus oppressa, difficilis et infrequens erat provinciarum inter 5656 communicatio.—Rigal/t. in Cypr. Ep. 67. ¢ Verum enim est impeditam fuisse eo tem- pore non parum pontificis auctoritatem ropter persecutiones continuas non potuisse manos pontifices libere exercere eam, quam δ. 179 The church, therefore, could so Jong subsist without the use of such authority, by the vigilance of governors over their flocks, and the friendly correspondence of neighbour churches: andif he would let it alone, it might do so still. That could be no divine institution, which had no vigour in the first and best times ; but an innovation raised by am- bition. VII. The ancients, when occasion did require, did maintain their equality of office and authority, particularly in re- spect to the Roman bishops; not only interpretatively by practice, but directly and formally in express terms asserting it. Thus when Felicissimus and his com- plices, being rejected by St. Cyprian, did apply themselves to Pope Cornelius for his communion and countenance, St. Cy- prian affirmed that to be an irregular and unjust course ; subjoining, “ Except toa few desperate and wicked persons, the authority of the bishops constituted in Afric, who have already judged of them, do seem less ;’’* that is, inferior to any other authority, particularly to that of Rome, unto which they had recourse: what other meaning could he have ? Doth not his argument require this mean- ing ? πον instance is that of the Fathers of the Antiochene synod? (being ninety- seven bishops), the which St. Hilary calleth “‘ a synod of saints congregated” (the decrees whereof the Catholic church did admit into its code, and the canons whereof popes have called ‘ venera- ble :”’||) these in their Epistle to Pope Julius, complaining of his demeanour in the case of Athanasius, did flatly assert to themselves an equality with him: ** They did not,” as Sozomen reciteth out of their Epistle, “‘ therefore, think it equal, that they should be thought inferi- a Christo acceperant auctoritatem, &c.—Bell. de R. P. ii. 17. * Nisi si paucis desperatis et perditis minor esse videtur auctoritas episcoporum in Africa constitatorum, qui jam de illis judicaverunt—~; ἡ Fides quam exposuerunt qui affuerunt episcopi 97. —— Hilar. de syne. 367.) t Congregatam sanctorum synodum.—Hi- lar. ibid. || Venerabiles Antiocheni canones.—P. Ni- col. 1. Ep. ix. (p. 519.) 180 ors, because they had not so big and nu- merous a church.”* That pope himself testifieth the same in his Epistle to them, extant in the second Apology of Athanasius: “ If” (saith he) “ye do truly conceive the honour of bishops to be equal, and the same; and ye do not, as ye write, judge of bishops according to the magnitude of cities:”* which assertion of theirs, so flatly thwarting papal supremacy, he doth not at all confute, yea, not so much as contradict; and therefore reasonably may be interpreted to yield consent thereto; the rule, ‘“‘ He that holdeth his peace seemeth to consent,”’t never hold- ing better than in this case, when his copyhold was so nearly touched ; indeed, he had been very blameable to waive such an occasion of defending so impor- tant a truth, or in letting so pestilent an error to pass without correction or re- proof. After the pope had climbed higher than at that time (upon the ladders of dissension and disorders in the church), yet he was reproved by Euphemius, bishop of Constantionple, for preferring himself before his brethren ; as we may collect from those words of a zealous pope: ‘ We desire not to be placed above others (as you say), so much as to have fellowship holy and well-pleas- ing to God with all the faithful.’’]| That Pope Gregory I. did not hold himself superior to other bishops, many sayings of his do infer: for in this he placeth the fault of the bishop of Con- stantinople, which he so often and so severely reprehendeth, that he did “ pre- fer himself before, and extol himself above, other bishops.’’§ * Οὐ παρὰ τοῦτο τὰ δευτερεῖα φέρειν ἠξίουν, ὅτι μὴ μεγέθει, ἢ πλήθει ἐκκλησίας πλεονεκτοῦσιν.----3δ0Ζ. ni. 8. t Ei οἷν ἀληθῶς ἴσην καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν ἡγεῖσθε τιμὴν τῶν ἐπισκόπων, καὶ μὴ ἐκ τοῦ μεγέθους τῶν πόλεων, ὡς γράφετε, κρίνετε τοὺς ἐπισκόπους.----, Jul. I. apud Athan. in Apol. il. (p. 744.) + Qui tacet consentiri videtur. πος || Hic non tam optamus preponi aliis (sicut predicas) quam cum fidelibus cunctis sanctum et Deo placitum habere consortium.—P. Gelas. I. Ep. 1. (ad Euphemium.) § —— In elatione sua Antichristum pre- currit, quia superbiendo se ceteris praponit. — P. Greg. I. Ep. vi. 30. Super ceteros sacer- dotes se extollit.—ZJbid. Christi sibi student membra judicare.—Jd. Ep. iv. 36. Solus om- a a i "| " t ; A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. And would he directly assume that to. himself which he chargeth on another, although only following his position by consequence ? And when Eulogius, the bishop of Alexandria, had complimentally said, “ς Sicut jussistis, As ye commanded :” he doth thus express his resentment : ‘That word of command 1 desire you let me not hear; because I know who ἢ am, and who ye are: by place ye are my brethren; in goodness, fathers; I did not therefore command ; but what seem- ed profitable I hinted to you.’* That many such instances may not be ‘alleged out of antiquity, the reason is, because the ancient popes did not under- stand this power to belong to them, and therefore give no occasion for bishops to maintain their honour; or were more just, prudent, and modest than to take so much upon them, as their successors did, upon frivolous pretences. VIII. The style used by the primitive bishops in their applications to the Ro- man bishop doth signify, that they did not apprehend him their sovereign, but their equal. « Brother, colleague, fellow-bishop,”’* are the terms which St. Cyprian doth use in speaking about the Roman bishops, his contemporaries, Fabianus, Cornelius, Lucius, Stephanus; and in his epistles to the three last of them; nor doth he ever use any other, importing higher re- spect due to them ; as indeed his practise demonstrateth he did not apprehend any other due, or that he did take them for his superiors in office. “Know now, brother,’’+ was the compellation of Di- onysius (bishop of Alexandria) to Pope Stephanus. The synod of Antioch, which rejected Paulus Samosatenus, in- scribeth its epistle to “" Dionysius” (then bishop of Rome) ‘* and Maximus, and all our fellow-ministers through the world.”’¢ nibus preesse.—IJd. Ep. iv. 38. quibus (episcopis) cupis temetipsum vocabulo elatio- nis preeponere.—Id. ibid. * Quod verbum jussionis peto a meo auditu removeri ; quia scio quis sum, qui estis ; loco enim mihi fratres estis, moribus patres, non ergo jussi, sed que utilia visa sunt, indicare curavi, &c.—Greg. 1. Ep. vii. 30. (ad Bulog. Alex.) t Ἴσθι νῦν ddedg?.—Euseb. vii. 5. 7 Διονυσίῳ καὶ Making καὶ rots κατὰ τὴν οἰκου- μένην πᾶσι συλλειτουργοῖς jpoav.—Euseb, vil. 20. x Cypr. Ep. 4, 41, 58, 67, 68, 45, 49, &e. == = =e A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 181 _ The old synod of Arles directeh their epistle “to Seignior Sylvester, their brother.” Athanasius saith, ‘ These things may suffice, which have been written by our beloved and fellow-minis- ter Damasus, bishop of great Rome.”* Marcellus inscribed to Pope Julius, to his ‘* Most blessed fellow-minister.”’7 So Cyril spake of Pope Celestine L., Qur brother and fellow-minister, the bishop of Rome.”t So St. Basil, and his fellow-bishops of the east, did in- seribe their Epistle,|| “Τὸ the beloved of God, and our most holy brethren and fellow-ministers, the unanimous bishops through Italy and France.” In this style do the Fathers of Sardica salute Pope Julius; those of Constantinople, Pope Damasus ;” those of Ephesus, Pope Celestine I.: ‘Our brother and fellow- minister, Celestine ;”§ those of Carth- age, Pope Celestine I., in the very same terms wherein St. Austin doth salute Maximinus, a Donatist bishop, ‘ Seignior, my beloved and most honoured broth- er.”{] The oriental bishops, Eustathius, Theophilus, and Silvanus, did inscribe their remonstrance to Pope Liberius, “Τὸ seignior, our brother and fellow- minister, Liberius.”** So John of An- tioch to Nestorius writeth, “To my master.”+7 The synod of Illyricum call Elpidius, “ Our Seignior, and fellow- minister.” tt | { In which instances, and some others of later date, we may observe that the Word κύριος, or domius, was then (as it *. Ἰκανὰ μὲν ra γραφέντα παρά τε τοῦ ἀγαπητοὺ καὶ συελλιτουργοῦ Aapaoov.—Athan. Ep. ad Alr. (p- 931.) ’ + Τῷ ακαριωτάτῳ συλλειτουργῷ ']Ἰουλίῳ.----Νῖ ΑΥ- cell. ad P. Jul. Epiph. Heer. 72. t ᾿Αδελφοῦ καὶ συλλειτουργοῦ ἡμῶν τοῦ τῆς Ῥω- αίων ἐκκλησίας ἐπισκόπου . Cyril. ad Nest. in yn. Eph. p. 207. || Τοῖς θεοφιλεστάτοις Kat botwrdrots ἀδελφοῖς συλλειτουργοῖς κατὰ τὴν ᾿Ιταλίαν καὶ Τ᾿ αλλίαν ὃμο- ψύχοις ἐπισκόποις ..----Βὰ5. Ey. 69; Athanas. Apol. 1. (p. 761, 756.) “ Tod ἀδελφοῦ καὶ συλλειτουργοῦ ἡμῶν Ἰζηλεστί- vov.—Syn. Eph, p. 217. Domino dilectissimo et honoratissimo fratri Conc. Afr. §{] Domino dilectissimo et honorabili fratri Maximino.— Aug. Ep. 203. ala Κυρίῳ ἀδελφῷ, καὶ συλλειτουργῷ Λιδερίῳ Εὐσ- τάθιος, Θεύφιλος, LidBavds ἐν Ἰζυρίῳ χαίρειν > Socr. iv. 12. tt T6 δεσπότῃ pod.—Conc. Eph. 202. Tov κύριον ἡμῶν καὶ evddecrovpydv.—Theod. γ Thod. ν. 9, lv we is now) barely a term of civility, being then usually given to any person of quality, or to whom they would express common respect ; so that St. Chrysostom in his epistles commonly doth give it, not only to meaner bishops, but even to priests ; and St. Austin doth thus salute even Donatist bishops, reflecting thereon thus: ‘Since therefore by charity I serve you in this office of wiriting let- ters to you, I do not improperly call you master, for the sake of our oue true Master, who has commanded us so to do? © my most honoured mas- 887 0 Ὁ now therefore having with me my most honoured seignior and most reverend presbyter,” &c.i * my most honoured master, Asyncritus the elder.”’|| Pope Celestine himself did salute the Ephesine Fathers, κύριοι, ἀδελφοὶ, ** mas- ters, brethren,’§ Even in the sixth council, Thomas, bishop of Constantino- ple, did inscribe according to the old style, to Pope Vitalianus, ‘his brother and fellow-minister.”’ The French bishops had good reason to expostulate with Pope Nicholas I. ‘You may know that we are not, as you boast and brag, your clerks; whom, if pride would suffer, you ought to ac- knowledge for your brethren and fel- low-bishops.’’§] Such are the terms and titles which primitive integrity, when they meant to speak most kindly and respectfully, did allow to the pope, being the same which all bishops did give to one another (as may be seen in all solemn addresses and reports concerning them:) which is an argument sufficiently plain, that bishops in those times did not take themselves to * Cum ergo vel hoc ipso officio literarum per charitatem tibi serviam, non absurde te dominum voco, propter unum et verum Domi- num nostrum qui nobis ista pracepit.—Aug. Ep. 103. t Δέσποτά nov rineorare.—Chrys. Ep. 26, t Nov γοῦν ἐπιλαδόμενοι rod κυρίου pod τιμιω- τάτου καὶ ci\abeordrov πρεσδυτέρου.---Ἰ ἃ. ibid, || Δεσπότην μοῦ τιμιώτατον ᾿Ασύγκριτον τὸν πρεσδύτερον.----Ἐ ». 68. (71, 75, 77, 84, 91, &e.) ᾧ Κύριοι ἀδελφοί. P. Celest. I. Ep. ad Syn. Eph. Aet. ii. (p. 324). {{ Scias nos non tuos esse, ut te jactas et ex- tollis, clericos, quos ut fratres et coepiscopos recognoscere, sielatio permitteret, debueras,— An. Franc. Pith. (an. 858 ) * Conc. 6, Act. xiii. p. 224. 182 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. be the pope’s subjects, or his inferiors in office ; but his fellows and mates, co- ordinate in rank. Were not these improper terms for an ordinary gentleman or nobleman to accost his prince in? yet hardly is there such a distance between any prince and his peers, as there is between a modern pope and other bishops. It would now be taken for a great ar- rogance and sauciness for an underling bishop to address to the pope in such language, or to speak of him in that manner ; which isa sign that the world is altered in its notion of him, and that he beareth a higher conceit of himself than his primitive ancestors did. Now nothing but Beatissimus Pater, Most blessed Father; and Dominus noster Papa, Our Lord the Pope, in the highest sense, will satisfy him. Now a pope ina general synod, in a solemn oration, could be told to his face, that ‘* the most holy senate” of cardinals had chosen “a brother into a father, a colleague into a lord.”’* Verily so it is now, but not so anciently. In the same ancient times, the style of the Roman bishops writing to other bish- ops was the same; he calling them breth- ren and fellow-ministers. So did Cornelius write to Fabius of Antioch, ‘* Beloved brother :”’+. so did he call all other bishops,—‘‘ Be it known to all our fellow-bishops and brethren.’’¢ So Julius to the oriental bishops, ‘* ΤῸ our beloved brethren.”’|| So Liberius to the Macedonion bishops, ‘* To our belov- ed brethren and fellow-ministers :"’§ and to the oriental bishops, “ΤῸ our brethren and fellow-bishops.”’{] + So Damasus to the bishops of Illyricum.* So Leo him- self frequently in his epistles. So Pope Celestine calleth John of Antioch, ** Most * Vere divina providentia factum consen- dum est, quod te sacerrimus iste senatus fratrem, et ita dixerim filium in patrem, colle- gam in dominum —elegerint, assumpserint, adoraverint.—Balt. Delrio. in Conc. Later. ad Leonem X. sess. viii. (p. 85.) Tt ᾿Αδελφὲ dyannré.—Euseb. vi. 43. { Omnibus coepiscopis nostris et fratribus innotescat.—P. Corn. apud Cypr. Epist. 48. || “Ayannrots ade\pots.— Athan. p. 739. ᾧ ᾿Αγαπητοῖς ἀδελφοῖς καὶ συλλειτουργοῖς .---- Socr. iv. 12, 4 Fratribus et coepiscopis.—Hi. Frag. p. 450. « Soz. vi. 23 honoured brother;’* to Cyril and to Nestorius himself, ** Beloved brother ΟἿ to the fathers of Ephesus, “" Seigniors, brethren.”¢ Pope Gelasius to the bish- ops of Dardania, ‘* Your brotherhood.” St. Gregory to Cyriacus, ‘ Our brother and fellow-priest, Cyraicus.”’|| If it be said, the popes did write so then out of condescension, or humility and modesty ; it may be replied, that if really there was such a difference as is now pretended, it may seem rather af- fectation, and indecency or mockery : for it would have more become the pope to maintain the majesty and authority of his place, by appellations apt to cherish their reverence, than to collogue with them in terms void of reality, or signi- fying that equality which he did not mean. But Bellarmine hath found out one in- stance (which he maketh much of) of Pope Damasus,’ who writing (not as he allegeth, to the Fathers of Constantino- ple, but) to certain eastern bishops, call- eth them most honoured sons. ‘That whole epistle I do fear to be foisted into Theodoret ;\for it cometh in abruptly ; and doth not much become such a man: and if it be supposed genuine, I should suspect some corruption in the place : for why, if he writ to bishops, should he use a style so unsuitable to those times, and so different from that of his prede- cessors and successors? Why should there be such a disparity between his own style now and at other times ? for, writing to the bishops of Illyricum, he calleth them ‘* beloved brethren :’’4[ why then is he so inconstant and partial as to yield these oriental bishops less re- Ὁ spect 2 wherefore perhaps vfol was thrust in for ἀδελφοὶ : or perhaps the word ἐπισκόποις was intruded, and he did write to laymen; ‘ those who gov- erned the east,’ who well might be called ‘* most honoured sons ;*’** other- wise the epithet doth not seem well, to * Τιμιώτατε ddekpé.—Conc. Eph. p. 196. +t T6 ἀγαπητῷ ἀδελφῷ.---Ῥ, 179, 183. + Κύριοι ddedpot.—Act. il. p. 324, || Fraternitas vestra.—P. Gelas. Ep. 12; Greg. Ep. vi. 24. Fratris et consacerdotis nos- tri Cyriact § Vales. in Theod., ib. υἱοὶ τιμιώτατοι. Ἵ ᾿Αγαπητοῖς adedpots.—Soz. vi. 23. ἘᾺΝ Tots τὴν ἐώαν (Odvover. > Bell. ii. 14; Theod. ν. 10. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. suit; but however, a single example of arrogance or stateliness (or of what shall I call it?) is not to be set against so many modest and mannerly ones. In fine, that this salutation doth not al- ways imply superiority, we may be as- sured by that inscription of Alexander, bishop of Thessalonica, to Athanasius of Alexandria, “ΤῸ my beloved son and unanimous colleague, Athanasius.”* IX. The ground of that eminence which the Roman bishop did obtain in the church, so as in order to precede other bishops, doth shake this pretence. The church of Rome was indeed al- lowed to be “ the principal church,” as St. Cyprian calleth it: but why? Was it preferred by divine institution? No, surely ; Christianity did not make laws of that nature, or constitute difference of places. Was it in regard to the succes- sion of St. Peter? No; that was a slim, upstart device ; that did not hold in An- tioch, nor in other apostolical churches. But it was for a more substantial rea- son ; the very same on which the dignity and pre-eminency of other churches was founded ; that is, the dignity, magnitude, opulency, opportunity of that city in which the bishop of Rome did preside ; together with the consequent numerous- ness, quality, and wealth of his flock ; which gave him many great advantages above other his fellow-bishops : it was, saith Rigaltius, called by St. Cyprian the principal church, ‘ because constituted in the principal city.”’t That church, in the very times of se- verest persecutions, ‘* by the providence of God’ (as Pope Cornelius said in his Epistle to Fabius), ‘had a rich and plentiful number, with a most great and innumerable people ;’’|| so that he reck- oneth forty-four presbyters, seven dea- cons (in imitation of the number in the * 'Ayannra υἱῷ καὶ ὁμοψύχῳ συλλειτουργῷ 'A- Gavaci.—Apud Athan. Apol. ii. p. 783. + Feclesia principalis.—Cypr. Ep. 55. Ἢ Ecclesia principalis, id est in urbe princi- pali constituta.— Rigalt. in Cypr. Ep. 55. Διὰ τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ προνοίας πλούσιός τε καὶ πλη- θύων ἀριθμὸς μετὰ μεγίστου καὶ ἀναριθμήτου λαοῦ .---- Euseb. vi. 43. Et quanquam sciam frater, pro mutua dilectione quam debemus et exhibe- musinvicem nobis florentissimo illic clero te- cum presidenti, et sanclissime atque umplis- Simz plebi, legere te semper literas nostras —. Cypr. Ep. 55, (ad Corn.) ἜΝ 189 acts), seven sub-deacons, forty-two aco- luthi, fifty-two others of the inferior clergy, and above fifteen hundred alms- people. To that church there must needs have been a great resort of Christians, going to the seat of the empire in pursuit of business ; as in proportion there was to each other metropolis ; according to that canon of the Antiochene synod, which ordered, that ‘the bishop of each me- tropolis should take care of the whole province, because all that had business did resort to the metropolis.”* That church was most able to yield help and succour to them who needed it ; and accordingly did use to do it; ac- cording to that of Dionysius (bishop of Corinth) in his epistle to bishop Soter of Rome: “This” (saith he) “is your custom from the beginning, in divers ways to do good to the brethren, and to send supplies to many churches in every city, so refreshing the poverty of those who want.”+ Whence it is no wonder that the head of that church did get most reputation, and the privilege of precedence without competition. “To this church” (said Irenzeus) “it is necessary that every church (that is, the faithful who are all about) should resort, because of its more powerful principality ἢ what is meant by that ‘resort’ will be easy to him who con- sidereth how men here are wont to go up to London, drawn thither by interests of trade, law, &c. What he did under- stand ““ by more powerful principality,”’|| the words themselves do signify, which exactly do agree to the power and gran- deur of the imperial city, but do not well suit to the authority of a church; especially then when no church did ap- pear to have either principality or * Kai τὴν φροντίδα ἀναδί εσθαι πάσης τῆς ἑπαρ- χίας. Διὰ τὸ ἐν τῇ μητροπόλει συντρέχειν πάντας τοὺς τὰ τράγματα fyovras.—Syn. Ant. can. 9. {ἜΣ ἀρχῆς γὰρ ὑμῖν ἔθος ἐστὶ τοῦτο, πάντας μὲν ἀδελφοὺς ποικίλως εὐεργετεῖν, ἐκκλησίαις τε πολλαῖς ταῖς κατὰ πᾶσαν πόλιν ἐφόδια πέμπειν, ὧδε μὲν τὴν τῶν δεομένων πενίαν dvayiyorras, «ec. —Dionys. Corinth. apud Euseb. iv. 23. ¢ Ad hane ecclesiam, propter potentiorem principalitatem, necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam, hoc est, eos qui sunt ubique fideles. —Tren. iii. 3. || (Avvarwrofay doy fiv.—I conjecture he said.) 184 puissance. And that sense may clearly be evinced by the context, wherein it doth appéar, that St. Irenzus doth not allege the judicial authority of the Ro- man church, but its credible testimony, which thereby became more considera- ble, because Christians commonly had occasions of recourse io it. Such a reason of precedence St. Cy- prian giveth in another case: ‘ Be- cause”’ (saith he) ‘ Rome for its magni- tude ought to precede Carthage.’* For this reason a pagan historian did observe, the Roman bishop “ had a greater authority”’ (that is, a greater in- terest and reputation) ‘‘ than other bish- ops.’’*t This reason Theodoret doth assign in his Epistle to Pope Leo, wherein he doth highly compliment and cajole him : “ς For this city” (saith he) ‘ is the great- est, and the most splendid, and presiding over the world; and flowing with mul- titude of people; and which, moreover, hath produced the empire now govern- ing.” This is the sole ground upon which the greatest of all ancient synods, that of Chalcedon, did affirm the papal eminen- cy to be founded ; for, “‘ To the throne” (say they) “ of ancient Rome, because that was the royal city, the Fathers rea- sonably conferred the privileges :”’|| the fountain of papal eminence was in their judgment not any divine institution, not the authority of St. Peter deriving itself to his successors ; but the concession of the Fathers, who were moved to grant This reason had indeed in it much of equity, of decency, of conveniency ; it was equal, that he should have the pref- erence, and more than common respect, who was thence enabied and engaged to do most service to religion. It was de- cent, that out of conformity to the state, and in respect to the imperial court and senate, the pastor of that place should be graced with repute; it was convenient, that he who resided in the centre of all business, and had the greatest influence upon affairs, who was the emperor’s chief counsellor for direction, and instru- ment for execution of ecclesiastical af- fairs, should not be put behind others. Hence did the Fathers of the second general synod advance the bishop of Constantinople ‘ to the next privileges of honour after the bishop of Rome, be- cause it was new Rome,’ and a seat of the empire. ; And the Fathers of Chalcedon assign- ed ‘* equal privileges to the most holy See of new Rome, with good reason” (say they), ‘‘ judging that the city which was honoured with the royalty and sen- ate, and which” (otherwise) “did en- joy equal privileges with the ancient roy- al Rome, should likewise in ecclesiasti- cal affairs be magnified as it, being sec- ond after il.” Indeed upon this score the church of Constantinople is said to have aspired to the supreme principality, when it had the advantage over old Rome, the empire being extinguished there; and sometime was styled ‘ the head of all churches.” it upon account that Rome was the im-]- perial city. To the same purpose the Empress Placidia, in her Epistle to Theodosius in behalf of Pope Leo, saith, ‘‘ It becometh us to preserve to this city (the which is mistress of all lands) a reverence in all things.”’) * Quoniam pro magnitudine sua debeat Car- thaginem Roma precedere.—Cypr. Ep. 49. ¢ Auctoritate qua potiores eterne urbis epis- copi.—Amm. Marcell. lib. xv. (p. 47.) t ‘oH γὰρ αὐτὴ πασῶν μεγίστη, καὶ γαμπροτάτη, καὶ τῆς οἰκουμένης προκαθημένη, καὶ τῷ πλήθει τῶν οἱἷ- κητόρων Kvpaivovea, πρὸς δὲ τούτοις καὶ νῦν κρατοῦ- σαν ἡγεμονίαν ἐδλάστησε . Theod. Ep. 113. \| Toe θρόνῳ τῆς πρεσδυτέρας Ῥώμης διὰ τὸ βασι- λεύειν πόλιν ἐκείνην ot Ilarépes εἰκότως ἀποδεδώκασι τὰ mocobcta.— Syn. Chale. Act. xvi. can. 28. ᾧ Πρέπει ἡμᾶς ταύτη τῇ μεγίστη πόλει, ἥτις déo- Towa πασῶν ὑπάρχει τῶν γεῶν, ἐν πᾶσι τὸ σέδας πα- ραφυλάξαι.---- Ῥ] οιά, in Syn. Chale. p. 27. * Τὸν μέντοι Kworavrwovrb\ews ἐπίσκοπον ἔχειν τὰ πρεσδεῖα τῆς τιμῆς μετὰ τὸν τῆς “Ῥώμης ἐπίσκοπον διὰ τὸ εἶναι αὐτὴν νέαν Ῥώμην . Syn. Const. can. 3. 1 Τὰ ica πρεσδεῖα ἐπένειμαν τῷ τῆς νέας “Ῥώμης ἁγιωτάτῳ θρόνῳ, εὐλόγως κρίναντες τὴν βασιλεῖᾳ καὶ συγκλήτῳ τιμηθεῖσαν πόλιν, καί τῶν ἴσων ἀπολαύου- σαν πρεσβείων τῇ πρεσθυτέρᾳ βασιλίδι “Ῥώμῃ, καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἐκκλησιαστικοῖς ὡς ἐκείνην μεγαλύνεσθαι πράγ- pact, δευτέραν per’ ἐκείνην trap youcav.—Syn. Chal. can. 28. t Sacrosanctam quogue hujus religiosissime civitatis ecclesiam, et matrem nostre pietatis, et Christianorum orthodoxe religionis omnium, et ejusdem regiz urbis sanctissimam sedem, &c.—Imp. Leo. Cod. lib. i. tit. 2,§ 16. The boly church of this most religious city, the mother of our devotion, and of all orthodox Christians, and the most holy see of that im- perial city. Bonifacius III]. a Phoea impera- tore obtinuit, magna tamen contentione, ut se- des B. Petri apostoli, qua caput est omnium ecclesiarum, ita et diceretur, et haberetur ab iu ~~ ἀν ee — a ry Ἶ ΄ ᾿ Ὶ . A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. lt is also natural, and can hardly be otherwise, but that the bishop of a chief city (finding himself to exceed in wealth, in power, in advantages of friendships, dependencies, &c.) should not affect to raise himself above the level: it is an ambition that easily will seize on the most moderate, and otherwise religious minds. Pope Leo objected it to Anatoli- us, and Pope Gregory to John (from his austere life called ‘* the Faster.’’) Upon the like account it was that the bishops of other cities did mount toa pre-eminency, “‘ metropolitan, primatical, patriarchal.” Thence it was that the bishop of Alex- andria, before Constantine’s time, did acquire the honour of second place to Rome; because that city, being head of a most rich and populous nation, did in magnitude and opulency (as Gregory Nazianzen saith) “approach next to Rome, so as hardly to yeild the next place to it.’* Upon that account also did Antioch get the next place; as being the most large, flourishing, commanding city of the east; “the which,” as Josephus saith, ‘‘ for bigness and for other advan- tages, had without controversy the third place in all the world subject to the Ro- mans ;”+ and the which St. Chrysostom omnibus; quem quidem locum ecclesia Con- Stantinopolitana sibi vendicare conabatur ; fa- ventibus interdum principibus, aflirmantibus- que eo loci primam sedem esse debere, ubi im- om caput esset.— Plat. in Bonif. 111. (p. 161.) oniface IIT. (though with a great deal of stir) obtained of the Emperor Phocas, that the see of St. Peter the apostle, which is the head of all churches, should be so called and accounted by all; which dignity the church of Constanti- nople did indeed endeavour to assert to itself. princes sometime favouring them, and arfirm- ing that there the chief see ought to be, where the head of the empire was. Phocas rogante papa Bonifacio statuit sedem Romane ecclesixe caput esse omnium ecclesiarum, quia ecclesia Constantinopolitana primam se omnium eccle- Siarum scribebat.—Anastas in Bonif. 11]. Idem Sabellicus, Blondus, Letus, &c. tradunt. Phocas, at the entreaty of Pope Boniface, ap- pointed that the Roman see should be the head of all churches, because the church of Con- Stantinople wrote herself the chief of all churches. * Ὑμεῖς ἡ μεγάλη πόλις, of μὲν τὴν πρώτην εὐθέ- ὥς, ἢ μηδὶ τοῦτο napaywpodvres.—Greg. Naz. Orat. 27. Ἢ ᾿Αλεξανδρέων, peyadérodis.—Evagr. il. 4, et passim. + Ἢ μητρόπολίς ἐστι τῆς Συρίας, μεγέθους ἕνεκα Vou. ΠῚ. 24 iii 185 calleth “6 the head of all cities seated in the east.”’* St. Basil seemeth to call the church thereof the principal in the world; for, ‘* What” (saith he) “‘can be more op- portune to the churches over the world than the church of Antioch? the which, if it should happen to be reduced to con- cord, nothing would hinder but that asa sound head it would supply health to the whole bedy.”’t Upon the same account the bishop of Carthage did obtain the privilege to be standing primate of his province (al- though other primacies there were not fixed to places, but followed seniority), and a kind of patriarch over all the Afri- can provinces. . Hence did Caesarea, as exceeding in temporal advantages, and being the po- litical metropolis of Palestine, overtop Jerusalem, that most ancient, noble, and venerable city, the source of our religion. Jt was indeed the general rule and practice to conform the privileges οὗ ecclesiastical dignity in a proportion con- venient to those of the secular govern- ment, as the synod of Antioch in express terms did ordain; the ninth canon where- of runneth thus: ‘* The bishops in every province ought to know, that the bishop presiding in the metropolis doth under- take the care of all the province ; be- cause all that have business do meet to- gether in the metropolis; whence it hath been ordained that he should pre- cede in honour, and that the bishops should do nothing extraordinary without him; according to a more ancient canon hold- ing from our Fathers”? (that is, accord- καὶ τῆς ἄλλης εὐδαιμὸόνίας τρίτον ἀδηρίτως ἐπὶ 'Ῥω- μαίοις οἰκουμένης ἔχουσα rérev.—Joseph. de Bello. Jud. iti. 3. * Tlédts οὕτω μεγάλη, καὶ τῶν ὑπὸ τὴν ἕω κειμέ- νων h κεφαλή---ΟἾΓΥ5. ᾿Ανδρ. B’. +t Tid’ dp γένοιτο ταῖς κατὰ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐκκλη- σίαις τῆς ᾿Αντιοχείας καιριώτερον ; ἥν εἰσυνέθδη πρὸς ὁμόνοιαν ἐπανελθεῖν, οὐδὲν ἐκώλυεν, ὥσπερ κεφαλὴν, ἐῤῥωμένην, παντὶ τῷ σώματι ἐπι χορηγεῖν τὴν ὑγίειαν. —Bas. Ep. 48. (ad Athanas.) t Τοὺς ἐν ἑκάστη ἐπαρχίᾳ ἐπισκόπους εἰδέναι χρὴ τὸν ἐν τῇ μητροπόλει προεστῶτα ἐπίσκοπον, (καὶ) τὴν φροντίδα ἀναδέχεσθαι πάσης τῆς ἐπαρχίας" διὰ τὸ ἐν τῇ μητροπόλει συντρέχειν πάντας τοὺς τὰ πράγματα ἔχοντας ὅθεν ἔδοξε καὶ τῇ τιμῇ προηγεῖσθαι αὐτὸν, μηδέν re πράττειν περιττὸν τοὺς λοιποὺς ἐπισκόπους ἄνευ αὐτοῦ. κατὰ τὸν ἀρχαιότερον κρατήσαντα ἐκ τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν κανόνα.---- yn. Ant. can. 9; Syn. Chale. 17. "oy es i [ N Υ, 186 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ing to the thirty-fourth canon of the apostles.) " It is true, that the Fathers do sometimes mention the church of Rome being found- ed by the two great apostles, or the suc- cession of the Roman bishop to them in pastoral charge, as a special ornarnent of that church, and a congruous ground of respect to that bishop, whereby they ‘* did honour the memory of St. Peter : ἢ but even some of those who did acknowl- edge this, did not avow it as a sufficient ground of pre-eminence ; none did admit it for an argument of authoritative supe- riority. St. Cyprian did call the Roman See ‘the chair of St. Peter,” and ‘ the prin- cipal church ;"* yet he disclaimed any authority of the Roman bishops above his brethren. Firmilian did take notice, that Pope Stephanus “ did glory in the place of his bishopric, and contend that he held the succession of Peter;”7 yet did not he think himself thereby obliged to submit to his authority, or follow his judgment ; but sharply did reprehend him, as a fa- vourer of heretics, an author of schisms, and one who had cut himself off from the communion of his brethren. The Fathers of the Antiochene synod “ὁ did confess, that in writings all did wil- lingly honnige the Roman church, as hav- ing been from the beginning the ‘school of the apostles, and the metropolis of religion; although yet from the east the instructors of the Christian doctrine did go and reside there; but from hence they desired not to be deemed inferiors ; because they did not exceed in the great- ness and numerousness of their church.’’? * Sedis apostolicze primatum S. Petri meri- tum (qui princeps est episcopalis coronz) Ro- mane dignitas civitatis, sacre etiam synodi firmavit authoritas.— Valentin. Nov, 24. in fin. Cod. Theod. + Atque ego in hac parte juste indignor ad hane tam apertam et manifestam Stephani stultitiam, quod qui sic de episcopatus sui loco gloriatur, et se successionem Petri tenere con- tendit———._ Stephanus qui per successionem cathedram Petri habere se predicat Fir- mil. apud Cypr. Ep. 70. t Pé per yap πὲν μᾶσι φιλοτιμίαν τὴν “Ῥωμαίων ἐκκλησίαν ἐν τοῖς γράμμασιν ὡμολόγουν, ὡς ἀποστόλων φροντιστήριον, καὶ εὐσεδείας μητρόπολιν ἐξ ἀργῆς γεγενημένην" εἰ καὶ ἐξ! ἔω ἐνεδήμησαν αὐτῇ ol τοῦ δόγ- ματος ἐξηγηταί' οὐ παρὰ τοῦτο δὲ τὰ δευτερεῖα φέρειν ° Cypr. Ep. lv. 52. They allowed some regard (though faintly _ and with reservation) to the Roman church upon account of their apostolical — foundation; they implied ἃ stronger ground of pretence from the grandeur of that city ; yet did not they therefore grant themselves to be inferiors, at least as to any substantial gine ἢ importing authority. if by divine right, upon account of his succession to St. Peter, he had such pre- eminence, why are the other causes reckoned as if they could add any thing to God’s institution, or as if that did need human confirmation? ‘The pretence to that surely was weak, which did need corroboration, and to be propped by worldly considerations. Indeed, whereas the apostles did found many churches, exercising apostolical authority over them (eminently contain- ing the episcopal), why in conscience should one claim privileges on that score rather than or above the rest ? Why should the See of Antioch, that most ancient and trulyapostolical church,* where the Christian name began, where St. Peter at first (as they say) did sit bishop for seven years, be postponed to Alexandria ? Especially . why should. the church of Jerusalem, *‘ the seat of our Lord him- — self, the mother of all churches,”’? the fountain of. Christian doctrine, the first consistory of the apostles, ennobled by so many glorious performances (by the life, preaching, miracles, death, burial, resurrection, ascension of our Saviour; by the first preaching of the apostles, the effusion of the Holy Spirit, the con- version of so many people, and consti- tution of the first church, and celebration of the first synods),’ upon these consider- ations, not obtain pre-eminence to other ἠξίουν, ὅτι μὴ μεγέθει ἢ πλήθει ἐκκλησίας πλεονεκτοῦ- otv.—Soz. iil. 8. * Ths πρεσθυτάτης καὶ ὄντως ἀποστολικῆς ἐκκλη- cias.——. Ep. Synod. Const. Theodoret. Hist. 1. v.cap. 9, p 211. Quoe quantumlibet a Pe- tro ante Alexandrinam fuerat instituta, tamen quoniam preefectura Alexandrina Augustalis dicta longe prestabat Syria prefecture, &c.— Baron. ann. 39, § 10. + Epiph. Synod. Constant. ibid.—Tiajs δὲ ye μητρὸς ἁπασῶν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ἡ ἐν 'Τεροσολύμοις. ἀ Opt. [. vi. (p. 169;) Hier. Ep. 61; Cone. Nic. can. 7. : A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. churches, but in honour be cast behind _ divers others ; and as to power be sub- jected to Cesarea, the metropolis of Palestine ? The true reason of this even Baroni- us himself did see and acknowledge ; for, “That” (saith he) “the ancients observed no other rule in instituting the ecclesiastical sees, than the division of provinces, and the prerogative before established by the Romans, there are very many examples.”’* Of which examples that of Rome is the most obvious and notable; and. what he so generally asserteth may be so ap- plied thereto, as to void all other grounds of its pre-eminence. ΟΝ. The truth is, all ecclesiastal presi- dencies and subordinations or dependen- cies of some bishops on others in admin- istration of spiritual affairs, were intro- duced merely by human ordinance, and established by law or custom upon pru- dential accounts, according to the ex- igency of things: hence the prerogatives of other Sees did proceed ; and hereto whatever dignity, privilege, or authority the pope with equity might at any time claim, is to be imputed. To clear which point we will search the matter nearer the quick ; propound- ing some observations concerning the ancient forms of discipline, and consider- ing what interest the pope had therein. At first each church was settled apart, under its own bishop and presbyters ; so as independently and separately to man- age its own concernments; each was αὐτοκέφαλος, and αὐτόνομος, ‘ governed by its own head, and had its own laws.” Every bishop, asa prince in his own church, did act freely, according to his will and discretion, with the advice of his ecclesiastical senate, and with the consent of his people (the which he did use to consult), without being controlla- ble by any other, or accountable to any, further than his obligation to uphold the verity of Christian profession, and to maintain fraternal communion in chart ys and peace with neighbouring churches id require; in which regard, if he * Majores enim in instituendis sedibus ec- clesiarum non aliam iniisse rationem, quam Secundum divisionem provinciarum, et prero- gativas a Romanis antea stabilitas, quam plu- rima sunt exempla.—Z/d. ibid. ὌΡΗ ee, ie ἊΨ 187 were notable peccant, he was liable to be disclaimed by them as no good Christian, and rejected from communion, together with his church, if it did adhere to him in his misdemeanours. This may be collected from the remainders of state in the times of St. Cyprian.* But because little, disjointed, and inco- herent bodies were like dust, apt to be dissipated by every wind of external assault or intestine faction; and peacea- ble union could hardly be retained with- out some ligature of discipline ; and churches could not mutually support and defend each other without some method of intercourse and rule of confederacy engaging them: therefore for many good purposest (for upholdin® and advancing the common interests of Christianity, for protection and support of each church from inbred disorders and dissensions, * Cypr. Ep. 52, 55, 72, 73, 76. Omnis hic actus populo erat insinuandus.—P. Corn. apud Cypr. Ep. 46. All this business was to have been imparted to the people. Secumdum ar- bitrium quogue vestrum, et omnium nostrum commune consilium—ea que agenda sunt dis-" ponere.—Cypr. Ep. 40. (Plebi Univ.) To or- der what was to be done according to your judgment, and the common advice of us all. Et limanda plenius, rationon solum cum col- legis meis, sed et cum plebe ipsa universa.— Id. Ep. 28. And the reason is more thorough- ly to be examined, not only with my colleagues, but with the whole people. Praejudicare ego et soli mihi rem communem vindicare non audeo. —Ep.18. I dare not therefore prejudge, nor assume to myself alone a matter which is com- mon to all. + Hoc enim et verecundie et discipline et Vite ipsi omnium nostrum convenit, ut episco- pi plures in unum convenientes, presente et stantiam plebe (quibus et ipsis pro fide et ti- more suo honor habendus est), disponere om- nia consilii communis religione possimus.— Cypr. Ep. 14. For it becomes the modesty, the discipline, and the manner of our living, that many bishops meeting together, the peo- ple being also present (to whom respect ought to be had for their faith and fear), we may order all things with the common advice. quoniam non paucorum, nec ecclesiz@ unius aut unius provincie, sed totius orbis hee causa est Cypr. Ep. 14. because this is the concern, ΠΟΙ οἵ a few men, or of one church, or one province, but of the whole world. ITd- circo copiosum corpus est sacerdotum——ut si quis ex collegio nostro hiresin facere, et gre- gem Christi lacerare et vastare tentaverit, sub- veniant ceteri Id. Ep. 76. Therefore the clergy is a large Lody that if any one of our own society should vent an heresy, an attempt to rent and waste the flock of Christ, the rest might come in to their help. 188 for preserving the integrity of the faith, for securing the concord of divers churches, for providing fit pastors to each church, and correcting such as were scandalously bad or unfaithful*) it was soon found needful that divers churehes should be combined and linked together in some regular form of discipline; that if any church did want a bishop, the neighbour bishops might step in to ap- prove and ordain a fit one;° that if any bishop did notoriously swerve from the Christian rule, the others might interpose to correct or void him ;° that if any error or schism did peep up in any church, the joint concurrence of divers bishops might avail to stop ils progress, and to quench it, by convenient means of instruction, reprehension, and censure; that if any church were oppressed by persecution, by indigency, by faction, the others might be engaged to afford effectual suecour and relief: for such ends it was needful that bishops in certain precincts should convene, with intent to deliberate and resolve about the best expedients to com- . pass them; and that the manner of such proceeding (to avoid uncertain distrac- tion, confusion, arbitrariness, dissatisfac- tion, and mutinous opposition) should be settled in an ordinary course, according to rules known and allowed by all.t / In defining such precincts it was most natural, most easy, most commodious, to follow the divisions of territory or juris- diction already established in the civil state ; that the spiritual administrations, being in such circumstances aptly con- formed to the secular, might go on more smoothly and expeditely, the wheels of one not clashing with the other; accord- ing to the judgment of the two great sy- nods, that of Chalcedon and the Trul- lane ; which did ordain, that ‘if by royal authority any city be, or should hereafter be re-established, the order of the churches shall be according to the civil and public form.’’t * Particularly in the dispensation of church goods, Conc. Ant.can: 25. t (οἰκονομίαι éxx\novaorixai.—Syn. Const. can. t Ei δὲ καὶ τις ἐκ βασιλικῆς ἐξουσίας ἐκαινισθη πόλις, ἢ αὖθις καινισθείη τοῖς πολιτικοῖς καί dnpoot- οις τύποις καὶ τῶν ἐκκλησιαστικῶν παροικιῶν ἡ rakes ἀκολουθείτω.----Οοηο. Chalced. can. 17, et Cone. Trull. can. 38. © Nov. cxxxvil. cap. 4; exxiii. cap. 10. 4 Vide Can. Apost. 38. αι. 30,) de Synodis. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. Whereas therefore in each nation Οὐ province subject to one political jurisdie- tion there was a metropolis, or head city, to which the greatest resort was for dis- pensation of justice, and despatch of principal affairs emergent in that prov- ince 3° it was also most convenient that also the determination of ecelesiastical matters should be affixed thereto; espe- cially considering that usually those places were opportunely seated; that many persons upon other occasions did meet there; that the churches in those cities did exceed the rest in number, in opu- leney, in ability and opportunity to pro- mote the common interest in all kinds of advantages. Moreover, because in all societies and confederacies of men for ordering public affairs (for the setting things in motion, for effectual despatch, for preventing endless dissensions and confusions both in resolving upon and executing things), it is needful that one person should be au- thorised to preside among the rest, unto whom the power and care should be in- trusted to convoke assemblies in fit sea- son, to propose matters for consultation, to moderate the debates and proceedings, to declare the result, and to see that what is agreed upon may be duly exe- cuted ;* such a charge then naturally would devolve itself upon the prelate of the metropolis, as being supposed con- stantly present on the place; as being at home in his own seat of presidence, and receiving the rest under his wing; as in- contestably surpassing others in all ad- vantages answerable to the secular ad- vantages of his city ; for that it was un- seemly and hard, if he at home should be postponed in dignity to others repair- ing thither; for that also commonly he was in a manner the spiritual father of * Ad hoc divine dispensationis provisio gra- dus et diversos constituit ordines in'se distine- tos, ut dumreverentiam minores potioribus ex- hiberent, et potio res minoribns diligentiam im- penderent, una concordie fieret a diversitate contentio et recte officiorum gereretur adminis- tratio singulorum. Joh. VIJI. Ep. 95. To this end Divine Providence hath appointed degrees and divers orders distinct from one another, that while the less reverence the greater, and the greater take care of the less, from this diver- sity there might arise one frame of concord, and a!l offices be “duly adininistered, ε P. Anacl. Dist. xcix. cap.1; P. Greg. VII. Ep. vi. 35. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. the rest (religion being first planted in great cities, and thence propagated to others), so that the reverence and de- pendence on colonies to the mother city was due from other churches to his see. Wherefore, by consent of all churches, grounded onsuch obvious reason of things, the presidency in each province was assigned to the bishop of the me- tropolis, who was called the first bishop, the metropolitan (in some places the pri- mate, the archbishop, the patriarch, the pope) of the province.* The Apostolli- cal Canons call him the first bishop (which sheweth the antiquity of this in- stitution) the African synods did ap- point that name to him as most modest, and calling him primate in that sense ;" other ancient synods style him the me- tropolite ; and to the metropolites of the principal cities they gave the title of archbishop. The bishops of Rome and Alexandria peculiarly were called popes ; although that name was sometimes de- ferred to any other bishop. During this state of things the whole church did consist of so many provinces, being αὐτοκέφαλοι, independent on each other in ecclesiastical administrations ; each reserving to itself the constitution of bishops, the convocation of synods, the enacting of canons, the decision of causes, the definition of questions; yet so that each province did hold peaceful and amicable correspondence with oth- ers ; upon the like terms as before each παροικία, or episcopal precinct, did hold intercourse with its neighbours. And whoever in any province did not comply with or submit to the orders and determinations resolved upon in those assemblies, was deemed a schismatical, contentious, and contumacious person ;' with good reason, because he did thwart a discipline plainly conducible to public good ; because declining such judgments he plainly shewed that he would admit none (there not being any fairer way of determining things than by common ad- vice and agreement of pastors ;) because * Primas provincie. Cod. Afr. can. 19. Ἵ Τοὺς ἐπισκόπους ἑκάστου ἔθνους eidivar χρὴ τὸν ty αὐτοῖς tpdrov.—Can. Apost.27. The bishops of each nation ought to know who is chief among them. » Cod. Afr. can. 39; Dist. xcix. cap. 3. * Tlapérafis.—Syn. Nic. can. 18. . a 189 he did in effect refuse all good terms of communion and peace. Thus, I conceive, the metropolitical governance was introduced, by human prudence following considerations of public necessity or utility. There are indeed some who think it was instituted by the apostles: but their arguments do not seem convincing; and such a con- stitution doth not (as 1 take it) well suit to the state of their umes, and the course they took in founding churches. Into sucha channel, through all parts of Christendom (though with some petty differences in the methods and measures of acting), had ecclesiastical administra- tions fallen of themselves; plain com- munity of reason and imitation insensibly propagating that course; and therein it ran for a good time, before it was by general consent and solemn sanction es- tablished. The whole church then was a body consisting of several confederations of bishops, acting in behalf of their churches under their respective metropolitans, who did manage the common affairs in each province;) convoking synods at stated times and upon emergent occa- sions ; in them deciding causes and con- troversies incident, relating to faith or practice ;* framing rules serviceable to common edification and decent uniformity in God’s service ; quashing heresies and schisms, declaring truths impugned or questioned ; maintaining the harmony of communion and concord with other prov- inces adjacent or remote. Such was the state of the church, un- to which the Apostolical Canons and and Constitutions do refer, answerable to the times in which they were framed ; and which we may discern in the prac- tice of ancient synods. Such it did continue, when the great synod of Nice was celebrated ;+ which by its authority (presumed to represent the authority of all bishops in the world, who were summoned thereto), backed by the imperial authority and power, did * Διὰ τὰς ἐκκλησιαστικὰς χρείας καὶ τὰς τῶν ἀμ- φισδητουμένων διαλύσεις . Syn. Ant. can. 20. t+ Παλαιός τε ὡς ἴστε θεσμὸς κεκράτηκε, καὶ τῶν ἁγίων ἐν Νικαίᾳ Πατέρων ὄρος . Syn. Con- stant. Theod. v. 9. } Can. Apost. 38 ; Tertull. de Jej. cap. 13; Syn. Nic. can. 5. 190 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. confirm those orders, as they found them standing by more general custom and re- ceived rules in most provinces ;* reduc- ing them into more uniform practice ; so that what before stood upon reason, cus- tomary usage, particular consent, by so august sanction did become universal law ; and did obtain so great veneration, as by some to be conceived everlastingly and immutably obligatory ; according to those maxims of Pope Leo. It is here further observable, that whereas divers provinces did hold com- munion and intercourse ; so that upon oc- casion they did (by their formed letters) render to one another an account of their proceedings, being of great moment, es- pecially of those which concerned the general state of Christianity and common faith ; calling, when need was, for assis- tance one of another, to resolve points of faith, or to settle order and peace ; there Was in so doing a special respect given to the metropolites of great cities: and to prevent dissensions, which naturally ambition doth prompt men to, grounded upon degrees of respect, an order was fixed among them, according to which in subscriptions of letters, in accidental con- gresses, and the like occasions, some should precede others (that distinction being chiefly and commonly grounded on the greatness, splendour, opulency of cities; or following the secular dignity of them;) whence Rome had the first place, Alexandria the second, Antioch the third, Jerusalem the fourth, &c. Afterward, Constantine having intro- duced a new partition of the empire, whereby divers provinces were combin- ed together into one territory, under the regiment of a vicar, or a lieutenant of a prefectus-pretorio, which territory was called a diacese ;* the ecclesiastical state was adapted in conformity thereto ; new ecclesiastical systems, and a new sort of spiritual heads, thence springing up; so that in each diocese, consisting of divers provinces, an ecclesiastical exarcht (oth- erwise sometimes called a primate, some- times a diocesan,t sometimes ἃ patri- *'Y nip τοῦ πάντα ἐν πασῃ παροικίᾳ ὁμοίώς φυλάτ- reoOat.—Can. 20, + ᾿Επικολούθησα τῷ ἐξάρχῳ pov.—Syn. Chale. Act. x. p. 358. $ Atotenrfis.—Epist. Orient. ad Rufum. in Syn. Eph. p. 396; Dist. xcix. cap. 1, 2. * Zos. lib. ii. p. 63; Sextus Rufus, Brev. arch*) was constituted, answerable to the | civil exarch of a diocese ; who by such constitution did obtain a like authority over the metropolitans of provinces, as they had in their province over the bish- ops of cities : so that it appertained to them to call together the synods of the whole diocese, to preside in them, and in them to despatch the principal affairs concerning that precinet, to ordain me- tropolitans, to confirmt he ordinations of bishops, to decide causes and controver- sies between bishops upon appeal from provincial synods. Some conceive the synod. of Nice did establish it ; but that can hardly well be; for that synod was held about the time of that division (after that Constantine was settled in a peaceful enjoyment of the empire), and scarce could take no- tice of so fresh a change in the state; that doth not pretend to innovate, but pro- fesseth in its sanctions specially to re- gard ‘ancient custom, saving to the churches their privileges” of which they were possessed ;{ that only mentioneth — provinces, and representeth the metropol- itans in them as_ the chief governors ec- clesiastical then being; that constituteth a peremptory decision of weighty causes in provincial synods, which is inconsist- ent with the diocesan authority ; that tak- eth no notice of Constantinople,|| the principal diocese in the east, as seat of | the empire (and the synod of Antioch, insisting in the footsteps of the Nicene, doth touch only metropolitans (can. 19), and the synod of Laodicea doth only sup- * OF δσιώτατοι πατριάρχαι διοικήσεως Exaorns.— Syn. Chale. Act. 2. (p. 3112) ἙἘρμοϑὶ δίκαιον marp.apy txov.—Evag. 111. 6. } Τινὲς piv ἐξάρχους τῶν διοικήσεων τοὺς πατρι- ἄῤχους daci.—Zon. ad 28; Can. Chale. Novell. CXXXvu. Cap. 5, etexxiii. cap. 10; P. Greg. I. Ep. 11, 56. Ordo episcoporum quadripartitas est, id est, in patriarchis, archiepiscopis, me- (ropolitanis, atque episcopis.—Jsid. Dist. xxi. cap. 1, Dionysius Ex. translates ἔξαρχον, pri- matem, in Syn. Chale. can. 9, 17. t “Ὅπερ οὔτε ὃ κανὼν, οὔτε ἡ συνήθεια mapidwxev. ——.Can. 18, Ta ἀρχαῖα ἔθη κρατείτω.---ΟΔἢ. 0. ᾿Ιὐπειδὴ συνήθεια κεκράτηκε καὶ παράδοσις ἀρχαία . Can: γι ‘Opotws δὲ καὶ κατὰ τὴν ᾿Αντιόγε- (αν, καὶ ἐν ταῖς ἄλλαις ἐπαρχίαις τὰ πρεσδεῖα σώζεσ- θαι rato é«xAnotats.—Ilbid. || Tovds ἐπισκόπους κρίσει τῶν μητροπολιτῶν, καὶ τῶν πίριξ ἐπισκόπων καθίστασθαι . Syn. Laod. can. 12. The bishops should be constituted by the judgment of the metropolitans and the neighbouring bishops. — ai A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. pose that order.) In fine, that synod is not recorded by any old historian to have framed such an alteration; which indeed was so considerable, that Eusebius, who was present there, could not well have passed it over in silence. ‘Of this opinion was the synod of Car- thage, in their Epistle to Pupe Celestine I., who understood no jurisdiction but that of metropolitans, to be constituted in the Nicene synod. . Some think the Fathers of the second general synod did introduce it, seeing it expedient that ecclesiastical administra- tions should correspond to the. political ; for they did innovate somewhat in the form of government; they do expressly use the new word diocese, according to the civil sense, as distinct from a prov- ince; they do distinctly name the par- ticular dioceses of the oriental empire, as they stood in the civil establishment ; they do prescribe to the bishops in each diocese to act unitedly there, not skip- ping over the bounds of it; they order a kind of appeal to the synod of the dio- cese, prohibiting other appeals: the his- torians expressly do report of them, that they did distinguish and distribute dio- cese, that they did constitule patriarchs, that they did prohibit that any of one di- ocese should intrude upon another.* But if we shall attently search and scan passages, we may perhaps find rea- * Ei δὲ cvp6ain ἀδυνατῆσαι τοὺς ἐπαρχιῶτας πρὸς διόρθωσιν ἐπιφερομένων ἐγκλημάτων τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ, τότε αὐτοὺς προσιέναι μείζονι συνόδῳ τῶν τῆς διοικῆ- σεως ἐπισκόπων ἐκείνης ὑπὲρ τῆς αἰτίας ταύτης συγκα- λουμένων Syn. Const. can. 6. Butif it so happen that the bishops of any province cannot rectify those things which are laid to the charge of a bishop, they shall then go toa greater synod of the bishops of that diocese, met together for that purpose. The Fathers of Constantinople, in their synodic Epistle, distin- guish the province and diocese of Antioch, of τε τῆς ἐπαρχίας, καὶ τῆς ἀνατολικῆς διοικήσεως συν- δραμόντες . Theod. v. 9. Kai πατριάρχας κα- τέστησαν διανειμάμενοι τὰς érap Xias.—Socr. v. 8. Ἔν ἐκείνῃ γὰρ τῇ Bactdevoven πόλει συνελθόντες of μακάριοι πατέρες συμφώνως τοῖς ἐν τῇ Ν ικαΐᾳ συν- αθροισθεῖσι τὰς διοικήσεις διέκριναν, καὶ ἑκάστη διοι- κῆσει τὰ ἑαυτῆς ἀπένειμαν, ἄντικρυς ἀπαγορεύοντες ἐξ ἑτέρας τινὰς διοικήσεως ἑτέρα μὴ ἐπιέναι.----ΓΠ ΘΟΘΟΥ, Ep. 86. (ad Flavianum.) For (says Theodo- fet) the blessed Fathers meeting together in the imperial city, distinguished dioceses agree- ably to what the Nicene Fathers had done, and allotted to every diocese what belonged to it: on the contrary, charging that no one of one diocese should encroach upon another. “-. ΡΥ ΨΥ" 191 son to judge that this form did soon after the synod of Nice creep in, without any solemn appointment, by spontaneous as- sumption and submission, accommodat- ing things to the political course ; the great bishops (who by the amplification of their city, in power, wealth, and con- course of peuple, were advanced in rep- utation and interest) assuming such au- thority to themselves; and the lesser bishops easily complying: and of this we have some arguments.' Cyril, bish- op of Jerusalem, being deposed and ex- truded by Acacius, metropolitan of Pal- estine, ‘‘ did appeal to a greater judicato- ry; being the first (as Socrates noteth) who ever did use that course; because, it seemeth, there was no greater in being till about that time; which was some years before the synod of Constanople ; in which there is mention ‘ of a greater synod of the diocese.””**—— There was a convention of bishops of the Pontic diocese at Tyana (distinguish- ed from the Asian bishops), whereof Eu- sebius of Caesarea is reckoned, in the first place, as president, in the time of Valens.” Nectarius, bishop of Constanople, is said by the synod of Chalcedon to have presided in the synod of Constantino- ple.7 A good argument is drawn from the very canon of the synod of Constantino- ple itself; which doth speak concerning ἐς bishops over dioceses,” as already con- stituted, or extant; not instituting that or- der of bishops, but supposing it, and to- gether with an implicit confirmation reg- ulating practice according to it, by pro- hibiting bishops to leap over the bounds of their diocese, so as to meddle in the affairs of other diocese; and by order- ing ‘“‘appeal§ to the synod of a dio- cese.”*t Of authority gained by such assump- * Βιδλίον rots καθελοῦσι διαπεμψάμενος μειζον ἐπικαλέσατο δικαστήριον τοῦτο μὲν οὖν μόνος καὶ πρῶτος παρὰ τῷ σύνηθες ἐκκλησιαστικᾷ κανόνι Ἰζύριλ- λὸς ἐποίησεν Soer. i. 40. {Τῶν δὲ ΝΝεκτάριος σὺν Τρηγορίῳ ἡγεμονίαν ἣρ- aro.—(In prosphonetico ad Imper.) t Tovs ὑπὲρ διοίκησιν ἐπισκύπους -----ας. Can. 2. TIooerévac μείζονι συνόδω τῶν τῆς διοικήσεως ἐπισκό- πων Can. 6. Γ Theod. ii. 26; Soz. iv. 25. ™ Soz. vi. 12. 192 tion and concession, without law, there might be produced divers instances. As particularly that the See of Con- stantinople did assume to itself ordina- tion, and other acts of jurisdiction, in three dioceses, before any such power was granted to it by any synodical de- cree; the which to have done divers in- stances show; some whereof are alleged in the synod of Chalcedon ;" as St. Chry- sostom, of whom it is there said, ‘ That going into Asia he deposed fifteen bish- ops, and consecrated others in their room.’’* He also deposed Gerontius, bishop of Nicomedia, belonging tothe diocese of Pontus.° Whence the Fathers of Chalcedon did aver, ‘That they had in a synod con- firmed the ancient custom which the holy church of God in Constantinople had, to ordain metropolitans in the Asian, Pontic, and Thracian dioceses.’’t The which custom (consistent with reason, and becoming the dignity of the empire, and grateful to the court) that great synod did establish, although the Roman church, out of jealousy, did con- test and protest against it.? But the most pertinent instances are those of the Roman, Alexandrine, and Antiochene churches, having by degrees assumed to themselves such power over divers provinces; in imitation of which churches the other diocesan bishops may well be thought to have enlarged their jurisdiction. This form of government is intimated in the synod of Ephesus, by those words in which dioceses and provinces are dis- tinguished: ‘and the same shall be observed in all dioceses and all provinces every where.” * ᾿Ιωάννης δεκαπέντε ἐπισκύπους καθεῖλεν, ἀπελθὼν ἐν ᾿Ασίᾳ, καὶ ἐχειροτόνησεν ᾿ἄλλους ἀντ᾽ αὐτῶν .--- Syn. Chale. Act. 11. (p. 411.) + Τὸ γὰρ ἐκ πολλοῦ κρατῆσαν ἔθος ὅπερ ἔσχεν ἡ Ἰζωνσταντινουπολιτῶν ἁγία Θεοῦ ἐκκλησίο εἰς τὸ χει- ροτονεῖν μητροπολίτας τῶν διοικήσεων τῆς τε ’Acta- νῆς, καὶ ἸΠυντικῆς, καὶ Θρακικῆς καὶ νὺν κατὰ συνοδι- κὴν ἐκυρώσαμεν Pipov.—Syn, Chale. in E pist. ad P. Leonem. 1 Τὸ δὲ αὐτὸ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλον διοικήσεων καὶ τῶν ἁπανταχοῦ ἐπαρχιῶν παραφυλαχθήσεται.----Ογ. Eph. can. 8, [There is mention of dioceses in Strabo. ] " Syn. Chale. Act. xvi. (p. 463.) 9 Soz. viii. 6. » Syn. Chale. Act. xvi. (p. 462.— rr ee i ν᾿ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. However, that this form of discipline | was perfectly settled in the times of the fourth general synod is evident by two notable canons thereof, wherein it is decreed, that ‘“‘if any bishop have a con- troversy with his metropolitan of his province, he shall resort to, and be judg- ed by, the exarch of the diocese, or by the See of Constantinople.’’* This was a great privilege confer- red on the Bishop of Constantinople; the which perhaps did ground (to be sure it did make way for) the plea of that bishop to the title of Gicwmenical Patriarch, or Universal Bishop, which Pope Gregory did so exagitate; and indeed it soundeth so fairly toward it, that the pope hath nothing comparable to it to allege in favour of his pretences ; this being the decree of the. greatest synod that ever was held among the ancients, where all the patriarchs did concur in making these decrees; which Pope Gregory did reverence as one of the Gospels. If any ancient synod did ever constitute any thing like to wniver- sal monarchy, it was this; wherein a final determination of greatest causes was granted to the See of Constantino- ple, without any exception or reserva- tion: I mean as to semblance, and the sound of words ; for as to the true sense, I do indeed conceive that the canon did only relate to causes emergent in the eastern parts; and probably it did only respect the three dioceses (of Asia, Pon- tus, and Thrace) which were immediate- ly subjected to his patriarchal jurisdie- tion. Pope Nicholas I. doth very jocularly expound this canon; affirming that by the primate of the diocese is understood the pope (diocese being put by a notable figure for dioceses), and that an appeal is to be made to the bishop of Constan- tinople only by permission, in case the party will be contenttherewith.t * Ei δὲ πρὸς τὸν τῆς αὐτῆς ἐπαρχίας μετροπολίτην ἐπίσκοπος ἣ κληρικὸς ἀλφισβητοίη, καταλαμ βανέτω ἤ τὸν ἔξαρχον τῆς διοικήσεως, ἣ τὸν τῆς βασιλενούσης ΚΚωνσταντινουπόλεως θρόνον, καί én’ αὐτῷ δικαζέσθω. —Syn. Chale. can. 19, 17. + Quem autem primatem diceceseos δ. syno- dus dixerit, preeter apostoli primi vicarium, nullus penitus intelligitur ——. Nonecan un- derstand whom the holy synod should call pri- mate of a diocese, except the vicar of the prime apostle. Tantundem valet dixisse prima- om A TREATISE OF THE We may note, that some provincial churches were by ancient custom ex- empted from dependence on any primacy or patriarchate. Such an one the Cyprian church was adjudged to be in the Ephesine synod ; wherein the privileges of such churches were confirmed against the invasion of greater churches, and to that purpose this general law enacted: ‘“ Let the same be observed in all dioceses and provinces every where—that none of the bishops most beloved of God invade another province, which did not formerly belong to him or his predecessors; and if any one have invaded one#and violent- ly seized it, that he restore it.’’* Such a church was that of Britain an- ciently, before Austin did introduce the papal authority here against that canon ; as by divers learned pens hath been shewed. Such-was the church of Afric, as by their canons against transmarine ap- peals, and about all other matters, doth appear. It is supposed by some, that discipline was screwed yet one peg higher, by setting up the order of patrfarchs higher than primates, or diocesan exarchs:* but I find no ground of this supposal, except in one case ; that is, of the bish- op of Constantinople being set above the bishops of Ephesus, Czesarea, and Her- aclea, which were the primates of the three dioceses. It is a notable fib which Pope Nicholas Il. telleth, as Gratian citeth him: “* That the church of Rome instituted all patri- archal supremacies, al] metropolitan pri- macies, episcopal sees, all ecclesiastical orders and dignities whatsoever.’’t tem dieeceseos, quantum si perhibuisset dic- ceseon—P. Nich. I. Eph. 8. (p. 607.) To say, the primate of a diocese, is as much as to Say of dioceses. * Τὸ δὲ αὐτὸ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων διοικήσεων καὶ τῶν ἁπανταχοῦ ἐπαρχιῶν παραφυλα χθήσεται---ὦστε Μηδένα τῶν θεοφιλεστάτων ἐπισκόπων ἐπαρχίαν ἕτέ- pay οὐκ οὖσαν ἄνωθεν καὶ ἐξαπχῆς ὑπὸ τὴν αὐτοῦ ἤγουν τῶν πρὸ αὐτοῦ χεῖρα καταλαμθάνειν, ἀλλ᾽ εἰ καί τις κατέλαβεν, καὶ ὑφ' ἑαυτῷ πεποίηται, βιασάμε- νος τοῦτον ἀποδιδόναι, &c. Conc. Eph. can. 8. + Omnes sive patriarche cujuslibet apices, Sive metropolean primatus, aut episcopataum cathedras, vel eecclesiarum cujusilbet ordinis dignitates instituit Romana ecclesia.— Pic. Nic. 1. Dist. xxii. cap. 1. 4 Isid. Dist. ii. cap, 1. Vor. ΤΠ. 25 POPE’S SUPREMACY. 193 Now things standing thus in Christen- dom, we may, concerning the interest of the Roman bishop in reference to them, observe, 1. In all these transactions about modelling the spiritual discipline, there was no canon established any peculiar jurisdiction to the bishop of Rome, only the 2. Synod of Nice did suppose that he, by custom, did enjoy some authority within certain precincts of the west, like to that which it did confirm to the bish- op of Alexandria in Egypt, and the countries adjacent thereto. 3. The synods of Constantinople did allow him “honorary privileges,” or precedence before all other bishops, assigning the next place after him to the bishop of Constantinople.* 4. In other privileges the synod of Chalcedon did equal the See of Con- stantinople to the Roman. 5. The canons of the two first and fourth general synods, ordering all af- fairs to be despatched, and causes to be determined in metropolitan or diocesan synods, do exclude the Roman bishop from meddling in those concerns. 6. The popes (out of a humour natur- al to them, to like nothing but what they did themselves, and which served their interests) did not relish those canons, al- though enacted by synods which them- selves admitted for ecumenical. ‘ That subscription of some bishops made above sixty years since, as you boast, does no whit favour your persuasion ; a subscrip- tion never transmitted to the knowledge of the apostolic see by your predecessors, which, from its very beginning, being weak, and long since ruinous, you en- deavour now, too late and unprofitably, to revive.’’t So doth Pope Leo I. treat the second great synod, writing to Anatolius; and Gregory speaking of the same says, * Πρεσβεῖα ripfis—Can. 3. Ta πρωτεῖα καὶ ἐξαίρετος riph.—Syn. Ch. Act. 16. "Ica πρεσ- Beia. + Persuasioni enim tue in nullo penitus suf- fragatur quorundam episcoporum ante sexa- ginta, ut jactas, annos facta subscriptio, nun- quamque a praedecessoribus tuis ad apostolice sedis transmissa notitiam, cui ab initio sui ca- duce, dudumque collapse sera nunc et inutilia subjicere fumenta voluisti—. PP. Leo. Ep, 53. (ad Anatol.) vide Ep. 54, 55, 61. Ἔν ὦ. 7 = >, ee eC νον = er ΜΝ νυ... Σ 194 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. “That the Roman church has not the |an appeal from a bishop to himself, ad- acts of that synod, nor received its can- ons.”’* 7. Wherefore in the west they did obtain no effect, so as to establish dio- cesan primacies there. The bishops of cities, which were heads of dioceses, either did not know of these canons (which is probable, be- cause Rome did smother the notice of them), or were hindered from using them; the pope having so. winded him- self in, and got such hold among them, as he would not let go.+ 8. It indeed turned toa great advan- tage of the pope, in carrying on his en- croachments, and enlarging his worldly interests, that the western churches did not, as the eastern, conform themselves to the political frame in embracing dio- cesan primacies; which would have engaged and enabled them better to pro- tect the liberties of their churches from papal invasions.t{ 9. For hence, for want of a better, the pope did claim to himself a patriarch- al authority over the western churches; pretending aright of called synods, of meddling in ordinations, of determining causes by appeal to him; of dictating laws and rules to them, against the old rights of metropolitans, and the later constitutions for primacies. Of this we have an instance in St. Gregory ; where he alleging an imperial constitution importing that .in case a clergyman should appeal from his me- tropolitan, ‘‘ the cause should be referred to the archbishop and patriarch of that diocese, who judging according to the canons and laws should give an end thereto ;” doth consequentially assume * Romana autem ecclesia eosdem canones velgesta synodi illius hactenus non habet, nec accepit.—Greg. M. Ep. vi. 31 (ad Eulog. Alex.) + WN. B. A Roman synod, anno 378, consist- ing of Jtalian bishops, did give the pope such a privilege as the synod of Constantinople did to the bishop of that See.—( Marc. de Primat. p. 103, ex App. Cod. Thedos. Vide Baron) But there is difference between a general synod andan Italian synod: and what had an Italian synod to preseribe to all the provinces of the Roman Empire, or rather of the west ?—P. Greg. 1. Ep. 7, 8. ΡΝ 1 Balusius thinketh that Hilarius of Arles did pretend and offer at this primatical power, apud Marc. v. 32; but Pope Leo did mainly eheck and quash his attempt. ἌΝ “ΤῸ against these things it be said that the bishop had ‘neither metro- politan nor patriarch, it is to be said that this cause was to be heard and decided by the apostolical see, which is the head — of all churches.’’”* 7 10. Having got such advantage, and, as to extent, stretched his authority be- yond the bounds of * his suburbicarian precincts," he did also extend it in quality far beyond -the privileges by any ecclesiastical law granted to patriarchs, or claimed or exercised by any other patriarch ; till at length, by degrees, he had advanced it to an exorbitant omnip- otency, and thereby utterly enslaved the western churches. The ancient order did allow a patri- arch or primate to call a synod of the bishops in his diocese, and with them to determine ecclesiastical affairs by ma- jority of suffrages: but he doth not do so; but setting himself down in his chair, with a few of his courtiers about him, doth make decrees and dictates, to which he pretendeth all must submit. The ancient order did allow. a patri- arch to ordafn metropolitans duly elected in their. dioceses ; leaving bishops to be ordained by the metropolitans in their provincial synods: but he will meddle ‘in the ordination of every bishop, suffer- ing none to be constituted without his confirmation, for which he must soundly | Pay- The ancient order did allow a patri- arch, with the advice and consent of his synod, to make canons for the well-or- dering his diocese: but he sendeth about his decretal letters, composed by an in- fallible secretary, which he pretendeth must have the force of laws, equal to the highest decrees of the whole church. The ancient order did suppose bish- ops, by their ordination, sufficiently obliged to render unto their patriarch due observance, according to the canons, he being liable to be judged in a synod for the transgression of his duty: but he forceth all bishops to take the most slav- * Contra hree si dictum fuerit, quia nec me- tropolitam habuit nec patriarcham ; dicendum est quia a sede apostolica, que omnium eccle- siarum caput est, causa hee audienda ac diri- menda fuerat.—Greg. I, Ep. xi. 56. * Ruffin, Hist.i. 6. ish oaths of obedience to him that can be imagined. The ancient order did appoint, that bishops accused for offences should be judged in their provinces; or, upon ap- peal from them, in patriarchal synods: but he receiveih appeals at the first hand, and determineth them in his court, without calling such a synod in an age for any such purpose. ᾿ς The ancient patriarchs did order all things, as became good subjects, with leave and under submission to the em- peror, who as he pleased did rere his confirmation of their sanctions: but this man pretendeth to decree what he. pleaseth without the leave, and against’ the will of princes. | Wherefore he is not a patriarch of the | western churches (for that he acteth ac- cording to no patriarchal rule), but a certain kind of sovereign lord, ora ty- rannical oppressor of them. 11. In all the transactions for model- ling the church, there never was allowed to the pope any dominion over his fel-| low-patriarchs, or of those great pri- | mates who had assumed that name to themselves ;>5 among whom indeed, for the dignity of his city, he had obtained a priority of honour or place : but never had any power over them settled by a title of law, or by clear and uncontested | practice. Insomuch, that if any of them had) ᾿΄::-. :-οΟο-: "»---- Ἁ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 195 They, without his leave or notice, did call and celebrate synods (whereof all the first great synods are instances ;) their ordinations were not confirmed or touched by him; appeals were not (with public regard or allowance) thence made to him in causes great or little, but they decided them among themselves : they quashed heresies springing up among them, as the second general synod the Macedonians, Theophilus, the Origen- ists, &c. Little in any case had his worship to do with them, or they with him, beyond what was needful to main- tain general communion and correspon- dence with him ; which they commonly, as piety obliged, were willing to do. And sometimes, when a pert pope, upon some incidental advantage of dif- ferences risen among them, would be more busy than they deemed convenient in tampering with their affairs, they did rap his fingers: so Victor, so Stephanus, so Julius and Liberius, of old did feel to their smart: so afterwards Damasus and other popes in the case of Flavia- nus ; Innocent in the case of St. Chry- sostom ; Felix and his successors in the case of Acacius, did find little regard had to their interposals. So things proceeded, till at length a final rupture was made between them, and they would not suffer him at all to meddle with their affairs. Before [ proceed any further, I shall erred in faith, or offended in practice, it | briefly draw some corollaries from this was requisite to call a general synod to) historical account which I have given judge them ; as in the cases of Athana-| of the original and growth of metro- sius, of Gregory Nazianzen and Μαχὶ- political, primatical, and patriarchal ju- mus, of Theophilus and St. Chrysostom, | of Nestorius and of Dioscorus, is evi- dent. 12. Indeed all the oriental churches | did keep themselves pretty free from his | encroachments, although, when he had | swollen so big in the west, he sometimes | and confirmation of did take occasion to attempt on their liberty ; which they sometimes did wari- ly decline, sometimes stoutly did oppose. | » But as to the main, those flourishing, yond his own churches constantly did maintain a dis- tinct administration from the western churches, under their own patriarchs and risdiction. 1. Patriarchs are an human institution. 2. As they were erected by the pow- er and prudence of men, so they may be dissolved by the same. 3. ‘They were erected by the leave princes ; and by the same they may be dejected, if gyeat reason do appear. 4. The patriarchate of the pope be- province or diocese doth not subsist upon any canon of a general synod, 5. He can therefore claim no such synods, not suffering him to interlope in| power otherwise than upon his invasion prejudice to their liberty.' * Isid. in Dist. 21, cap. 1. * Vide de Mare. lib. vii. cap. 4, 5. or assumption. 6. The primates and metropolitans of the western church cannot be supposed 196 otherwise than by force, or out of fear, to have submitted to such an authority 85 he doth usurp. 7. It is not really a patriarchal power (like to that which was granted by the canons and princes), but another sort of power, which the pope doth exercise. 8. The most rightful patriarch, hold- ing false doctrine, or imposing unjust laws, or tyrannically abusing his,power, may and ought to be rejected from com- munion. } 9. Such a patriarch is to be judged by a free synod, if it may be had. 10. Ifsuch a synod cannot be had by consent of princes, each church may free itself from the mischiefs induced by his perverse doctrine or practice. 11. No ecclesiastical power can in- terpose in the management of any affairs within the territory of any prince with- out his concession. 12. By the laws of God, and accord- ing to ancient practice, princes may model the bounds of ecclesiastical juris- diction, erect bishoprics, enlarge, di- minish, or transfer them as they please. 13. Wherefore each prince (having supreme power in his own dominions, and equal to what the emperor’ had in his) may exclude any foreign prelate from jurisdiction in his territories. 14. It isexpedient for peace and pub- lic good that he should do thus. 15. Such prelate, according to the rules of Chciahéiie ought to be content with his doing so. 16. Any prelate, exercising power in the dominion of any prince, is eatenus his subject; as the popes and all bish- ops were to the Roman emperors. 17. Those joints of ecclesiastical dis- cipline, established in the Roman empire by the confirmation of emperors, were (as to necessary continuance) dissolved by the dissolution of the Roman empire. 18. ‘The power of the pope in the ter- ritories of any prince did subsist by his authority and favour. 19. By the same reason as _ princes have curbed the exorbitancy of papal power in some cases (of entertaining legates, making appeals, disposing of benefices, ὅσο.) by the same they might exclude it. 20. The practice of Christianity doth i A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. \ not depend upon the subsistence of such a form instituted by man. . Having shewed at large that this uni- — versal sovereignty and jurisdiction of the bishop of Rome over the Christian church hath no real foundation either in scripture or elsewhere, it will be requi- site to shew by what ways and means so groundless a claim and pretence should gain belief and submission to it from so considerable a part of Christendom ; and that from so very slender roots* (from slight beginnings, andthe slimmest pre- tences one can well imagine) this bulk of exorbitant, power did grow, the vast- est, that ever man on earth did attain, or did ever aim at, will be the less wonder- ful, if we do consider the many causes which did concur and contribute thereto ; some whereof are proposed in the fol- lowing observations :— 1, Eminency of any kind (in wealth, in honour, in reputation, in might, in place, or mere order of dignity) doth easily pass into advantages of real power and command over those who are inferi- or in those respects, and have any deal- ings or common transactions with such superiors. For to persons ‘endowed with such eminency, by voluntary deference the conduct of affairs is wont to be allow- ed ; none presuming to stand in compe- tition with them, every one rather yield- ing place to them than to their equals. The same conduct of things, upon the same accounts, and by reason of their possession, doth continue fast in their hands, so long as they do retain such ad- vantages. Then from a custom of managing things doth spring up an opinion or a pretence of right thereto ; they are apt to assume a title, and others ready to al- low it. Men naturally do admire such things, and so are apt to defer extraordinary re- spect to the possessors of them. Advantages of wealth and might are not only instruments to attain, but incen- tives spurring men to affect the getting authority over their poorer and weaker neighbours : for men will not be content with bare eminency, but will desire real power and sway, so as to obtain their * De pusillo crescere.—P. Leo. Ep. 50. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. wills over others, and not to be crossed by any. Pope Leo had no reason to wonder that Anatolius, bishop of Con- stantinople, was not content with dry honour.* Men are api to think their honour is precarious, and standeth on an uncertain foundation, if it be not support- ed with real power; and therefore they will not be satisfied to let their advan- tages lie dead, which are so easily im- provable to power, by inveigling some, and scaring or constraining others to bear their yoke: and they are able to benefit and gratify some, and thereby render them willing to submit; those af- terwards become serviceable to bring others under, who are disaffected or re- fractory. Su the bishops of Constantinople and of Jerusalem, at first, had only privileges ‘of honour; but afierward they soon hooked in power. Now the Roman bishops from the be- ginning were eminent above all other bishops in all kinds of advantages. He was seated in the imperial city, the place of general resort; thence obvious to all eyes, and his name sounding in all mouths. He had a most numerous, opu- lent, splendid flock and clergy. He had the greatest income (from liberal obla- tions) to dispose of. He lived in great- est state and lustre. He had opportuni- ties to assist others in their business, and to relieve them in their wants. He ne- cessarily thence did obtain great respect and veneration.t Hence, in all common affairs, the conduct and presidence were naturally devolved on him, without con- test. No wonder, then, that after some time the pope did arrive to some pitch of au- thority over poor Christians, especially those who lay nearest to him; improving his eminency into power, and his pasto- ral charge into a kind of empire ; ac- cording to that observation of Socrates, that “* long before his time the Roman episcopacy had advanced itself beyond the priesthood into a potentacy.”’} * Quid illi satisfaciet, si tante urbis magni- ficentia et claritudo non sufficit ?—Leo. Ep + Euseb. vi. 43. (an. 254.)—Oblationibus Matronarum ditati. Cireumspecte vestiti.— Amm. Marc. 1. xvii. (p. 337), an. 367, Euseb. t Tis Ῥωμαίων ἐπιηκοτῆς πέρα τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἐπὶ δυναστείαν ἤδη πάλαι προελθούσης.---Φ ον, vii. 11. 197 And the like he observeth to have hap- pened in the church of Alexandria, upon the like grounds, or by imitation of such a pattern." 2. Any small power is apt to grow and spread itself; a spark of it soon will expand itself into a flame: it is very like to the grain of mustard seed, which in- deed is the least of all seeds; but when it is grown,it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.’ ‘* Encroaching” (as Plutarch saith) ** is an innate disease of potentacies.”** Whoever hath any pit- tance of it, will be improving his_ stock ; having tasted the sweetness of having his will (which extremely gratifieth the na- ture.of man), he will not be satisfied without having more; he will take him- self to be straitened by any bounds; and will strive to free himself of all re- straints. Any pretence will serve to ground at- tempts of enlarging power, and none will be balked. For power is bold, en- terprising, restless: it always watcheth, or often findeth, ‘never passeth oppor- tunities of dilating itself.°* Every ac- cession doth beget further advantages to amplify it; as its stock groweth, so it with ease proportionably doth increase ; being ever out at use. As it groweth, so its strength to maintain and enlarge itself doth grow : it gaining more wealth, more friends, more associates and dependents. . None can resist or obstruct its growth without danger and manifold disadvan- tages: for as its adherents are deemed loyal and faithful, so its opposers are branded with the imputations οὐ rebel- lion, contumacy, disloyalty ; and not suc- ceeding in their resistance, they will be undone. None ever doth enterprise more than to stop its career ; so that it seldom loseth by opposition; and it ever gaineth by composition. If it be checked at one * Τὸ συμῴυτον νοσημὰ ταῖς δυναστείαις, i) πλεονε- fca.—Plut. in Pyrrh. t Subrependi occasiones non pretermittit ambitio . P. Leo I. Ep. 62. Facilius cres- cit dignitas quam incipit.— Ser. Ep. 101. Pris me dominandi spes in ardvo; ubi sis ingres- sus, adsunt stadia et ministri.— Zecit. Ana, iv. (p. 143.) ἃ Soer. vii. 7 * Matt. xiii. 31, 32. 198 time, or in one place, it will, like the sea, at another.season, in another point, break in. If it is sometimes overthrown ina battle, it is seldom conquered in the war. It is always on its march forward, and gaineth ground; for one encroachment doth countenance the next, and is alleged for a precedent to authorize or justify it. It seldom moveth backward; for every successor thinketh he may justly enjoy what his predecessor did gain, or which is transmitted into his possession ; so that there hardly can ever be any restitution of ill-gotten power. Thus have many absolute kingdoms grown : the first chief was a leader of volunteers ; from thence he grew to be a prince with stated privileges; after, he became a monarch invested with high prerogatives ; in fine, he creepeth for- ward to be a grand seignior, usurping ab- solute dominion: so did Augustus Cesar first only assume the style of prince of the senate, demeaning himself modestly as such ; but he soon drew to himself the administration of all things; and upon that foundation his successors very sud- denly did erect a boundless power. If you trace the footsteps of most empires to the beginning, you may perceive the like. So the pope, when he had got a little power, continually did swell it. The puny pretence of the succeeding St. Pe- ter, and the name of the apostolical see ; the precedence, by reason of the impe- rial city ; the honorary privileges allowed him by councils; the authority deferred to him by one synod of revising the caus- es of bishops; the countenance given’ to him in repressing some heresies, he did improve to constitute himself sovereign lord of the church. 8. Spiritual power especially is of a growing nature, and more especially that which deriveth from divine institution ; for it hath a great awe upon the hearts and consciences of men: which engag- eth them toa firm and constant adhe- rence. It useth the most subtle arms, which it hath always ready, which need- A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ments to its adversaries; alluring the one with promises of God’s favour and eternal happiness, terrifying the other with menaces of vengeance from heav- en, and endless misery: the which do ever quell religious, superstitious, weak people ; and often daunt men of knowl- edge and courage. It is presumed unchangeable and un- extinguishable by any human power, and thence is not (as all other power) subject to revolutions. Hence, like Achilles, it is hardly vincible, because almost im- mortal. If it be sometimes rebuffed or impaired, it soon will recover greater strength and vigour. The popes derive their authority from divine institution; and their weapons al- ways are sentences of scripture :” they pretend to dispense remission of sins, and promise heaven to their abetiors. They excommunicate, curse, and damn the opposers of their designs. They pretend they never can lose any power that ever did belong to their see: they are always stiff, and they never re- cede or give back. ‘The privileges of the Roman church can sustain no detri- ment.’’* 4. Power is easily attained and aug- mented upon occasion of dissensions. Each faction usually doth make itself a head, the chief in strength and reputa- tion which it can find inclinable to favour it; and that head it will strive to magni- fy, that he may be the abler to promote its cause ; and if the cause doth pros- per, he is rewarded with accession of privileges and authority : especially those who were oppressed, and find relief by his means, do become zealously active for his aggrandizement. Thus usually in civil broils the cap- tain of the prevalent party groweth a prince, or is crowned with great privi- leges (as Cesar, Octavian, Cromwell, &c.) So upon occasion of the Arian faction, and the oppression of Athanasius, Mar- cellus, Paulus, and other bishops, the pope (who by their application to him eth no time or cost to furnish, which can- | had occasion to head the catholic party) not be extorted from its hand ; so that it can never be disarmed. And its weapons make strong impression, because it pro- poseth the most effectual encourage- ments to its abettors, and discourage- did grow in power; for thereupon the * Privilegia Romane ecclesize nullum pos- sunt sustinere dewrimentum.—P. Nic. 1. Ep. XXxvi. (32—.) ~ Dist. xxi. cap. 2, 3. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 199 Sardican synod did decree to him that|least to uphold the usurpations of their privilege, which he infinitely enhanced, and which became the main engine of rearing himself so high. And by his interposal in the dissen- sions raised by the Nestorians, the Pe- lagians, Eutychians, the Acacians, the Monothelites, the Image-worshippers, and Image-breakers, &c., his authority was advanced; for he, adhering in those causes to the prevailing party, was by them extolled, obtaining both reputation and sway. 5. All power is attended by depend- encies of persons sheltered under it, and by it enjoying subordinate advantages ; the which proportionably do grow by its increase. Such persons, therefore, will ever be inciting their chief and patron to ampli- fy his power ; and in aiding him to com- pass it, they will be very industriously, resolutely, and steadily active, their own interest moving them thereto. Wherefore their mouths will ever be open in crying him up, their heads will be busy in contriving ways to further his interests, their care and pains will be employed in accomplishing his designs ; they with their utmost strength will con- tend in his defence against all opposi- tions. Thus the Roman clergy first, then the bishops of ltaly, then all the clergy of the west, became engaged to support, to fortify, to enlarge the papal authority ; they all sharing with him in domination over the laity 3 and enjoying wealth, | credit, support, privileges, and immuni- ties thereby. Some of them especially Were ever putting him on higher pre- tences ; and furthering him by all means in his nequist and maintenance of them 6. Hence if a potentate himself should have no ambition, nor much ability to im- prove his power; yet it would of itself | pass for the best popes.* grow, he need only be passive therein; the interests of his partisans would effect it: so that often power doth no less thrive under sluggish and weak potentates, es- pecially if they are void of goodness, than under the most active and able: let the ministers alone to drive on their in- terest. 7. Even persons otherwise just and good do seldom scruple to augment their power by undue encroachment, or at ᾿ est ampliare imperium ; foregoers: for even such are apt to fa- vour their own pretences, and afraid of incurring censure and blame, if they should part with any thing left them by their predecesors. They apprehend them- selves to owe a dearness to their place, engaging them to tender its own weal and prosperity, in promoting which they suppose themselves not to act for their own private interest; and that it is not out of ambition or avarice, but out of a regard to the grandeur of their office, that they stickle and bustle ; and that in so doing they imitate St. Pual, who did magnify his office. ‘They are encourag- ed hereto by the applause of men, espec- ially of those who are allied with them in interest, and who converse with them ; who take it for a maxim, Boni principis the extenders of empire are admired and commended, however they do it, although with cruel wars, or by any unjust means. Hence usually the worthiest men in the world’s eye are greatest enlargers of power; and such men being appearances of virtue, ability, reputation, to aid their endeavours, do most easily compass de- signs of this nature, finding less obstruc- tion to their attempts; for men are not so apt to suspect their integrity, or to charge them with ambition and avarice ; and the few, who discern their aims and consequences of things, are overborne by the number of those who are favourably conceited and inclined toward them. Thus Julius I., Damasus I., Innocent I., Gregory I., and the like popes, whom history representeth as laudable persons, did yet confer tothe advancement of pa- pal grandeur. But they who did most advance that interest, as Pope Leo L., Gelasius I., Pope Nicholas I., Pope Greg- ory VIL, in the esteem of true zealots, Hence the dis- tinction between a good man, a good prince, a good pope. 8. Men of an inferior condition are apt to express themselves highly in commen- ‘dation of those who are ina superior rank, especially upon occasion of address and intercourse ; which commendations are liable to be interpreted for acknowl- edgments or attestations of right, and x Sixtus V. 200 thence do sometimes prove means of creating it. Of the generality of men it is truly said, that it ““ doth fondly serve fame, and is stunned with titles and images,”* read- ily ascribing to superiors whatever they claim, without scanning the grounds of their title. Simple and weak men, out of abjectedness or fear, are wont to crouch, and submit to any thing upon any terms. Wise men do not love brangling, nor will expose their quiet and safety with- out great reason ; thence being inclinable to comply with greater persons. Bad men, out of design to procure advaniages or impunity, are prone to flattery and gloze with them. Good men, out of due reverence to them, and in hope of fair usage from them, are ready to compli- ment them, or treat them with the most respectful terms. Those who are obliged to them will not spare to extol them; paying the easy return of good words for good deeds. Thus all men conspire to exalt power ; the which snatcheth all good words as true, and construeth them to the most fa- vourable sense ; and allegeth them as verdicts and arguments of unquestionable right. So are the compliments, or terms of respect, used by Jerome, Austin, The- odoret, and divers others, toward popes, drawn into an argument for papal author- ity ; whenas the ‘actions of such Fathers, and their discourses upon other occasions, do manifest their serious judgment to have been directly contrary to his pre- tences: wherefore the emperor of Con- stantinople, in the Florentine synod, had good reason to decline such sayingst for arguments; for, * [f” (saith he) “ any of the saints doth in an epistle honour the pope, shall he take that as importing priv- | ileges 9 9. Good men commonly (out of char- itable simplicity, meekness, modesty, and humility, love of peace, and averseness from contention) are apt to yeild to the encroachments of those who anywise do excel them; and when such men do ω qui fame servit ineptus, Ac stupet in titulis et imaginibus Hor. | Kara ῥητὰ τῶν ayiov. | 1 Μήπος, φησὶ, ris τῶν ἁγίων ἐν ἐπιστολῆ τιμᾶ τὸν πάπαν, καί ἐκλάβῃη τοῦτο ἀντὶ προνομ..., —Syn. Flor. sess. xxv. (p. 848.) —— wy i , =" P Ἵ ‘ . A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. yield, others are ready to follow their ex- ample. Bad men have little interest to resist, and no heart to stand for public good ; but rather strike in presently, tak- ing advantage by their compliance to drive a good ‘market for themselves. Hence so many of all sorts in all times did comply with popes, or did not ob- struct them ; suffering them without great obstacle to raise their power. 10. If in such cases a few wise men do apprehend the consequences of things, yet they can do little to prevent them. They seldom have the courage with suf- ficient zeal to bustle against encroach- ments; fearing to be overborne by its stream, to lose their labour, and vainly to suffer by it: if they offer at resistance, it is usually faint and moderate: whereas power doth act vigorously, and push it- self forward with mighty violence; so that it is not only difficult to check it, but dangerous to oppose it. Ambiguity of words (as it. causeth many debates, so) yieldeth much advan- tage to the foundation and amplification of power:* for whatever 15. said of it, will be interpreted in favour of it, and will afford colour to its pretences. Words innocently or carelessly used are by in- terpreiation extended to signify great - matters, or what you please. For in- slance, The word bishop may import any kind of superintendency or inspection: hence St. Peter came to be reckoned bishop of Rome, because in virtue of his apostolic office he had inspection over that church founded by him, and might exercise some episcopal acts. The word head doth signify any kind of eminency ; the word prénce, any pri- ority; the word to preside, any kind of superiority or pre-eminence :t hence some Fathers attributing those names to St. Peter, they are interpreted to have thought him sovereign in power over the apostles. And because some did give like terms to the pope, they infer his su- periority in power over all bishops ; not- withstanding such Fathers did express a contrary judgment. * Ita de vocabulorum occasionibus plurimum quzestiones subornantur, sicut et de verborum in communionibus.—Tertull, de Resur. Carn. 54, + Kai ἡγεῖσθαι κεφαλήν. Can. Apost. 34, A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. The word successor may import any der- ivation of power: hence because St. Pe- ter is said to have founded the church of Rome, and io have ordained the first bish- op there, the pope is called his succes- sor. The word authority doth often import any kind of influence upon the opinions or actions of men (grounded upon emin- ence of place, worth, reputation, or any such advantage:) hence, because the pope of old sometimes was desired to interpose his authority, they will under- stand him to have had right to command or judge in such cases ;* although author- ity is sometimes opposed to command, as where Livy saith, that “* Evander did hold those places by authority, rather than by command,”’t and Tacitus of the German princes saith, ‘‘ They are heard rather according to their authority of persuading, than power of commanding.”t ‘ The word judge” (saith Canus) * is frequent- ly used to signify no more than, I do think or conceive ;”|| whereby he doth excuse divers popes from having decreed a notable error; (for Alexander III. says of them, “ That they judged, that after a matrimony contracted, not consummated, another may be valid, that being dissolv- ed.”) Yet if the pope is said to have judged so or so in any case, it is alleged for a certain argument of proper juris- diction. 11. There is a strange enchantment in words; which being (although with-no great colour of reason) assumed, do work on the fancies of men, especially of the weaker sort. Of these power doth ever arrogate to itself such as are most opera- tive, by their force sustaining and extend- ing itself. * Quia duobus episcopis, quorum ea tem- pestate summa authoritas erat non illuserat —. Suip. Sev. ii. 63. Because he had not deluded the two bishops who had the greatest authority in those times. Non mediocris au- thoritatis episcopus Carthag.—Awg. Ep. 162. The bishop of Carthage was of no mean au- ty. + Evander ea authoritatemagis quam imperio retinebat loca.— Liv. 1. y audiuntur authoritate suadendi potias quam jubendi potestate—Tac. de Mor. Ger. (p. 640.) | Verbum judico frequenter in ea significa- tione usurpatur, ut idem sit quod sentio seu eas loc, vi. cap. 8. (Comp. lib. vi. Vou. ΠῚ. 26 201 So divers prevalent factions did as- sume to themselves the name of catho- lic ; and the Roman church particularly hath appropriated that word to itself, even so as to commit a bull, implying Rome and the universe to be the same place ; and the perpetual canting of this term hath been one of its most effectual charms to weak people: “1 am a catho- lic,” that is, “δὴ universal; therefore all I hold is true:” this is their great argu- ment. The words successor of Peter, apos- tolic see, prima sedes, have been strongly urged for arguments of papal authority ; the which have, beyond their true force (for indeed they signify nothing), had a strange efficacy upon men of understand- ing and wisdom. 12. The pope’s power was much am- plified by the importunity of persons con- demned or extruded from their places, whether upon just accounts, or wrongful- ly and by faction; for they finding-no other more hopeful place of refuge and redress, did often apply to him :* for what will not men do, whither will not they go in straits ἢ Thus did Marcion go to Rome, and sue for admission to communion there. So Fortunatus and Felicissimus in St. Cyprian, being condemned in Afric, did fly to Rome for shelter; of which ab- surdity St. Cyprian doth so complain. So likewise Martianus and Basilides, in St. Cyprian, being outed of their Sees for having lapsed from the Christian pro- fession, did fly to Stephen for succour, to be restored.» So Maximus (the Cyn- ic) went to Rome to get a confirmation of his election at Constantinople. So Marcellus, being rejected for heterodoxy, went thither to get attestation to his or- thodoxy (of which St. Basil complaineth.) So Apiarius, being condemned in Afric for his crimes, did appeal to Rome. And, on the other side, Athanasius be- ing with great partiality condemned by the synod of Tyre ;+ Paulus and other ° ut ad domini mei tanti pontificis et piissimi patris, omnium ad se confugientium tutissimi defensoris ac protectoris, &c.—Ro- thaldi Appell. (in P. Nich. 1. Ep XVii. p. 563.) —— my lord so great a pontiff, and most pious a father, the safe defender and protector of all those that flee unto him for succour, + Calendion of Antioch, liber. cap. 18. Υ Cypr. Ep. 55, 68. 202 bishops being extruded from their Sees for orthodoxy; St. Chrysostom being condemned and expelled by Theophilus and his complices; Flavianus being de- posed by Dioscorus and the Ephesine synod ; Theodoret being condemned by the same—did cry out for help to Rome.’ Chelidonius, bishop of Resanon, being deposed by Hilarius of Arles (for crimes), did fly to Pope Leo. Ignatius, patriarch of Constntinople, being extrud- ed from his See by Photius, did complain to the pope. 13. All princes are forward to heap honour on the bishop of their imperial city ; it seeming a disgrace to themselves that so near a relation be an inferior to any other; who is, as it were, their Spiritual pastor, who is usually by their special favour advanced. The city it- self, and the court, will be restless in as- sisting him to climb. : Thus did the bishop of Constantinople arise to that high pitch of honour, and to be second patriarch ; who at first was a mean suffragan to the bishop of Heraclea: this, by the synods of Constantinople and Chalcedon, is assigned for the reason of his advancement.* And how ready the emperors were to promote the dignity of that bishop, we see by many of their edicts to that pur- pose ; as particularly that of Leo. So, for the honour of their city, the emporors usually did favour the pope, assisting him in the furtherance of his de- signs, and extending his privileges by their edicts at home, and letters to the eastern emperors, recommending their affairs. So in the synod of Chalcedon we have the letters of Valentinian, together with those of Placidia and of Eudoxia, the em- presses, to Theodosius, in behalf of Pope Leo, for retractation of the Ephesine synod; wherein they do express them- selves engaged to maintain the honour of the Roman See: ‘‘ Seeing that” (saith Placidia, mother of Theodosius) * it be- cometh us in all things to preserve the honour and dignity of this chief city, which is the mistress of all others.”’* * 'Onbre πρέπει ἡμᾶς ταύτῃ τῇ μεγίστῃ πόλει, ἥτις δέσποινα πασῶν ὑπάρχει τῶν γεῶν, ἐν πᾶσι τὸ σέθας παραφυλάξαι.----γη. Chale, (p. 27.) * P. Leo Ep. 89; Marc. v. 32; P. Nich. I. Ep. xxxvili. (p. 564,) Rothaldus. * Cod. Lib. 1. tit. 2. cap. 16. 4 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. So Pope Nicholas confesseth, that the — emperors had “ extolled the Roman See with divers privileges, had enriched it~ with gifis, had enlarged it with benefits’””* (or benefices), ἄτα. 14. The popes had the advantage of being ready at hand to suggest what they pleased to the court, and thereby to pro- cure hisedicts (directed or dictated by themselves) in their favour, for extending their power, or repressing any opposi- tion made to their encroachments. Baronius observeth, that the bishops of Constantinople did use this advantage for their ends: for thus he reflecteth on the edict of the emperor Leo in favour of that see: “ These things Leo ;t but questionless conceived in the words of Acacius, swelling with pride.” And no less unquestionably did the popes conceive words for the emperor in countenance of their authority.” | Such was that edict of Valentinian in favour of Leo against Hilarius, bishop of Arles (in an unjust cause, as Binius con- fesseth), who contested his authority’ to undo what was done in a Gallican synod.° And we may thank Baronius himself for this observation: ‘* By this, reader, thou understandest that when the emperors or- dained laws concerning religion, they did it by transcribing and enacting the laws of the church, upon the admonition of the holy bishops requiring them to do their duty.”¢ It was a notable edict which Pope Hilarius allegeth: ‘ It was also de- creed by the laws of Christian princes, that whatsoever the bishop of the apos- tolic see should upon examination pro- nounce concerning churches and _ their *Qualiter (imperatores) eam diversis bene- ficiis extulerint, donis ditaverint, bheneficiis ampliaverint, qualiter illam, &c.—P. Nich. 1. Ep. viii. (p. 513.) — —Romanus tempore prisco Pauper erat presul, regali munere crevit, &e. Gunth. Lig. lib. 6. |} Heee Leo, sed Acacii fastu tumentis pro- culdubio verbis concepta, et stylo superbix ex- arata.— Baron. ann. 473, § 4. t Ex his intelligis, lector, cum de rebus sa- cris imperatores leges sanxivere, id ipsum admonitione ss. preesulum requirentium eorum officium ex scriptis legibus statuisse.— Baron. ann. 458, ᾧ 4. » Apud Mare. v. 22. © Bin. ad P. Hill. Ep. 11. (p. 576.) -_- A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. governors, &c. should with reverence be received, and strictly observed,”’* &c. Such edicts, by crafty suggestions, be- ing at opportune times from easy and unwary princes procured, did hold, not being easily reversed: and the power which the pope once had obtained by them, he would never part with ; forti- fying it by higher pretences of divine immutable right.¢ _ | The Emperor Gratian, having gotten the world under him, did order the churches to those who would communi- cate with Pope Damasus.* ‘This and the like countenances did bring credit and authority to the Roman See. 15. It is therefore no wonder that popes, being seated in the metropolis of the western empire (the head of all the Ro- man state), should find interest sufficient to make themselves by degrees what they would be: for they not only sur- passing the provincial bishops in wealth and repute, but having power in court, who dared to pull a feather with them, or to withstand their encroachments ? What wise man would not rather bear much, than contest upon such disadvant- ages, and without probable grounds of success ? . 16. Princes who favoured them with such concessions, and abetted their un- dertakings, did not foresee what such in- crease of power in time would arise to; or suspect the prejudice thence done to imperial authority. They little thought that in virtue thereof popes would check and mate princes, or would claim superiority over them: for the popes at that time did behave and express them- selves with modesty and respect to em- perors. 17. Power once rooted doth find sea- sons and favourable junctures for its growth; the which it will be intent to embrace. The confusions of things, the eruptions of barbarians, the straits of emperors, the contentions of princes, &e. did all turn to account for him; and in confu- sion of things he did snatch what he could to himself. * Christianorum quoque principum lege de- cretum est, &c.—P. Hilarius, Ep. xi. (p. 576.) « P. Nich. I. Ep. 36. * Theod. vy. 2. 203 The declination and infirmity of the Roman empire gave him opportunity to strengthen his interests, either by closing with it, so as to gain somewhat by its con- cession ; or by opposing it, so as to head a faction against it. As he often had op- portunity to promote the designs of em- perors and princes, so those did return to him increase of authority ; so they trucked and bartered together. For when princes were in straits, or did need assistance (from his reputation at home) to the fur- therance of their designs, or support of their interest in Italy, they were content to honour him, and grant what he desir- ed; asin the case of Acacius, which had caused so long a breach, the emperor, to engage Pope Hormisdas, did consent to his will. And at the Florentine synod, the emperor did bow to the pope’s terms, in hopes to get his assistance against the Turks. When the eastern emperors, by his means chiefly, were driven out of Italy, he snatched a good part of it to himself, and set up for a temporal prince.* When princes did clash, he, by yield- ing countenance to one side, would be sure to make a good market for himself: for this pretended successor to the fisher- man was really skilled to angle in troub- led waters. They have been the incendiaries of Christendom, the kindlers and fomenters of war; and would often stir up wars ;* and inclining to the stronger part, would share with the conqueror; as when he stirred up Charles against the Lombards. They would, upon spiritual pretence, be interposing in all affairs.t He did oblige princes by abetting their cause when it was unjust or weak; his spiritual authority satisfying their con- science: whence he was sure to receive good acknowledgment and reccompense. As when he did allow Pepin’s usurpa- tion. (An. 752.) * Δρυὸς πεσούσης πᾶς ἀνὴρ fvdAlferat ——. When the oak is fallen, every one gets some wood, + Non sine suspicione, quod {ΠΟΤῚ ΠῚ tempo- rum pontifices, qui bella extinguere, discordias tollere debuissent, suscitarent ea potius atque nutrirent.—Modruviensis Episc. in Cone, Lat, sub Leo. X. ses. vi. (p. 72.) f Anast. in Vit. Zach. P. Nich. I. Ep, 25, 30, ἄς. 204 He pretended to dispose of kingdoms, and to constitute princes ; reserving obei- sance to himself. Gregory VII. grant- ed to Robert Guislard Naples and Sicily (An. 1060), beneficiario jure. Innocent II. gave to Roger the title of king. (An. 1139.) There is scarce any kingdom in Eu- rope which he hath not claimed the sov- ereignty of, by some pretence or other. Princes sometime, for quiet sake, have desired the pope’s consent and allowance of things appertaining of right to them- selves, whence the pope took advantage to claim an original right of disposing such things. The proceeding of the pope upon occasion of wars is remarkable: when he did enter league with a prince, to side with him ina war against another, he did covenant to prosecute the enemy with spiritual arms (that is, with excom- munications and interdicts), engaging his confederates to use temporal arms. So making ecclesiastical censures tools of interest. When princes were in difficulties (by the mutinous disposition of princes, the emulation of antagonists), he would, as served his interest, interpose ; hooking in some advantage to himself. In the tumults against our King John, he struck in, and would have drawn the kingdom to himself. He would watch opportunity to quar- rel with princes, upon pretence they did intrench on his spiritual power : as about the point of the investiture of bishops, and receiving homage from them. Gregory VII. did excommunicate Hen. III. (an. 1076.) Calixtus II. Hen. IV. (an. 1120.) Adrian [V. Fred. (an. 1160.) Clestinus III. - - - - - - - Hen. V. (an. 1195.) Innocent IIL. Otho (an. 1219.) Honorius ΠΠ, and Gregory a Saige 11, (an. 1220.) Innocent LIV. in the Lugd. Conc. (1245.) 18. The ignorance of times did him great service: for then all the little learning which was, being in his clients and factors, they could instil what they pleased into the credulous people. Then his dictates would pass for infallible or- acles, and his decrees for inviolable laws: whence his veneration was ex- ceedingly increased. 19. He was forward to support fac- tious churchmen against princes, upon pretence of spiritual interest and liber- A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ty.* And usually by his importunity and ~ arts getting the better in such contests, he thereby did much strengthen his au- — thority. 20. He making himself the head of all the clergy, and carrying himself as its protector and patron, did engage — thereby innumerable most able heads, tongues, and pens, who were devoted to maintain whatever he did, and had lit- tle else to do. 21. So great a party he cherished with exorbitant liberties, suffering none to rule over them, or touch them, beside himself. 22. He did found divers militias and bands of spiritual janizaries, to be com- batants for his interests; who, depend- ing immediately upon him, subsisting by his charters, enjoying exemptions by his authority from other jurisdictions, being sworn to a special obeisance of him, were entirely at his devotion, ready with all their might to advance his in- terests, and to maintain all the pretences of their patron and benefactor. These had great sway among the peo- ple, upon account of their religious guises and pretences to extraordinary heights of sanctimony, austerity, contempt of the world. And learning being mostly confined to them, they were the chief teachers and guides of Christendom; so that no wonder if he did challenge and could maintain any thing by their influ- ence. They did cry up his power, as_ supe- rior to all others. ‘They did attribute to him titles strangely high, Vice-god, Spouse of the church, &c., strange attri- butes of emnipotency, infallibility, &c. 23. Whereas wealth is a great sinew of power, he did invent divers ways of drawing great store thereof to himself.+ By how many tricks did he proll money from all parts of Christendom ? as by Dispensations for marriage within de- grees prohibited, or at uncanonical times ;—for vows and oaths; for ob- servance of fasts and abstinences; for . * Anselme, anno 1109. Becket, anno 1154, Eadmer. Matt. Par. + Pro pallio omnino aliquid dare prohibeo,.— Greg. 1. Ep. iv. 44. | | = A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. pluralities and incompatible benefices, non-residences, &c. Indulgences, and pardons, and freeing souls from the pains of purgatory. Reservations, and provisions of bene- fices,not bestowed gratis.* Consecrated presents ; Agnus Devs, roses, swords,t ὅσα. Confirmation of _ bishops ; 3 palls.t Appeals to his court. Tributes of Peter-pence, annates, tithes,—introduced upon occasion of ho- ly wars, and continued.|| Playing fast and loose, tying knots, and undoing them for gain. Sending legates to drain places of money. Commutations of penance for money. Inviting to pilgrimage at Rome. Hooking in legacies. What a mass of treasure did all this come to! What a trade did he drive !§ 24. He did indeed easily, by the help of his mercenary divines, transform most points of divinity in accommodation to his interests of power, reputation, and gain. 25. Any pretence, how slender soev- er, will in time get some vaiidity ; being fortified by the consent of divers au- thors, and acurrent of suitable practice. Any story serving the designs of a party will get credit by being often told, especially by writers bearing a sem- blance of gravity; whereof divers will mever be wanting to abet a flourishing party. 26. The histories of some ages were composed only by the pope’s clients, friars and monks, and such people ; which therefore are partial to him, ad- dicted to his interests, and under awe of him. Fora long time none dared open his mouth to question any of his pretences, or reprehend his practices, without being called heretic, and treated as such. 27. Whereas the pope had two sorts sending * Vendit plumbum pro auro, + Taxa camerarie. t In the times of Henry I., the Bishop of York did pay £10,000 sterling for his pal].— Matt. Par. (p. 274.) { Peter-pence. ~_ Plat. p. 257. Quantas nobis divitias perperit hee fabula Christi? Ἠ 205 of opposites to subdue temporal princes and-bishops ; his business being to over- top. princes and to enslave all bishops, or to invade and usurp the rights of both ; he used the help of each to compass his designs on the other; by the authority of princes oppressing bishops, and by the assistance of bishops mating princes. 28. When any body would not do as he would have them, he did incessantly clamour or whine that ‘St. Peter was injured.””* 29. The forgery of the Decretal Epis- tles (wherein the ancient popes are made expressly to speak and act accord- ing to some of his highest preiences, devised long after their times, and which they never thought of, good men) did hugely conduce to his purpose ; author- izing his encroachments by the suffrage of ancient doctrine and practice: a great part of his canon law is extracted out of these, and grounded on them. The donation of Constantine, fictitious acts of councils, and the like counterfeit stuff, did help thereto; the which were soon embraced, as we see in Pope Gre- gory Il. As also legends, fables of miracles, and all such deceivableness of unright- eousness.t 30. Popes were so cunning as to form grants, and impute that to privileges de- rived from them, which princes did en- joy by right or custom.t 31. Synods of bishops called by him at opportune seasons, consisting of his vo- taries or slaves. None dared therein to whisper any thing to the prejudice of his authority. He carried whatever he pleased to propose, without check or contradiction. Who dared to question any thing done by such numbers of pas- tors, styling themselves the ‘* represen- tative of Christendom ῥ᾽ 32. The having hampered all the clergy with strict oaths of universal obe- dience to him (beginning about the times of Pope Gregory VII.), did greatly as- sure his power. * Quando et apostolica preceptio ad injuri- am B. Petri in illis partibus non observatur, et a te spernitur et violatur.—P. Nich. 1. Ep. 37. t ᾿Απάτη τῆς ἀδικίας ---Ὁ Thess. ii, 10. t Twisd. p. 17. Non necessitatis, sed hono- ris causa peto. Extortis assentationibus —P. | Leo. Epist. (ad Syn. Chale.) 206 99. When intolerable oppressions and exactions did constrain princes to strug- gle with him, if he could not utterly pre- vail, things were brought to composition ; whereby he was to be sure for that time a gainer, and gained establishment in some points, leaving the rest to be got afterward in more favourable junctures. Witness the) Henry II. and P. Alex. ITI. anno. 1172- Concordates¢ Baw Ill. and P. Greg. XI. anno 1373. between Henry V. and P. Mart. V. anno 1418. 34. When princes were fain to curb their exorbitances by Pragmatical Sanc- tions, they were restless till they had got those sanctions revoked. And when they found weak princes, or any prince in circumstances advantaging their de- sign, they did obtain their end. So Pope Leo X. got Lewis XI. to repeal the Pragmatical Sanctions of his ancestors. 35. The power he did assume to ab- solve men from oaths and vows, to dis- pense with prohibited marriages, &c., did not only bring much grist to his mill, but did enable him highly to oblige divers persons (especially great ones) to him- self. For to him they owed the quiet of their conscience from scruples; to him they owed the satisfaction of their de- sires, and legitimation of their issue, and title to their possessions. 36. So the device of indulgences did greatly raise the veneration of him: for who would. not adore kim, that could loose his bands, and free his soul from long and grievous pains ? SUPPOSITION VI. The next Supposition is this, “ That in fact the Roman bishops continually from St. Pe- ter’s time have enjoyed and exercised this sovereign power.” Tuis is a question of fact, which will best be decided by a particular consid- eration of the several branches of sover- eign power; that so we may examine the more distinctly whether in all ages the popes have enjoyed and exercised them, or not. And if we survey the particular branches of sovereignty, we shall find that the pope hath no just title to them, in reason, by valid law, or according to ancient practice ; whence each of them doth yield a good argument against his pretences. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. I. If the pope were sovereign of the — church, he would have power to con- vocate its supreme councils and judica- tories ; and would constantly have ex- ercised it. This power, therefore, the pope doth claim; and indeed did pretend to it a long time since, before they could obtain to exercise it: ‘I]t is manifestly ap- parent,” saith Pope Leo X., with appro- bation of his Lateran synod, ‘ that the Roman bishop for the time being (as who hath authority over all councils) hath alone the full right and power of indicting, translating, and dissolving councils :”’* and long before him, “ To the apostolical authority,” saith Pope Adrian 1... ‘* by our Lord’s command, and by the merits of St. Peter, and by the decrees of the holy canons, and of the venerable Fathers, a right and special power of convocating synods hath many- wise been committed :”+ and yet before him, ‘ The authority” (saith Pope Pe- lagius II.) ‘* of convocating synods hath been delivered to the apostolical see by the singular privilege of St. Peter.”’i But it is manifest that the pope cannot pretend to this power by virtue of any old ecclesiastical canon, none such being extant or produced by him; nor can he allege any ancient custom; there having been no general synod before Constan- tine: and as to the practice from that time, it is very clear, that for some ages the popes did not assume or exercise such a power, and that it was not taken for their due. Nothing ean be more evident, and it were extreme impudence to deny, that the emperors, at their pleas- ure, and .by their authority, did congre- * Distinct. 17. Cum etiam solum Rom. pontificem pro tempore existentem, tanquam auctoritatem super omnia concilia habentem, conciliorum indicendorum, transferendorum ac dissolvendorum plenum jus et potestatem ha- bere —— manifeste constet.—Conc. Lat. sess. ΧΙ. (p. 152), ann. + —— Cui jussione Domini, et meritis B. Petri apostoli, singularis congregandarum sy- nodorum authoritas, et sanctorum canonum ac verandorum Patrum decretis multipliciter privata tradita est potestas.—P. Hadrian I. apud Bin. tom. v. p. 565, (an. 785.) ¢ Cum generalium synodorum convocandi auctoritas apostolice sedi B. Petri singulari privilegio sit tradita P. Pelag. Il. Ep. 8, (Bin. tom. iv. p. 476), ann. 587. Qu. An heec epistola sit Pelagii Il.? Negat Launoius. ies A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. gate all the first general synods ; for so the oldest historians in most express terms do report, so those princes in their edicts did aver, so the synods themselves did declare. The most just and pious emperors, who did bear greatest love to the clergy, and had much respect for the pope, did call them without scruple; it was deemed their right to do it; none did remonstrate against their practice ; the Fathers in each synod did refer there- to, with allowance, and commonly with applause ; popes themselves did not con- test their right, yea commonly did peti- tion them to exercise it. | These things are so clear and so obvi- ous, that it is almost vain to prove them ; I shall therefore but touch them. In general, Socrates doth thus attest tothe ancient practice: “" We” (saith he) ““ do continually include the emperors in our history, because upon them, ever since they became Christians, ecclesiasti- cal affairs have depended, and the great- est synods have been and are made by their appointment :”* and Justinian, in his prefaiory type to the fifth general council, beginneth thus: “It hath been. ever the care of pious and orthodox em- perors, by the assembling of the most religious bishops, to cut off heresies, as they did spring up; and by the right faith, sincerely preached, to keep the holy church of God in peace :”+ and to do this was so proper to the emperors, that when Ruffin did affirm St. Hilary to have been excommunicated ina synod, St. Jerome, to confute him, did ask; “Tell me, what emperor did command this synod to be congregated ?”t imply- ing it to be illegal or impossible that a synod should be congregated without the imperial command. Particularly Eusebius saith of the first Christian emperor, that “ as-a com- *® Συνεχῶς καῖ τοὺς βασιλεῖς τῇ ἱστορίᾳ περιλαμ- δάνομεν, διότι ἀφ᾽ οὐ Χριστιανίζειν ἤρξαντο, τὰ τῆς ἐκκλησίας πράγματα ἤρτητο ἐξ αὐτῶν, καὶ αἱ μέγισται σύνοδοι τῇ αὐτῶν γνώμη γεγόνασί τε καὶ γίνονται .---- Socr. 5, Νά" aida ᾽ + Semper studium fuit orthodoxis et piis im- Peratoribus, protempore exortas hereses per congregationem religiosissimorum episcoporum amputare, et recta fide sincere pradicata in pace sanctam, Dei ecclesiam cusiodire Jus- tin. in Syn. δ, Collat. i. (p. 209), Grace p. 368, Magis emphatice. t Doce —— quis imperator hanc synodum jusserit congregari ?— Hier. 7 207 mon bishop appointed by God he did summon synods of God’s ministers ;” so did he “*command a great number of bishops to meet at Arles” (for decision of the Donatists’ cause ;) so did he also ‘“*command” the bishops from all quarters to meet at Tyre, for examination of the affairs concerning Athanasius; and that he did convocate the great svnod of Nice (the first and most renowned of all gen- eral synods) all the historians do agree, he did himself affirm, the Fathers there- of in their synodical remonstrances did avow; as we shall hereafter, in remark- ing on the passages of that synod, shew.* The same course did his son Constan- tius follow, without impediment; for al- though he was a favourer of the Arian party, yet did the Catholic bishops readi- ly at his call assemble in the great synods of Sardica,7 of Ariminum,t of Seleucia,|| of Sirmium,§ of Milan,§{ ἄς. Which he, out of a great zeal to compose dis- sensions among the bishops, did conyo- cate. After him the emperor. Valentinian, understanding of dissensions about divine matters, to compose them, did indicta synod in Illyricum.** A while after, for settlement of the Christain state (which had been greatly disturbed by the persecution of Julian and of Valens, and by divers factions), Theodosius I. did * command,” saith Theodoret, “ the bishops of his empire * Od τις κοινὸς ἐπίσκοπος ἐκ Θεοῦ καθιστάμενος συνόδους τῶν τοῦ Θεοῦ λειτουργῶν συνεκρότει.--- “ἃ - seb. de Vit. Const. 1. 44. Tete ἐκ διαφόρων καὶ ἀμυθήτων τόπων ἐπισκόπους εἰς τὴν ᾿Αρελατησίων πόλιν συνελθεῖν ἐκελεύσαμεν.---ἘΞθ5ο Ὁ. Hist. x. 5, Ep.ad Chrestum. Ad Arelatensium civita‘em pilssimi imperatoris voluntate adducti, say the Fathers in their Epistle to P. Sylvester him- self—Vide Euseb. de Vit. Const. lib. iv. cap. 41, 42, 43, et Socr. 1. 28. ἡ IIpocéragev εἰς Lapdixiy συνδραμεῖν ἐπισκόπους. —Theod. ii. 4; Soz. iit. 11 - Soer. i. 16, 20; Athan. tom. i. p. 761; Hil. in Fragm. p. Ju- bet ex toto orbe apud Sardicam episcopos con- gregari.— Sulp. ii. 52. t "Ex re τῆς τοῦ Θεοῦ κελεύσεως, καὶ τῆς σῆς εὖ- σεδείας προστάγματος, &c.—Syn. Arm. Ep. ad Const. Socr. n. 37. || Soer. ii. 39. ἣν----γενέσθαι τὸ βασιλέως ἐκέλευ- σε πρόσταγμα.--- ΑἸ. 351. ᾧ Ὁ βασιλεὺς σύνοδον ἐπισκόπων ἐν τῷ Σιερμίῳ γεσθαι ixévédevoe.—Socr. ii. 29; Soz. iv. 6, Ἵ Πρόσταγμα δὲ ἣν τοῦ βασιλέως ἐν Μεδιολάνῳ πόλει ποιεῖσθαι τὴν covodov.—Socr.1. 36; Soz.i.9, ** "Ey μὲν τῷ ᾿Ιλλυρικῷ σύνοδον γενέσθαι προσῖ- rate.—Theod. iv. 7. _— ΉΨΨΥ 208 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. to be assembled together at Constantino- ple;”* the which meeting accordingly did make the second general synod: in the congregation of which the pope had so little to do, that Baronius saith it was celebrated against his will. Afterwards, when Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople, affecting to seem wiser than others in explaining the mys- tery of Christ’s incarnation, had raised a jangle to the disturbance of the church ; for removing it, the Emperor Theodosius II. did ** by his edict command the bish- ops to meet at Ephesus; who there did celebrate the third general council : in the beginning of each action it is af- firmed, that the synod was “ convocated by the imperial decree ;”t the synod itself doth often profess it; the pope’s own legate doth acknowledge it; and so doth Cyril the president thereof. || The same emperor, upon occasion of Eutyches being condemned at Constanti- nople, and the stirs thence arising, did indict the second general synod of Ephe- sus) which proved abortive by the mis- carriages of Dioscorus, bishop of Alex- andria), as appeareth by his imperial letters to Dioscorus, and the other bish- ops, summoning them to that synod: ** We have decreed, that the most holy bishops meeting together,”§ &c. “ Af- * Σύνοδον δμοδόξων αὐτῷ avvexddece.—Soz. Vii. 7; Socr.v.8. Μόνης τῆς οἰκείας βασιλείας τοὺς ἐπισκόπους εἰς τὴν ωνσταντινούπολιν συναθροισθῆναι προσέταξεν. Theod. ν. 7. Repugnante Damaso celebrata, 4&c.— Baron. ann. 553, § 224. ἡ ΤΙρόσταγμα τοῦ βασιλέως εἰς τὴν σύνοδον συνιέ- vat éxéXcvoev.—Socr. vil. 34, Evagr. i. 3. t Ἔκ θεσπίσματος τῶν βασιλέων συγκροτηθεῖσα. || Ἢ ἁγέα σύνοδος, ἣ χάριτι Θεοῦ κατὰ τὸ θέσπι- σμα τῶν εὐσεδεστάτων καὶ φιλοχρίστων ἡμῶν βασιλέ- wy ovykpornfeica.— Syn. Eph. Act. 1. p. 291. The holy synod assembled by the grace of God, according to the decree of our most religious emperors, ic. ἡ χάριτι Θεεῦ καὶ πνεύματι τοῦ ὑμετέρου κράτους συναχθεῖσα. Ὁ. 297. Ta προστετ- αγμένα τῇ ἁγίᾳ συνόδῳ παρὰ τοῦ ὑμετέρου κράτους, &c.—Act. v. p. 347. ‘Tots ἀθροισθεῖσι κατὰ πρόσ- ταγμα τῶν βασιλέων. Ῥ. 404. “Ηντινα σύνοδον οἱ "Χριστιανικώτατοι καὶ φιλανθρωπότατοι βασιλεῖς ὥρι- σαν. Which synod our most Christian and gracious emperors appointed, saith Philip, the pope’s legate.—Act, i. p. 330. Ty ἁγίᾳ συνό- dw τῇ κατὰ Θενῦ χάριν καὶ θέσπισμα τῶν θεοφιλεστά- των καὶ φιλοχρίστων βασιλέων συναχθείσῃ To the holy synod assembled by the grace of God, and the command of our emperors, &c. So do Cyril and Memnon inscribe their Epis- tle. — Act. iv. p. 337. § 'E@econicapev κατά ταῦτο συνελθόντων bcvord- των, &e. ter the same manner the other most re- verend bishops were written to, to come to the synod.”* And, as Pope Leo doth — confess, calling it “ the council of bish- ops, which you” (Theodosius) ‘ com- manded to be held at Ephesus.”+ The next general synod of Chalcedon (An. 451) was convocated by the author- ity of the Emperor Marcian; as is ex- pressed in the beginning of each ac- tion,t as the emperor declareth, ἃ8 the synod itself, in the front of its Defini- tion,|| doth avow: “The holy, great, and cecumenical synod, gathered togeth- er by the grace of God and the com- mand of our most dread emperors, &c. has determined as follows.” The fifth general synod (An. 533) was also congregated by the authority of Justinian I. ;s and the emperors letter authorizing it, beginneth (as we saw be- fore) with an assertion (backed witha particular enumeration), that all former great synods were called by the same power: the Fathers themselves do say, that they had ““ come together according to the will of God, and the command of the most pious emperor.” So littie had the pope to do in it, that, as Baronius himself telleth us, it was congregated “against his will, or with his resistance.’ The sixth general synod at Constanti- nople was also indicted by the Emperor Constantine Pogonatus ; as doth appear by his letters, as is intimated at the en- trance of each action, as the synod doth acknowledge, as Pope Leo II. (in whose time it was concluded) doth affirm. The synod, in its Definition, as also in its Epistle to Pope Agatho, doth inscribe it- * TG αὐτῷ τύπῳ ἐγράφη καὶ rots ἄλλοις εὐλαδεσ- τάτουϊς ἐπισκόποις ὥστε παραγενέσθαι εἰς τὴν σύνοδον. —Syn. Chale. pars. i. p. 53: + Episcopale consilium, quod haberi apud Ephesum precepistis.—P. Leo I. Ep. 25. (et 24,) ad Theod. £ Kara θεῖον θέσπισνα συναθροισθεῖσα. Tiv ἁγίαν ὑμῶν ἠθροίσαμεν cbvodov.—( Act. vi. p. 345.) || ᾿Ἢ ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη καὶ οἰἱκουμενικὴ σύνοδος, ἡ κατὰ Θεσῦ χάριν, καὶ θέσπισμα τῶν εὐλαδεστάτων καὶ φιλοχρίστων ἡμῶν βασιλέων συναχεῖσα ὥρισε τὰ broreraypéva.—Act. vi. 346. ᾧ Pro Dei voluntate, et jussione piisimi im- peratoris ad hance urbem convenimus.—Col- lat. 8. 4 Ut que resistente Romano pontifice fuerit congregata. — Baron. ann. 553, ᾧ 219. ® Act. p. 368; Gr. p. 309, Lat. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. self, “The holy and ccumenical sy- nod, congregated by the grace of God, and the altogether religious sanction of the most pious and most faithful great Emperor Constantine :”* and in their Definition they say, “* By this doctrine of peace dictated by God, our most gracious emperor, through the divine wisdom being guided, as a defender of the true faith, and an enemy to_the false, having gathered us together in this holy and cecumenica! synod, has united the whole frame of the church,’t &c. In its ac- clamatory oration to the emperor, it saith, Ταῖς θειοτάταις ὑμῶν προστάξεσιν εἴκοντος ὅτε τῆς πρεσθυτάτης καὶ ἀποστολικῆς ἀκ- ρομόλεως ἀρχιερατικώτατος πρόεδρος καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐγάχιστοι, &e. Act. xviii. p. 271. * We all acquiescing in your most sacred commands ; both the most holy president of” (Rome) “ the most ancient and apos- tolical city, and we the least,” &c.t These are all the great synods which posterity with clear consent did admit as general: for the next two have been dis- claimed by great churches (the seventh by most of the western churches, the eighth by the eastern), so that even di- vers popes after them did not reckon them for general councils; and all the rest have been only assemblies of western bishops, celebrated after the breach be- tween the oriental and _ occidental churches. Yet even that second synod of Nice, which is called the seventh synod, doth avow itself to have “convened by the emperor’s cominand ;”|| and in the front *'H ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη καὶ οἰκουμενικὴ σύνοδος, ἡ κατὰ Θεοῦ χάριν καὶ πανευσεθὲς θέσπισμα τοῦ εὐσε- δεστάτου καὶ πιστοτάτου μεγάλου βασιλέως ζωνσταν- τίνου συναχθεισα.---Αοἴ, ΧΥΪ. p. 255, 285, (in Epist. ad P. Agath.) ἡ Ταύτῃ τῇ θεολέκτῳ τῆς εἰρήνης διδασκαὰ a θεοσ- Spws ὃ πραότατος ἡμῶν βασιλεὺς bdnyobpevos, & τῆς μὲν ὀρθοδοξίας ὑπέρμαχος, τῆς δὲ κακοδοξίας ἀντίμα- Kos, τὴν καθ' ἡμᾶς ἁγίαν ταύτην καὶ οἰκουμενικὴν ἀθροίσας ὁμήγυριν, τὸ τῆς ἐκκλησιας ἅπαν ἥνωσε συγ- κριμα.----Αοι. Xvill. p. 296, in Definitione Syno- ica. $ Kai γὰρ ἐπέγνωμεν ὅτι ἡ ἁγία καὶ μεγάλη καὶ οἱ ουμενι. ἔκτη σύνοδος, ἥτις κατὰ Θεοῦ χάριν, τῷ βασιλικῷ προστάγματι ἔναγχος ἐν τῇ βασιλίδι συνε- δροίσθη a ai, Leo 11. in Ep. ad Con. Imp. . 205. || Πᾶσα ἡ ἁγία σύνοδος ἡ κατ᾽ εὐδοκίαν Θεοῦ, προστάξει τε τῆς φιλοχρίστου ὑμῶν βασιλείας συνελ- θοῦσα..---Αὐαἱ. vii. p. 831: 1.519; i. 551 Σ i ὃ P. Joh. VIII. Ep. 247; P. Nic. I. Ep. 7, 8, 10; P. Hadr. 11. Ep. 26. Vor. Il. 27 of each action, as also of their synodi- cal Definition, the same style is retained. Hitherto it is evident, that all general synods were convocated by the imperial authority ; and about this matter divers things are observable. It is observable in how peremptory a manner the emperors did require the bishops to convene at the time and place appointed by them. Constantine, in his letter indicting the synod of Tyre, hath these words: “If any one presuming to violate our command and sense,’ ὅσ. Theodosius II. summoneth the bishops to the Ephesine synod in these terms: “ We, taking a great deal of care about these things, will not suffer any one, if he be absent, to go unpunished ; nor shall he find excuse either with God or us, who presently without delay does not by the time set appear in the place appointed.”’* In like terms did he call them to the second Ephesine synod: “If any one shall choose to neglect meeting in a synod so necessary and grateful to God, and by the set time do not with all diligence ap- pear in the place appointed, he shall find no excuse,’’t &c. Marcian thus indicteth the synod of Nice (after by him translated to Chalce- don:) “ It properly seemeth good to our clemency, that an holy synod meet in the city of Nice, in the province of Bi- thynia "*¢ Again we may observe, that in the imperial edicts, or epistles, whereby councils effectually were convened, there is nothing signified concerning the pope’s having any authority to call them; it is 586 ; iv.609; v. 696; vi. 722; vii.812; Defin. Synod, Act. vii. p. 817. * Kai ἡμεῖς δὲ τούτων πολλὴν ποιούμενοι φρουτίδα ἀπολιμπάνεσθαι οὐδένα φορητῶς ἀνεξόμεθα' οὐδεμίαν re ἕξει πρὸς Θεὸν, οὐδὲ πρὸς ἡμᾶς ἀπολογίαν, ὃ μὴ rapa- χρῆμα κατὰ τὸν προειρημένον καιρὸν, εἰς τὸν ἀφυρισ- θέντα τόπον σπουδαίως παραγενόμενος .---ΤἸοοιὶ Jun. Ep. ad Cyril. Cone. Eph. pars. i. p. 2, 6. + Ei δέ τις τὴν οὕτως ἀναγκαίαν καὶ τῷ Ocd φίλην παριδεῖν ἕλοιτο σύνοδον, καὶ μὴ πάση δυνάμει κατὰ τὸν προειρημένον καιρὸν τὸν ἀφορισθέντα καταλάδοι τόπον, οὐδεμίαν ἕξει πρὸς τὸ κρεῖττον, ἢ πρὸς τὴν ἡμετέραν εὐσέδειαν drodoylay.—Theod. in Ep. ad Diose. in Cone. Chale. Act. i. p. 53. t Τοῦτο ἰδικῶς τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ ἤρεσεν ἡμερότητι, ἵνα ἁγία σύνοδος ἐν τῇ Νικαιέων πόλει τῆς βιθυνῶν ἐπαρ- xias evyxpornd).—In Epist. ad Epise. Syn. hale. pars. i. p. 34. ‘ Euseb. de Vit. Const. iv. 42; (vide in v. p. 30.) 210 not as by licence from the pope’s holi- ness, but i their own name and authori- ty they act: which were very strange, if the popes had any plea then commonly approved for such a power. As commonly emperors did call synods by the suggestion of other bishops,* so again there be divers instances of popes applying themselves to the emperors with petitions to indict synods ; wherein sometimes they prevailed, sometimes they were disappointed: so Pope Libe- rius did request of Constantius to indict a synod for deciding the cause of Atha- nasius. ‘ Ecclesiastical judgment” (said he, as Theodoret reports) “ should be made with great equity : wherefore, if it please your piety, command a_judica- tory to be constituted ;”* and in his epis- tle to Hosius, produced by Baronius, he saith: ‘¢ Many bishops out of Italy met together, who together with me had be- seeched the most religious emperor that he would command, as_ he had thought fit, the council of Aquileia to meet.”’t So Pope Damasus, having a desire that a general synod should be celebrated in Italy for repressing heresies and factions then in the church, did obtain the impe- rial letters for that purpose directed to the eastern bishops, as they in their epis- tle to the western bishops do intimate: ** But because expressing a brotherly af- fection toward us, ye have called us, as your own members, by the most pious emperor’s letters, to that synod which by the will of God ye are gathering at Rome.”’|| Itis a wonder that Bellarmine should have the confidence to allege this passage for himself.' So again Pope Innocent I., being desir- ous to restore St. Chrysostom, ** did” (as Φ Kip os εἰκότως ἐδέησε νεύμασι τοῦ νέου Θεοδοσίου τὰ σκῆπτρα τῆς ἑώας διέποντος τὴν ἐν ἜἘφέ- σῳ πρώτην σύνοδον ἁλισθῆναι.----Ἰ νὰ σον. 1. 3. Ἷ Διόπερ εἴ σου δοκεῖ τῇ εὐσεβείᾳ κριτήριον συστα- θῆναι κέλευσον .---- heod. ι1. 10. ¢ Multi οχ Italia episcopi convenerunt, qui mecum religiosissimum imperatorem fuerant deprecati, ut juberet sicut ipsi placuerat, dudum concilium Aquileiense congregari.— Baron. ann. 353, ὁ 19. || 'Exmecdiv μέντοι τὴν ἀδελφικὴν περὶ ἡμᾶς ἀγάπην ἐπιδεικνύμενοι, σύνοδον ἐπὶ τῆς ‘Pipes Θεοῦ, βουλήσει συγκροτοῦντες, καὶ ἡμᾶς ὡς οἰκεῖα μέλη προσεκαλέσασ- θε, διὰ τῶν τοῦ θεοφιλεστάτου βασιλέως γραμμάτων. —Theod. ν. 9, ) Bell. de Pont. R. ii. 19. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. Sozomen telleth us*) “ send five bishops _ and two priests of the Roman church to Honorius, and to Arcadius the emperor, requesting a synod, with the time and the place thereof:” in which attempt he suffered a repulse; for the courtiers of Arcadius did repel those agents, ‘ as troubling another government which was beyond their bounds,’t or wherein the pope had nothing to do that they knew of. So also Pope Leol.t (whom no pope could well exceed in zeal to maintain the privileges and adyance the eminence of his See) did in these terms request Theodosius to indict a synod: ‘* Whence if your piety shall vouchsafe consent to our suggestion and supplication, that you would command an episcopal council to be held in Italy; soon, God aiding, may all scandals be .cut οἵ, Upon this occasion the emperor did appoint a coun- cil (not in Italy, according to the pope’s desire, but) at Ephesus; the which not succeeding well, Pope Leo again did address to Theodosius in these words: ‘All the churches of our parts, all bishops with groans and tears, do suppli- cate your grace, that you would com- mand a general synod to be. celebrated within Italy.°§ To which request (al- though backed with the desire of the western emperor) ‘Theodosius would by no means consent: for, as Leontius re- porteth, ‘‘ when Valentinian, being im- portuned by Pope Leo, did write to Theodosius II. that he would procure another synod to be held for examining whether Dioscorus had judged rightly or * Tliroudev ἐπισκόπους πέντε καὶ πρεσβυτέρους δύο τῆς Ῥωμαίων ἐκκλησίας πρὸς 'Ονώριον, kat’ Apradcov τὸν βασιλέα, σύνοδον αἰτήσοντας, καὶ καιρὸν ταύτης καὶ rénov.—Soz. vill. 28. + ‘Qs ὑπερορίαν ἀρχὴν ἐνοχλήσαντας.---ἸὈϊά. + Humiliter ac sapienter exposcite, ut peti- tioni nostra, qua plenariam indici synodum postulamus, clementissimus imperator dignetur annuere (sailh Pope Leo, to the clergy and people of Constantinople, Ep. 23.) || Unde si pietas vestra suggestioni ae sup- plicationi nostre dignetur annuere, ut intra Italiam haberi jubeatis episcopale concilium, cito auxiliante Deo poterunt omnia scandala resecari.—P. Leo I. Ep. 9. ᾧ Omnes partium ecclesiz nostrarum, omnes mansuetudini vestra cum gemitibus et laery- mis supplicant sacerdotes, ut generalem syno- dum jubeatis intra Italiam celebrari.—P. Leo I, Ep. 42. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. no, Theodosius did write back to him, saying, I shall make no other synod.””* The same pope did again of the same emperor petition for a synod to examine the cause of Anatolius, bishop of Con- stantinople: ‘*Let your clemency” (saith he) ‘ be pleased to grant an uni- versal council to be held in Italy ; as with me the synod, which for this cause did meet at Rome, doth request.” Thus did that pope continually harp upon one string, to get a general synod to be cele- brated at his own doors ; but never could obtain his purpose, the emperor being stiff in refusing it. The same pope, with better success (as to the thing, though not as to the place), did request of the Emperor Marcian a synod ;7 for he (concurring in opinion that it was needful) “ did,” saith Libera- tus, “‘ at the petition of the pope and the Roman princes, command ἃ general council to be congregated at Nice.” Now if the pope had himself a known right to convocate synods, what needed all this supplication, or this application to the emperors? Would not the pope have endeavoured to exercise his author- ity? would he not have clamoured or whined at any interruption thereof? Would so spiritful and sturdy a pope as Leo|| have begged that to be done by another, which he had authority to do of himself, when he did apprehend so great necessity for it, and was so much provok- ed thereto? Would he not at least have remonstrated against the injury therein done to him by ‘Theodosius ? All that this daring pope could adven- * Οὐαλεντινιανὸς ὀχλούμενος ὑπὸ Λέοντος τοῦ πάπα γράφει Θεοδοσίῳ τῷ μικρῷ, ἵνα ἐπιτρέψη σῦνο- ὁον γενέσθαι, εἰς τὸ γνώναι εἰ καλῶς ἔκρινεν 6 Διόοσ- κόρος ἢ οὐ" ὃ δὲ Θεοδόσιος ἀντέγραφεν αὐτῷ λέγων, ὅτι οὐ ποιῶ ἄλλην σύνυδον.---ἰ ,Ἔοηϊ. de Sect. Act. 4. + Sanctum clementie vestra studium, quo ad reparationem pacis ecclesiastice synodum habere voluistis, adeo libenter accepi, ut quam- vis eam fieri intra Italiam poposcissem, &c.— Leo, Ep. 50. Poposceram quidem a gloriosissi- ma clementia vestra, ut synodum, quam pro reparanda orientalis ecclesia pace a nobis eti- am petitam necessariam judicastis, aliquantis- per differi ad tempus opportunius juberetis P. Leo, Ep. 43, 44, 50. j 1 Sed eo defuncto, cum martianus imperii culmen fuisset adeptus, pro illa pape et princi- pum Romanorum petitione universale concili- um in Nicena congregari jussit.—Lib. Brev. cap. 13. Fortissimus Leo.— Leder. cap. 12. ὶ 211 ture at was to wind in a pretence, that the synod of Chalcedon was congregated by his consent; for, “It hath been the pleasure” (of whom? I pray) ‘*thata general council should be congregated, both by the command of the Christian princes and with the consent of the apos- tolical see,”* saith he very cunningly ; yet not so cunningly, but that any other bishop might have said the same for his See. This power, indeed, upon many just ac- counts, peculiarly doth belong to princes ; it suiteth to the dignity of their state, it appertaineth to their duty, they are most able to discharge it. ‘They are the guar- dians of public tranquillity, which con- stantly is endangered, which commonly is violated, by dissensions in religious matters (whence we must pray for them, that by their care we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and hones- ty ;*) they alone can authorize their sub- jects to take such journeys, or meet in such assemblies; they alone can well cause the expenses needful for holding synods to be exacted and defrayed ; they alone can protect them, can maintain or- der and peace in them, can procure ob- servance to their determinations; they alone have a sword to constrain resty and refractory persons (and in no cases are men so apt to be such as in debates about these matters), to convene, to confer peaceably, to agree, to observe what is settled; they, as nursing fathers of the church, as ministers of God’s kingdom, as encouragers of ali good works,' as the stewards οὐ God, intrusted with the great talents of power, dignity, wealth, enabling them to serve God, are obliged to cause bishops in such cases to perform their duty ; according to the example of good princes in holy scripture, who are commended for proceedings of this na- ture: for so king Josias did convocate a general synod of the church in his time: Then (saith the text) the king sent, and gathered together all the elders of Judah and Jerusalem. In this synod he presid- ed, standing in his place, and making a in causa fidei, propter quam generale concilium et ex precepto Christianorum prin- cipum, et ex consensu apostolice sedis placuit congregari.— Ep. 61. Κ 1 Tim. ii. 2. ' 158. xlix. 23; Wisd. vi. 4; Rom. xiii, 3, 212 covenant before the Lord ; its resolutions he confirmed, causing all that were pres- ent in Jerusalem and Benjamin to stand to that covenant: and he took care of their execution, making all present in Israel effectually to serve the Lord their God.™ So also did king Hezekiah gather the priests and Levites together, did warn, did command them to do their duty, and reform things in the church: My sons, said he, be not now negligent; for the Lord hath chosen you to stand before him, to serve him, and that ye should minister unto him, and burn incense.* Beside them none other can have rea- sonable pretence to such a power, or can well be deemed able to manage it: so great an authority cannot be exercis- ed upon the subject of any prince, with- out eclipsing his majesty, infringing his natural rights, and endangering his state. He that at his pleasure can summon all Christian pastors, and make them trot about, and hold them when he will, is in effect emperor, or in a fair way to make himself so. It is not fit therefore that any other person should have all the gov- ernors of the church at his beck, so as to draw them from remote places whither he pleaseth; to put them on long and chargeable journeys; to detain them from their charge.; to set them on what delib- erations and debates he thinketh good. It is not reasonable that any one, without the leave of princes, should authorize so great conventions of men, having such interest and sway ; it is not safe that any one should have such dependencies on him, by which he may be tempted to clash with princes, and withdraw his sub- jects from their due obedience. Neither can any success be well expected from the use of such authority by any, who hath not power by which he can force bishops to convene, to resolve, to obey ; whence we see that Constantine, who was a prince so gentle and friendly to the clergy, was put to threaten those bishops who would absent themselves from the synod indicted by himat Tyre ; and The- odosius (also “a very mild and religious prince’’) did the like in his summoning ™ 2Chron. xxxiv. 29, &c. 5 2Chron,. xxix. 4, 15, 20, 21, &c., ver. 11. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. the two Ephesine synods.* We likewise — may observe, that when the ‘ pope and western bishops,”’ in a synodical Epistle, ‘did invite those of the east to a great synod indicted at Rome, these did refuse the journey, alleging that it would be to no good purpose : ἢ so also when the western bishops did call those of the east, for resolving the difference between Fla- vianus and Paulinus, both pretending to be bishops of Antioch, what effect had their summons? And.so will they al- ways or often be ready to say, who are called at the pleasure of those who want force to constrain them: so that such au- thority in unarmed hands (and God keep arms out of the pope’s hand!) will be only a source of discords. Either the pope is a subject, as he was in the first times, and ‘then it were too great a presumption for him to claim such a power over his fellow-subjects in prejudice to his sovereign (nor indeed did he presume so far, until he had in a man- ner shaken off subjection to the empe- ror ;) or he is not a subject, and then it is not reasonable that he should have such power in the territories of another prince. ~The whole business of general synods was an expedient for peace, contrived by emperors, and so to be regulated by their order. Hence even in times and places where the pope was most reverenced, yet princes were jealous of suffering the pope to exercise such a power over the bishops their subjects ;¢ and to obviate it, did command all bishops not to stir out of their territories without licence ; particu- larly our own nation, in the council at Clarendon, where it was decreed,|| “ That they should not go out of the kingdom without the king’s leave.” To some things above said, a passage * TH πραότητι καὶ πάντας τοὺς ἀληθῶς ἱερωμένους ἐνίκα. ὃ βασιλεὺς Θευδόσιος πραὺς σφύδρα παρὰ πάντας τοὺς ἀνθρώπους τοὺς ὄντας ἐπὶ τῆς yiis.—Socr. vil. 42, Fi Thy ἀποδημίαν παρητήσαντο ὡς οὐδὲν ἔχουσαν xéodos.—Theod, v. 8. “Eypawev αὐτοί τε, καί Toartavds ὃ βασιλεὺς, συγκαλοῦντες εἰς τὴν δύσιν τοὺς ἀπὸ τῆς ἀνατολῆς ἐπισκόπους. ---30Ζ. vii. Ll. Both they and Gratian the emperor wrote, call- ing the eastern bishops into the west. t Philip of France.—Bin. tom. vii. p. 906. (an. 1302.) || Decretum est non licere —— exire regnum absque licentia regis. —Conc. Clarend. ; vide Matt. Par. ann, 1164. ὐὐδὼ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. may be objected which occurreth in the acclamation of the sixth synod to the Emperor Constantine Pogonatus ; where- in it is said, that Constantine and Sylves- ter did collect the synod of Nice; ‘Theo- dosius I. and Damasus (together with Gregory and Nectarius), the synod of ‘Constantinople ; ‘Theodosius II., with Ce- lestine and Cyril, the Ephesine synod ;* and so of the rest. ‘To which I answer, that the Fathers mean only for the hon- our of those prelates to signify, that they in their places and ways did concur and co-operate to the celebration of those sy- nods; otherwise we might, as to matter of fact and history, contest the accurate- ness of their relation; and it is observa- ble, that they join other great bishops, then flourishing, with the popes; so that if their suffrage prove any thing, it prov- eth more than our adversaries would have, viz. that all great bishops and pa- triarchs have a power or right to convo- cate synods. As for passages alleged by our adver- saries, that no synod could be called, or ecclesiastical law enacted, without con- sent of the pope, they are nowise perti- nent to this question; for we do not de- ny that the pope had a right to sit im ev- ery general synod ; and every other pa- triarch at least have no less; as all rea- son and practice do shew : and as they of the seventli synod do suppose, argu- ing the synod of Constantinople, which condemned the worship of images, to be no general council, ‘‘ because it had not the pope’s co-operation, nor the consent of the eastern patriarchs.” Syncellus, the patriarch of Jerusalem’s legate in the eighth synod, says, “‘ For this reason did * Syn. Sext. Act. xviii. p. 272.—Keveravri- vos 6 deicibacros, καὶ Lidbeorpos ὃ ἀοίδιμος τὴν ἐν Νικαίᾳ μεγάλην τε καὶ περίδλεπτον συνέλεγεν cive- éov. ἀλλ᾽ ὃ μέγιστος βασιλεὺς Θεοδόσιος, καὶ Δάμασος ὃ ἀδάμας τῆς πίστεως -Τ᾽ρηγόριός τε καὶ txrdpios τὸν ἐν ταύτη τῇ βασιλίδι πόλει συνήθροιζον σύλλογον. Πάλιν Νεστόριος, καὶ πάλιν Kedeorivos, καὶ Ἰζύριλλος, ὃ μὲν γὰρ τὸν Χριστὸν διήρει, καὶ κα- Τεδίχαζεν, οἱ δὲ τῷ δεσπότῃ συλλαμβανόμενοι σὺν τῷ τῶν σκῆπτρων δεσπόζοντι τὸν κατατομέα κατέβαλλον -.- --- + ᾿Αναγνωσθέντων τίνων συνοδικῶν τῶν διαγορευ- ὄντων μὴ δεῖν γίνεσθαι ποτὲ sare οἰκουμενικὴν πα- ὃς συμφωνίας τῶν λοιπῶν ιωτάτων πατριΐρ- τη Awteacta Syn. Nic. II. 4 518. Ἐ Οὐκ ἔσγε συνεργὸν τὸν τηνικαῦτα τῆς Ρωμαίων , καθὼς νόμος ἐστὶ ταῖς συνόδοις" ἀλλ᾽ οὔτε συμφρονοῦντας αὐτὴ τοὺς πατριάρχας τῆς ἴω, ἄςς.--- Syn. 7, Act. vi. p. 725. I αὐ ᾿ — o ee Gat © — eed ae 213 the Holy Spirit set up patriarchs in the world, that they might suppress scandals arising in the church of God :”* and Photius is in the same synod told, ‘* That the judgment passed against him was most equal and impartial, as proceeding not from one, but all the four patri- archs.”’*+ That a general synod doth not need a pope to call it, or preside in it, appear- eth by what the synods of Pisa and Con- stance define, for provision in time of schisms.° Il. It inseparably doth belong to sove- reigns in the general assemblies of their states to preside, and moderate affairs ; proposing what they judge fit to be con- sulted or debated ; stopping what seem- eth unfit to be moved ; keeping proceed- ings within order and rule, and steering them to a good issue ; checking disorders and irregularities, which the distemper or indiscretion of any persons may create in deliberations or disputes. This privilege, therefore, the pope doth claim ; not allowing any general council to be legitimate, wherein he in person, or by his legates, doth not preside and sway. ‘All Catholics” (says Bellar- mine) ‘teach this to be the chief pon- tiffs proper office, that either in person or by his legate he preside, and as chief judge moderate ἃ}. But for this prerogative no express grant from God, no ancient canon of the church, no certain custom, can be pro- duced. Nor doth ancient practice favour the pope’s claim to such a prerogative, it ap- pearing that he did not exercise it in the first general synods, | St. Peter himself did not preside in the apostolical synod at Jerusalem, where he was present; but rather St. James, as we before have shewed.’ * Διὰ τοῦτο τὰς πατριαρχιπὰς κεφαλὰς ἐν τῷ κόσ- po ἔϑετο τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, ἵνα τὰ ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ τοῦ Θεοῦ vty tw τῶ σκάνδαλα dt’ αὐτῶν ἀναφανίζων- rat.—Syn. δ, Act. i. p. 930. T ᾿Απροσωπόληπτος ἡ κρίσις, ὡς οὐκ ἐξ ἑνὸυ μόνου θρόνου, ἀλλὰ τῶν τεσσάρων πατριαρχικῶν γινομένη.---- Act. v. p. 946. 1 Catholici omnes id munus proprium esse docent summi pontificis, ut per se, vel per lega- tos preesideat, et tanquam supremus judex om- nia moderetur.— Bell de Conc. i. 19. * Sess. xxxix. (p. 1109.) Ρ Acts xv. 214 In all the first synods, convocated by emperors, they did either themselves in person, or by honourable persons autho- rized by them, in effect preside, govern- ing the proceedings. In the synod of Nice, Constantine was the chief manager, director, and modera- tor of the transactions ;* and under him | other chief bishops did preside ; but that the pope’s legates had any considerable influence or sway there, doth by no evi- deuce appear, as we shall hereafter out of history declare. In the synod of Sardica (which in de- sign was a general council, but in effect did not prove so, being divided by a schism into two great parts), Hosius, bishop of Corduba, did preside, or (by reason of his age and venerable worth) had the first place assigned to him, and bore the office of prolocutor: so the synod itself doth imply ; ‘* All we bish- ops” (say they in their Catholic Epistle) ἐς meeting together, and especially the most ancient Hosius, who, for his age, and for his confession, and for that he hath undergone so much pains, is worthy all reverence : ἡ so Athanasius express- ly doth call him: ‘*The holy synod,” saith he, ‘‘the prolocutor of which was the great Hosius, presently sent to them.”i &c. The canons of the synod intimate the same, wherein he proposeth matters, and asketh the pleasure of the synod: the same is confirmed by the subscriptions of their general Epistle, wherein he is set before Pope Julius himself: (** Hosius from Spain, Julius of Rome, by the presbyters Archidamus and Philoxenus.”’||) In this all ecclesias- tical histories do agree; none speaking * TIpoedidov τὸν λόγον τοῖς mpoédoo1s.—Euseb. ill. 13. t Πάντων ἡμῶν συνελθόντων ἐπισκόπων, καὶ μά- λιστα τοῦ εὐγηροτάτου 'Οσίου, τοῦ καὶ διὰ τὸν χρό- vov, καὶ διὰ τὴν ὑμολυγίαν, καὶ διὰ τὸν τοσοῦτον κά- parov ὑπομεμενηκέναι, πάσης αἰδοῦς ἄξιον τυγχάνον- τος, ὅζο —Athan. Apol. 11. p. 701. 1 Εὐθὺς ἡ ἁγία σύνοδος, ἧς προήγυρος iy ὃ μέγας “Ὅσιος, ἔγραψεν αὐτοῖς, %C.—Athan. ad Solit. p. 819, ᾿Αμέλει “Ὅσιος, cai πρωτογένης, οἵ τότε ὑπῆρ- Nov ἄρχοντες τῶν ἀπὸ τῆς δύσεως ἐν Σιαρδικῇ συνε- ληλυθότων Soz. xii. 13. Tov ἐν Lapdixh συνεληλυθότων mpwredoas.—Theod. Wen dels δὲ piv "Ὅσιος ἐξῆρχε τῆς γνώμης -------. Syn. Chale. ad Imp. Mare. p. 469. || "Ὅσιος ἀπὸ Lravias, "lobdtos ‘Pans de’ ᾿Αρχι- δάμου, καὶ Φιλοξένου πρεσθυτέρων͵ &c. apud Athan. Ῥ. 767. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. of the pope’s presiding there by his le- — gates. %: In the second general synod at Con- stantinople the pope had plainly no stroke ; the oriental bishops alone did - there resolve on matters, “" being head- ed” by their patriarchs (of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem), as Sozomen saith; ** being guided by Nectarius and St. Gregory Nazianzen,’’* as the council of Chalcedon in its Epistle to the em- peror doth aver. In the third general synod at Ephesus, Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, did, preside, as Pope Leo himself doth testify : he is called ‘* the head of it,’’+ in the Acts. We may note, that the bishop of the place where the synod is held did beara kind of presidency in all synods ;* so did St. James, bishop of Jerusalm, in the first synod, as St. Chrysostom noteth ; so did Protogenes at Sardica, and Nec- tarius at Constantinople, and Memnon in this of Ephesus. | It is true, that according to the acts of that synod, and the reports of divers his- torians, Pope Celestine (according toa new politic device of popes) did author- ize Cyril to represent his person, and act as his proctor in those affairs ; assigning to him, as he saith, “‘ jointly both the au- thority of his throne” (that is, his right of voting), ““ and the order of his place” (the first place in sitting;) but it is not consequent thence, that Cyril upon that sole account did preside in the synod.f He thereby had the disposal of one so considerable suffrage, or a legal concur- rence of the pope with him in his act- ings; he thereby might pretend to the first place of sitting and_ subscribing (which kind of advantages it appeareth that some bishops had in synods by the * Baron. ann, 553, § 224. ‘Hyotvro. Soz. vil. 7. Top dé Nexréotos σὺν Τρηγορίῳ τὴν ἦγε- μανίαν ἤρατο.---(οηο. Chale. in Epist. ad Imp, Marc. (p. 469.) + Prioris Ephesinz synodi, cui sancte me- moriz Cyrillus episcopus tune prasedit.—P. Leo I, Ep. 47. ἹΚεφαλὴ τῶν συνειλεγμένων ἁγιω- τάτων ἐπισκόπων Kopidd\os.—Relat. Act. Eph. cap. 60. t Συναφθείσης σοι τῆς αὐθεντίας ταῦ ἡμετέρου θρόνου, καὶ τῇ ἡμετέρᾳ τοῦ τύπου διαδὸο χῇ.---ΟΘ 651. ad Cyril. Relat. cap. 16. NV. Yet the Fathers in their Epistle to Pope Celestine do only take notice of Arcadius, Projectus, and Philippus supplying his place.—Act. p. 353. 4 Digress. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. virtue of the like substitution in place of others), but he thence could have no au- thoritative presidency ; for that the pope himself could by no delegation impart, having himself no title thereto warrant- ed by any law or by any precedent; that depended on the emperor’s will, or on the election of the Fathers, or on a tacit regard to personal eminence in compari- son to others present: this distinction Evagrius seemeth to intimate, when he saith, that the divine Cyril did “ adminis- ter it, and the place of Celestine’* (where a word seemeth to have fallen out:) and Zonaras more plainly doth ex- press, saying, that “Cyril, Pope οἵ Al- exandria, did preside over the orthodox Fathers, and also did hold the place of Celestine :’+ and Photius; ‘Cyril did supply the seat and the person of Cel- estine.”"t If any latter historians do confound these things, we are not obliged to comply with their ignorance or mis-. take. Indeed as to presidency there we may observe, that sometime it is attributed to Cyril alone, as being the first bishop pre- sent, and bearing a great sway : some- times to Pope Celestine, as being in rep- resentation present, and being the first bishop of the church in order; some- times to both Cyril and Celestine ; some- times to Cyril and Memnon, bishop of Ephesus, who, as being very active, and having great influence on the proceed- ings are styled the presidents and rulers of the synod.|| The which sheweth, * Κυρίλλου τοῦ θεσπεσίου διέποντος καί τὸν Ke- λεστίνου rérov.—LEvagr. i. 4. ἡ Προισταμένου τῶν ὀρθοδόξων πατέρων τοῦ ἐν ἁγίοις υρίλλου πάπα ᾿Αλεξανδρείας, ἐπέχοντος δὲ καὶ τὸν τύπον Kedecrivov.—Zon. in Syn. Eph. can. 1. t Tod “Ῥώμης ἹΚελεστίνου ἐπλήρου τὴν καθέδραν καὶ πρόσωπον. | "Hs ἡγεῖτο ὁ μακάριος πατὴρ ἡμῶν ΚΚύριλλος.--- Conc. Chale. Act. iv. p. 302. Συνόδου καθηγη- τής.---ΟἹεν. Const. in Syn. Eph. p. 418. Cui refit Cyrillus—Syn. Chale Act. i. p. 173. ς ἡγεμόνες of ἁγιώτατοι Kedeorivos καὶ ἸΚύριλλος. —Syn. Chale. Defin. in Act. ν. p. 338; iv. p 300. The bishops of Isauria to the Emperor Leo, say, that Cyril was partaker with Pope lestine.&c. Dum, B. Celestino incolumis ecclesie Romanorum particeps Part, 3, Syn Chale. p. 522. Τῆς συνόδου πρόεδροι .---- Eph. Act. iv. p. 338. (p. 420, 422.) Πρόεδροι τῆς ἐκ- κλησίαξ.---Αοἰ. v. p. 347. 'Ἡμέτεροι πρόεδροι .---- Jat. Syn. p. 406. "Εξαρχοι τῆς συνόδου.---ἢ 6- lat. p. 411. 215 that presidency was a lax thing, and no peculiarity in right or usage annexed to the pope; nor did altogether depend on his grant or representation, to which Memnon had no title. The pope himself and his legates are divers times in the Acts said συνεδρεύειν, “ὁ to sit together” with the bishops ; which confidence doth not wel! comport with his special right to presidency.* Yea, it is observable, that the oriental bishops, which with John of Antioch did oppose the Cyrilian party in that synod, did charge on Cyril, that “ he (as if he lived ina time of anarchy) did proceed to all irregularity ;°7 and that “ snatch- ing to himself the authority, which neither was given him by the canons, nor by the emperor’s sanctions, did rush on to all kind of disorder and unlawfulness ;7°t whence it is evident, that, in the judg- ment of those bishops (among whom were divers worthy and excellent per- sons),|| the pope had no right to any au- thoritative preisdency. This word “ presidency” indeed hath an ambiguity, apt to impose on those who do not observe it; for it may be taken for a privilege of precedence, or for authority to govern things: the first kind of presidence the pope without dis- pute, when present at a synod, would have had among the bishops, (as being the bishops of the first 566. Ὁ as the sixth synod calleth him; and ‘the first of priests,”4{ as Justinian calleth him;) and in his absence his legates might take up his chair (for in gen- eral synods each see had its chair assigned to it, according to its order of dignity by custom.) And according to * Σύνοδος ἢ συνεδρεῦει καὶ ὃ τῆς μεγάλης 'Ῥώμης dpytexicxoros.—Relat. ad Imp. p. 422. Love- δρευσάντων ἀπὸ τῆς ἑσπέρας, &C —Act. ii wp: "See, "Tdv ἀποστολικὸν θοόνον συνεδρεύοντα ipiv.—Act. iv. p. 340. Tt 'Qs ἐν ἀδασιλεῦτοις καιροῖς χωρεῖ πρὸς πᾶσαν παρανομίαν t A gulls ἑαυτῷ τὴν αὐθεντίαν τὴν pire παρὰ τῶν κανόνων αὐπῶ δεδομένην, μῆτε ἀπὸ τῶν ὑμετέρων θεσπισμάτων, ὁρμᾶ πρὸς πᾶν εἶδος ἀταξίας καὶ παρανο- plas —Relat. ad Imper. Act. Eph. p 380. || The bishops of Syria being then the most learned in the world; as John of Antioch doth imply, p, 377. ᾧ Πρωτόθρονος τῆς éxeA\nolas.—Syn, Vi. Ῥ. 285. Tov re συνθρόνων αὐτῇ μετ᾽ αὐτὴν ἁγιωτάτων πατρι- ἀρχῶν.---Ἰοιά. p. 997. ¥ Πρῶτος fepfow.—Justin. Cod. tit. 1. 216 this sense the patriarchs and chief met- ropolitans are also often (singly or con- junctly) said to preside, as sitting in one of the first chairs. But the other kind of presidency was (as those bishops in their complaint against Cyril do imply, and as we shall see in pratice) disposed by the emperor, as he saw reason ; although usually it was conferred on him who, among those present, in dignity did precede the rest: this is that authority, αὐθεντίας which the Syrian bishops complained against Cyril for assuming to himself, without the emperor’s warrant, and whereof we have a notable instance in the next general synod at Ephesus. For, In the second Ephesine synod (which in design was a general synod, lawfully convened, for a public cause of determin- ing truth and settling peace in the church ; but which by some miscarriages proved abortive), although the pope had his legates there, yet by the emperor’s order Dioscorus, bishop of Alexandria, did preside: “" We” (saith Theodosius in his Epistle to him) “ do also commit to thy godliness the authority and the pre- eminency of all things appertaining io the synod now assembled :”* aud in the synod of Chalcedon it is said of him, ““he had received the authority of all affairs, and of judgment:”t and Pope Leo I. in his Epistle to the emperor saith, that Dioscorus did “ challenge to himself the principal place :᾽ 1 (insinuating a com- plaint, that Dioscorus should be prefer- red before him, although not openly con- testing his right.) ‘he emperor had indeed some reason not to commit the presidency to Pope Leo, because he was looked upon as prejudiced in the cause, having declared in favour of Flavianus, against Eutyches; whence Eutyches declined his legate’s interessing in the judgement of his cause, * Kai pay (συνῆν) καὶ 'Lod\tos ἐπίσκοπος τόπον πλὴρῶν Λέοντος, τοῦ τῆς πρεσθυτέρας Ῥώμης ἐπισκό- mov.——Evag. 1.10. ᾿Αλλὰ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πάν- των τῶν ἀνηκόντων τῇ νῦν συναθροιζομένη συνόδῳ τὴν αὐθεντίαν, καὶ τὰ πρωτεῖα τῇ σῇ θεοσεθδείᾳ παρέχομεν. —Syn. Chale. Act. i. p. 89. 1 Τὴν ἐξουσίαν πάντων eidnpas πραγμάτων καὶ τῆς kricews.—Ibid. p. 100, "Hs ἔξαρχος καθεισ- τήκει Atébcxapos.—Evag. i. 10. t Si is qui sibi locum principalem vin- dicabat, sacerdotalem moderationem custodire voluisset Leo 1. Ep, 25, 26, ἄς. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. saying, “‘ They were suspected to him, because they were entertained by Flavi- anus with great regard.”* And Dio. scorus, being bishop of the next See, was — taken for more indifferent, and otherwise — a person (however afierward it proved) of much integrity and moderation: “* He did” (saith the emperor) ‘* shine by the grace of God, both in honesty of life, and orthodoxy of faih;’+ and ‘Theodoret himself, before those differences arose, doth say of him, that he was by common fame ‘reported a man adorned with may other kinds of virtue, and that es- pecially he was celebrated for his mod- eration of mind.” It is true, that the legates of Pope Leo did take in dudgeon this preferment of Dioscorus ; and (if we may give cred- ence to Liberatus) ** would not sit down in the synod, because the presession was not given to their holy See;”’ and after- wards, in the synod of Chalcedon, the pope’s legate, Paschasinus (together with other bishops), did complain that Dioscorus was preferred before the bish- op of Constantinople :§ but notwithstand- ing those ineffectual mutinies, the emper- or’s will did take place, and according thereto Dioscorus had (although he did not use itso wisely and justiy as he should) the chief managery of things. It is to be observed, that to other chief bishops the presidency in that synod is also ascribed, by virtue of the emperor’s appointment: “ Let the most reverend bishops” (say the imperial commissaries in the synod of Chalcedon), ‘* to whom the authoritative management of affairs was by the royal sovereignty granted, speak why the epistle of the most holy * ὙὝποπτοί μοι γεγόνασι, &c.— Syn. Chale, Act.i. p. 80. τῇ σῇ ἁγιωσύνῃ ἐλλαμποήσῃ Ce τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ χάριν ἐπὶ re τῇ τοῦ βίου σεμνότητι, καὶ τῇ ὁρ- θοτάτῃ πίστει.---- [Πδοὰ. Ep. ad Diose. in Sya. Chale. Act. i. p. 59. Ὁ ἸΠυλλοῖς μέν καὶ ἄλλοις εἴδεσιν dost} κοσμεῖσ- θαι τὴν σὴν ἀγιωσύνην ἀκούομεν---οοὐκ ἥκιστα δὲ ἅπαν- τες ἄδουσι τὸ τοῦ φρονήματος pérpcov.— Theod. Ep. 60. || Ecclesiae Romane diaconi, vices habentes P, Leonis assidere non passi sunt, eo quod non data fuerit preesessio sanctee sedi eorum.—Li- ber. cap. 12. ᾧ Πασχασῖνος elrev—ijds ἡμεῖς Θεοῦ θέλοντος Κύριον τὸν ᾿Ανατόλιον πρῶτον ἔχομεν" οὗτοι πέμπτον ἔτοξαν τὸν μακάριον Φλαυιανόν.---γῃ. Chale. Act. i. p. 62. | ) | A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. Archbishop Leo was not read ;”* and ** You”? (say they again), ‘‘ to whom the power of judging was given : ἢ and of Dioscorus, Juvenalis (bishop of Jerusa- lem), Thalassius (of Caesarea), Eusebius (of Ancyra), Eustathius (of Beristus), Basilius (of Seleucia), it is by the same commissioners said, that they ‘“‘had re- ceived the authority, and did govern the synod which was then ;°¢ and Elpidius, the emperor’s agent in the Ephesine 217 pounding and allowing matters to be dis- cussed ; moderating debates by their in- terlocution, and driving them to an issue ; maintaining order and quiet in proceed- ings; performing those things which the pope’s legates at Trent or otherwhere, in the height of his power, did undertake. To them supplicatory addresses were made for succour and redress by persons needing it; as, for instance, ‘*‘ Command” | (said Eusebius of Doryleaum) ‘ that my synod itself, did expressly style them | supplications may be read.’’* *“ presidents ;” and Pope Leo himself calleth them *‘ presidents and primates of the synod.”’|| Whence it appeareth, that at that time, according to common opinion and prac- tice, authoritative presidency was not af- fixed to the Roman chair. In the synod of Chalcedon, Pope Leo did indeed assume to himself a kind of presidency by his legates ;| and no won- der that a man witha stout and ardent spirit (impregnated with high conceits of his See, and resolved with all his might to advance its interests, as his legates themselves did in effect declare to the world) should do so; having so favoura- ble a time, by the misbehaviour of Diosco- rus and his adherents ; against whom the clergy of Constantinople, and other Fa- thers of the synod, being incensed, were ready to comply with Leo (who had been the champion and patron of their cause), in allowing him extraordinary respect, and whatever advantages he could pre- tend to. Yet in effect, the emperor by his com- missioners did preside there ;° they pro- * Oj cidabicrarot inicxoros, ols ἣ αὐθεντία τότε TOY πρᾳττομένων παρὰ τῆς βασιλικῆς ἐδίδοτο κορυφῆς, EL Ibid. p. 65. ἡ ‘Yucis, ols ἡ ἐξουσία τοῦ δικάζειν ἐδέδοτο Ibid. p. 77. ε Τοὺς ἐξουσίαν εἰληφότας, καὶ ἐξάρχονπας τῆς τότε συνύδου Act. Hv. “p. 202; iv. 288. (Evagr. 24, ἔξαρχοι.) Kowwils ἁπάντων φωνῆς συν- θεμένης τε καὶ εὐφημησάσης τὴν ὑμῶν τῶν προεδρευσάν- των ψῆφον Ibid. p. 70. || Siqaidem pene omnes, qui in consensum presidentium aut traducti fuerant, aut coacti. —Leo. Ep. 51. Ibi primates synodi nec resis- tentibus, &c.—P. Leo 1. Ep. § In his fratribas—me synodo vestrafra- ternitas existimet praesidere.—P. Leo I. Ep. 47. τῶν σύ μέν ὡς κεφαλὴ μελῶν ἡγεμόνευες, ἐν τοῖς τὴν σὴν τάξιν éxiyover.—Syn. Chale. Epist. ad Leon. τ Act. i. p. 50, 202; ii. 211. Vor. Ill. 28 ἃ. Of them leave is requested for time to diliberate : ‘* Command” (saith Atticus, in bebalf of other bishops) “ that respite be given, so that within a few days, with acalm mind, and undisturbed reason, those things may be formed which shall be pleasing to God and the holy Fa- thers.”°7 Accordingly they order the time for consultation; ‘* Let’ (say they ‘* the hearing be deferred for five days, that in the mean time your holiness may meet at the house of the most holy Archbishop Anatolias, and deliberate in common about the faith, that the doubtful may be instructed,”’*f They were acknowledged judges, and had thanks given them for the issue by persons concerned : * |” (saith Eunomi- us, bishop ef Nicomedia) “do thank your honour for your right judgment.”’|| And in,the cause between Stephanus and Bassianus concerning their title to the bishopric of Ephesus, they baving declar- ed their sense, “the holy synod cried, This is right judgment ; Christ hath de- cided the case, God judgeth by you;’’§ and in the result, upon their declaring their opinion, “ἢ the whole synod exclaim- * Kedcicare τὰς δεήσεις τὰς ἐμὰς ἀναγνωσθῆναι ..---- Act. i. p. δ0. + Ἱζελεύσατε ἐνδοθῆναι ἡμῖν, ὥστε ἐντὸς ὀλίγων ἡμερῶν ἀκυμάντῳ διανοίᾳ καὶ ἀταραχῳ λογισμῷ τὰ τῷ Θεῷ δοκοῦντα καὶ τοῖς ἁγίοις πατράσι τυπωθῆναι.---- Act. 1 p. 219. £ 'Ὑπετεθήσεται ἡ ἀκρόασις ἕως ἡμερῶν πέντε, Gore ἐν τῷ μεταξὺ συνελθεῖν τὴν ὑμετέραν ἁγιωσύνην εἰς τὸ τοῦ ἁγιωτάτυυ ἀἁρχιὲπισκόπου ᾿Ανατολίου, καὶ κοινῶς περὶ τῆς πίστεως βουλεύσασθαι, ἵνα oi ἀμφιϑάλλοντες διδα χθῶσι.- τ Αι, iv. p. 289. || Εὐχαριστῶ τῆ δικαιοκρισίᾳ τῆς μεγαλοπρεπείας ὑμῶν..---- cl, Xin. Ρ. 420. § aH ἁγία σύνοδος ἐβόησεν, Αὕτη δικαία κρίσις, ὃ Χριστὸς ἐδίκασε τῇ ὑπυθεσει, ὃ Θεὸς de’ ὑμῶν δικάζει, —Act. xii. p. 40Y. 218 ed, This isa right judgment, this is a pious order.”’* When the bishops, transported with eagerness and passion, did tumultuously clamour, they gravely did check them, saying, ‘“*These vulgar exclamations neither become bishops, nor shall advan- tage the parties.”’+ In the great contest about the privileges of the Constantinopolitan see, they did arbitrate and decide the matter, even against the sense and endeavours of the pope’s legates τῇ the whole synod con- curring with them in these acclamations, “This is a right sentence; we all say these things; these things please us all ; things are duly ordered: let the things ordered be held.”’|| The pope’s legates themselves did avow this authority in them; for, * If” (saith Paschasinus, in the case of the Egyptian bishops) ** your authority doth command, and ye enjoin that somewhat of humanity be granted to them,”&c.§ And in another case, “If,” said’ the bishops, ‘* supplying the place of the apos- tolical see, your honours do command, we have an information to suggest.” ] Neither is the presidency of these Ro- man legates expressed in the Conciliar Acts ; but they are barely said συνελθεῖν (to concur), and συνεδρεύειν (to sit to- gether), with the other Fathers :* and ac- cordingly, although they sometimes talk- ed high, yet it is not observable that they did much there; their presidency was nothing like that at Trent, and in other like papal synods. [τ may be noted, that the emperor’s deputies are always named in the first place, at the entrance of the Acts, before the pope’s legates, so that * Tlica ἢ ἁγία σύνοδος ἐθόησεν, Αὕτη δικαία κρί- σις, οὗτος εὐσεδὴς ror »5.—Ibid. p. 414. t Ai ἐκϑοήσεις αἱ δημοτικαὶ οὔτε ἐπισκόποις πρέπ- ουσιν, οὔτε τὰ μέρη ὠφελήσουσιν.----Αοτ. i. p δδ. κατὰ συνοδικὴν ἐκυρώσαμεν Wihdov.—Syn. Chalc. ad Leon. Ep. p. 475. || Οἱ εὐλαθέστατοι ἐπίσκοποι ἐβόησαν, αὕτη δικαία ψῆφος, ταῦτα πᾶὰᾶντες λέγομεν, ταῦτα πᾶσιν ἀρίσκει, πάντα δεόντως ἐτυπώθη, τὰ τυπωθέντα κρατεΐτω.---- Act. xvi. p. 404. § Εἰ προστάττει ἡ ὑμετέρα ἐξουσία, καὶ κελεύετε τί ποτε αὐτοῖς παρασχεσθῆναι φιλανθρωπίας ἐχόμενον Act. Iv. p. 31δ. 4 Οἱ cidabicrarot éricxora imioyovres τὸν τό- mov τοῦ ἀποστολικοῦ θρόνου εἶπον" εἰ mpoorarret Fj ὑμετέρα μεγαλειότης, ἔχομεν διδασκαλίαν ὑποθάλεῖν. —Act. xvi. p. 451. * Act. v. vii. viii. p. 366; ix. xi. xiii. xiv.; iii. (p. 230.) _—_ SS ee A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ~~ : ν᾿. p they who directed the notaries were not popish. In effect, the the emperor was president, though not as a judge of spirite — ual matters, yet as an orderer of the con- — ciliar transactions; as the synod doth report it to Leo: ‘ The faithful empe- rors” (said they) ‘* did preside” (or gov- ern it) “ΤῸ good order sake.”* In the fifih general synod, Pope Vigi- lius indeed was moved to be present, and (in his way) to preside; but he, out of state or policy, declined it;+ wherefore the patriarch of Constantinople was the ecclesiastical president, as in the begin- ning of every collation doth appear: whence clearly we may infer that the pope’s presidency is nowise necessary to the being of a general council. In the sixth general synod the empe- ror in each Act is expressly said to pre- side, in person, or by his deputies ;t al- though Pope Agatho had his leguaies there. In the synod of Constance sometim»s the cardinal of Cambray, sometim:s of Hostia, did preside (by order of the synod itself), and scmetimes the king of the Romans did supply that place 3| so little essential was the pope’s presidency to a council deemed even then, when papal authority had mounted to so high a pitch. Nor is there good reason why the pope should have this privilege, or why this prerogative should be affixed to any one See; so that (if there be cause ; as if the-pope be unfit, or less fit; if princes or the church cannot confide in him; if — he be suspected of prejudice or partiali- ty; if he be party in causes or contro- versies to be decided; if he do himself need correction) princes may not assign, or the church with allowance of princes may not choose any other president, more proper in their judgment for that charge: * Βασιλεῖς δὲ πιστοὶ πρὸς εὐκοσμίαν ἐξῆρχον.---- Relat. Syn. ad Leon. 473, t Ideo petimus presidente nobis vestra be- atitudine, sub tranquillitate, et mansuetudine sacerdotali, sanc tis propositis evangeliis, com= muni tractatu, &c.—Coll. i. p. 212, (et im Const. Vigil.) $ [Ιροκαθημένου τοῦ εὐσεβεστατου βασιλέως Kwv- σταντίνου, XC. || Dominus Rom. rex indutus vestibus re- galilusrecessit de sede sua solita. et transivit ad aliam sedem positam in [ronte allaris, tanquam presidens pro tune in concilio— on divine legis integritas—P. Gel. Ep. 4. ——— OO eee 219 rors serviceable to his interests: the which effects of such power, exercised by him in the synod of Trent, and in di- vers other of the later general synods, experience hath declared. Ill. If the Pope were sovere?gn of the church, the legislative power, wholly or in part, would belong to him; so far, at least, that no synod, or ecclesiastical consistory, could, without his consent, determine or prescribe any thing; his approbation would be required to give life and validity to their decrees; he should at least have a negative, so that nothing might pass against his will: this is a+ most essential ingredient of sove- reignty ; and is therefure claimed by the pope, who long hath pretended that no decrees of synods are valid without his consent and confirmation. ‘But the decrees made by the holy popes of the chief see of the Roman church, by whose-authority and sanction all synods and holy councils are strength- ened and established, why do you say, that you do not receive and observe them ὁ ἢ ἐς Lastly, as you know nothing is 86- counted vatid, or to be received in uni- versal councils, but what the see of St. Peter has approved; so, on the other side, whatever she alone has rejected, that only is rejected.”’*+ “We never read of any synod that was valid, unless it were confirmed by the apostolic authority.” ** We trust no true Christian is now ignorant, that no See is above all the rest more obliged to observe the constitution of each council, which the consent of the universal church hath approved, than the prime See, which, by its au- thority, confirms every synod, and by * Decretalia autem, que a sanctis pontifici- bus prime sedis Romane ecclesie sunt insti- tula, cujus auctoritate atque sanctione omnes synodi, et sancta concilia roboran ‘ur et stabilita~ tem sumunt, cur vos non habere, ve! observare dicitis?——Papa Nic. I Ep. 6. (ad Photinm.) + Denique ut in universalibus conciliis, quid ratum vel quid prorsas accepium, nisi quod se sedes Β' Petri probavit (ut ipsi scitis) habevar ; sicut e contrario quod ipsa sola reprubavit, hoe solummoedo consistat hactenus reprobatam,— P. Nich. 1. Ep. 7. $ —— Nulla quam synodus rata legatur, que apostolica auctoritate non fuerit fulta.— P. Pelag. ii. Epist. 8. ( Dist. 17.) * Nic. II, Lugd. Lat. IV. V. 220 , continued moderating, preserves them according to its principality,”* &e. But this pretence, as it hath no ground in the divine law, or in any old canon, or in primitive custom ; so it doth cross the sentiments and practice of antiquity ; for that in ancient synods divers things were ordained without the pope’s consent, di- vers things against his pleasure. What particular or formal confirma- tion did St. Peter yield to the assembly at Jerusalem ? That in some of the first general syn- ods he was not apprehended to have any negative voice, is by the very tenor and air of things, or by the little regard expressed toward him, sufficiently clear. There is not in the synodical Epistles of Nice or of Sardica any mention of his confirmation. Interpretatively all those decrees may be supposed to pass without his consent, which do thwart these pretences; for if these are now good, then of old they were known and admitted for such; and being such, we cannot suppose the pope willingly to have consented in derogation to them. Wherefore the Nicene canons estab- lishing ecclesiastical administrations with- out regard to him, and in authority equalling other metropolitians with him, may be supposed to pass without his con- sent. The canons of the second general council, and of all others confirming those; as also the canons of all synods which advanced the see of Constantino- ple, his rival for authority, above its for- mer State, first to a proximity in order, then to an equality of privileges with the see of Rome, may, as plainly contrary to his interest and spirit, be supposed to pass without his consent :7 and so divers * Confidimus quod nullus jam veraciter Christiauus ignoret uniuscujusgue synodi con- stitutum, quod universalis ecclesiw probavit assensus, non aliquam magis exequi sedem pre ceteris oportere, quam primam; que et unamquamque synodum sua auctoritate con- firmat, et continuata moderatione custodit, pro suo scillicet principatu, &e.—P. Gelas I. Ep. 13. (ad Fpisc. Dard.) vide p. 647, Tract. de Anath. God hath promised to bless particular synods.— Matt. xviii. 19. + Persuasioni tue in nullo penitus suffragatur quorundam episcoporum ante 60, ut jactas, an- nos, nunquamque a pradecessoribus tuis ad osiolice sedis transinissa notitiam A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. popes have affirmed. If we may believe : Pope Leo (as I suppose), the canons of — the second council were not transmitted — to Rome: they did therefore pass, and obtain in practice of the catholic church, without its consent or knowledge. Pope Gregory |. saith, “that the Roman Church did not admit them ?’* wherein it plainly discorded with the catholic chureh, which with all reverence did re- ceive and hold them: and in despite to the canon of that synod, advancing the royal city to that eminency, Pope Gela- sius 1, would not admit it for so much as ἃ metropolitian see.t O proud insolency ἢ O contentious frowardness ! O rebellious contumacy against the catholic church and its peace! (Such was the humour of that See, to allow nothing which did not suit with the interests of its ambition.) But further, divers synodical decrees did pass expressly against the pope’s mind and will: I pass over those at Tyre, at Antioch, at Ariminium, at Con- stantinople, in divers places of the east (the which do yet evince that commonly there was no such opinion entertained of this privilege belonging to the pope), and shall instance only in general syneds. In the synod of Chalcedon “ equal privileges” were assigned to the bishop of Constantinople, as the bishop of Rome had ;t¢ this, with a general con- ‘| currence, ‘* was decreed and subscribed,” although the ““ pope’s legates did earnest- ly resist, clamour, and protest against it ;”’|| the imperial commissioners and all Lzo Ep. 53. (ad Anat.) Cone. Constant. can. 3; Concil. Chale. can. 9, 17, 28; Syn. ἘΠῚ can. 36. * Romana autem ecclesia eosdem canones vel gesta synodi illius hactenus non bhabet, nec accipit; in hoc autem eandem synodum ac- cepit quod est per-eam contra Macedonium definitum.—P. Greg. M. Ep. vi. 31. The same Pope Leo [. doth affirm.— Ep. 53. tT ejus civitatis quae non solum inter sedes numeratur, sed nec inter metropolitano- rum jura censetar, &c.—P. Gelas. 1. Ep. 13. (ad Epise. Dard.) - t "Ica πρεσθεῖα. ἸΠάντω ἡ σύνοδος ἐκύρωσε.---[Ἰἢ fine Auctorum. p. 464.) || Inde enim fratres nostri, ab apostolica sede directi, qui vice mea synodo_ preesidebant, probabiliter atque constanter illicitis ausibus obstiterunt, aperte reclamantes, &c.—Leo 1. Ep. 53, 54. οὐδεὶς jvayxacOn.—(Act. xvi p. 469, against Fr. Οἱ εὐλαθίστατοι ἐπίσκοποι *ébneav, Leo’s assertion, that the consent was extorted.) To ἐκ πολλοῦ τρατῆσαν ἔθος rari συνυδιτὴν éxv- ρώσαμεν ψῆφον, say the Fathers to Pope Leo(p a a a aie eat Ω A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. the bishops not understanding or not al- lowing the pope’s negative voice. And whereas Pope Leo (moved with a jealousy, that he who thus had obtain- ed an equal rank with him should aspire to get above him) did fiercely dispute, exclaim, inveigh, menace against this or- der, striving to defeat it, pretending to annul it, labouring to depress the bishop of Constantinople from that degree, which both himself and his legates in the synod had acknowledged due to him ;* in which endeavour divers of his successors did imitate him: * Eusebius, bishop ef Do- rylzeum, said, | have willingly subscribed, because I have read this canon to the most holy pope of Rome, the clergy of Constantinople being present, and he re- ceived it.””* Yet could not he or they accomplish their design; the veneration of that syn- od and consent of Christendom over- bearing their opposition; the bishop of Constantinople sitting in all the sendy ing general synods in the second place, without any contrast; so that at length popes were fain to acquiesce in the bish- op of Constantinople’s possession of the second place in dignity among the patri- archs. In the fifth general synod Pope Vigilius did make a constitution, in most express terms, prohibiting the condemnation of the “‘ three chapters” (as they are called), and the anathematization of persons de- ceased in peace of the church: “ We dare not ourselves” (says he) ** condemn Theodorus, neither do we yield to have him condemned by any other 3+ and in the same constitution he orders and de- crees, ** That nothing be said or done by any to the injury or discredit of Theodo- ret, Bishop of Cyrus,a man most ap- proved in the synod of Chalcedon: 475.) By a synodical vote we have confirmed this ancient custom. * Εὐσέδιος ἐπίσκοπος Δορυλαίου εἶπεν ἑκὼν ὑπε- yeaa’ ἐπειδὰν καὶ τὸν κανόνα τοῦτον τῷ ἁγιωτάτῳ πάπα éy Ῥώμη ἐγὼ ἀνέγνων, παρόντων κληρικῶν ἹΚωνσταντινουπόλεως, καὶ ἀπεδέξατο airév.—Syn. Chale. Act χνὶ(Ρ. 462), supra. + Eum (Theodorum) nostra non audemus damnare sententia, sed nec ab alio quopiam condemnari concedimus —Vig. Const. p. 186. ¢ Statnimus atque decernimas nihil in inju- Tiam atque obtrectationem probatissimi in Chalcedonensi "πὶ viri, hoc est Theodoreti u Ep. 53, 54, 55, 61, 62. 221 “and the same” (says he) “ have the de- crees of the apostolical see determined, that no man pass a new judgment upon persons dead, but leave them as death found them.* Lastly, by that constitu- tion he specially provides, that (as he had before said) nothing might be dero- gated from persons dying in the peace and communion of the universal church, by his condemning that perverse opin- ion.”*F Yet did the synod (in smart terms re- flecting on the pope, and giving him the lie, not regarding his opinion or authori- ty) deeree, that persons deceased were |i- able to be anathemat'zed ; they did anath- ematize Theodorus, they did expressly condemn each of the “ chapters τ they threatened deposition or excommunication on whoever should oppose their constitu- tion ; they anathematize whoever doth not anathematize Theodorus. || But Pope Vigilius did refuse to approve their doctrine and sentence; and there- fore (which was the case of many other bishops, as Baronius himself doth con- episcopi Cyri, sub taxatione nominis ejus a quoguam fieri vel proferm.—Zbid. * Tdemque regulariter apostolice sedis defi- niunt constitata, mulli licere noviter aliquid de moritvorum judicare personis; sed in hoe re- lingui, in quo unumquemque stipremus dies invenit Ind. + Hac presentis constitutionis dispositione quam maxime providemus, ne (sicut supra dix:'mus) personis, qu in pace et communione universalis ecciesiz quieverunt, sub hac dam- nati a nobis perversi dogmatis ocecasione ali- quid derogetur —Jhid. ¢ Quoniam autem post hee omnia impieta- tis illus defensoris injuriis contra Creatorem suum dictis gloriantes dicebant non oporter eum post mortem anathematizare qui haec dicunt nullam curam Dei jadicaiorum faciunt, nec apostolicarum pronunciationum, nec pater- narum traditionum.—Coll. viii. p. 289. Con- demnamus autem et anathematizamus una cum omnibus ahis hereticis et Theodoram — Coll. viii. p 291. Quod dicitur a quibusdam quod in communicatione et pace, detunctus est Theodorus, mendacium est, et calumnia magis adversus ecclesiam.—Coll. v. p. 250. Sit quis conatus fuerit contra hac quepie disposuimus, vel tradere, vel docere, vel scribere, siquidem episcopus vel clericus sit, iste lanquam aliena a sacerdotibus et statu ecclesiastico faciens, de- nudabitur episcopatu vel clericaiu: si autem monachus vel laicus sit, anathematizabuur.— (Coll, viii. p. 293.) || Si quis defendit et non anathematizat eum —— anathema sit.—Jdid. 222 fess and argue) was driven into banish- ment ;" wherein he did expire.* Yet posterity hath embraced this syn- od asa legitimate and valid general syn- od ; and the popes following « did profess the highest reverence thereto, equally with the preceding general synods ;7 so litile necessary is the pope’s consent or concurrence to the validity of synodical definitions. Upon this Baronius hath an admirable reflection: ‘‘ Here βίαν," saith he, “Ὁ reader, and consider the matter attently” (ay, do so, 1 pray), “that it is no new thing that some synod, in which the pope was not even present by his legates, but did oppose it, should yet obtain the title of an (Ecumenical Synod; whenas af- terward the pope’s will did come ‘tn, that it should obtain such a title.”¢ So, in the opinon of this ductor, the pope can easily change the nature of things, and make that become a general synod which once was none; yea which, as it was held, did not deserve the name of any synod at ἃ|}.}} O the virtue of papal magic! or rather, O the impu- dence of papal advocates! The canons of the sixth general coun- cil, exhibited by the Trullane (or Quini- sext) synod, clearly and expressly do condemn several doctrines and practices of Rome:”: J] ask whether the’ pope did confirm them? They will, to be sure, as they are concerned to do, answer, No: and indeed Pope Sergius, as Anas- tasius in his Life reporteth, did refuse them ;§ yet did they pass for legitimate * contra ipsins (pontificis Rom.) decre- ta ab ea (synodo) pariter sententia dicta —Ba- ron. ann. 553, ὁ 219. Non consentientes depo- siti in exilium miss: sunt.— Lib. cap. 24. + Greg. Ep. i. 21.—Quiniam quoque ‘syno- dum pariter veneror, &c.—1. 24; Pelag. II. Ep. Agatho Syn. vi. Act. 4; Leo. Syn. vi. Act. 18; Hadrian ad Nectar. t Hie siste, lector, atque rem attente consi- dera ; non esse hoe novum, ut aliqua synodus, cui nec per legatos ipse pontifex interfuerit, sed adversatus fuerit, titulam tamen obtinuerit cecumenice ; cum postea ut hujusmodi titalum obtineret, Romani: pontificis voluntas accessit. — Baron. ann. 553, § 224. || Siad numeros omnes, ὅσο, Plene consen- ties ipsam non cecumenice tanitum, sed nec privaiz synodi mereri nomen.—Jd. ann, 553, § 219. | ὁ in quibus diversa capitula Romane ’ Baron. ann. 553, ὁ 223. ” Can. 2,7, 13, 36, 55, 58, 67. “=e 7 μὰς. eee A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. in the whole church; for in their gener-— al synod (the second Nicene), without contradiction, one of them is alleged (out of the very original paper, wherein the Fathers had subscribed) as a *t canon of the holy general sixth synod ;”* and avowed for such by the Patriarch ‘Tara- sius, both in way of argument of defence and of profession in his synodical Epistle to the patriarchs (where he saith, that “together with the. divine doctrines of the sixth synod, he doth also embrace the canons enacted by it;”t of which Epistle Pope Adrian, in his answer there- to, doth recite a part containing those words, and applaud it for orthodox ;f sig- nifying no offence at his embracing the Trullane canons. And all those hundred and two canons are again avowed by the synod in their antuthesis to the synod of Constantinople. In fine, if we believe Anastasius, Pope John VII. did, “ being timorous, out of human frailty, direct these e€anons, without amendinent, by two metropolites, 10 the emperor ;”’|| that is, he did admit them so as they stand. But it may be instanced that divers syn- ods have asked the pope’s consent for ratification of their decrees and acts. So the Fathers of the second general synod, having in an Epistle to Pope Da- masus and the western bishops, declared what constitutions they had made, in the close speak thus: “In which things, be- ing legally and canonically settled by us, we do exhort your reverence to ac- quiesce, out of spiritual charity and fear of the Lord.”§ So the synod of Chalcedon did, with much respect, ask from Pope Leo the ecclesie contraria scripta inerant.—Anast. in Vit. Joh. VII® * Kava τῆς ἁγίας καὶ οἰκουμενικῆς ἕκτης συνόδου. —Syn. Nic. IJ Act. iv. (031 ) Tlowrérumos χάρτης ἐστὶν, ἐν ᾧ ὑπέγρ αψαν οἱ πατέρες. —I bid. + Τῆς δὲ αὐτῆς ἁγίας ἕκτης συνόδου, μετὰ πάντων τῶν ἐνθέ ἕσμως καὶ θειωδιὺς ἐκϑωνηθέντων δ᾽γμάτων rap’ αὐτῆς, καὶ τοὺς ἐιδυθέντας κανόνας ἀποδέχομαι. —Act. in. p. 592. t Ταύτῃ τῇ μαρτυρίᾳ τῆς ὀρθοδόξου πίστεως, KC. —Ibid. (p. 363.) Act. vi. p. 732. (Dist. xvi. cap. ὅς &c.) || Sed hic humana fragilitate timidus hos nequaquam tomos emendans per suprafatos meiropolitas direxit ad principem,—Anast, in Vit. Joh. VIT. § Οἷς ὡς ἐνθέσμως καὶ κανονικῶς παρ᾽ ἡμῖν κεκρα- τηκόσι καὶ τὴν ἡμετέραν συγχαίρειν παρακαλοῦμεν εὖ- λάθειαν, τῆς πνευματικῆς μεσιτευούσης ἀγάπης, καὶ τοῦ κυριακοῦ φόδου, &c.—-Theod. v. 9. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. confirmation of its sanctions. ‘That you may know how that we have done nothing for favour or out of spite, but as guided by the divine direction, we have made known to you the force of all that has been done, for your concurrence, and for the confirmation and approbation of the things done.’’* Of the fifth synod, Pope Leo II. saith, “that he agreed to what was determined in it, and confirms it with the authority of the blessed St. Peter.”’+ To these allegations we reply, that it was indeed the manner of all synods (for notification of things, and promulga- tion of their orders; for demonstration and maintenance of concord; for adding Weight and authority to their determina- tions ; for engaging all bishops to a wil- ling compliance in observing them, for at- testation to the common interest of all bishops in the Christian truth, and in the governance and edification of the church), having framed decrees concerning the public state, to demand in fairest terms the consent to them of all Catholic bish- ops, who were absent from them, to be attested by their subscription. So did Constantine recommend the Ni- cene decrees to all bishops, undertaking that they would assent to them.t So (more expressly) the synod of Sar- dica, in their Epistle to all bishops of the Catholic church: ** Do ye also, our breth- ren and fellow-ministers, the more use diligence, as being present in spirit with our synod, to yield consent by your sub- scription, that concord may be preserv- ed everywhere by all the fellow-minis- ters.”’|| So did Pope Liherius request of the * να δὲ γνῶτε ὡς οὐδὲν mors χάριν, ἣ πρὸς ἀπέχ- θείαν πεποιήκαμεν, ἀλλ᾽ ὡς θείῳ κυδϑερνώμενοι πνεῦμα- τι, πᾶσαν ὑμῖν τῶν πεπραγμένων τὴν δύναμιν ἐγνωρί- σαμεν εἰς σύστασιν ἡμετίραν, καὶ τῶν πεπραγμένων βεϑαίωσίν τε καὶ συγκατάθεσιν.---ϑγη, Chale. ad I, Leon. 1. p. 476. Tots rap’ αὐτῆς ᾿“ισθεῖσι συναινεῖ, καὶ τ αὖ- θεντία τοῦ μακαρίου ἸΪέτρου BeBarot.—P. Leo II. Ep. (p. 306 ) t ᾿Ασμένως δέχεσθε τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ χάριν καὶ θείαν ὡς ἀληθῶς ἐντολὴν De Vit. Const. tii. 90. Kai αὐτὸς δὲ τῇ ὑμετέρᾳ ἀγχινοίᾳ ἀρέσαι ὑπεσχόμην. —Ib. ni. 19. || Drovddcare δὲ μᾶλλον καὶ ὑμεῖς, ἀδελφοὶ καὶ συλλειτυυργοὶ, ὡς τ πνι ὕματι συνόντες τῇ συνύδω μῶν συνεπι ψηφίζεσθαι du’ ὑπογραφῆς ἱμετίρας, trip τοῦ παρὰ πάντων τῶν πανταχοῦ συλλειτουργῶν τὴν πο. διασώζεσθαι.--οῦν ἃ. Sard. Episi. apud than. in Apol. ii. p, 766. 223 Emperor Constantius, ‘* that the faith de- livered at Nice might be confirmed by the subscription of all bishops.’’* So did Athanasius ‘ procure a synod at Alexandria to confirm the decrees at Sardica and in Palestine concerning him.’’+ So the Macedonian bishops are said to have authorized their agents δ᾽ to ratify the faith of consubstantiality.”°¢ Many such instances occur in story, by which it may appear that the decrees of synods concerning faith, or concern- ing any matters of common interest, were presented to all bishops, and their con- sent requested or required ; because, say the Roman clergy in St. Cyprian, “" ἃ decree cannot be firm, which has not the consent of many.”’|| Whence it is no wonder, if any synods did thus proceed toward so eminenta bishop as was he of Rome, that they should endeavour to give him satisfac- tion; that they should desire to receive satisfaction from him of his conspiring with them: in faith, of his willingness to comply in observing good rules of dis- cipline; that (as every vote had force, so) the suffrage of one in so great digni- ty and reputation might adjoin some re- gard to their judgment. The pope’s confirmation of synods, what was it in effect but a declaration of his approbation and assent, the which did confirm by addition of suffrage ; as those who were present by their vote, and those who were absent by their subscrip- tion, are said to confirm the decrees of councils ;f] every such consent being supposed to increase the authority ;, wlience the number of bishops is some- limes reckoned according to the sub- scriplions of bishops absent; as the council of Sardica is sometimes related ΡΣ - κ᾿ ᾿ Υ͂ ΄ "» ἘΠ ζήτει δὲ τὴν μὲν ἐν Ntxafy παραδοθεῖσαν πιστιν iroyp upatas τῶν πάντω., ἐπισκόπων κρατύνεσθαι ..---- Soz. iv. 1]. ἡ Σύνοδον γενέσθαι rapecnetace τῶν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου ἐπισκόπων, καὶ ἐπι Ψψηφίσαι τοῖς ἐν Σαρδοῖ καὶ ΠΠαλαισ- τίνη περὶ αὐτοῦ δεδογμένοις.---Ἰ ἀν iv, 1. 1 ᾿Ιὐντείλάμενοι κυρῶσαι τὴν τοῦ ὁμοουσίου miorty.—Sucr. iv. 12. || ——quoniam nee firmum decretum potest esse, quod non plurimorum videbitur habere consensum —Cler, Rom. apud Cyp. Ep. 91. § Παρακαλοῦμεν τοινυν τίμησον ταῖς ταις Ψήφοις τὴν κα ἰσιν —Syn Chale. ad Leon. p. 476, Ιζατά τὴν συνοδικὴν ἐκυρώσαμεν WY ipov —_ =<, Epist. Syn. Chale. ad Leon. p. 475. 224 to consist of three hundred _ bishops, al- though not two hundred were present, the rest concurring by subscription to its definitions. * Other bishops, in yielding their suf- frage, do express it by, “1 confirm, I de- fine, I decree.””* But the effectual confirmation of synods, which gave them the force of laws, was in other hands, and depended on the imperial sanction. So Justinian affirmeth generally : ‘ All these things at diverse times following, our above-named predecessors, of pious memory, corroborated and confirmed by their laws what each council had deter- mined, and expelled those heretics who attempted to resist the definitions of the aforesaid four councils, and disturb the churches.’ So particularly Constantine (as Athana- sius himself reporteth) ** did by law con- firm the decrees of the great synod of Nice;”t and Eusebius assureth the same: ‘** He” (saith he) ““ did ratify the decrees of the synod by his authority.”’|| His letters are extant, which he sent about the world, exhorting and requiring all to conform to the constitutions of that synod, So Theodosius did confirm the decrees of the second general synod, * adding” (saith Sozomen) “his confirmatory suf- frage to their decree ;”°§ the which he did at the supplication of the Fathers, addressed to him in these terms: ‘* We therefore do beseech your grace, that by your pious edict the sentence of the synod may be authorized; thatas by the letters of convocation you did honour the * Sententias fratrum omnes sequimur, om- nes confirmamus, omnes observandas esse de- cernimus.—Conc. Rom. P. Hil. p. 579. + Hisitaque omnibus perdiversa tempora subsecutis, pradicti pia recordationis nostri pa- tres ea qua in unoguoque concilio judicata sunt, legibus sais corroboraverunt, et confirma- verunt : et hereticos qui definitionibus preedic- toram S guatuor conciliorum resistere, et ec- clesjas conturbare conati sunt, expulerunt.— Justin. in Conc. V. Coll. i. (p. 210.) 1 Ta παρ᾽ ἐκείνων γραφέντα, τοῦ συνεδρίου Koww- viv, ἐκράτυνε vopw.— Athan. apud Theod. ii, 4. || Ta τῆς συνόδου δόγματα κυρῶν ἐπεσφραγίζετο.---- Euseb. de Vit. Const. ii. 235, 'Ὕποδέχεσθαι καὶ διατάττειν dpetrere, Id. 11}, 20, ὁ Kai ra piv dds τῇ συνόδῳ ἔδοξε, καὶ ὃ βασιλεὺς ἐπεψηφψίσατο.----ὃ0Ζ. Vil. 9 . ᾿ * Socr. ii. 20, et Vales. ann. ibid. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. assembly, so you would also confirm the result of things decreed.”* The third general synod was also con- firmed by Theodosius II., as Justinian telleth us: “ ‘The above-named Theodo- sius, of pious memory, maintaining what had been so justly determined against Nestorius and his impiety, made his con- demnation valid.”t And this emperor asserted this_priv- ilege to himself, as.of right and custom belonging to him; writing to the synod in these words: “ For all things, so as may please God, without contentious- ness and with truth being examined, ought so to be established by our reli- giousness. tf The other abortive synod at Ephesus was also confirmed by ‘Theodosius junior, as Dioscorus, in his defence, alleged in these words, which shew the manner of practice in thiscase: ** We then, indeed, did judge the things which were Judged ; the whole synod did accord with us, and gave verdict by their own votes, and sub- scribed ; and they were referred to the most religious emperor Theodosius, of happy memory ; and he did by a general law confirm all things judged by the holy and cecumenical synod.”’|| So also did the Emperor Marcian con- firm the synod of Chalcedon, as himself telleth us in his royal edict :§ ‘* We (saith he) ““ having by the sacred edict of our serenity confirmed the holy synod, did warn all to cease from disputes about * Δεόμεθα τοίνυν τῆς σῆς ἡμερότητος γράμμασι τῆς σῆς eboeSeiag ἐπικυρωθῆναι τῆς συνόδου τὴν ψη- pov, tv’ ὥσπερ τοῖς τῆς κλήσεως γράμμασι τὴν ἐκκλῆς- σίαν τετίμηκας, οὕτω καὶ τῶν δοξάντων ἐπισφραγίσης τὸ rédos,— Pret. ad Can. Gone. Const. (apud Bin. p. 660.) + Sed preedictus pix recordationis Theodo- sius vindicans ea,-que ita recte contra Nesto- rium, et ejus impietatem fueraut judicata, fe- cit firmiter obtinere contra eum factam con- demnationem.—Justin. in Quinto Conc. Coll. 1. t Χρὴ γὰρ πάντα κατὰ τὸ τῷ Θεῷ μέλλον ἀρέσκειν δίχα φιλονοικίας καὶ μετὰ ἡληθείας ἐξετασθίντα οὕτω παρὰ τῆς ἡμετέρας θεοσεδείας βεθαιωθῆναι.----Ἐ pist. Tbeod. ad Syn. Eph. in Actis Cone, p. 870. || Ἡμεῖς τοίνυν ἐκρίναμεν τὰ κεκριμένα" συνήνεσεν ἡμῖν πᾶσα ἡ σύνοδος, καὶ κατέθετο οἰκείαις φωναῖς, καὶ ὑπέγραψε" καὶ ἀνηνέχθη τῷ εὐσδεστάτῳ βασιλεῖ τῆς θείας λήξεως Θεοδασίῳ: καὶ ἐδεδαίωσε πάντα τὰ κεκριμένα παρὰ τῆς ἁγίας καὶ οἰκουμενικῆς συνόδου νό- μῳ γενικῷ. -τοῦγη. Chale. Act. i. p. bY, ‘Leo τῆς ἡμετέρας ἡμερότητος διατάγματι τὴν ἁγίαν βεδαιώσαντες σύνοδον ὑπεμνήῆσαμεν ἅπαντας, ὥστε τῶν περὶ θρησκείας παύσασθαι διαλέξεων.---ΟΟὨ 6. Chale. part iii. p. 478. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. religion ;” with which Pope Leo signifi- eth his compliance in these terms: ‘ But because by all means your piety and most religious will must be obeyed, | have willingly approved the synodical constitutions about confirming the catholic faith and condemning heretics, which pleased me.*” Justinian did with a witness confirm the fifth synod, punishing with banish- ment all who would not submit to its de- terminations. In the sixth synod the Fathers did re- quest the emperor, according to custom, to confirm its definitions, in these very words: “ΤῸ what we have determined set your seal, your royal ratification by writing, and confirmation of them all by your sacred edicts and holy constitutions, according to custom.”+ ** We beg that by your sacred signing of it you would give force to what we have defined and subscribed.”’t “* We entreat the power of our lord, guided by God’s wisdom, to confirm, for the greater strength and security of the orthodox faith, the copies of our determi- nation read in the hearing of your most serene majesty, and subscribed by us, that they may be delivered to the five patriarchal sees with your pious confirm- ation.””|| Accordingly he did confirm that synod by his edict: “ All these things being thus ordered by this sixth holy and cecu- menical synod; we decree, that none whosoever trouble himself further about this faith, or advance any new inventions about it.’’§ _* Quia vero omnibus modis obediendum est pietati vestre, religiosissimaque voluntati, con- Stitutionibus synodalibus, que mihi de confir- matione fidei catholice et hereticorum damna- tione placuerunt, libens adjeci sententiam meam.—P. Leo. I. Ep. 59. (ad Mart. Aug.) + Kai τοῖς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν δρισθεῖσι σφραγῖδα παράσ- χου τὴν ὑμῶν ἔγγραφον βασιλικὴν ἐπικύρωσιν, καὶ διὰ θείων ἡδίκτων, καὶ τῶν ἐξ ἔθους εὐσεβῶν διατάξεων τὴν τούτων ἁπάντων Bebaiwow.—Syn. Vi. Act. XViii. p. 275. t Αἰτοῦμεν διά θείας ὑμῶν ὑποσημειώσεως τὸ κῦρος χέσθαι τῷ rap’ ἡμῶν ἐκφωνηθέντι ἐνυπογράφῳ ὅρῳ.---ἰὈϊά. p. 283. | Αἰτοῦμεν τὸ θεόσοφον rod δεσπότου κράτος πρὸς μείζονα τῆς ὀρθοδόξου πίστεως ἀσφάλειάν τε καὶ Bebai- ὡσιν ἰσοτύπους ἐναπαγράφους ὅρους τοῦ ἀναγνωσθέν- τὸς κατὰ παρουσίαν τοῦ γαληνοτάτου ὑμῶν κράτους ὅρου ἐκδοθῆναι τοῖς πέντε πατριαρχικοῖς θρόνοις μετὰ τῆς εὐσεδοὺς ὑμῶν broonpercews.—Ibid. p. 284. ᾧ Τούτων οὕτως ἁπάντων ὑπὸ τῆς ἁγίας ravris Vou. I. 29 225 So he told Pope Leo II., in his Epistle to him: ‘ This divine and venerable de- termination the holy synod has made, to which we also have subscribed, and confirmed it by our religious edicts, ex- horting all our people, who have any love for Christ, to follow the faith there written.”* Pope Leo tells his namesake Leo the emperor, “that he must always remem- ber that the imperial power was given him, not only to rule the world, but more especially to protect the church.” So by long prescription, commencing with the first general synod, did the em- peror enjoy this prerogative ; and with good reason, he having an unquestionable warrant and obligation to promote the welfare of the church, designed by those conventions ; he being the guardian of concord among his subjects, and protec- tor of their liberties, which might be near- ly concerned in conciliar proceedings ; the power of enacting laws being an in- communicable branch of sovereign majesty ; he alone having power com- mitted to him, able to enforce the ob- servance of decrees, without which they would in effect signify little. Because also commonly the decrees of synods did ina manner retrench some part of the royal prerogative, translating or imparting to others causes before ap- propriate to his jurisdiction (as in the case of appeals, and of prohibiting addresses to court, ordered in the Sardican and other synods; of exempting clergymen from secular jurisdiction, from taxes and common burdens, &c.) which ought not to be done without his license and au- thority. So that the oriental bishops had good reason to tell the emperor, that “it was impossible, without his authority, to order καὶ οἰκουμενικῆς ἕκτης συνόδου διατυπωθέντων, San- cimus, ὥστε μηδένα τῶν πάντων ἵτερόν τι περὶ τὴν πίστιν ἐργάσασθαι, ἣ καινότερον δόγματος ἐφεύρεμα μη" χανήσασθαι, &c.—Ibid. Edict. Const. . 9.11 * Θεῖον δὲ σεβάσμιον ὅρον ἡ ἁγία σύνοδος ἐξεβδησεν, ᾧ καί συνυπεγράψαμεν, καὶ dc’ εὐσεδῶν ἡμῶν ἠδίκτων τοῦτον ἐπεκυρώσαμεν προτρέψαντες ἅπαντα τὸν φι- λόχριστον ἡμῶν λαὸν τῇ ἐν αὐτοῖς ἐγγεγραμμένῃ πί- στει συνέπεσθαι, &c.—Ilbid. p. 298, 302. +-Debes incunctanter advertere regiam po- testatem tibi non solum ad mundi regimen, sed maxime adecclesie presidium esse collatam, &c.—Leo M. Ep. 75. 226 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. the matters under consideration with good law and order.’* It is nowise reasonable that any other should have this power, it being incon- sistent with public peace, that in one state there should be two legislative powers ; which might clash the one with the other, the one enactingsanctions prejudicial to the interest and will of the other: wherefore the pope being then a citizen of Rome, and a subject to the emperor, could not have a legislative power, or a negative vote in synods, but that wholly did belong to the imperial authority. But it is opposed, that some synods have been declared invalid for want of the pope’s confirmation ; for to the de- crees of the synod at Ariminum it was excepted, that they were null,’ because the bishop of Rome did not consent to them ὁ ‘ There could not’ (say the Roman synod in Theodoret) ‘* be any prejudice from the number of those as- sembled in Ariminum, it being plain, that neither the Roman bishop, whose suffrage ought first to have been receiv- ed, nor Vicentius, who for so many years did hold his episcopacy blameless, nor others agreeing to such things.”¢ To which exception 1 answer, that, 1. That which is alleged against the synod of Ariminum is not the defect of the pope’s confirmation subsequent, but of his consent and concurrence before it or in it; which is very reasonable, be- cause he had a right to be present, and to concur in all such assemblies, espe- cially being so’eminent a bishop. 2. The same exception every bishop might allege, all having a like right and common interest to vote in those assem- blies. * ᾿Αδύνατον γὰρ ὡς ἡγούμεθα δίχα τοῦ ὑμετέρου κράτους εὐτάκτως καὶ ἐνθέσμως τὰ προκείμενα τυπω- θῆναι.----ἰλ6]. Orient. ad Imp. Aci. Syn. Eph. p. 372. 7 Tov ἐν ᾿Αριμίνῳ ἀπεναντὶων ταύτης ἀκύρωυ ὃν- των, ὡς pire “Ῥωμαίων ἐπισκόπῳ, pare τῶν ἄλλων συνθεμένων αὐτοῖς, καὶ ὡς πολλῶν τῶν αὐτόθι συνελ- θόντων ἀπαρεσθέντων τοῖς τότε rap’ αὐτῶν δεδογμέ- vots.—S0Z. Vi. 23. 1 Οὐδὲ yap πρόκριμά re ἡδυνήθη γενέσθαι ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ τῶν ἐν ’᾿Αριμίνῳ συναχθέντων, ὁπότε ovvéc- τῆκε, μήτε τῶν Ρωμαίων ἐπισκόπου, οὐ πρὸ πάντων ἔδει τὴν γνώμην ἐκόέξασθαι, οὔτε (Λὐικεντίου ὃς ἐπὶ τοσούτοις ἔτεσι τὴν ἐπισκοπὴν ἀσπίλώς ἐφύλαξεν, οὔτε τῶν ἄλλων τοῖς τοιούτοις συγκαταθεμένων -----..., The- od. ii. 22. || P. Liberius being absent, detained from it by violence in banishment. 3. Accordingly the dissent of other bishops, particularly of those eminent in dignity or merit, is also alleged in ex- ception; which had been needless, if his alone dissent had been of so very pes - culiar force. 4. The emperor, and many other bishops, did not know of any peculiar necessity of his confirmation. — Again, it may be objected, that popes have voided the decrees of general syn- ods, as did Pope Leo the decrees of the synod of Chalcedon,, concerning the privileges of the Constantinopolitan see, in these blunt words: ‘But the agree- ments of bishops repugnant to the holy canons made at Nice, your faith and piety joining with us, we make void, and by the authority of the blessed apostle St. Peter, by a general determination we disannul ;°* and in his Epistle to those of that synod, “ For however vain con- ceit may arm itself with extorted com- pliances, and think its wilfulness sufh- ciently strengthened with the name of councils; yet whatever is contrary to the eanons of the above-named Fathers will be weak and void.”+ Lastly, in his Epistle to Maximus, bishop of Antioch, he says, ‘‘ He has sucha reverence for the Nicene canons, that he will not per- mit or endure that what those holy Fa- thers have determined be by any novelty violated.”°¢ This behaviour of Pope Leo (although applauded and imitated by some of his successors) I doubt not to except against in behalf of the synod, that it was dis- orderly, factious, and arrogant (proceed- ing indeed from ambition and jealousy 3) the leading act of high presumption in this kind, and one of the seeds of that * Consensiones vero episcoporum, sancteram canorum apud Niciam conditorum regulis re- pugnantes, unita nobiscum vestree fidei pietate, in irritum mittimus, et per authoritatem beati Petrisapostoli generali prersus definitione cassa- mus.—P Leo 1. Ep. 55, (ad Pulcher. Aug.) + Quantumlibet enim extortis assentationi- bus sese instruat vanitatis elatio, et appetitus suos conciliorum eestimet nomine roborandos, infirmum atque irritum erit, quicquid a preedic- torum patrum canonibus discreparit.—Zp. 61 (ad Syn. Chatced.) 1 Tanta apud me est Nicenorum canonum reverentia, ut ea quae sunta sanctis patribas constituta nec permiserim nee patiar aliqua ra oi violari.—Leo, Ep. 62 (ad Maz. Anti- och.) A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. exorbitant ambition, which did at length overwhelm the dignity and liberty of the Christian republic ;’ yet, for somewhat qualifying the business, it is observable, that he did ground his repugnancy and pretended annulling of that decree (or of decrees concerning discipline), not so much upon his authority to cross gencral synods, as upon the inviolable firmness and everlasting obligation of the Nicene canons; the which he (although against the reason ef things, and rules of gov- ernment) did presume no synod could abrogate or alter. In fine, this opposi- tion of his did prove ineffectual by the sense and practice of the church, main- taining its ground against his pretence. It is an unreasonable thing, that the opinion or humour of one man (no wiser or better commonly than others) should be preferred before the common agree- ment of his brethren, being of the same office and order with him; so_ that he should be able to overthrow and frustrate the result of their meetings and consul- tations, when it did not square to his con- ceit or interest; especially seeing there is not the least appearance of any right he hath to such a privilege, grounded in holy scripture, tradition, or custom: for seeing that scripture hath net ἃ syllable about genera! synods, seeing that no rule about them is extant in any of the first Fathers, till after three hundred years, Seeing there was not one such council celebrated till afier that time, seeing in none of the first general synods any such canon was framed in favour of that bish- op, what ground of right could the pope have to prescribe unto them, or thwart their proceedings? Far more reason there is (in conformity to all former rules and practice), that he should yield to all his brethren, than that all his brethren should submit to him: and this we see to have been the judgment of the church, declared by its practice in the cases be- fore touched. _ IV. It is indeed a proper endowment of an absolute sovereignty, immediately and immutably constituted by God, with No terms or rules limiting it, that its will declared in way of precept, proclama- 7 P. Gelas. Ep. 13 (ad Episc. Dard.) p. 642, εἰ ἰὴ Tract. de Anathem. (p. 647;) P. Pelag. Tl. Ep. 5. (ad Eliam.) p. 474,—Greg. M. Ep. tions, concerning the sanction of laws, the abrogation of them, the dispensation with them, should be observed. This privilege therefore in a high strain the pope challengeth to himself; asserting to his decrees and sentences the force and obligation of laws; so that the body of that canon law, whereby he pretendeth to govern the church, doth in greatest part consist of papal edicts, or decretal epistles, imitating the rescripts of emperors, anc bearing the same force. In Gratian we have these aphorisms from popes concerning this their privi- lege: “ΝΟ person ought to have either the will or the power to transgress the pre- cepts of the apostolic see.”’* “Those things, which by the apostolic see have at several times been written for the catholic faith, for sound doctrines, for the various and manifold exigency of the church and the manners of the faithful, how much rather ought they to be preferred in all honour, and by all men altogether, upon all occasions whatsoever to be reverently received "ἢ ‘Those decretal epistles which most holy popes have at divers times given out from the city of Rome, upon their being consulted with by divers bishops,we decree that they be received with veneration.” “If ye have not the decrees of the bishops of Rome, ye are to be accused of neglect and carelessness ; but if ye have them, yet observe them not, ye are to be chidden and rebuked for your te- merity.”’|| * Nulli fas est vel velle vel posse transgre- di apostolicee sedis praeecepta.—P. Greg. IV. Dist. xix. cap. 5. + —— Quanto potius que ipsa (sedes apos- tolica) pro catholica fide, profanis (1. pro sa- nis) dogmatibus, provariis et multifariis ec clesiz necessitatibus et fidelium moribus di- verso tempore seripsit, omni debent bhonore preferi, et ab omnibus prorsus in quibustibet opportunitatibus discretione vel dispensatione magisira reverenter assam) (—P. Nic. I. Epist. Dist. xix. cap, 1. { Decretales epistolas, quas beatissimi pape diversis temporibus ab urbe Roma pro diverso- rum patrum consultatione dederunt, venerabili- ter suscipiendas decernimus.—P. Gelas. 1. (in decreto) lit. a Nic. Ῥ. Ep. 42; ad Epist. Gallia, Dist. xix. cap. 1. || Si decreta Romanorum pontificum non ha- betis, de neglectu atque incuria estis arguendi ; 5] vero habetis et non observatis, de temeritate estis corripiendi et increpandi.—P. Nic. 1. Ep. 6, ad Phot. Dist. xx. cap. 2. 228 ** All the sanctions of the apostolic see are so to be understood, as if con- firmed by the voice of St. Peter him- 861. 5 “ς Because the Roman church, over which by the will of Christ we do pre- side, is proposed for a mirror and exam- ple ; whatsoever it doth determine, what- soever that doth appoint, is perpetually and irrefragably to be observed by all men.’’t ** We who, according to the plenitude of our power, have a right to dispense above law or right.”’i ** This see—that which it might do by its own sole authority, it is often pleased to define by consent of its priests.”’|| But this power he doth assume and ex- ercise merely upon usurpation, and un- warantably ; having no ground for it in original right or ancient practice. Originally the church hath no other general lawgiver, beside our one Lord and one Lawgiver.” As to practice we may observe, 1. Anciently (before the first general synod) the church had no other laws be- side the divine laws; or those which were derived from the apostles by tradi- tional custom ;$ or those which each church did enact for itself in provincial synods; or which were propagated from one church to another by imitation and compliance: or which in like manner were framed and settled. Whence, according to different tradi- tions, or different reasons and circum- * Sic omnes apostolice ‘sedis sanctiones ac- cipiende sunt, tanquam ipsius divini Petri vo- ce firmate sunt.—P. Agatho. Dist. xix. cap. 2 ; vide Syn. VI. Act. iv. p. 35. + Quia in speculum, et exemplum S. Roma- na ecclesia, cuinos Christus presse voluit, pro- posita est, ab omnibus quicquid statuit, quic- quid ordinat, perpetuo et irrefragabiliter obser- vandum est.—P. Steph. (Dist. xix. cap. 3), P. Gelas. 1. Ep. 9, De Dispens. (p. 633.) + Qui secundum plenitudinem potestatis, de jure possumus supra jus dispensare.—P. Inn. III. Decret. Greg. lib. iii. tit. 8, cap. 4. || Sedes hee quod singulari eam auc- toritate perficere valet, multoram spe sacer- dotum decernit definire consensu.—P. Nich. I. Ep. 18 (ad Carolum. R.) Leo. 1. Ep. i. cap. 5 ; P. Hilarius in Conc. Rom. p. 578 ; Caus. 25, qu. i. cap.4; P. Urb. Caus. 25, qu. i. cap. 6; P. Anas. ad Imp. Anast. P. Siric. Ep. i. (p. 691.) § .—Syn Constantinop. can. 2. 2 Eph. iv. 5; James iv. 12. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. * stances of things, several churches did Ὁ vary in points of order and discipline. — The pope then could not impose his — traditions, laws, or customs upon any church ; if he did attempt it, he was lia- ble to suffer a repulse ; as is notorious in the case, when Pope Victor would (al- though rather as a doctor than as a law- giver) have reduced the churches of Asia to conform with the Roman, in the time of celebrating Easter; wherein he found not only stout resistance, but sharp re- proof. In St. Cyprian’s time every bishop had a free power, according to his discretion, to govern his church ; and it was deem- ed a tyrannical enterprise for one to pre- scribe to another, or to require obedience from his colleagues; as otherwhere by many clear allegations out of that holy man we have showed: “For none of us”’ (saith he) ‘ makes himself a bishop of bishops, or by a tyrannical terror compels his colleagues to a necessity of obedience ; since every bishop, according to the licence of his own liberty and power, hath his own freedom, and can no more be judged by another, than he himself can judge anoth- αὐ Ὁ If any new law were then introduced, or rule determined for common praciice, it was done by the general agreement of bishops, or of a preponderant multitude among them, to whom the rest out of modesty and peaceableness did yield compliance ; according to that saying of the Roman clergy to St. Cyprian (upon occasion of the debate concerning the manner of admitting lapsed persons to communion), * That decree cannot be val- id that hath not the consent of the major part.’’°+ The whole validity of such laws or rules did indeed wholly stand upon pre- sumption of such consent; whereby the common liberty and interest was secur- ed. * Neque enim quisquam nostrum episcopum se esse episcoporum constituit, aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequendi necessitatem collegas suos adigit; quando habeat omnis episcopus pro licentia libertatis et potestatis sue arbitrium proprium; tamque judicari ab alio non possit, quam nec ipse potest alterum judicare.—Cypr. in Conc. Carthag. + Quoniam nec firmum decretum potest esse, quod non plurimorum. videbitur habuisse con~ censum.—Cler. Rom. ad Cypr. (Epist. 31.) =: > = FF = A TREATISE OF THE 2. After that by the emperor’s conver- sion the church, enjoying secular protec- tion and encouragement, did reduce it- self, as into a closer union and freer com- munication of parts, so into a greater uniformity of practice; especially by means of great synods, wherein (the governors and representatives of all churches being called unto them, and presumed to concur in them) were or- dained sanctions, taken to oblige all ;* the pope had indeed a greater stroke than formerly, as having the first place in or- der, or “privilege of honour,” Πρωτεῖα τιμῆς, in ecclesiastical assemblies, where he did concur; yet had no casting vote, or real advantage above others: all things passing by majority of vote. This is supposed as notorious in the acts of the fifth council: * This” (say they) ‘is a thing to be granted, that in councils we must not regard the interlocution of one or two, but those things which are com- monly defined by all, or by the most.” So also in the fifth council, George, bishop of Constantinople, saith, that ‘‘see- ing every where the council of the mul. titude, or of the most, doth prevail, it is necessary to anathematize the persons before mentioned.”t 3. Metropolitan bishops in their prov- inces had far more power, and more surely grounded, than the pope had in the whole church (for the metropolitans had an unquestioned authority, settled by custom, and confirmed bp synodical de- crees), yet had not they a negative voice in synodical debates: for it is decreed to the Nicene synod, that in the designation of bishops (which was the principal af- fair in ecclesiastical administrations), “plurality of votes should prevail.’’|| It is indeed there said, that none should be ordained χωρὶς γγώμης, without the * Idem enim omnes credimur operati, in quo deprehendimur eadem omnes eensure et disci- ay consensione sociati.—Cler. Rom. ad Cypr. ror. ᾿ Illo certe constituto, quod in conciliis non unius vel secundi interlocutionem attendere oportet, sed hec que communiter ab omnibus vel amplioribus definiuntar.—Concil. v. Collat. 6, p. 263. ἘΦ ᾿Επειδὴ τοῦ πλήθους, ἤτοι τῶν πολλῶν πανταχοῦ ἡ βουλὴ κρατεῖ, ἀναγκαῖόν ἐστιν ὀνομαστὶ τὰ λεχθέν- Ta πρόσωπα ἀναθεματισθῆναι.---Ὑ I. Syn. Act. Xvi. p. 249. || Κρατείτω ἡ τῶν πλειόνων Wiipos—Cone. Nic. can. 6. POPE’S SUPREMACY. 229 opinion of the metropolitan: but that doth not import a negative voice in him, but that the transaction should not pass in his absence, or without his knowl- edge, advice, and suffrage ; for so the apostolical canon (to which the Nicene Fathers there did alude and refer, mean- ing to interpret it) doth appoint, that the metropolitan should “do nothing ἄνευ τῆς πάντων γνώμης, without the opinion of all,’* that is, without suffrage of the most, concluding all (for surely that ca- non doth not give to each one a negative voice.) And sothe synod of Antioch (held soon after that of Nice, which therefore knew best the sense of the Ni- cene Fathers, and how the custom went) doth interpret it, decreeing, that “ἃ bish- op should not be ordained without a syn- od, and the presence of the metropoli- tan of the province ;”7 in which synod yet they determine, that “plurality of votes should carry it;”i no peculiar ad- vantage in the case being granted to the metropolitan. Seeing, therefore, provincial synods were more ancient than general, and gave pattern to them; if we did grant the same privilege to the pope in general synods, as the metropolitans had in pro- vincial (which yet we cannot do with any good reason or ground), yet could not the pope thence pretend to an author- ity of making laws by himself. 4. It was then a passable opinion, that he, as one, was in reason obliged to yield to the common judgment of his col- leagues and brethren; as the Emperor Constantius told Pope Liberius, that “the vote of the plurality of bishops ought to prevail.”’|| 5. When Pope Julius did seem to cross a rule of the church, by communi- cating with persons condemned by syn- ods, the Fathers of Antioch did ‘* smart- ly recriminate against him, shewing that *® Kara κανόνα ἐκκλησιαστικον, ἀλλὰ μηδὲ ἐκεῖνος ἄνευ τῆς τῶν πάντων γνώμης ποιείτω rt.—Apost. Can. 84. Tt 'Exicxoroy μὴ χειροτονεῖσθαι diya συνόδον, καὶ παρουσίας τοῦ ἐν τὴ μητροπόλει τῆς ἐπαρχίας.--- Ἄγ, Act. Can. 19. t κρατεῖν τὴν τῶν πλειόνων Yidow.—Ibid. Κρατείτω ἡ τῶν πλειόνων ψῆφος.--- νη. Nic, can. 6. || Τῶν γὰρ πλειόνων ἐπισκόπων ἡ ψῆφος ἰσχύειν igcider.—Theod. ii. 16. 230 they were not to receive canons from him.”’* 6. So far was the pope from prescrib- ing laws to others, that he was looked up- on as subject to the laws of the church no less than others; as the Antiochene Fathers did suppose, ‘complaining to Pope Julius of his transgressing the ca- nons:”’+ the which charge he doth not repel by pretending exemption, but by declaring that he had not offended against the canons, and retorting the accusation against themselves; as the African Fa- thers supposed, when they told Pope Ce- lestine, that he could not admit persons to communion which had been excom- municated by them, that being contrary to a decree of the Nicene synod ;{ as the Roman church supposed itself, when it told Marcian, that they could not receive him without leave of his father who had rejected him.|| This the whole tenor of ecclesiastical canons sheweth, they run- ning in a general style, never excepting the pope from the laws prescribed to oth- er bishops. 7. The privilege of dispensing with laws had then been a strange hearing, when the pope could in no case dispense with himself for infringing them, with- out bringing clamour and censure upon him. 8. It had, indeed, been a vain thing for synods, with so much trouble and solem- nity to assemble, if the pope without them could have framed laws, or could with a puff of nis mouth have blown away the results of them by dispensa- tion. 9. Even in the growth of papal do- minion, and after that the seeds of Ro- * T'vapn κοινῇ σφοδρότερον bu’ ἐπιστολῆς dvreyxa- λοῦσι τῷ ᾿Ιουλίῳ, δηλοῦντες μὴ δεῖν κανονίζεσθαι rag’ a’rov.—Socr. il. 1d. + Ὑμεῖς ὡς παρὰ κανόνας ποιήσαντας ἡμᾶς ἐμέμ- ψψασθε . P. Julii Epist. apud Athanas. in Apol. ii. p. 748. “Τινές εἰσιν oi παρὰ κανόνας πράζ- avres, ἡμεῖς, ὅκα. p. “ 48, t Μηδὲ τοὺς παρ᾽ ἡμῶν ἀποκοινωνήτους, &c.— Epist. ad P. Ceiest. I. || Οὐ δυνάμεθα ἄνευ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς τοῦ τιμίου πατ- ρός σου τοῦτο rorjioat.—Lpiph. Heer. 42. § It was then a maxim becoming the mouth of a pope, Universe pacis tranquillitas non ali- ter poterit custodiri, nisi saa canonibus rever- entia intemerata servetur.—P. Leo J. Ep. 62. The tranquility of an universal peace cannot otherwise be kept, unless due reverence be paid to the canons. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. man ambition had sprouted forth to ἃ great bulk, yet had not popes the heart or face openly to challenge power over the universal canons, or exemption from them ; but pretended to be the chief ob- servers, guardians, defenders, and execu- tors of them; or of the rights and_privi- leges of churches established by them :* for while any footsteps of ancient liberty, simplicity, and integrity did remain, a claim of paramount or lawless authority would have been very ridiculous and very odious. Pope Zosimus I. denieth that he could alter the privileges of churches.” 10. If they did talk more highly, re- quiring observance to their constitutions,° it was either in their own precinct, or in the provinces where they had a more immediate jurisdiction, or in some cor- ners of the west, where they had obtain- ed more sway; and in some cases, wherein their words were backed with other inducements to obedience ; for the popes were commonly wise in their generations, accommodating their dis- course to the state of times and places, 11. It is also to be observed, that often the popes are supposed to speak and constitute things by their own. authority,° which indeed were done by synods, con- sisting of western bishops more closely adhering to that See, in regard to those regions ;* the decrees of which synods were binding in those places, not so much by virtue of papal authority, as proceeding from the consent of their ow bishops: how ready soever he were to assume all to himself, pretending those decrees as precepts of the apostolical see. Whence all the acts of modern popes are invalid, and do not oblige, seeing they do not act in synod; but only of their own head, or with the advice of a few partisans about them, men linked in com- * "Anaca κατὰ δύσιν civodos—Cone. Eph. p. 332. Livodor dvixaveat τῇ συνόδῳ ἀποστολικοῦ.---- Syn. VI. Act. iv. p. 60. N. The pope did in those councils ask the placets.—P. Hu. in Cone. R. (p. 578.) « P. Hil. Ep. 2; N. B. P. Innoc. I. Ep. ii. 12; P. Hil. Ep. 4; P. Gelas, I. Ep. ix. p. 634; xiii. 639; De Anath. p. 645. » P. Zos. lL Ep, 7. (ad Epise. Vienn. et Narb.) Caus. xxv. qu. i. cap. 7. * Ῥ, Siric. Ep. lL. 4 Leo M. Ep. 1, cap. 5; P.Gelas. Ep. 9. 4 P. Siric. Ep. 4. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. mon interest with them to domineer over the church. 12. Yet even in the western countries, in later times, their decrees have been contested, when they did seem plainly to clash with the old canons, or much to derogate from the liberties of churches ; nor have there wanted learned persons in most times, who, so far as they durst, have expressed their dislike of this usur- pation. “ For although the bishop of Rome be more venerable than the rest that.are in the world, upon account of the dignity of the apostolical see, yet it is not lawful for him in any case to transgress the order of canonical governance: for as every bishop who is of the orthodox church, and the spouse of his own See, doth entirely represent the person of our Saviour; so generally no bishop ought pragmatically to act any thing in anoth- er’s diocese.’ * 13. In the time of Pope Nicholas I., the Greeks did not admit the Roman de- crees ; so that pope in an Epistle to Pho- tius complains,‘ “ that he did not receive the decrees of the popes, whenas yet they ordained nothing but what the natu- ral, what the Mosaical, and what the law of grace required.”+ And in another Epistle-he expostulates with him for say- ing, that *‘ they neither had nor did ob- serve the decrees made by the holy popes of the prime See of the Roman church.”’¢ 14. That which greatly did advance the papal jurisdiction, and introduced his usurpation of obtruding new decrees on the church, was the venting of the forged Decretal Epistles under the name of old * Licet nomque pontifex Romane ecclesix ob digniiatem apostolice sedis ceteris in orbe constitutis reverentior habeatur; non iamen ei licet transgredi in aliquo canonici moderaminis tenorem ; sicut enim unusquisque orthodoxe ecclesia pontifex ac sponsus propriz sedis uni- formiter speciem gerit Salvatoris, ita generali- ter nulli convenit quippiam in alterius procaci- terpatrare episcopi dimcesi.—Glab. Rod. 2,4; vide Baron. ann. 996, § 22, 23. + Noli quia decreta ipsoram non susceperis amplius asseverare, cam ipsi nthil nisi quod Naturalis, quod Mosaica, necnon et gratia lex jussit, instituant.—P. Nic. 1. Ep. 11, (ad Phot.) ἘΦ Decretalia autem, que a sanctis pontitici- bus prime sedis Romane ecclesia sunt insti- tuta,—cur vos non habere vel observare dici- tis ?—Id. Ep. 6. (ad Phot. € Circa. an. 860. y popes;? which when the pope did allege for authorizing his practices, the French bishops, endeavouring to assert their privileges, did allege that ‘they were not contained in the whole body of their canons.”’* , 15. The power of enacting and dis- pensing with ecclesiastical laws touching exterior discipline, did of old belong to the emperor. And it was reasonable that it should; because old laws might not conveniently suit with the present state of things and the public welfare ; because new laws might conduce to the good of church and state, the care of which is incumbent on him ; because the prince is bound to use his power and au- thority to promote God’s service, the best way of doing which may be, by framing orders conducible thereto. Accordingly the emperors did enact divers laws concerning ecclesiastical matters, which we see extant in the codes of Theodosius and Justinian. “These things” (saith the council of Arlest) “we have decreed to be present- ed to our lord the emperor, desiring his clemency, that if any be defective, it may be supplied by his prudence ; if any thing be unreasonable, it may be correct- ed by his judgmeni; if any thing be reasonably ordered, it may by his help, the divine grace assisting, be perfected.” We may observe, that popes did allow the validity of imperial laws. Pope Gregory I. doth allege divers laws of divers emperors concerning ecclesiasti- eal affairs, as authentic and obligatory rules of practice." 16. Divers churches had particular rights of independency upon all power without themselves. Such as the church of Cyprus in the Ephesine synod did claim and obtain the confirmation of. * Quangnam quidam vestrum scripserint haud illa decretalia priscoram pontificum in toto codicis canonum corpore contineri descrip- ta, &e.—P. Nich. J. Ep. 42. (ad Galli@ Epise.) + Hece—domino Imperatori presentanda de- creviinus, poscentes ejus clementiam ui siquid hic minus est, ejus prudenia suppleatur, si quid secus quam se ratio habet, ejus judicio emendetar; si quid rationabiliter taxatum est, ejus adjutorio divina opitulante clementia per- ficiator.—Conc. Arel.iv. cap. 26, ann. 813, (sud Carola M.) * Vide Hinom. * P. Greg. I. Ep. xi. 56. 232 Such was the ancient church of Britain before Austin came into England. “The Welsh bishops are consecrated by the bishop of St. David’s and he him- self in like manner is ordained by others, who are, as it were, his suffragans, pro- fessing no manner of subjection to any other church.”’* V. Sovereign power, immediately by itself, when it pleaseth, doth exercise all parts of jurisdiction, setting itself in the tribunal; or mediately doth execute it by others, as its officers or commissioners, Wherefore now the pope doth claim and exercise universal jurisdiction over all the clergy ;' requiring of them en- gagements of strict submission and obe- dience to him ; demanding that all causes of weight be referred to him; citing them to his bar, examining and deciding their causes; condemning, suspending, deposing, censuring them, or acquitting, absolving, restoring them, as he seeth cause, or findeth in his heart;+ he doth encourage people to accuse their pastors to him, in case any doth infringe his laws and orders. But (in general) that originally or an- ciently the pope had no such right appro- priate to him may appear by arguments, by cross instances, by the insufficiency of all pleas and examples alleged in fa- vour of this claim. For, 1. Originally there was not at all among Christians any jurisdiction like to that which is exercised in civil govern- ments, and which now the papal court doth execute. For this our Saviour did prohibit, and St. Peter forbad the pres- byters καταχυριεύειν τῶν κλήρων, And St. Chrysostom affirmeth the episcopal power not to be αὐθευτία, or ἀρχή. And ecclesiastical history doth inform us, that such a jurisdiction was lately introduced in the church, as by other great bishops, * Episcopo Wallie a Menevensi antistite sunt consecrati, et ipse similiter ab aliis tan- quam suffraganeis est constitutus, nulla peni- tus alii, ecclesia facta professione vel subjec- tione.—Girald. Cambr. Itin. ii. 1. + Per hoc illam de tota ecclesia judicare.— P. Gelas. 1. Ep. 4. Cunctos ipse judicaturusa nemine est judicandus.—Dist. xl. cap. 6; Caus. 2,qu 7, cap. 45, ὅδε. Sacra statuta et veneranda decreta episcoporum causas, utpote majora negotia nostre definiendas censurce mandarunt.—P. Nic. 1. Ep. 38. ' Bell. ii. 18, 26. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. so especially by the bishop of Rome: ** For” (saith Socrates) “" from that time the episcopacy of Alexandria, beyond the sacerdotal order, did assume a domi- neering power in affairs.””* The which kind of power the Roman bishops had long before assumed; for (saith he) ‘* the episcopacy of Rome, in like manner as that of Alexandria, had already a great while ago gone before in a domineering power beyond that of the priesthood.’’+ At first the episcopal power did only consist in paternal admonition, and cor- ruption of offenders, exhorting and per- suading them to amendment; and in case they contumaciously did persist in disorderly behaviour, bringing them be- fore the congregation;* and the cause being there heard and proved, with its consent in imposing such penance or correction on them as seemed needful for the public good, or their particular bene- fit: ‘* All things” (saith St. Cyprian) ‘shall be examined, you being present and judging ;”t and (elsewhere), “ac- cording to your divine suffrages ; accord- ing to your pleasure.”’|| 2. Originally no one bishop had any jurisdiction over another, or authority to judge his actions; as St. Cyprian (who well knew the current judgment and practice of his age) in many places doth affirm; who particularly doth reflect on the Roman bishop for presuming to cen- sure his brethren, who dissented from him: ‘ Let us all” (saith he) “ expect the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ, who only hath power to prefer us to the government of his church, and _ to judge of what we ἀο. * Kai γὰρ ἐκ ἐκείνου ἡ ἐπισκοπὴ ᾿Αλεξανδρείας πέρα τῆς ἱερατικῆς τάξεως κατὰ δυναστείαν τῶν πραγ- μάτων ἔλαθε τὴν doxiv.—Socr. vii. 7. τῆς Ρωμαίων ἐπισκοπῆς ὁμοίως τῇ ᾿Αλεξ- ανδρέων πέρα τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἐπὶ δυναστείαν ἤδη πάλαι προελθούσης .----ϑΟογ. vii. 11. + Examinabunter singule presentibus, et judicantibus vobis.—Cypr. Ep. 12. (fratribus in plebe.) || Secundum vestra divina suffragia.—Cypr. Ep. 40. Secundum arbitrium quoque ves- trum.—IJd. (Ep. 46.) Tertull. Apol. 39. 1) ὲ- dem ——. § Expectemus universi judicium Domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui unus et solus habet po- ' 1 Pet. v.; Chrys. in 1 Tim. iii. 1, in Eph. Orat. 11, Hier. Ep. 3, 62; Isid. Pelus. Ep. xx. 125 ; iv. 219. κ 1 Cor. v. 4, 12; 2 Cor. ii. 6. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 3. Even the community of bishops did not otherwise take notice of, or intermed- die with, the proceedings of any bishop in his precinct and charge ; except when his demeanour did concern the general state of the church, intrenching upon the common faith, or public order and peace. In other cases, for one or more bishops to meddle with the proceedings of their brother, was taken for an ἀλλοτριοεπι- σκοπία, ἃ pragmatical intrusion upon another’s business ;:and an* invasion of that liberty which did belong to each bishop by the grant of our Lord, and the nature of his office. As by those passages of St. Cyprian, and the declaration of the synod with him, doth appear. 4. In cases needing decision for the public good of the church, the law and custom of the church, confirmed by the Nicene synod, did order, that jurisdic- tion should be exercised, and all causes finally determined in each province ; so that no regard is had to the pope, no ex- ception in favour of him being expressed or implied.' The which constitution, if we believe Pope Leo himself, cannot in any case by any power be revoked or infringed.* That is most expressly confirmed by the synod of Antioch, in the code of the universal church: “If any bishop ac- cused of certain crimes shall be con- demned by all the bishops in the province, and all shall unanimously vote against him, he shall not be judged again by others ; but the unanimous sentence of the bishops of the province shall remain valid.”’+ Here is no consideration or exception of the pope. 5. Accordingly in practice, synods, without regard or recourse to the pope, festatem et preeponendi nos in ecclesiam suam gubernatione et de actu nostro judicandi.— Cypr. in Conc. Carth. * In venerabilis concilii Niceni contumelia S#pe versatus, alienarum tibi provinciarum ju- Ta temerarie rapuisti—P. Felix Acacio apud Baron. an. 484, § 17. T Eirts ἐπίσκοπος ἐπί τισιν ἐγκλήμασι κατηγορη- θεὶς κριθείη ὑπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐπαρχίᾳ ἐπισκό- Rov, πάντες τε σύμφωνοι μίαν car’ αὐτοῦ ἐξενέγκοιεν Ψῆφον͵ τοῦτον μηκέτι nap’ ἑτέροις δικάζεσθαι" ἀλλὰ sd βεδαίαν τὴν σύμφωνον τῶν ἐπὶ τῆς ἐπαρχίας ἰσκόπων ἀπύφασιν.---Ἔγηῃ. Ant. Can. 16, ' Can. 5. Vou. III- 30 233 did judge bishops upon offences charged against them. 6. The execution of those judgments was intrusted to metropolitan bishops ; or had effect by the people’s consent; for it being declared that any bishop had incurred condemnation, the people did presently desert him. Every bishop was obliged to confer his part tothe execution; as Pope Gela- sius affirmeth.* 7. If the pope had such judicial power, seeing there were from the beginning so many occasions of exercising it, there would have been extant in history many clear instances of it; but few can be alleged, and those (as we shall see) im- pertinent or insufficient. 8. Divers synods (great and smaller) did make sanctions contrary to this pre- tence of the pope; appointing the decis- ion of causes to be terminated in each diocese, and prohibiting appeals to him: which they would not have done, if the pope had originally, or according to com- mon law and custom, a supreme judicial power. 9. The most favourable of ancient synods to papal interest, that of Sardica, did confer on the pope a power, qualified in matter and manner, of causing epis- copal causes to be revised ; which shew- eth that before he had no right in such cases, nor then had an absolute power. 10. ‘The pope’s power of judging bish- ops hath been of old disclaimed as an illegal and upstart encroachment. When the pope first nibbled at this bait of ambition, St. Cyprian and _ his bishops did reprehend him for it. The bishop of Constantinople denied that Pope Gelasius alone might condemn him ; aecording to the canons—the pope ranteth at it, and reasoneth against it ;t but hath no material argument or ex- ample for it (concerning the papal au- thority peculiarly), beside the Sardican canon. 11. The popes themselves have been * Quod non solum preesuli apostolico facere licet, sed cuicunque pontifici, ut quoslibet et quemlibet locum, secundum regulam heereseos ipsius ante damnate, a catholica communione discernant.—P. Gelas. 1. Ep. 4. | ¢ Euphemium vero miror, δὶ ignorantiam suam ipse non perspicit, qui dicit Acacium ab uno non posse damnari P. Gelas. I. Ep. 4. Nobis opponunt canones ——. Id. ibid. 234 judged for misdemeanour, heresy, schism ; as hereafter we shall shew. 12. 'The popes did execute some judg- ments, only by a right common to all bishops, as executors of synodical de- crees.* 13. Other bishops did pretend to judi- cature, by privilege: as Juvenalis, bish- op of Jerusalem, did pretend that to him did belong the judgment of the bishop of Antioch.t 14. ‘The popes were subject to the em- perors ; who, when they pleased, did in- terpose to direct or qualify all jurisdic- tion ;" commanding the popes them- selves—wherefore the popes were not judges sovereign, but subordinate. Pope Gregory I. did refer the great question about the title of e@cumencial bishop to the judgment of the Emperor Mauricius.i These things will more fully appear in the discussion of the particulars con- cerning the chief branches of jurisdic- tion; more especially under the tenth branch of sovereignty. They allege that passage of Valentin- ian, in his Epistle to Theodoius, ““ That the most blessed bishop of Rome, to whom antiquity hath given a priesthood over all, hath ἃ 566 and power to judge both of Δία and priests.”’|| This was suggested by Pope Leo and his adherents to the young emperor ; but it signifieth no more, but that in the judg- ment of priests (as of faith) he was to have his share, or at most to be ἃ lead- ing person therein. Theodosius (a mature, grave, pious * Quod non solum presuli apostolico facere licet, &c.—P. Gelas. [. Ep. 4. (Supr. in Arg. 6), vide Ep. 13. + ᾿Ε χρῆν Ἰωάννην τῷ ἀποστολικῷ τῆς Ἵεορ- σολύμων ἁγίας τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκκλησίας ὑπακοῦσαι, καὶ τι- μήσαι" παρ᾽ ᾧ μάλιστα ἔθος αὐτὸν τῶν ᾿Αντιοχέων θρόνον ἐξ ἀποστολικῆς ἀκολουθίας καὶ παραὸ ὄσεως ἰθύνεσθαι, καὶ nap’ αὐτῷ δικάζεσθαι.--- ὅγηῃ. Eph. Act. iv. (p. 400.) + —— utpiissimus dominus Mauritius ip- sum illud negotium judicare dignaretur.— Greg. Ep. iv. 22, \| Ἵνα μακαριώτατος ἐπίσκοπος τῆς Ῥωμαίων πό- λεως, ᾧ τὴν ἱερωσύνην κατὰ πάντων ἡ ἀρχαιότης, παρ- ἔσχε, χώραν καὶ εὐπορίαν ἔχειν περί τε πίστεως καὶ ἱερέων κρίνειν Act. Syn. Chale. p. 25. ™ Justin. Nov. cxxili. cap. 3; Jubemus Epise. Rom. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. = a 3 prince) did not regard that pretence of Leo, nor the appeal of Flavianus.* VI. To the sovereign of any state be- longeth the choice, constitution, confirm. _ ation, commissionating of all inferior magistrates ;t that none uncapable, un- worthy, or unfit for offices, or disaffected to the state, be intrusted with the man- agement of affairs. Wherefore the pope doth claim and exercise these prerogatives so far as he can; pretending at least that no bishop can be constituted without his designa- tion, or his licence, and his confirmation of the nomination, collation, or election. And these privileges by the great ad- ‘| vocates are upon highest terms asserted to him." In this matter may be distinguished, 1. The designation of the person by election, or otherwise. 2. The confirmation of that. 3. The ordination or consecration of him to his office; the which conferreth on him his character and authority. 4. The authority by which he acteth. Into all these the pope hath intruded himself, and he will have a finger in them. 1. He gladly would have drawn to himself the collation and disposal of all benefices, challenging a general right to dispose of all at his pleasure;t Lut not having been able wholly to deprive princes and patrons of their nominations, and corporations of their election; yet he hath by reservations, provisions, colla- tions of vacancies apud sedem, resigna- tions, devolutions, and other such tricks, extremely encroached on the rights of all, to the infinite vexation, damage, and mischief of Christendom.° *"Tya ὃ προλεχθεὶς συναχθέντων ἐκ πάσης τῆς οἷ- κουμένης καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν ἃ ἱερέων Ibid. Ρ. 28. 7 Upon a sovereign all inferior magistrates depend. ¢ Licit ecclesiarum, personatuum, dignita- tum, aliorumque beneficiorum ecclesiasticorum plenaria dispositio ad Romanum noscatur pon= tificem pertinere, &¢.—Clem. 1V. in Sexto, lib. lil. tit. 4, cap. 2; wide ibid. cap. iv. 10; xii. 20. Although the plenary disposal of all churches, parsonages, dignities, and other ecclesiastical benefices be known to belong to the Pope of Rome, &c. " Bell. iv. 24. ἰῷ Clem. IV. in Sexto, lib. iii. tit. 4, cap. 14, 9. 2. He pretendeth that no bishop shall be ordained without his licence. 3. He obligeth the person ordained to swear obedience to him. 4. He pretendeth that all bishops are his ministers and deputies. But no such privileges have any found- ation or warrant in holy scripture, in an- cient doctrine, or in primitive usage : they are all encroachments upon the original rights and liberties of the church, derived from ambition and avarice ; sub- sisting upon usurpation, upheld by vio- lence. This will appear from a survey of an- cient rules and practices concerning this matter. The first constitution after our Lord’s decease of an ecclesiastical person was that of Matthias into the vacant aposto- late,’ or bishopric of Judas ;* wherein (upon St. Peter’s motion) all the disciples present did by consent present two ;t out of whom God himself did elect one,t by determining the lot to fall upon Mat- thias; so that this designation being partly human, partly divine, so far as it was human, it went by free election of the whole fraternity; and St. Peter, beside generally suggesting the matter to be done, did assume nothing peculiar to himself. The next constitution we meet with is that of deacons to assist the apostles and elders in discharge of inferior of- fices ; wherein the apostles did commit the designation of the persons to the multitude of the disciples, who elected them ; and presented them to the apostles, who, by prayer and laying on of hands, did ordain them.\| Nor had St. Peter in this action any particular stroke. As to the constitution of bishops in the first apostolical times the course was this: the apostles, and apostolical per- sons (who were authorized by the apos- tles to act with their power, and in their stead), did in churches founded by them constitute bishops, such as divine inspira- tion, or their grace of discretion did * 'Επισκοπὴν αὐτοῦ λάβοι Erepos.—Act. i. 20. + Kai ἔστησαν d60.—Ver. 23. Φ ᾿Ανάδειξον ἐκ τοῦτων τῶν δύο ἕνα ὃν éehéfo,— Ver. 24. | Acts vi. 2, 5.—To πλῆθος τῶν μαθητῶν καὶ ἐξελέξαντο. ® Acts i. 15. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 235 guide them to ;* so did St. John in Asia, ‘* setting those apart for the clergy whom the Spirit had marked out.” This was not done without the consent of the Christain people, as Clemens Ro- manus telleth us in his excellent Epistle to the Corinthians :~ but he doth not ac- quaint us (although he were himself bish- op of Rome) that the pope had any thing to do in such constitutions, or in confirm- ations of them; “the whole church” (saith he) ““ consenting: why doth he not add, for his own sake, “‘and the pope confirming ?” In the next times, when those extraor- dinary persons and faculties had expired, when usually the churches planted were in situation somewhat incoherent and re- mote from each other, upon a vacancy the clergy and people of each church did elect its bishop; in which action com- monly the clergy did propound and re- commend a person or persons, and the people by their consent approve, or by their suffrages elect one :}} a strict exam- ination of his life and doctrine interven- ing: the which order Tertullian briefly doth intimate in those words: “The presidents of the church are certain el- ders well approved, who have obtain- ed that honour, ‘not by price, but by proof.” It may be inquired, how a bishop then was ordained, in case his city was very remote from any other churches ? Did they send for bishops from distant places to ordain him ?—or did the pres- byters of the place lay their hands on him ?—or did he receive no other ordina- tion than that he had before of presby- ter >—or did he abide no bishop till op- portunity did yield bishops to ordain him ? —or did Providence order, that there should be no such solitary churches ? The ancient commentator, contemporary * Kai Karacrijons κατὰ πόλιν πρεσβυτέρους, ὡς ἐγὼ σοὶ διεταξάμην.----ΤῚϊ. i. 5. Διακρίσεις πνευμά- των.----1 Cor. xil. 10. t Κλήρῳ ἕνα ye κληρώσων τῶν ὑπὸ τοῦ πνεύματος onpatvonévoyv.— Eus, Ἧι, 23. Tots οὖν κατασταθέντας tr’ ἐκείνων, ἣ μεταξὺ ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρων ἐλλογίμων ἀνόρων, συνενδοκησάσης ἐκκλη- σίας raons.—Clem, Epist. p. 57. || Kai οὗτοι δοκιμαζέσθωσαν πρῶτον, εἶτα διακο- νείτωσαν, ἀνέγκλητοι dvres.— 1 Tim. ili. 10, § President probati quique seniores, hono- rem istum non pretio, sed testimonio adepti.— Tertull. Apol. 39. Plena diligentia, explorati- one sincere.—Cypr. Ep. 68. » —— “~~ , 236 to St. Ambrose, and bearing his name, did concéive,* that upon decease of a bishop the elder of the presbyters did succeed into his place. Whence had he this? out of his invention and conjec- ture, or from some tradition and_histo- ry °° Afterward, when the faith was diffus- ed through many provinces, that churches grew thick and close, the general prac- tice was this: the neighbour bishops (be- ing advertised of a vacancy, or want of a bishop) did convene at the place ; then in the congregation the clergy of the place did propound a person, yielding their attestation to his fitness for the charge; which the people hearing, did give their suffrages accepting him, if no weighty cause was objected against him ; or refusing him, if such cause did ap- pear: then, upon such recommendation and acceptance, the bishops present did adjoin their approbation .and consent ; then by their devotions, and solemn laying on of their hands, they did ordain or con- secrate him to the function. Of this course most commonly prac- tised in his time we have divers plain tes- timonies in St. Cyprian, the best author extant concerning these matters of an- cient discipline: ‘* For which reason,” saith he, ‘that from divine tradition and apostolical observation is to be observed and held, which also is with us, and al- most through all provinces, kept; that for duly celebrating ordinations unto. that people, for whom a bishop is ordained, all the neighbour bishops of the same” (province or people) “ should resort ; and a bishop should be chosen, the people being present, which most fully knoweth the life of each one, and hath from his conversation a thorough insight into bis practice; the which we see done with you in the ordination of our colleague Sabinus, that by the suffrage of all the fraternity, and by the judgment of all the bishops, which had assembled in the pres- ence, and had sent letters to you about * Primum presbyteri episcopi appellabantur ut recedente uno sequens ei succederet, &c.— Vide Dist. \xvi. cap. 2. At first presbyters were called bishops, that one departing, the next might succeed him, * In Eph. iv 11. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. | him, the bishopric should be deferred to _ oa him.?* ἐν Again, “A people obedient to {8 Lord’s commands, and fearing God, ought to'separate itself from a wicked bishop” (such a notoriously wicked bishop as those were of whom he treateth, who had renounced the faith), *‘ and not to mingle itself with the sacrifices of asac- rilegious priest; seeing especially that it hath a power either to choose worthy priests, orto refuse those who are un- worthy ; the which also we see to de- ‘scend from divine authority, that a bish- op should be chosen, the people being present, before the eyes of all; and that he who is worthy and fit, should be ap- proved by public judgment and testimo- ny.’ Again,t when. (saith he concerning himself) ‘a bishop is substituted in the place of one deceased, when he is peace- ably chosen by the suffrage of all the people ;’—and, ‘* whom, if according to the divine instructions, the whole frater- nity would obey, no man would move any thing against the college of priests: none after the divine judgment, after the suffrage of the people, after the consent of the fellow-bishop, would make him- self judge, not indeed of the bishop, but of God.”’|| * Propter quod diligenter de traditione divi- na et apostolica observatione observandum est et tenendum, quod apud nos. quoque et fere per provincias universas tenetur; ut ad ordi- nationes rite celebrandas, ad eam plebem cui preepositus ordinatur, episcopi ejusdem proxi- mi qUique conveniant, et episcopus deligatur plebe presente, que singulorum vitam plenis- sime novit, et uniuscujusque actum de ejus conversatione perspexit; quod etapud vos fac- tum videmus in Sabini collegze nostri ordinati- one, ut de universe fraternitatis suffragio, et de episcoporum, qui-in preesentia convenerant, quique de eo ad vos literas fecerant, , judicio episcopatus ei deferretur.—Cypr. Ep. 68. + Plebs obsequens praceptis Dominicis, et Deum metuens, a peccatore preeposito separare se debet, nec se ad sacrilegi sacerdotis sacrificia miscere ; quando ipsa maxime habeat potesia- tem vel eligendi dignos sacerdotes, vel indignos recusandi ; quod et ipsum videmus de divina auctoritate descendere ; ut sacerdos plebe prae- sente sub omnium oculis deligatur, et dignus atque idoneus publico judicio ac testimonio comprobetur Cypr. Ep. { Suffragio totius populi Cyprianus eligitur. —Opiat. 1. || Caterum quando episcopus in locum de- A TREATISE OF THE in, “Cornelius was made bishop by the judgment of God and his Christ, by the testimony of almost all the clergy, by the suffrage of the people being then present, and by the college of priests, ancient and good men:’* and, ‘* Corne- lius being in the catholic church ordain- ed by the judgment of God, and by the suffrage of the clergy and people.’’+ Again, ““ When a bishop is once made, and is approved by the testimony and the judgment of his colleagues, and of the people” i The author of the Apostolical Consti- tutions thus in the person of St. Peter very fully and clearly describeth the manner of ordination of bishops in his times :—‘“* After one of the chief bishops present has thus prayed, the rest of the priests with all the people shall say Amen ; and afier the prayer, one of the bishops shall deliver the eucharist into the hands of the person ordained, and that morning he shall be placed by the rest of the bishops in his throne, all of them saluting him witha kiss in the Lord. After the reading of the Law and Prophets, of our Epistles, the Acts and Gospel, he who is ordained shall sa- lute the church with these words,—The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God the Father, and the fellow- ship of the Holy Ghost, be with you all, Amen. And let all answer, And with thy spirit. After which words let him exhort the people.”’|| Thus it was then, in a practice so ob- vious and observable, that a pagan em- functi substituitur, quando populi universi suf- fragio in pace deligitur—cui si secundum ma- gisteria divina obtemperaret fraternitas uni- versa,nemo adversum sacerdotum collegium quidquam moveret; nemo post divinum judi- cium, post populi suffragium, post coepiscopo- tum consensum, judicem se jam non episeopi sed Dei faceret ——. Cypr. Ep. 55. * Factus est autem Cornelius episcopus de Dei et Christi ejus judicio, de clericorum pene omnium testimonio, de plebis, que tune affuit, suffragio, et de sacerdotum antiquorum et bo- norum virorum collegio Cypr. Ep. 52. + Cornelio in catholica ecclesia de Dei judi- cio, et cleri ac plebis suffragio ordinato : Cypr. Ep. 67. { Episcopo semel facto, et collegarum ac plebis testimonio et judicio comprobato ——. Ep. 41. (ad Cornel.) || Const. Apost. viii. 4.—Postquam heec erit precatus, &c. POPE’S SUPREMACY. 237 perer took good notice of it, and chose to imitate it in constituting the governors of provinces, and other officers : ‘* When” (saith Lampridius of Alexander Severus) ‘“‘ he would either give rulers to provinces, or make presidents, or ordain procura- tors, he set up their names, exhorting the people, if they had any thing against them, to prove it by manifest evidence ; if they could not make their accusation good, they were to die for it: and he said it would be hard not to do that in the choice of governors of provinces, to whom the lives and fortunes of men were intrusted, which the Christians and Jews did in setting up those who were to be ordained priests.’’* Afterward, in process of time, when (the gaps of distance being filled up, and Christendom becoming one continued body) ecclesiastical discipline was im- proved into a more complete shape ; for constitution of a bishop, all the dzshops of a province did convene (or such as could with convenience, the others signi- fying their mind by writing), and having approved him who was recommended by the clergy, and allowed by the people, they did ordain him ; the metropolitan of the province, ratifying what was done.t So the Nicene synod, regarding the practice which had commonly obtained, did appoint, witha qualification to be generally observed : “ It is most fit” (say they) ‘* that a bishop be constituted by all bishops in the province; but if this be hard, either because of urgent necessity, or for the length of the way, then three of the body being gathered together (those also who are absent conspiring in opinion, and yielding their consent in writing), let the ordination be performed, but let the ratification of what is done be * Ubi aliquos voluisset vel rectores provin- ciis dare, vel preepositos facere, vel procurato- res id est rationales ordinare, nomina eorum proponebat, hortans populum, ut siquid haberet criminis, probaret manifestis rebus; Si non probasset, subiret, paenam capitis ; dicebatque grave esse, quum id Christian et Judi face- rent in predicandis sacerdotibus qui ordinandi sunt, non fieri in provinciarum rectombus, qui- bus et fortune hominum committerentur et ca- pita.—Lamprid. in Alex. Sev. cap. 40. } Παλαιὸς Oscpés.—Syn. Constantinop, The- od. v. 9. 238 assigned to the metropolite in each prov- oe.” ** In this canon (the which is followed by divers canons of other synods) there is nO express mention concerning the interest of the clergy and people in elec- tion of the bishops ; but these things are only passed over, as precedaneous to the constitution or ordination, about which only the Fathers did intend to prescribe ; supposing the election to proceed accord- ing to former usual practice. That we ought thus to interpret the canon, so that the Fathers did not intend to exclude the people from their choice, doth appear from their synodical epistle ; wherein they decree concerning bishops constituted by Meletius, who, returning to communion with the church, did live in any city, that, “ If any Catholic bishop should happen to die, then should those who were already received ascend into the honour of him deceased ; in case they should appear worthy, and the people should choose, the bishop of Alexandria withal adding his suffrage to him, and his confirmation ;’+ the which words with sufficient evidence do interpret the canon not to concern the election, but the ordi- nation of bishops. Thus the Fathers of the second general synod plainly did interpret this canon by their proceeding ; for they, in their syn- odical epistle to Pope Damasus and the western bishops,‘ did assure him, that they, in the constitution of bishops for the principal eastern Sees, had followed this order of the synod of Nice, together with ‘** the ancient law of the church ; re? in agreement whereto they had ordained Nectarius bishop of Constantinople, “ with common consent, under the eyes of the most religious Emperor Theodosius, and of all the clergy, the whole city adjoin- * "Extioxomovy προσήκει μάλιστα piv ὑπὸ πάντων τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐπαρχίᾳ καθίστασθαι---τὸ δὲ κῦρος τῶν γι- νομένων δίδοσθαι καθ᾽ ἑκάστην ἐπαρχίαν τῷ μητροπο- λίτῃ . Conc. Nic. Can. 4. + Ei δέ τινας συμδαίη ἀναπαύσασθαι τῶν ἐν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ, τηνικαῦτα προσαναδαίνειν εἰς τὴν τιμὴν τοῦ τετελευκότος τοὺς ἄρτι προσληφθέντας, μόνον εἰ ἄξιοι φαίνοιντο, καὶ ὃ λαὸς αἱροῖτο, συνεπιψηφίζοντος αὐτῷ, καὶ ἐπισφραγίζοντος τοῦ τῆς ᾿Αλεξανδρείας ἐπισκόπου. —Socr. 1.9; Theod. i. 9. εἶ Ye σϑρ δα τε θεσμὸς κεκράτηκε, καὶ τῶν ἁγίων ἐν Νικαίᾳ πατέρων ὅρος---Οἷς ἀκολούθως ---: -ὄ.ὄς * Vide Can. Apost. 1; Conc. Antioch. Can. 19; Cone. Laod. Can. 12— Conc. Afr. Can. 13. t Theod. v. 9. ΣΎΝ <7" * UY Cee” A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ing also its-suffrage : ἢ and that for tioch, “ the bishops of the province, of the eastern diocese concurring, | canonically ordained Flavianus bishop the whole church consenting, as with — one voice, to honour the person.”= == Indeed, the practice generally doth confirm this, the people everywhere con- tinuing to elect their bishop. So did the people of Alexandria demand Athanasi- us for their bishop." So Pope Julius did complain, that Gregory was intruded into the place of Athanasius, ‘‘ not being re+ quired by the presbyters, not by the bishops, not by the people.”’t So Gregory Nazianzen describeth the elections of bishops in his times, to be carried by the power of wealthy men, and impetuous- ness of the people. v So Austin intimat- eth the same in his speech about designa- — tion of a successor to himself:|| “I know” (says he) “that after the de- cease of bishops the churches are wont to be disturbed by ambitious and con- tentious men.”’§ So the tumults at An- tioch, in choosing a bishop after Eusta- thius ; at Rome, after Liberius ; at Con- stantinople, after Alexander; at Milan, when St. Ambrose was chosen. So Stephanus, bishop of Ephesus, in justification of himself saith, ‘ Me forty bishops of Asia, by the suffrage of the - most noble and of the substantial citizens, and of all the most reverend clergy, and of all the rest of the whole city, did or- dain ;”{] and his competitor, Bassianus, ‘“‘ Me, with great constraint and violence, ΄ * pera κοινῆς ὁμονοίας, ὑπ᾽ ὄψεσι καὶ θεοφι - λεστάτου βασιλέως Θεοδοσίου, παντός τε τοῦ κλήρου, καὶ πάσης ἐπιψηφι ζομένης τῆς wikis Τ ἐπίσκοσπον Φλαθιανὸν οἵ τε τῆς ἐπαρχίας, καὶ τῆς ᾿Δνατολικῆς διοικήσεως συνδραμόντες κανονι- κῶς ἐχειροτόνησαν, πάσης συμψήφου τῆς ἐκκλησίας ὥσπερ διὰ μιᾶς φωνῆς τὸν ἄνδρα τιμησάσης. εἶ Μὴ αἰτηθέντα τοῖς πρεσδυτέροις, μὴ παρ᾽ ἐπισκό- πων, μὴ παρὰ Nadv.—Ath. ibid. p- 749. || Euseb. de Vit. Const. iii. 59, 60; Soer. i. 24.—Mepiabévros τοῦ πλήθους---. Sozom. vi. 29 ; Marcell. lib. 27.—Aryii διακριθὲν τὸ πλῆθος.---:. Socr. i. 24; Soz. iii. 4; Theod. iv. 6. § Scio post obitus episcoporum per ambitio- sos aut contentiosos solere ecclesias perturbari . Aug. Ep. 110. { 'Epi τεσσαράκοντα ἐπίσκοποι τῆς ᾿Ασίας Ψψηφῳ καὶ τῶν λαμπροτάτων, καὶ τῶν λογάδων, καὶ τοῦ εὐλα- βεστάτοῦ παντὸς κλήρου, καὶ τῶν λοιπῶν πάντων τῆς πόλεως πάσης éye.porévncav.— Cone. Chale. Act. i. p. 404. * Ath. Apol. 11. p. 726. νυ Orat. xix. 310. Epist. 21. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. the people and the clergy, and the bish- ops did install.”’* In the synod of Chalcedon, Eusebius, bishop of Ancyra, saith, that ‘‘ the whole city of Gangra did come to him, bringing their suffrages:t+ Posidius telleth us of St. Austin, that “in ordaining priests and clergymen he deemed the greater con- sent of Christians, and the custom of the church, was to be followed.”t So Celestine the first, “" Let no bishop be given them against their wills; let the consent and request of the clergy, the people, and the order, be expected ;”’|| and Pope Leo the first: ‘‘ When there shall be an election of a bishop, let him be preferred who has the unanimous con- sent of the clergy and people; so that if the votes be divided, and part for another person, let him, by the judgment of the metropolitan, be preferred, whose merits and interest are greatest; only that none may be ordained against their wills, or without their desire, lest the un- willing people contemn or hate a bishop whom they never desired, and become less religious than they ought, because they could not have such a bishop as they would.”’§ And in another of his Epistles, ‘* There is no reason that they should be accounted bishops, who were neither chosen by the clergy, nor desired by the people, nor with the metropolitan’s order consecrated by the provincial _bish- ops ds * 'Ἐμὲ δὲ μετὰ πολλῆς ἀνάγκης καὶ βίας ἐνθρονί- ζουσιν εἰς τὴν αὐτὴν πόλιν ΓΕ φεσον ὃ λαὸς, καὶ ὃ κλῆ- ρος, καὶ οἱ éxicxoro:.—lbid. t Arava γὰρ ἡ πόλις ἦλθε πρὸς ἐμὲ εἰς ᾿Α γκύραν καὶ ἐκόμισαν τὰ Wndicpara.—Syn. Chale. Act. xvi. p- 462. Φ In ordinandis vero sacerdotibus et clericis consensum majorem Christianorum, et consue- tudinem ecclesiz sequendam esse arbitrabatur. Posid. in Aug. Vit. cap. 20. || Nallus invitis detur episcopus ; cleri, ple- bis, et ordinis consensum ac desiderium requi- ratur ——. Celest. 1. Ep. 2. § Cum ergo de summi sacerdotis electione tractabitur, ille omnibus preponatur, quem cleri plebisque consensus concorditer postula- Tint ; ita ut si in aliam forte personam partium Se vota diviserint, metropolitani judicio 1s alteri preferatur, qui majoribus et studiis juvatur et meritis, tantum ut nullus invitis et non peten- tibus ordinetur ; ne civitas episecopum non op- tatum aut contemnat aut oderit, et fiat minus religiosa quam convenit, cui non licuit habere quem voluit.—P. Leo I. Ep, 84, ad Anastas. ᾿ς ¥J Nulla ratio sinit, ut inter episcopos habean- tur, qui nec a clericis sunt electi, nec a plebibus 239 “ς Certainly the desires of the citizens, and the testimonies of the people should have been expected with the judgment of the honourable, and the choice of the clergy, which in the ordinations of priests used to be observed by those who knew the rules of the Fathers.”’*—‘* When peaceably, and with such concord as God loves, he who is to be a teacher of peace is ordained by the agreement of all.”’+—** Let priests who are to be or- dained be required peaceably and quiet- ly ; let the subscription of the clergy, the testimony of the honourable, the consent of the order and people, be ‘ob- served; let him who is to preside over all be chosen by all.”i And Pope Nich- olas I., “" Because we know the custom of your royal city, that none can arrive at the top of the highest priestly power without the assent of the ecclesiastical people and the emperor’s suffrage.”’|| Now in all these proceedings it is most apparent that there was no regard had to the pope, or any thought of him, out of his particular territory ; which he had as metropolitan (or afterwards as primate in some parts of the west.) Nowhere else had he the least finger in the constitution of a bishop anywhere through the whole church ; no, not of the least clergyman. When by St. Cyprian so largely and punctually the manner of constituting bishops is declared τὸ when the Nicene canons and those of other synods do so carefully prescribe about the ordination of them; when so many reports concern- expetiti, nec a provincialibus episcopis cum metropolitani judicio consecratii—P. Leo J. Ep. 92. * Expectarentur certe vota civium, testimo nia populorum, quereretur honoratorum arbit- rium, electio clericorum, que in sacerdotum solent ordinationibus ab bis qui norunt patrum regulas custodiri.—P. Leo Ep. 89, Dist. )xiii. cap. 27. + Quum per pacem, et Deo placitam concor- diam consonis omnium studiis qui doctor pacis futuras est ordinatur.—Jbdid. ¢ Per pacem et quietem sacerdotes qui pre- futuri sunt postulentur; teneatur subseriptio clericorum, honoratorum testimonium, ordinis consensus et plebis ; qui praefuturus est omni- bus, ab omnibus eligatur.—//id. || P. Nich. 1. Ep. 5.—Quia consuetudinem vestram novimus in regia urbe, minimo api- cem archieratice potestatis aliquem posse habere sine ecclesiastice plebis assensu atque imperiali suffragio P. Joh. ΤΩΣ Ep. Ixx. Dist. 62. “ Vide P. Leo Ep. 84, 101, 107. 240° ing the election of bishops do occur in history ; why is there not a tittle of men- tion concerning any special interest of the Roman bishops about them ? So true is that of Alb. Crantzius: **'There was no need then of apostolical confirmation ; it was sufficient if the election were approved by the archbish- op: now the church of Rome has assum- ed to herself the rights of all churches.”’* We may by the way observe, that in the first times they had not so much as an absolute power of ordaining a pres- byter in the church of his own city with- out leave of the clergy and people; as may be inferred from that passage in Eusebius, where Pope Cornelius relateth that the bishop who ordained Novatus, ‘“‘ being hindered from doing it by all the clergy, and by many of the laity, did request that it might be granted to him to ordain that one person ;’’+ and he that so hardly could ordain one priest in his own church, what authority could he have to constitute bishops in all other churches ? To all these evidences of fact* our ad- versaries do oppose some instances of popes meddling in the constitution of bishops ; as, Pope Leo I. saith, that An- atolius did, “ by the favour of his assent, obtain the bishopric of Constantinople.” The same pope is alleged as having con- firmed Maximus of Antioch. ‘The same doth write to the bishop of Thessalonica (his vicar), that he should “ confirm the elections of bishops by his authority.’’|| He also confirmed Donatus, an African bishop: ‘* We will that Donatus preside over the Lord’s flock, upon condition that he remember to send us an account of * Nihil tum opus erat apostolica confirmati- one; satis erat electionem ab archiepiscopo comprobari: nunc ad se omnium ecclesiarum jura traxit Romana ecclesia.—Crantz. Metrop. Vii. 45. + Ataxwdvbpevos ὑπὸ παντὸς τοῦ κλήρου, ἀλλὰ καὶ λαϊκῶν πολλῶν, ἠξίωσε συγχωρηθῆναι αὐτῷ τοῦτον μόνον χειροτονῆσαι.---Ῥ. Cornel. apud Euseb. vi. 43. Satis est quod vestre pietatis auxilio, et mei favoris assensu episcopatum tant urbis obtinuit.—P. Leo Ep. 54; De Marc. iii. 14, § 1. || Ut ordinationem rite celebrandam tua quo- que firmet authoritas—P. Leo Ep. 84 (ad Anastas.) * Bell. ii. 18, 20. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. his faith.”* Also Gregory I. doth com- plain of it, as of an inordinate act, the a bishop of Salone was “ ordained with- out his knowledge.”+ Pope Dama did confirm the ordination of Peter Alex- | Ἵ andrinus: ‘The Alexandrians” (saith Sozomen) “ did render the churches to Peter, being returned from Rome, with the letters of Damasus, which confirmed both the Nicene decrees, and his ordina- tion: but what, I pray, doth confirma- tion here signify, but approbation? for did he otherwise confirm the Nicene de- crees? did they need other confirma- tion ? To the former instances we answer, that, being well considered, they do much strengthen our argument; in that they are so few, so late, so lame, so im- pertinent: for if the pope had enjoyed a power of constituting bishops, more in- stances of its exercise would have been producible ;~indeed it could not be but that history would have been full of them ; the constitution of bishops being a matter of continual use, and very re- | markable. At least they might have found one instance or other to allege before the times of that busy Pope Leo; in whose time, and by whose means, pa- pal authority began to overflow its banks. And those which they produce do no- wise reach home to the point : Anatolius did obtain the bishopric of Constantino- ple ‘* bythe help of the emperor, and by the assent of the pope’s favour :”|| what then? Anatolius being put into that See in the room of Flavianus, by the influence of Dioscorus (whose responsal he had been), and having favoured the Eutychian faction, Pope Leo might thence have had a fair colour to disavow him as uncapable of that function and * Donatum—ita Dominico volumus gregi preesidere, ut libellum fidei sue ad nos memi- nerit dirigendum P. Leo Ep. 87. + Solonitanz civitatis episcopus ne ac re- sponsali meo nesciente ordinatus est, et facta res est, quee sub nullis anterioribus principus evenit.—Greg. Ep. iv. 34. t ᾿Αλεξανδρεῖς" ἐπανελθόντι δὲ τότε ἸΠέτρω and τῆς “Ῥώμης μετά γραμμάτων Δαμάσου τάτε ἐν τα δόξαντα, καὶ τὴν αὐτοῦ χειροτονίαν κυρούντων, παρέ- δωκαν τὰς éxxAncias.—Sozom. vi. 30. || Nos enim vestre fidei et interventionis habentes intuitum, cum secundum sum con- secrationis authores ejus initia titubarent, be- nigniores erga ipsum quam justiores esse vol- uimus P. Leo Ep. 55. (ad Martianum.) - τσ τ Se a ee A TREATISE OF THE dignity, he being so obnoxious ;* both having such a flaw in his ordination, and’ having been guilty of great faults, adhe- rence to the party of Dioscorus, and ir- regularly ordaining the bishop of Anti- ech ; but he, * out of regard to the em- peror’s intervention,” did acknowledge Anatolius for bishop: this was the “ fa- vourable assent” with which he upbraid- eth Anatolius, having displeased him : and what doth this signify ? Again, Pope Leo did not reject Maxi- mus, bishop of Antioch, from communion, nor disclaimed his ordination, although liable to exception :+ what then? [5 this a confirmation of him? No such mat- ter: it was only, which in sucha vixenly pope was a great favour, a forbearance to quarrel with him, as not duly ordained ; which any other bishop might have done. If a pope had a flaw in his ordination, another bishop might refuse him. Again, Pope Leo did enjoin the bishop of Thessalonica to confirm ordinations : what is that to the purpose? It belong- ed to that bishop, as a metropolitan, by the canons, to confirm those in his prov- ince, or, as a primate, to confirm those in his diocese; it belonged to him, as the pope’s vicar in those territories to which the pope had stretched his jurisdiction, to execute the pope’s orders: but what is this to universal authority? It is certain that |llyricum was then ina more special mannersubjected to the pope’s jurisdiction than any of the other eastern churches ; what therefore he did there, cannot be drawn into consequence as to other places. The same may be said in answer to the complaint of Pope Gregory, and to any the like instances. Moreover, surreptitious, presumptuous, pragmatical intrusions, or usurpations of power, do not suffice to found a right in this or any other case ; to which purpose, and wholly to invalidate any such pleas, these observations may be considered. 1. There do occur divers instances of * Decessore enim tuo B. memorie Flaviano propter defensionem catholice veritatis ejecto, Ron immerito credebatur quodord:natores tui contra sanclorum canonum constituta videren- tur sui similem consecrasse Post illa ita- que ordinationis tue non inculpata principia —. P. Leo Ep. 53. ad anatol. Liber. cap. 12. + Quod nos amore reparande fidei, et pacis Studio retractare cessavimus.—P. Leo Ep. 54 @d Marcian.) Conc. Chalc. Act. 10. Vor, Il. 31 POPE’S SUPREMACY. 241 ᾿ bishops, who did meddle in ordinations of other bishops, so as to bear great stroke in constituting them, who did not thereby pretend to universal jurisdiction; and it would be extremely ridiculous thence to infer they had any reasonable claim thereto. Thus it was objected to Athana- sius, “that he presumed to ordain in cities which did not belong to him.”* Eusebius of Constantinople did obtrude Eusebius Emissenus to be bishop of Alexandria. Evustathius of Antioch did ordain Evagrius bishop of Constantino- ple.’ Euzoius delivered unto Lucius the bishopric of Alexandria.t Lucifer, a Sardinian bishop, did ordain Paulinus bishop of Antioch.|| They for a salve say, as the pope’s legate: but upon what ground or testimony? Why did not historians tell us so much? ‘The pope had then been hissed at, if he had sent legates about such errands; it was in- deed out of presumption and pragmati- cal zeal to serve a party, then ordinary in persons addicted to all parties, right and wrong ; it not being then so express- ly forbidden by the canons as afierward. Theognis and Theodorus did make Macedonius bishop οἵ Constantinople.* Theophilus of Alexandria did ordain St. Chrysostom.§ The Egyptian bishops surreptitiously did constitute Maximus, the Cynic philosopher, bishop of Constanti- nople.{{ Acacius (who had as little to do there as the pope) did thrust Edoxius into the throne of Constantinople.** Meletius, of Antioch, did constitute St. Gregory Nazianzen to the charge of Constantinople.t+ Acacius and Patro- philus, extruding Maximus “ did ἴῃ his * "Auédec rot καὶ τοῦτο ἔγκλημα αὐτῶ ἐπῆγον, ὡς ἐν γόλεσι μηδὲν αὐτῷ προσηκοῦσαις χειροτονεῖν ἐτόλ- pnoev.—Soz. iii. 2}. + ᾿Επὶ τὸν ᾿Αλεξανδρείας προεδγήθη θρόνον ὑτὸ egos τοὺ Kwveravrivouré\ews éxioxérov.—Soz. ll. J. $ 'Exi τῷ παραδοῦναι Λουκίῳ ro ᾿Αρειανῷ τὰς ἐκεῖ ix«A\noias.—Socr. iv. 21. ΕΠ ᾿Εχειροτόνησε τὸν Παυλῖνον ἐπίσκοπον.---- 00 Γ. ill. 6; vi. 2 ἡ Θεόφιλος ᾿Ιωάννην éxeiporénce.—Socr. vi. 2. "Τούτου κλέψαντες τὴν χειροτονίαν ἐπίσκοπον Κωνσταντινουπόλεως κατέστησαν οἵ rore ἐξ Αἰγύπτου συνεληλυθότες .--- 0 Ζ. vii. 9. ** Τῶν περὶ ᾿Λκάκιον ἐνθρονισάντων αὐτόν ͵---- Socr. ii: 13. tt Ἤδη πρώην eis Ἐωνσταντινούπολιν διὰ τὴν Γρηγορίου κατάστασιν ἀφικόμενος .---802Ζ. vii. 2, 3. Υ Soer. iv. 14. * Soz. ii. 6. 242 room constitute Cyril’? bishop of Jerusa- lem.* Pope Leo doth complain of Anatolius, that “‘ against the canonical rule he had assumed to himself the ordi- nation of the bishop of Antioch.” 2. To obviate these irregular and. in- convenient proceedings, having crept in upon the dissensions in faith, and espe- cially upon occasion of Gregory Nazian- zen being constituted bishop of Constanti- nople by Meletius, and Maximus being thrust into the same See by the Egyp- tians (whose party for a time the Roman church did countenance), the sec- ond general synod did ordain, that no bishop should intermeddle about ordina- tions without the bounds of his own dio- cese. 3. In pursuance of this law, or vpon the ground of it, the pope was some- times checked, when he presumed to make a sally beyond his bounds in this or the like cases. As when Pope Innocent I. did send some bishops to Constantinople for pro- curing a synod to examine the cause of St. Chrysostom ; ‘ those of Constantino- ple did cause them to be dismissed with dsgrace, as molesting a govern- ment beyond their bounds.” 4. Even in the western parts, after that the pope had wriggled himself into most countries there, so as to obtain sway in their transactions, yet he in divers pla- ces did not meddle in ordinations: ‘* We do not” (says Pope Leo I.) * arrogate to ourselves a power of ordaining in your provinces.”’|| Even in some parts of ltaly itself the pope did not confirm bishops till the times of Pope Nicholas I., as may be collected from the submission then of the bishop of Ravenna to that condition, ‘“ that he should have no power to consecrate bish- ops canonically elected in the regio Fla- minia, unless it were granted him by let- ters from the apostolical see.’’§ * ’Akdxots μὲν γὰρ καὶ Τατρόθιλος Μάξιμον τὸν “Ἱεροσολύμων ἐξωθήσαντες Κύριλλον ἀντικατέστησαν. —Soer. ii. 238. + Post consecrationem Antiocheni episcopi, quam tibimet contra canonicaim regulam ven- dicasti P. Leo I, Ep. 53. (ad Anatol.) t Τοὺς μὲν ὑπερορίαν ἀρχὴν ἐνοχλήσαντας ἀτίμως ἐκπεμφθῆναι παρεσκεύασαν, —s0zZ0mM. Vill. 28. || Non enim nobis ordinationes vestrarum provinciarum defendimnus.—P. Leo. Ep. 89. § —— et ne electos etiam canonice in Fla- ows Seo A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. And it was not without great opposi- tion and struggling that he got that power — otherwhere than in his original precinets, or where the juncture of things did af- — ford him special advantage. r 5. If exainples would avail to deter. mine right, there are more, and more clear instances of emperors interposing in the constitution of bishops than of popes; as they had ground in reason, and authority in holy seripture: And Zadock the priest did the king putin the room of Abiathar.* Constantine did in- terpose at the designation of a bishop at Antioch in the room of Eustathius.” Upon Gregory Nazianzen’s recess. from Con- stantinople, Theodosius (that excellent emperor, who would not have infringed right) ‘* did command the bishops present to write in paper the names of those whom each did approve worthy to be or- dained, and: reserved to himself the choice of one ;” and accordingly they obeying, he, out of all that were nominated, “did elect Nectarius.”* ‘*Constantius did deliver the see of Constantinople to Eu- sebius Nicomediensis.”+ — Constantius was angry with Macedonius, because he was ordained ‘ without his licence.”’y He “ rejecting Eleusius and Sylvanus did order others to be substituted in their places.”’|| When, before St. Ambrose, the See of Milain was vacant, a synod of bishops ‘* there did entreat the emperor to declare one.”’§ Flavianus said to the Emperor Theodosius, ‘ Give forsooth, O king, the See of Antioch to whom you shall think good.’’€] The emperor did call Nestorius from Antioch to the See of minia episcopos consecrandi facultatem habe- ret, nisi id sibi a sede apostolica Jiteris concedes retur.—Plat. in P. Nichol. 1. i ἸΠροστάξαντος τοῦ βασιλέως rots ἱερεῦσιν ἐγγρά- ψαι χάρτῃ τὰς προσηγυρΐας ὧν ἕκαστοι δοκιμάζουδιν εἰς τὴν χειροτονίαν ἀξίων, ἑαυτῷ δὲ φυλάξαντος τοῦ ἕνος τὴν αἵρεσιν — καὶ ΝΝεκτάριον αἱρεῖται. —Sozom. Vil. + E ὑσεδίῳ τὸν Κωνσταντινουπόλεως θρόνον παρέ- dwxev.—lLcd. iit. 4. μὰ “Ort πρὶν αὐτὸν ἐπιτρέψαι, ἐχειροτονήθη. —)d, εἰ}. OF | “Τοὺς piv ἐξήλασε τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν, ἑτέρους δὲ ἀντ᾽ αὐτῶν καταστῆναι πρσσέταξε. --- ΤΠ ΘΟΠΟΥ͂, ii. 27. ᾧ Αὐτὸν ἡ σύνοδος ἠξίου ψηφίσασθαι Id. iv. 7. 4 Toe γὰρ τοι dds ᾧ βούλει τὸν ᾿Δντιοχέων Op6- νον, ὦ Baowes ——. Id. v. . 28 « 1 Kings ii. 35. b Euseb. de Vit. Const. iii. 59, 60. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. Constantinople;* and he was, saith Vincentius Lir., ‘‘ elected by the empe- sror’s judgment.”+ The favour of Jus- tinian did advance Menas to the See of ‘Constantinople ;f and the same did pre- fer Eutychius thereto.|| _ He did put in Pope Vigilius BDiettte In Spain the kings had the election of bishops by the decrees of the council of Toledo.° That the Emperor Charles did use to _ confirm bishops, Pope John VIII. doth testify, reproving the archbishop of Ver- dun for rejecting a bishop ** whom the clergy and people of the city had chosen, _-and the Emperor Charles had confirmed by his consent.” When Macarius, bishop of Antioch,{] for monothelitism was deposed in the sixth synod, the bishops under that throne did request the presidents of the synod to suggest another to the emperor to be substituted in his room. In Gratian there are divers passages wherein popes declared, that they could not ordain bishops to churches, even in Italy, without the emperor’s leave and li- cence. As indeed there are also in later times other decrees (made by popesof an- other kidney, or in other junctures of af- fairs), which forbid princes to meddle in the election of bishops; as in the seventh synod, and in the eight synod as they call it, upon occasion of Photius being placed in the See of Constantinople by the power of the court.t. And that of * Visum est imperatoribus nu!lum ordinare | - de Constantinopolitana ecclesia pontiticem Nestorium quasi utilem ad docendum Constan- tinopolin principes evocaverunt.—Lib. Brev. 6; Soer. vii. 29. ἡ Quem tanto imperii judicio electum, tan- to sacerdoium studio prosecutum——. Vine. Lir. p. 330. t Tune papa principis favere Menam pro eo (Anthimo) ordinavit antistitem.—Zid. cap. 21. \| ἀνεβίβασε τὸν Ἐξ ὑτύχιον.----Ἐνασ. iv. 38, § Quem clerus et populus civitatis eligerat, ‘pieque memorie Carolus imperator sno con- sensu firmarerat ——. . P. Joh. VII. Ep. 70. Y Αἰτοῦμεν τὴν ὑμετέραν tvdolérnra τοῦ ἀναγά- " τῷ εὐσεδεστάτῳ καὶ ------- ἡμῶν δεσπότη καὶ μεγά- ‘Aw βασιλεῖ ἕτερον ἀντὶ Maxaploun—dia τὸ μὴ χηρεύ- εἰν τὸν τοιοῦτον Opdvov.—Syn. VI. Act. xil. (p. 208.) © Conc. Tolet. xii. cap. 6; apud Gr. Dist. Ixiii. cap. 25. ᾿ * Dist. Ixiii. cap. 9; Greg. I. Ep. iv. 15, cap. 15-18 ; P. Leo. 1V. et. Steph. ; Dist. Lxiii. cap. 6,7; Ibid. cap. 1, 2. =o 7, © Pope Nicholas I., by which discordance in practice we may see the consistence and stability of doctrine and practice in the Roman church.* The emperors for a long time did en- joy the privilege of constituting or con- firming the popes; for (says Platina, in the Life of Pelagius Il.) ““ nothing was then done by the clergy in electing a pope, unless the emperor approved the election.”+ He did confirm Pope Gre- gory L. and Pope Agatho. ** Pope Adrian, with his whole synod, did deliver to Charles the Great the right and power of electing the pope and or- daining the apostolic see. He, more- over, defined that archbishops and bish- ops In every province should receive in- vestiture from him; and that if a bish- op were not commended and invested by the king, he should be consecrated by none ; and whoever should act against this decree, him he did noose in the band of anathema.”’i The like privilege did Pope Leo VIII. attribute to the Emperor Otho Il. “ We give him” (says he) “ for ever power to ordain a successor and bishop of the chief apostolic see, and change archbish- ops,”|| &c. And Platina, in his Life, says, ‘‘ That being weary of the incon- stancy of the Romans, he transferred all authority to choose a pope from the clergy and people of Rome to the em- peror.”’*§ * Thid. cap. 4.—[It is a notorious thing, that most princes in the west, in Germany, France, England, did invest bishops ull the time of Pope Gregory VII. when that boisterous man did raise 50 much stir in Christendom to dispossess them of that right; which they enjoyed, not only as princes, but as founders, patrons, bene- factors, protectors of churches.] + Nihil acleroin eligendo pontifice actum erat, nisi ejus electionem imperator approbas- set.—Plat in Pelagio 1]. (p.154;) Dist. 63; Plat. p. 155); vide Joh. Diac. et Anastas. Dist. Ixiti, cap. 21. ¢t Hadrianus autem papacom universa sy- nodo tradiderunt jus et potestatem eligendi pon- tificem, et ordinandi apostolicam sedem insuper archiepiscopos et episcopos per singu- las provineias ab 60 investituram aceipere de- finivit ; et nisi a rege laudetur et investiatur episcopus, ἃ nemine consecretur: et quicunque contra hoc decretum ageret, anathematis vincu- lo eum innodavit.— Dist. Ixiii. cap. 22. || Largimar in perpetuum facultatem suc- cessorem, atque summe sedis apostolic pon- tificem ordinandi, ac perhoc archiepiscopos seu episcopos, &c.—Tbid. cap. 23. $ Qui statim Romanorum inconstantie per- 244 Now, I pray, if this power of con- firming bishops do by divine institution belong to the pope, how could he part with it, or transfer it on others? is not this a plain renunciation in popes of their divine pretence ? 6. General synods, by an authority paramount, have assumed to themselves the constitution and confirmation of bish- ops.° So the second general synod did confirm the ordination of Nectarius, bish- op of Constantinople, and of Flavianus, bishop of Antioch: ‘ This ordination” (say they) “the synod generally have admitted,’”’* although the Roman ehurch did not approve the ordination of Nectar- ius, and for a time after did oppose that of Flavianus. So the fifih synod, it seemeth, did confirm the ordination of Theophanius, bishop of Antioch. So the synod of Pisa did constitute Pope Alex- ander V.; that of Constance, Pope Martin V.; thatof Basil, Pope Felix V. 7. All Catholic bishops in old «times might, and commonly did, confirm the elections and ordinations of bishops, to the same effect as popes may be pretend- ed to have done; that is, by signifying their approbation or satisfaction concern- ing the orthodoxy of their faith, the at- testation to their manners, the legality of their ordination, no canonical impedi- ment; and: consequently by admitting them to communion of peace and charity, and correspondence in all good offices, which they express by returning κοιγογικαὶ ἐπιστολαὶ in answer to their synodical- communicatory letters. Thus did St. Cyprian and all the bish- ops of that age confirm the ordination of Pope Cornelius, being contested by No- vatian; as St. Cyprian in terms doth affirm: ‘“ When the see of St. Peter, the sacerdotal chair, was vacant, which by the will of God being occupied, and by all our consents confirmed,” &c.t— tzesus authoritatem omnem eligendi pontificis a clero populogue Romano ad imperatorem trans- tulit Plat in Leo VIII. p. 291. * "Hyep ἔνθεσμον χειροτονίαν ἐδέξατο τὸ τῆς ov- νόδου κοινὸν----Π οὔ, v. 9. + Cum locus Petri et gradus cathedre sacer- dotalis vacaret, quo occupato de Dei voluntate, atque omnium nostrum consensione firmato.— Cypr. Ep. 52 (ad Anton.) * Conc. Const. sess. 40; Conc. Bas, sess. XxxVil. (p. 98.) A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. “to confirm thy ordination with a great- er authority.’”* ) To which purpose, each bishop αἱ write epistles to other bishops (or at least to those of highest rank), acquainting them with his ordination and instalment, making a profession of his faith, so as to satisfy them of his capacity of the fune- tion. 8. But bishops were complete bishops before they did give such an account of themselves; so that it was not in the power of the pope, or of any others, to reverse their ordination, or dispossess them of their places. ‘There was no confirmation importing any such mat- ter: this is plain; and one instance will serve to shew it;—that of Pope Hon- orius, and of Sergius, bishop of Con- stantinople, who speak of Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem; that he was constituted bishop before their knowl- edge, and receipt of his synodical let- ters.t 9. If the designation of any bishop should belong to the pope, then especial- ly that of metropolitans, who are the chief princes of the church; but this anciently did not belong to him. In Afric the most ancient bishop of the prov- ince (without election) did succeed into that dignity. Where the metropoles were fixed, all the bishops of the prov- ince did convene, and with the consent of the clergy, persons of quality, and the commonalty, did elect him.{ So was St. Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, elected. So Nectarius of Constantino- ple, Flavianus of Antioch, and Cyril of ordinationam tuam auctoritate majore Ep. 45, ad * Ad eomprobandam factam Corn. 1 ‘Qs ἐξ ἀκοῆς καὶ μόνης μεμαθήκαμεν τῆς ἭἝεροσο- λυμιτῶν χειροτονηθεὶς πρόεδρος" οὔπω γὰρ τὰ ἐξ ἔθους αὐτοῦ συνοδικὰ μέχρι τοῦ νῦν édegaueOa.—Syn. VI. Act. xii. 198. Νυνὶ δὲ ἀκούομεν ἐπισκόπου xabec- τῶτος τῆς 'Ἱεροσολυμιτῶν P. Honor. ib. p. 198. t Metropolitano defuncto, eum in locum ejus alius fuerit subrogandus, provinciales episcopt ad civitatem metropolitanam convenire debe- bunt, ut omnium clericorum atque omnium Οἷ- vium voluntate discussa expresbyteris ejusdem ecclesiv, vel ex diaconibus obtimus eligatur.— P. Leo Ep, 88. The metropolitan being dead, when another is to be put in his place, the pro- vincial bishops ought to meet in the metropo- litan city, that by votes of the whole clergy and citizens, out of the priests or deacons of the same church, the fittest person may be chosen. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. Jerusalem, as the Fathers of Constantino- ple tell us. ‘So Stephanus and Bassianus, rival bishop of Ephesus, did pretend to have been chosen, as we saw before. - And for confirmation, there did not need any, there is no mention of any ; except that confirmation of which we spake, a consequent approbation of them from all their fellow bishops, as having no exception against them, rendering them unworthy of communion. In the synod of Chalcedon it was defined, that the bishop of Constantinople should have equal privileges with the bishop of Rome; yet it is expressly cautioned there, that he shall not meddle in ordin- ation of bishops in any province, that being left to the metropolitan : fora good time, even in the western parts, the pope did not meddle with the constitution of metropolitans ;° leaving the churches to enjoy their liberties.* Afterwards, with all other rights, he snatched the collation, confirmation, &c. of metropolitans. VIL. Sovereigns have a power to cen- sure and correct all inferior magistrates in proportion to their offences; and in case of great misdemeanour, or of ‘inca- pacity, they can wholly discharge and remove them from their office. This prerogative, therefore, he of Rome doth claim, as most proper to him- self, by divine sanction.% “God Almighty alone can diasolve the spiritual marriage between a bishop and his church. Therefore those three things premised” (the confirmation, translation, and deposition of bishops) ‘ are reserv- ed to the Roman bishop, not so much by canoninal constitution, as by divine insti- tution.”’+ This power the convention of Trent doth allow him; thwarting the ancient laws, and betraying the liberties of the church thereby, and endangering the Christian doctrine to be inflected and cor- * Μηδὲν ἐπικοινοῦντος rats ἐκείνων χειροτονίαις τοῦ ὑσιοτάτου ἀρχιεπισκόπου τῆς βασιλίδος Act. xvi. p. 464. + Et ideo tria hee que premisimus non tam constitutione-canonica, quam institutione divina soli sunt Romano pontifici reservata.— P. Innoc. Ill. in Gregor. Deeret. lib i. tit. cap. 2. ' Vide Concil. Aur. can. 7. aptd de Mare. Vi. iv. ὁ 8 ε Vide Gelas. Ep. xiii. (p. 640.) 245 rupted to the advantage of papal inter- est.” But such a power anciently did not, by any rule or custom, ina peculiar manner belong to the Roman bishop.t Premising what was generally touched about jurisdiction; in reference to this branch we remark, 1. The exercising of judgment and censure upon bishops (when it was need- ful for general good) was prescribed to be done by synods, provincial or patri- archal (diocesan.) In them causes were to be discussed, and sentence pronounc- ed against those who had deviated from faith, or committed misdemeanours. So it was appointed in the synod of Nice ;" as the African synod (wherein St. Austin was one bishop) did observe, and urge in their Epistle to Pope Celestine, in those notable words: ‘* Whether they be clergy of an inferior degree, or whether they be bishops, the Nicene decrees have most plainly committed them to the met- ropolitan’s charge: for they have most prudently and justly discerned, that all matters whatsoever ought to be determin- ed in the places where they do first be- gin; and that the grace of the Holy Spirit would not be wanting to every par- ticular province.”+ The same law was enacted by the synod of Antioch, by the synods of Constantinople, Chalcedon, &e.! Thus was Paulus Samosatenus, for his error against the divinity of our Lord, and for his scandalous demeanour, deposed by the synod of Antioch. Thus wes Eustathius, bishop of Antioch (being ac- * Cause criminales graviores contra episco- pos, etiam heresis quod absit, qua depositione aut privatione digne sunt, ab ipso tantum summo Romano pontifice cognoscantur, et ter- minentur.—Conc. Trid. sess. xxiv. cap. 5. + “Exicxoros καθαιρεῖ πάντα κληρικὸν ἄξιον ὄντα καθαιρέσεως, πλὴν ἐπισκόπον, μόνος γὰρ οὐχ οἷός τε. —Const. Ap. vill. 98. A bishop may depose any clerk who deserves it, except he be a bish- op; whom to deprive, one bishop alone is not sufficient. ¢ Decreta Nicena sive inferioris gradus cler- icos, sive ipsos episcopos suis metropolitanis apertissime commiserunt: prudentissime enim justissimeque viderunt quecunque negotia in suis locis ubi orta sunt finienda; nee unicui- que provincie gratiam S. Spiritus defuturam,.— Syn. Afr Ep. ad P. Celest. 1. b Syn. Nic. can. 5 i Syn. Ant. can. 15, (An. 269.) Euseb. vii. 30. —) ee ——)hUhC”ltCOUD Oe . ““συ 246 cused of Sabellianism and of other faults), removed by a synod of. the same place; the which sentence he quietly did bear.* ‘Thus another Eustathius, bishop of Sebastia (for his uncouth garb and fond conceits against marriage), was discarded by the synod of Gangra. Thus did a synod of Constantinople ‘ab- dicate Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra, for heterodoxy in the point concerning our Lord’s divinity. For the like cause was Photinus, bishop of Sirmium, deposed by asynod there, ‘gathered by the empe- ror’s command.” So was Athanasius tried and condemned(although unjustly as to the matter and cause) by the synod of Tyre.* So was St. Chrysostom (al- though most injuriously) desposed by a synod at Constantinople. So the bishops at Antioch (according to the emperor’s order) deposed Stephanus, bishop of that place, for a wicked contrivance against | the fame of Euphratas and Vincentius.' In all these condemnations, censures, and depositions of bishops (whereof each was of high rank and great interest in the church), the bishop of Rome had no hand, nor so much as alittle finger. All the proceedings did go on supposition of the rule and laws, that such judgments were to be passed by synods. St. Chrysostom δεκαπέντε ἐπισκόπους καθεῖλε» ----ς deposed fifteen bishops.””™ 2. In some case a kind of deposing of bishops was assumed by particular bish- ops, as defenders of the faith, and execu- tors of canons; their deposition consist- ing in not allowing those to be bishops, whom for erroneous doctrine or disorder- ly behaviour (notoriously incurred), they deemed incapable of the office, presum- ing their places, ipso facto, void.t This Pope Gelasius |. proposed for a rule, ** That not only a metropolitan, but every other bishop, hath a right to separ- ate any persons or any place from the catholic communion, according to the rule by which his heresy is already con- ω ‘Hovyn τὴν συκοφαντίαν ἤνεγκε. am SOL, il. 9, + Divwexe ἀπὸ πάσης κιθολικῆς ἐκκλησίας ἀκοι- νώνητον εἶναι σεαυτὸν, καὶ ἀνενέργητον πρὸς πᾶν ὃτι- οὖν τῶν ἐξ αὐθεντίας ἱερατικῆς.----. Ορ]65ι. in Nest. Sent. Eph. Act. p. 195. κ Socr. i. 24; i. 43; 36: ii. 29; i. 28. 1 Theod. ii. 10. ™ Act. xi. Syn, Chale. p. 411 ; 4, jungenda. Soz. ili. 14; Soer. i. Hec ᾧ, cum A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. demned.”* And upon this accoun the popes for so long time quarrel wi the See of Constantinople, because t did not expunge Acasius from the ὡ“ bishops, who had communicated with — heretics.t| So did St. Cyprian reject — Marcianus, bishop of Arles, for adhering to the Novatiaus. So Athanasius was — said to have deposed Arian bishops, and substituted others in their places. So Acasius and his complices deposed. Mac- edonius and divers others bishops." And_ the bishops of those times καθεῖλον ἀλλής μους, factiously applying a rule taken for granted then, ‘‘ deposed one another ;"¢ so Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem, depos- ed Athanasius. So Eusebius of Nico- media threatened to depose Alexander of Constantinople, if. he would not admit Arius to communion.|| Acasius and his complices did extrude Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem. He also deposed and ez- pelled Cyril of Jerusalem ; and deposed many other bishops at Constantinople.° Cyril deposed Nestorius, and..Nestorius deposed Cyril and Memnon. Cyril and Juvenalis deposed Jchn of Autioch.§ John of Antioch, with his bishops, depos- ed Cyriland Memnon.{[ Yea, after the synod of Ephesus, John of Antioch, “gathering together many bishops, did depose Cyril.”** Stephanus, ‘concern- ing Bassianus: ‘* Because he had enter- ed into the church with swords—there- fore he was expelled out of it again by the holy Fathers, both by Leo of Rome, the imperial city, and by Flavianus; by * Quod non solum presuli apostolico facere licet, sed cuicunque pontifici, ut quoslibet et quemlibet Jocum secundum regulam heereseos ipsius ante damnate, a catholica communione discernant. —Ep. 4. t ᾿Επεὶ οὖν ἐχρὴν τὸν ἐπί κακοδοξίᾳ φωρασθέντα pyr’ ἑτέρας ἄρχειν ἐκκλησίας, ἢ διδασκᾶλου ὄνομα πε- ριφέρειν.---Οὐης sub Men. (p. 10.) ᾿ Πότερον καθελών.---ϑοοῦ. i.'24. || Εὐὐσέθιος πολλὰ διηπείλει αὐτῷ, λέγων ὅσον οὐὖ- δέπω καθαιρήσειν αὐτὸν, εἰ νὴ εἰς κοινωνίαν δέξηται τὸν ΓΑρειον.---Ἰἀ. 1. 37 ᾧ Κύριλλος δὲ ἅμα καὶ ᾿Ιουδεναλίῳ, ἀμυνόμενος τὸν ᾿Ιωάννην καθαιρεῖ καὶ αὐτόν.---ἰ ἡ, vil. 34. ‘H ἁγία σύνοδης τοῦτον μὲν καθαιρεῖ διὰ τὰ προειρημένα πάντα, Μέμνονα δὲ ὡς συνεργὸν αὐτοῦ. —Act. Syn. Eph. p. 380. 'Qs τῶν κακῶν ἡγεμό- vas καθελεῖν paper κα δὴ —Ibid. p. 390. ** Ἰωάννης δὲ καταλαβὼν τὴν ᾿Αντιόχειαν καὶ πολλους συναγαγὼν ἐπισκόπηυς τρῶς τ" iia Wen κατειληφότα τὴν ᾿Αλεξάνδρειαν —pocr, Vil. * Cypr. Bp. 67; Soz. in, 215 Soer. it. ia, ἯΙ ξωθήσαντες. —Soer. il. 38 ; ” Theod. il. 26; ων iv. 24. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. the bishop of Alexandria, and also by the bishop of Antioch.”* Anatolius of Constantinople did reject Timotheus of Alexandria. Acacius, bishop of Con- stantinople, did reject Petrus Fullo. 8. St. Cyprian doth assert the power of censuring bisops, upon needful and just occasion, to belong to all bishops for maintenance of common faith, discipline, and peace. “Therefore” (saith he, writing to Pope Stephanus himself), ‘t dear brother, the body of bishops is copious, being coupled by the glue of concord, and the band of unity, that if any of our college shall attempt to frame a heresy, or to tear and spoil the flock of Christ, the rest may succour, and like useful and merci- ful shepherds, may gather together the sheep of ovr Lord’into the flock.”+ The like doctrine is that of Pope Ce- lestine I. in his Epistle to the Ephesine synod.t In matter of faith any bishop might in- terpose judgment; Theophilus did pro- ceed to condemn the Origenists withou regard to the pope.? oF Epiphanius did demand satisfaction of John of Jerusalem. 4. Thiscommon right of bishops in some cases is confirmed by the nature of such censures, which consisted in dis- claiming persons notoriously guilty of heresy, schism, or scandal ; and in refus- ing to entertain communion with them: * ᾿Επειδὰν αὐτὸς ἐπεισῆλθε τῇ ἁγιωτάτῃ ἐκκλησίᾳ era ξιφῶν ἐξώσθη διὰ τοῦτο παρὰ τῶν ἁγίων ᾿ ἀἰθήβας παρά τε τοῦ ὑσιοτάτου τῆς βασιλενούσης Ῥώμης Λέοντος, καὶ τοῦ μακαριοτάτου Φλαυιτανοῦ ----- καὶ παρὰ τοῦ ἐν ᾿Αλεξανδρείᾳ, καὶ παρὰ τοῦ ἐν "Avrioyeta.—Syn. Chale. Act. xi. p. 405. Ὁ μακάρι ς ἐν ἁγίοις Pravavds ἐξεώσατο adrév.—lbid. " 406; Baron, ann. 467, ὁ 34; P. Felix. Lil. p. 4 . + Idcireo enim, frater charissime, copiosum corpus est sacerdotum, concordiz mutuze glu- tino atque unitatis vinculo copulatum, ut siquis ex collevio nostro heresin facere, et gregem Christi lacerare, et vastare tentaverit, subveni- ant ceteri, et quasi pastores utiles et miseri- ~ eordes oves Dom inicas in gregem colligant.— Cypr. Ep. 67. (ad Steph.) t ᾽᾿Α κούεσθω ταῦτα παρὰ πάντων εἰς τὸ κοινὸν. κύ- ρίοι ἀδελφοὶ ἐν ταύτη τῇ φροντίδι σφιγγόμεθα πανταχοῦ καὶ dva πᾶσαν οἱκσυμένην ry ἐκείνων δια- δυχῇ τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου κηρύττοντες &c. Cone Eph. Act. ii. p. 324. Τοιγαροῦν περισπούδαστόν dori, καὶ πρακτίον ὅπως καμάτῳ κοινῷ τὰ ἐμπιστεύ- θεντα, καὶ διὰ τῆς ἀποστολικῆς διαδοχῆς ἕως τοῦ νῦν συσχεθέντα φυλάξωμεν. —Ibid. p. 320. P Vide Hier. 67 et 78, 247 which every bishop, as entitled to the common interests of faith and peace, might do.* 5. Indeed in such a case every Chris- tian had*a right (yea an obligation) to desert his own bishop. So John of Je- rusalem having given suspicion of error in faith, St. Epiphanius did write letters to the monks of Palestine not to “" com- muniecate with him till they were satisfi- ed of his orthodoxy.” Upon which ae- count St. Jerome, living in Palestine, did decline communication with the patriarch thereof; asking him, if it ‘‘ were any where said to him, or commanded, that without satisfaction concerning his faith, they were bound to maintain communion with him.”’|| So every bishop, yea every Christian, hath a kind of universal juris- diction. 6. If any pope did assume more than was allowed in this case by the canons, or was common to other bishops of his rank, it was an irregularity and an usurp- ation. Nor would examples, if any were producible, serve to justify him, or to ground a right thereto, any more than the extravagant proceedings of other pragmatical and factious bishops, in the same kind (whereof so many instances can be alleged), can assert such a power to any bishop. 7. When the pope hath attempted in this kind, bis power hath been disavow- ed, as an illegal, upstart pretence.{] 8. Other bishops have taken upon them, when they apprehended cause, to * Cypr. Ep. 67.—"Ooot παρὰ rods ἐπὶ τῇ πίστει τῶν πατέρων τύπους διαπράτ rovrat, ἑαυτοῖς ἐπάγυυσι τὰ ἐκ τῶν κανόνων ᾿ἐπιτίμια.---- ΠΔ]αΝ ΞΕ. in Syn. Chale. Act.i. p. 19]. ᾿Εχρὴν γὰρ τὴν ὑμετίραν ἀγάπην μεμνημένην τῶν πατρικῶν παραδόσεων μηδένα συγχωρεῖν τὰ κεκωλυμένα ποιεῖν, ἀλλὰ καὶ εἴ τις ToA- μηρὸς φανείη πάση δυνάμει ἐναν ειοῦσθαι.----. Aga- pet. ad Petr. Hier (p. 21.) + Εἰκότως ἡμεῖς ἐπιστάμενοι τὴν τῶν θείων κανό- νων ἐκδίκησιν ἁρχιερεῦσιν μόνον dppdrrecy, τήνδε τῆς ὀρθῆς πίστεως οὐ μόνον ἱερωμένοις, ἀλλὰ καὶ παντὶ dpe θοδόξῳ Xorwriava.—Menas. (tom. iv. p. 10.) Plebs, &c. Deum metuens Cypr. Ep. 68; vide P. Nich. I. Ep. 8.(p 506 ) ¢ Cunctis monachis ab eodem Epiphanio scripta venerunt, ut absque satisfrehone fidei nullus ei temere communicaret.— Hier. Ep. 61, (ad Pammach.) cap, 15. || Alicubine dictum, aut tibi alicubi: manda- tum est, quod sine satistactione det communi- onem tuam subiremus ?—//i/. Quod tibi non communicemus, fide est —J+rd. cap. 16, Theophilus, John of Antioch, Dioscoras, Novam legem, &c.— Vide de Cone. Sard. 248 discard and depose popes. So did the oriental faction at Sardica depose Pope Julius for transgressing, as they supposed, the laws of the church, in fostering here- tics and criminal persons condemned by synods. So did the synod of Antioch thereaten deposition to the same pope. So did the patriarch Dioscorus make show to reject Pope Leo from communion. So did St. Hilary anathematize Pope Liberius.* 9. Popes, when there was great occa- sion, and they had a great mind to exert their utmost power, have not yet presum- ed by themselves, * without joint author- ity of synods,” to condemn bishops.* So Pope Julius did not presume to depose Eusebius of Nicomedia, his great adver- sary, and so much obnoxious by his pat- ronising Arianism. Pope Innocent did not censure Theophilus and his complices, who so irregularly and wrongfully had extruded St. Chrysostom, although much displeased with them; but endeavoured to get a general synod to do the business. Pope Leo I. (though a man of spirit and animosity sufficient) would not, without assistance of a synod, attempt to judge Dioscorus, who had so highly provoked him and given so much advantage against him, by favouring Eutyches, and _per- secuting the orthodox. Indeed often we may presume that popes would have deposed bishops, _ if they had thought it regular, or if others commonly had received that opinion, so that they could have expected success in their attempting it. But they many times were angry when their horns were short, and shewed their teeth when they could not bite. 10. What has been done in this kind by popes jointly with others, or in synods (especially upon advantage, when the cause was just and plausible), is not to be ascribed to the authority of popes as such. It might be done with their in- fluence, not by their authority: so the synod of Sardica (not Pope Julius) cash- iered the enemies of Athanasius; so the synod of Chalcedon (not Pope Leo) de- posed Dioscorus; so the Roman synod (not Pope Celestine) checked Nestorius ; * An qui in hominem imperatorem peccasge dicebatur, nulla interveniente synodo dejici de- buerunt?—P. Gelas. I Ep. 13. 4 Soz.iii. 11,8; Evag. ii. 4; Hilar. fragm. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. The | whole western synod (whereof he was president) had a great sway.* 11. If instances were arguments of right, there would be other pretenders to and that of Ephesus deposed him. the deposing power. Particular bishops would have it, as we before shewed. 12. The people would have the pow- er; for they have sometimes deposed popes themselves, with effect. So of Pope Constantine, Platina telleth us, “δι length he is deposed by the peo- ple of Rome, being very much provoked by the indignity of the matter.? 13. There are many instances of bish- ops being removed, or deposed by the imperial authority. This power was in- deed necessarily annexed to the imperial dignity ; for all bishops being subjects of the emperor, he could dispose of their persons, so as not to suffer them to con- tinue in a place, or to put them from it as they demeaned themselves, to his sat- isfaction or otherwise, in reference to public utility. It is reasonable, if they were disloyal or disobedient to him, that he should not suffer them to be in places of such influence, whereby they might pervert the people to disaffection. It is fit that he should deprive them of tem- poralities. The example of Solomon deposing Abiathar.* Constantine M. “ commanded Eusebius and Theogonius to depart out of the cities over which they presided as bish- ops.”’¢ * 'H ayia 'ΡῬωμαίων σύνοδος φανερὰ τετύπωκε.--- Cyril. ad Joh. Ant. Cone. Eph.—p. 197, 332; Syn. p. 11, 60. ᾿Αποστολικὸς θρόνος, καὶ ἣ σύνο- δος avros.—Const. Sacr. in Syn. VI. p. 11. ᾿Α- γάθων ἐπίσκοπος σὺν πάσαις ταῖς συνόδεις ταῖς ἀνη- κούσαις τῇ συνόδῳ τοῦ ἀποστολικοῦ θρόνου Ibid. p. 60. ‘Andons κατὰ δύσιν cvvédov.—Act. Eph. p. 332. Sit hee inte fixa damnatioa me, et ab his qui sub me constituti episcopales sedes eubernare noscuntur . P. Feliz ad Petrum Antioch. apud Baron. ann. 483, ᾧ 68. + Tandem a sede dejicitur a populo Romano ira et indignitate rei percito. Plat. p.223. P. Leo. VII. p. 291. Anastasius. Plat. p. 131. t Εὐσέβιον δὲ καὶ Θεογόνιον φεύγειν προσέταξεν ἂς ἐπισκόπουν πόλεις .----ἴϑδοΖ. 1. 21. Tére μὲν οὗτοι καθηρέθησαν, καὶ τῶν πόλεων ἐξηλάθησαν .--- ἢ θο- dor. i. 20. He threatened Athanasius to depose him.—édy γὰρ γνῶ ὡς κεκώλυκας τινὰς αὐτῶν τῆς ἐκκλησίας μεταποιουμένους, ἢ ἀπείρξας τῆς εἰσόδου, ἀποστελῶ παραχρῆμα τὸν καθαιρήσοντά σε ἐξ ἐμῆς κε- λεύσεως, καὶ τῶν τύπων meraerioovra.—Socr. 1. 27; Athanas. Apol. ii. p. 778. t | Kings ii. 35, A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. Constantius deposed Paulus of Con- stantinople.* Constantius ejected all that would not subscribe to the creed of Ariminum.7 The Emperor Leo deposed 'Timotheus fBlurus, for which Pope Leo did highly commend and thank him.* The emperors discarded divers popes. Constantius banished Pope Liberius, and caused another to be put in his room. Otho put out John the Twelfth. Justinian deposed Pope Silverius, and banished Pope Vigilius.* Justinian banished Anastasius, bishop of Antioch ; extruded Anthimus of Con- stantinople, and Theodosius of Alexan- dria.® Neither indeed was any great patriarch effectually deposed without their power or leave. Falvianus was supported by Theodo- sius against the pope. Dioscorus subsisted by the power of Theodosius Junior. The deposition of Dioscorus, in the synod of Chalcedon, was voted witha reserve of, “If it shall please our most sacred and pious lord.”’t In effect, the emperors deposed all bishops which were ordained beside their general laws; as Justinian, having pre- scribed conditions and qualifications con- cerning the ordinations of bishops, sub- joineth, * But if any bishop. be ordained Without using our formentioned constitu- tion, we command you that by all means he be removed from his bishopric.”’|| 14. The iastances alleged to prove the pope’s authority in this case are in- | concludent and invalid. They allege the case of Marcianus, bishop of Arles; concerning whom * Tov Παῦλον σχολάζειν éroinecv.—Socr. 11. 7. t Τὴν δὲ ἔκδοσιν τῆς ἀναγνωσθείσης ἐν ᾿Αριμίνῳ πίστεως ἐκέλευσεν εἰς τὰς περὶ ᾿Ιταλίαν ἐκκλησίας ἐκ- πέμπεσθαι, προστάξας τοὺς μὴ βουλομένους ὑπογράφ- εἰν αὐτῇ, ἐξεῶσθαι τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν, καὶ, εἰς τοὺς τύπους αὐτῶν ἑτέρους ἀντικαθίστασθαι .---ἰἀ. ii. 37. ft Εἰ παρασταίη τῷ θειοτάτῳ, καὶ εὐσεθεστάτῳ ἡμῶν deorérn.—Act. 11. p. 202. || Si quis autem citra memoratam observa- tionem episcopus ordinetur, jubemus hunc om- nibus modis episcopatu depelli.—Justin. Novell. ΟΧΧΊΪΙ. cap. 1. * Evag. ii. 11; Lib. cap. 15; P. Leo I. Epist. 99. * Lib. cap. 22. " Evag. iv. 41, 11. Vor. Il. 32 (for abetting Novatianism) St. Cyprian doth exhort Pope Stephanus, that he would direct letters to the bishops of Gaul and the people of Arles, that he being for his schismatical behaviour re- moved from communion, another should be substituted in his room.* The Epistle grounding this argument is questioned by a great critic; but I willingly admit it to be genuine, seeing it hath the style and spirit of St. Cyprian, and suiteth his age, and I see no cause why it should be forged: wherefore, omitting that defence, I answer, that the whole matter, being seriously weighed, doth make rather against the pope’s cause than for it; for if the pope had the sole or sovereign authority of rejecting bish- ops, why did the Gaulish bishops refer the matter to St. Cyprian ?>—why had Marcianus himself a recourse to him ? St. Cyprian doth not ascribe to the pope any peculiar authority of judgment or censure, but a common one, which himself could exercise, which all bishops might exercise : “ It 15᾽) (saith he) ‘* our part to provide and succour in sucha case ;” for “‘ therefore is the body of priests so numerous,” that—t by joint endeavour they may suppress heresies and schisms.”’+ The case being such, St. Cyprian ear- nestly doth move.Pope Stephanus to con- cur in exercise of discipline on that schismatic, and to prosecute effectually the business by his letters ; persuading his fellow bishops in France, ** that they would not suffer Marcianus to insult over the college of bishops”t (for to them it seemeth the transaction did immediately belong.) To do thus St. Cyprian implieth and prescribeth to be the pope’s special duty, not only out of regard to the common in- terest, but for his particular concernment * Cypr. Ep. 67. Dirigantur in provinciam et ad plebem Arelate consistentem liter, qui- bus abstento Marciano alius in ejus locum sub- stituatur + Cui rei nostrum est consulere, et subvenire Idcirco copiosum est corpus sacerdotum Quando ipse est ab universis sacerdo- tibus judicatus ; { Facere te oportet plenissimas literas ad co- episcopos nostros in Galliis constitutos, ne ul- tra Marcianum collegio nostro insultare pati- antur ——. 250 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. af). ye in the case ;* that schism having been| did belong solely to the bishop of Rome, — first advanced against his predecessors. | wherefore did Faustinus, bishop of Lyons, _ St. Cyprian also (if we mark it) covert-| advertise Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, ly doth tax the pope of negligence, in| not having suon enough joined with him-| self and the community of bishops in| censuring that delinquent.t | We may add, that the church of Arles and Gaul, being near Italy, the pope may be allowed to have some greater sway there, than otherwhere in more distant places; so that St. Cyprian thought his letters to quicken discipline there, might be proper and particularly effectual. These things being duly considered, what advantage can they draw from this instance ?—doth it not rather prejudice their cause, and afford a considerable ob- jection against it ? We may observe that the strength of their argumentation mainly consisteth in the words quibus abstento ; the which (as the drift of the whole Epistle, and parallel expressions therein do shew) do signify no more than gutbus efficiatur ut abstento, which may procure him to be excommunicated ; not gue contineant ab- stentionem, which * contain excommuni- cation,’ as P. de Marca glosseth: al- though admitting that sense, it would not import much, seeing only thereby the pope would have signified his consent with other bishops: wherefore De Marca hath no great cause to blame us, than we do “not deprehend any magnificent thing in this place for the dignity of the papal see :”* indeed he hath, I must confess, better eyes than I, who can see any such mighty things there for that purpose. As for the substitution of another in the room of Marcianus, that was a conse- quent of the excommunication ; and was to be the work of the clergy and people of the place; for when by common judgment of catholic bishops any bishop was rejected, the people did apply them- selves to choose another, I adjoin the resolution of a very learn- ed writer of their communion, in these words : “6 In this case of Marcianus, bishop of) Arles, if the right of excommunication * Multo magis ta ——. + Quo! nedum videatur a nobis abstentus. * Marc. vii. 1, 6. who was so far distant, concerning those — very things touching Marcianus, which both Faustinus himself, and other bishops of the same province, had before sent word of to Stephen, bishop of Rome, who lived nearest, being moreover of all bishops the chief? It must either be said, that this was done because of Ste- phen’s negligence; or, what is more probable, according to the discipline then used in the church, that all bishops of neighbouring places, but especially those presiding over the most eminent: cities, should join their counsels for the welfare of the church, and that Christian religion might not receive the least damage in any of its affairs whatsoever: hence it was, that in the case of Marcianus, bishop of Arles, the bishop of Lyons writ let- ters to the bishop of Rome and Carth- age ; and again, that the bishop of Carth- age, as being most remote, did write to the bishop of Rome, as being his brother and colleague, who by reason of his pro- pinguity might more easily know and judge of the whole matter.”* The other instances are of a later date (after the synod of Nice), and therefore of not so great weight ; yea, their having none more ancient to produce, doth strongly make against the antiquity of this right; it being strange, that no mem- ory should be .of any deposed thereby for above three hundred years: but how- * In hac Marciani episcopi Arelatensis causa si jus abstinendi sive excommunicandi compe- iebat soli episcopo Romano, cur Faustinus epis-= copus Lugdunensis Cypriano episcopo Cartha- giniensi longe dissito semel atque iterum sig- nificat eade Marciano, que jam utique ipse Faustinus et alii ejusdem provincie episcopi nunciaverant Stephano proximiori, et omnium episcoporum principi? Dicendum igitur faetum id fuisse aut per negligentiam Stephani; aut quod magis videtur, per disciplinam que tune in ecclesia vigebat, ut omnes quidem in circum= positis locis, sed preesertim urbium clarissima=- rum episcopi in commune consulerent ecclesiz, viderentque ne quid detrimenti res Chrisuana catholica caperet. Ttaque super isto Marciani Arelatensis facinore,.Lugdunensem episcopum ad Romanum et Carthaginiensem dedisse lite- ras, istum vero ut remotissimum dedisse vicis- sim suas ad Romanum, ut fratrem et eollegam, qui in propinquo facilius posset de negotio et cognoscere et statuere.—Rigalt. in Cypr.—Ep. | 67. — A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ever, suchas they are, they do not reach home to the purpose. allege Flavianus, bishop of Anti- och, deposed by Pope Damasus, as_ they affirm.” But it is wonderful they should have the face to mention that instance ; the story in short being this: “ The great Fiavianus” (a most worthy and orthodox prelate, whom St. Chrysostom in his Statuary Orations doth so highly com- mend and celebrate) being substituted in the place of ““ Meletius by the quire of bishops,”’* a party did adhere to Paulin- us; and after his decease they set up Evagrius, ordaining him (as Theodoret, who was best acquainted with passages ‘on that side of Christendom, reporteth) against many canons of the church.* Yet with this party, the Roman bishops, * not willing to know any of these things” (three of them in order, Damasus, Siri- cius, Anastasius), did conspire, instigat- ing the emperor against Flavianus, and reproacing him as “ supporter of a tyrant against the laws of Christ.’’+ But the emperor having called Flavian- us to htm, and received much satisfac- tion in his demeanour and discourse, did remand and settle him in his place: “ The emperor,” saith ‘Theodorct, “ won- dering at his courage and his wisdom, did command him to return home, and to feed the church committed to him ;”i at which proceeding, when the Romans afierward did grumble, the emperor gave them such reasons and advices, that they complied, and did entertain communion with Flavianus. It is true, that upon their suggestions ‘and clamours*the emperor was moved at first to order that Flavianus should go to ‘Rome, and give the western bishops sat- isfaction ; but after that he understood the quality of his plea, he freed him of that trouble, and without their allowance settled him in his See. Here is nothing of the pope’s depos- * Τῷ μεγάλῳ Φλαδιανῷ χαλεπαίνοντες ‘ Theod. + "Ad. ὅμως τούτων οὐδὲν εἰδίναι θέλοντες τὴν Εὐαγρίου μὲν κοινωνίαν ἡσπάζοντο, κατὰ Φλαδιανοῦ ris βατιλίκας ἐκίνησαν dxods.—Theod. ib. Αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν ἀνδρείαν καὶ τὴν σοφίαν θαυμάσας "ὁ βασιλεὺς, τὴν ἐνεγκοῦσαν καταλαδεῖν, καὶ τὴν ἐγ- χειρισθεῖσαν ποιμαίνειν ἐκκλησίαν ἐκέλευσεν .---- ΤΠ) 6- . ib, ’ Bell. de Pont. R. ii. 18. * Theod. 23; Socr. v. 15; Soz. viii. 3. ee i a ~~ re) ing Flavianus ; but of his embracing in a schism the side of a competitor, it being in such a case needful that the pope or any other bishop .should choose with whom he must communicate, and conse- quently must disclaim the other; in which choice the pope had no good success, not deposing Flavianus, but vainly op- posing him; wherefore this allegation is strangely impertinent, and well may be turned against them. Indeed in this instance we may see how fallible that See was in their judgment of things, how rash in taking parties and fo- menting discords, how pertinacious in a bad cause, how peevish against the com- mon sense of their brethren (especially considering, that before this opposition of Flavianus, the Fathers of Constantinople had, in their letter to Pope Damasus and the occidental bishops, approved and com- mended him to them; highly asserting the legitimateness of his ordination ;) in fine, how little their authority did avail with wise and considerate persons, such as Theodosius M. was.* De Merca representeth the matter somewhat otherwise out of Socrates ;¥ but take the matter as Socrates hath it, and it signifieth no more, than that both Theophilus and Damasus would not en- tertain communion with Flavianus, as be- ing uncapable of the episcopal order, for having violated his oath, and caused a division in the church of Antioch: what is this to judicial deposition? and how did Damasus more depose him than The- ophilus, who upon the same dissatisfac- tion did in like manner forbear commun- ion? whenas indeed a wiser and better man than either of them, St. Chrysostom, did hold communion with him, and did at length (saith Socrates, not agreeing with Theodoret) reconcile him to them both. They allege the deposition of Nesto- rius. But who knoweth not, that he was for heretical doctrine deposed in and by a general synod ὃ Pope Celestine did in- deed threaten to withdraw his commun- ion, if he did not renounce his error.t+ * Theod. v. 9. οἶτε ris ἐπαρχίας, καὶ τῆς ἀνατολικῆς διοικήσεως συνδοαμόντες κανονικῶς ἐχει- porévncay ἥνπερ ἔνθεσμον χειροτονίαν ἐδέξατο καὶ τὸ τῆς συνόδου κοινόν. ἐινωσκέτω, ὅτι αὐτὸς τὴν ἡμετέραν κοινωνίαν ἔχειν οὐ δυνήσεται, ἣν μὴ P. Celest. ad Cy- rf. in Cone. Eph. Act. p. 281. Thavrehds ἀπὸ ? Socr. v. 15; Mare. ili. 14, ὁ 1. gs aa “_ ᾿ ry " ᾿ 252 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. But had not any other bishop sufficient au- thority to desert a perverter of the faith ? Did not his clergy do the same, being commended by Pope Celestine for it ?* Did not Cyril in writing to Pope Celes- tine himself affirm, that he might before have declared that he could not commu- nicate with him δὲ Did Nestorius admit the pope’s judgment ? No; as the papal legates did complain, “ he did not admit the constitution of the apostolical chair.”’t Did the pope’s sentence obtain effect? No, not any; for, notwithstanding his threats, Nestorius did hold his place. till the synod ; the emperor did severely re- buke Cyril for his fiereeness (and im- plicitly the pope), and did order that no change should be made, till the synod should determine in the case; not re- garding the pope’s judgment: so that this instance may well be retorted, or used to prove the insignificancy of papal au- thority then. , They allege also Dioscorus of Alexan- dria, deposed by Pope Leo: but the case is very like to that of Nestorius, and ar- gueth the contrary to what they intend : he was, for his misdemeanours, and vio- lent countenancing of heresy, solemnly in a general synod accused, tried, con- demned, and deposed; the which had long before been done, if in the pope, his professed and provoked adversary, there had been sufficient power to effect it. Bellarmine also allegeth Pope Sixtus ΠῚ. deposing Polycronius, bishop of Je- rusalem: but no such Polyecronius is to be found in the registers of bishops then, or in the histories of that busy time, be- tween the two great synods of Ephesus and Chalcedon; and the acts of Sixtus, upon which this allegation is grounded, have so many inconsistencies, and smell τοῦ συνεδρίου ἡμῶν, καὶ τῆς τῶν Χριστιανῶν συνόδου ἀπεκλείσθης, ἐὰν μὴ εὐθέως τὰ κακῶς εἰρημένα ὑπὸ cod | d:0p9w04j.—Ibid., Epist. ad Nest. p. 186. ᾿Απὸ τῆς ἡμετέρας κοινωνίας ἀποχωρίζομεν.---( Joh. Ant. p. 196.) * Μακαρία δὲ ὅμως ἡ dyéxn, ἦ παρέσχεν ὃ κύριος κρίνειν περὶ τῆς ἰδίας νομῆς.---, Celest. ad Cle- rum, &c. Const. Act. Eph. p. 190. + Eyo δὶ ὁμολογῶ καὶ τοι βουληθεῖς συνοδικῷ | γράμματι φανερὸν αὐτῷ καταστῆσαι, ὅτι ταῦτα λέγον- τι καὶ φρονοῦντι κοινωνεῖν οὐ δυνάμεθα..---ΟὙγγ}, Ep. ad Celest, Act. Eph. p. 177. t Tov τύπον τῆς ἀποστολικῆς καθέδρας οὐκ ἐδίξα- ro.—Cone. Eph. Act, ill. p. 331; vide Theodes. 2, Epist. in Cone. Eph. p. 224, 225, so rank of forgery, that no conscionable nose could endure them ; and any “ pru- dent man,” as Binius himself confesseth, would assert them to be spurious.” Wherefore Baronius himself doth reject and despise them; who gladly would lose no advantage for his master.* Yet Pope Nicholas I. doth precede Bellarmine in citing this trash; no wonder, that be- ing the pope who did avouch the wares of Isidore Mercator. They allege 'Timotheus, the usurper of Alexandria, deposed by Pope Damasus ;* and they have indeed the sound of words attesting to them: ‘ These are heads up- on which the B. Damasus deposed the heretics Apolinarius, Vitalius, and Timo- theus.”’* The truth is, that Apolinarius, with di- vers of his disciples, in a great synod at Rome, at which Petrus, bishop of Alex- andria, together with Damasus, was pre- sent, was condemned and disavowed for heretical doctrine ; whence Sozomensaith, that “the Apolinarian heresy was by Damasus and Peter, at a synod at Rome, voted to be excluded from the Catholic ehurch.’’t On which account, if we conclude that the pope had an authority to depose bish- ops, we may by like reason infer that ev- ery patriarch and metropolitan had a power to do the like; there being so many instances of their having condemn- ed and disclaimed bishops supposedly guilty of heresy; as particularly Joba of Antioch, with his convention of arien- tal bishops, did pretend to depose Cyril and Memnon, as guilty of the same Apol- inarian heresy ;—allegingethat tof “ ex- scind them was the same thing as to set- tle orthodoxy.”” The which deposition was at first admitted by the emperor. * Taira ἐστι τὰ κεφάλαια ἐφ᾽ οἷς ὃ τρισμακάριος Δάμασος καθεῖλεν ᾿Απολινάριον, καὶ Βιτάλιον, καὲ Τιμόθεον τοὺς aigertxoss.—Orient. ad Rufum. apud Bin. p. 396. + Μαθὼν οὖν ταύτην τὴν αἵρεσιν εἰς πολλοὺς ἔρ- new πρῶτος Δάμασος ὃ Ρωμαίων ἐπίσκοπος, καὶ 1Πέτ- ρος δ Αλεξανδρείας, συνύδου γενομένης ἐν Ῥώμῃ ἂλ- λοτρίαν τῆς καθόλου ἐκκλησίας ἐψηφίσαντο.----ϑοΖ. vi. 25. t To γὰρ τούτους ἐκκόψαι οὐδὲν ἕτερόν ἐστιν ἢ dp- θοδοξίαν oricat.—Relat. Orient. ad Imp. in Act. Eph. p. 380. “Ὅθεν καὶ viv τὴν γνωρισθεῖσαν παρὰ ᾿ὐὐσεθείας ὑμῶν Νεστορίου, καὶ Κυρίλλου, καὶ Μέμ- vovos καθαίρεσιν ἐδεξάμεθα.----Αοἴ. p. 389. 2 Baron. ann. 433. ὁ 38, 39; P. Nich. I. Epist. 8. (ad Mich.) * Fac. Herm. p. 150. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. The next instance is of Pope Agapetus (in Justinian’s time, for so deep into time is Bellarmine fain to dive for it) deposing Anthimus, bishop of Constantinople.° But this instance being scanned, will also prove slender and lame. The case was this : Anthimus having deserted his charge at Trabisonde, did creep into the see of Constantinople (a course then held irreg- ular and repugnant to the canons), and withal he had imbibed the Eutychian heresy. Yet for his support he had wound himself into the favour of the Empress Theodora, a countenancer. of the Eutychian sect..—Things standing thus, Pope Agapetus (as an agent from Rome to crave succour against the Goths, pressing and menacing the city) did ar- rive at Constantinople. Whereupon the empress desired of him to salute and con- sort with Anthimus.* But he, by peti- tions of the monks, &c., understanding how things stood, did refuse to do so, ex- cept Anthimus “ would return to his own charge, and profe# the orthodox doc- trine.” Thereupon the emperor joined with him to extrude Anthimus from Con- Stantinople, and to substitute Menas. ** He” (say the monks in their libel of request to the emperor) ‘ did justly thrust this Anthimus from the episcopal chair of this city ; your grace affording aid and force both to the Catholic faith and the divine canons.”+ The act of Agapetus was (according to his share in the com- mon interest) to declare Anthimus, in his judgment, uncapable of Catholic com munion and of episcopal function by rea- son of his heretical opinions, and _ his transgression of ecclesiastical orders ;i which moved Justinian effectually to de- pose and extrude him: “" You” (say they) * fulfilling that which he justly and canon- * Denique petentibus principibus, ut Anthi- mum papa in salutatione et communicatione Susciperet; ille fieri inquit posse, si se libello probaret orthodoxum, et ad cathedram suam reverteretur.—Lid. cap. 21. Ta κατὰ τῆς ἐκκλε- σίας ἀθέσμως τολμώμενα λαθὼν Libell. Μο- nach p 7. + ᾿Αλλὰ τοῦτον δικαίως ἐξωθήσας rod τῆς δὲ τῆς πόλεως ἱερατικοῦ θρόνου, συνεπαμυνούσης, καὶ συνεπισ- χυούσης rare καθυλικῇ πίστει καὶ τοῖς θείοις κανόσι τῆς ὑμετέρας εὐσεβείας Ibid. Et Syn. Deer. p. 43; Imper. Sanct. p. 128. t ᾿Αποφηνάμενος pire καθολικοῦ αὐτὸν ἔχειν τὸ dvona.—Synod. Dec. p. » Ann. 536. Vict. Tun. * Evag. iv, 10. fire ἱερέως {3 Φ» 295 ically did judge, and by your general edict confirming it; and forbidding that hereafter such things should be attempt- ed—.”* And Agapetus himself saith, that it was done by ‘“ the apostolical au- thority, and the assistance of the most faithful emperors.”+ The which pro- ceeding was completed by decree of the synod under Menas, and that again was confirmed by the imperial sanction. Whence Evagrius, reporting the story, doth say, concerning Anthimus and The- odosius of Alexandria, that ‘* because they did cross the emperor’s commands, and did not admit the decrees of Chalce- don, they both were expelled from their 5665. It seemeth by some passages in the Acts, that before Agapetus’s intermed- dling, the monks‘ and orthodox bishops* had condemned and rejected Anthimus ; according to the common interest, which they assert all Christians to have in re- gard to the common faith. As for the substitution of Menas, it was preformed ‘ by the choice and suf- frage of the emperor, the clergy, nobles, and people conspiring ;’’|| the pope only (which another bishop might have done) ordaining or consecrating him: ‘ Then” (saith Liberatus) ‘the pope by the em- peror’s favour did ordain Menas bishop, consecrating him with his hand.”’¢ And Agapetus did glory in this, ‘| as be- ing the first ordination made of an east- ern bishop by the hands of a pope: ‘“* And this” (said the pope) ‘* we conceive doth add to his dignity, because the eastern church, never since the time of the Apostle Peter, did receive any bishop be- * Ta οὖν παρ᾽ ἐκείνου δικαίως καί κανονικῶς κεκρι- μένα πλὴροῦντες, καὶ διὰ γενικῆς ὑμῶν νομοθεσίας κυ- φοῦντες. καὶ τὰ τοιαῦτα τοῦ λοιποῦ τολμᾶσθαι ἀπαγο- ρεύοντες . + Τῆς δὲ ἐν Ἱζωνσταντινουπόλει λαθέδρας τὴν ὕβριν βοηθοῦντος rod Θεοῦ, τῇ ἀποστολικῇ αὐθεντίᾳ, καὶ τῶν πιστοτάτων βασιλέων τῇ βοηθείᾳ διορθώσα- pey.—P. 24. t Opes & οὖν ὡς ἀντικρὺ τῶν (1. ἀντὶ κῶν rod) βασιλέως κελευσμάτων ἱόντες, καὶ μὴ δεχόμενοι τὰ ἐν Χαλκηδόνι συντεθειμένα ἀμφὶ τῶν οἰκείων ἐξελαθέτην θρόνων .---- να σ. iv. 11. || Kar’ ἐκλογὴν καὶ ψῆφον τῶν εὐσεδεστάτων ἡμῶν βασιλέων, καὶ τοῦ εὐαγοὺς τῆσδε τῆς ἁγιωτάτης ἐκκλη- olas κλήρου , Tune papa principis favore Menam pro eo ordinavit antistitem, consecrans ¢um Manu sua —. Lib. cap. 21. 4 "Qerine τῶν γαληνοτάτων βοσιλέων ἐπεγέλασεν ἡ ἐπιλογὴ Act. p. 24. 4 Pp. 10, *?P. 16. _— =e Pewee. eS ψὸς 254 side him,, by the imposition of hands of those who sat in this our chair.’”* If we compare the proceedings of Aga- petus against Anthimus, with those of Theophilus against St. Chrysostom, they are (except the cause and qualities of persons) in all main respects and circum- stances so like, that the same reason, which would ground a pretence of uni- versal jurisdiction to one, would infer the same to the other. Baronius allegeth Acacius, bishop of Constantinople, deposed hy Pope Felix Ill. But Pope Gelasius asserteth, that any bishop might, in execution of the canons, have disclaimed Acacius as a fa- vourer of heretics. And Acacius did not only refuse to submit to the pope’s juris- diction, but slighted 1. And the pope’s act was but an attempt, not effectual ; for Acacius died in possession of his See. VIII. If popes were sovereigns of the church, they could effectually, whenever they should see it just and fit, absolve :} resiore any bishop excommunicated from the church, or deposed from his office by ecclesiastical censure: for relief of the oppressed, or clemency to the distressed, are noble flowers in every sovereign crown. Wherefore the pope doth assume this power, and reserveth it to himself as his special prerogative: “It is” (says Baro- nius) “ἃ privilege of the church of Rome only that a bishop deposed by a synod may, without another synod of a greater number, be restored by the pope ;”|| and Pope Gelasius I. says, * Kai τοῦτο δὲ πιστεύομεν τῇ αὐτοῦ ἀξία προστι- θέναι, ὅτι περ ἐκ τῶν χρόνων τοῦ ἀποστόλου Πέτρου οὐδένα ἄλλον οἱαδείποτε ἐκκλησία ἀνατολικὴ ἐδέξατο ἐπίσκοπον ταῖς χερσὶ τῆς ἡμετέρας καθέδρας χειροτο- νηθέντα Ibid. + Ad cujus precipue vocatus examen vel ve- nire vel mittere non curavit.—Gelas. Ep. 13, 1 When a bishop was unjustly censured up- on malice or mistake when he did repent of his error or miscarriage when the case would upon any account bear favour or pity || Privilegium quidem solius ecclesia Roma- ne esse reperitur, ut depositus a synodo episco- pus absque alia synodo majoris. pumeri restitui possit per Romanum pontificem.— Baron. ann. 449, § 127, ‘ Baron. ann. 484, ὁ 19, wide P. Felic. III. Ep. 6, P. Gelas. Ep. 4. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 2 “ That the See of St. Peter the apostle has a right of loosing whatever the sentences of other bishops have bound.* ‘That the apostolic see, according to frequent ancient custom, had a power, no synod preceding, to absolve those whom a synod had unjustly condemned, and “without a council to condemn those who deserved it.”+ It was an old pretence of popes, that bishops were not condemned, except the pope did consent, renouncing communion with them. So Pope Vigilius saith of St. Chrysostom and Flavianus, that ‘“al- though they were violently excluded, yet were they not looked upon as condemn- ed, because the bishops of Rome always inviolably kept communion with them.” And before him Pope Gelasius saith, that ‘* the pope, by not consenting to the condemnation of Athanasius, Chrysostom, Flavianus, did absolve them.”’|| But such a power of old did not be- long to him. For, 1. There is not extant any ancient eanon of the church, nor apparent foot- steps of custom, allowing such a power to him. _2. Decrees of synods (provincial in the former times, and diocesan after- wards) were inconsistent with, or repug- nant to such a power; for judgments concerning episcopal causes were deem- ed irrevocable, and appointed to be so by decrees of divers synods; and con- sequently no power was reserved to the pope of thwarting them by restitution of any bishop condemned in them. 3. The apostolical canons (which at least serve to prove or illustrate ancient custom), and divers synodical decrees, did prohibit entertaining communion with any person condemned or rejected by * Quorumlibet sententiis ligata pontificum sedis B. Petri apostoli jus habet resolvendi.— FP: Gels I-Epets. + Sedes apostolica frequenter more majorum, etiam sine ulla synodo precedente et absolven- di quos synodus inique damnaverat, et dam- nandi nulla existente synodo quos oportuit ha- buit facultatem P. Gelas. 1. Ep. 13. + Qui licet violenter exelusi sunt, non ta- men pro damnatis sunt habiti, eo quod semper inviolatam eorum communionem Rom. pontifi- ces servaverant.—P. Vigilius in Constit. Athan, &c. || Quem (Johannem Chrys.) sedes apos- tolica etiam sola, quia non consensit, absolvit- -. Gelas. Ep. 3. ᾿ “« 4 --- canonical judgment, without exception or reservation of power of infringing or re- laxing that prohibition ;° and Pope Gelasius himself says, “* That he who had pollut- ed himself by holding communion witha condemned person, “did partake of his -eondemnation.’’** _ 4. Whence in elder times popes were opposed and checked when they offered to receive bishops rejected in particular synods. So St. Cyprian declared the re- stitution of Basilides by Pope Stephanus to be null.‘ So the Fathers of the Anti- ochene synod did reprehend Pope Julius for admitting Athanasius and Marcellus to communion, or avowing them for bish- ops, after their condemnation by synods. And the oriental bishops of Sardica did excommunicate the same pope for com- municating with the same persons. Which instances do shew, that the pope was not then, undoubtedly, or according to common opinion, endowed with such a power. But whereas they do allege some in- stances of such a power, 1 shall premise some general considerations apt to clear the business, and then apply answers to the particular allegations. 1. Restitution commonly doth signify no more than acknowledging ἃ person (although rejected by undue sentence) to be de jure worthy of communion and capable of the episcopal office; upon which may be consequent an obligation to communicate with him, and to allow him his due character: according to the precept of St. Paul, Follow righteous- ness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call upon the Lord with a pure heart.* ’ This may be done when any man no- toriously is persecuted for the truth and righteousness. Or when the iniquity and malice of pretended judges are ap- parent, to the oppression of innocence. Or when the process is extremely irreg- ular: as in the cases of Athanasius, of St. Chrysostom And this is not an * Damnati hominis communione pollutus, damnationis ejus factus est particeps—P. Ge- das. Ep. 13. (p. 640.) » Can. Apost. 10, 11, 12, 13; Cone. Nic. Can. 5; Sard. 16,17; Cod. Afr. 9; Cone. An- tioch. 6, 15; Evag. ii. 4. τ Cypr. Ep. 68. © 2 Tim. ii. 22. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 255 act of jurisdiction, but of equity and charity, incumbent on all bishops: and there are promiscuous instances of bish- ops practising it. Thus Socrates saith, that Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem, “did restore communion and dignity to Athanasius.”** And so Cyril of Alex- andria, and John of Antioch, being re- conciled and reduced to a good under- standing of each other, “ did restore to each other their Sees,”? rescinding the censures, which in heat they had de- nounced each on other. Which shew- eth that restitution is not always taken for an act of jurisdiction, wherein one’ is superior to another; for those persons were in rank and power co-ordinate. 2. Restitution sometime doth import no more than a considerable inflnence toward the effects of restoring a person to communion or office; no judicial act being exercised about the case: * The emperor writing that Paulus and Athan- asius should be restored to their Sees, availed nothing.”t That was a restitu- tion without effect. Thus a pope’s avowing the orthodoxy, or innocence, or worth of a person, after a due information about them (by reason of the pope’s eminent rank in the church, and the regard duly had to him), might sometimes much conduce to restore a person; and might obtain the name of restitution by an ordinary scheme of speech. 3. Sometimes persons said to be re- stored by popes are also said to be re- stored by synods, with regard to such instance or testimony of popes in their behalf. In which case the judicial re- stitution, giving right of recovery and completion thereto, was the act of the synod. || 4. When cases were driven to a legal debate, popes could not effectually re- solve without a synod, their single acts not being held sufficiently valid. So, not- * 'Αποδίδωσι καὶ αὐτὸς τὴν κοινωνίαν ᾿Αθανασίῳ καὶ τὴν ἀξίαν —Socr. ii. 24. T ᾿Αλλήλοις τοὺς θρονους ἀπίδοσαν .---ϑοοῦ. Vil. 33. t Γράψαντος τοῦ βασιλίως, Hore ἀποδοθῆναι Tlaé- λῳ καὶ ᾿Αθανασίῳ τοὺς οἰκείους τόπους͵ οὐδέν πλέον ἠνύετο.---- bid. i). 20. || Note-—It is an ordinary style of votes in synods for the restitution of a bishop, 1 restore. —Vide Conc. Chale. Act. i. p. 166. Thatis, I give my vote for his restitution. 256 withstanding the declarations of Pope Julius in favour of Athanasius, for the effectual resolution of his case, the great synod of Sardica was convened. So whatever Pope Innocent I. did endeav- our, he could not restore St. Chrysostom without a general synod. Nor could Pope Leo restore Flavianus, deposed in the second Ephesine synod, without convocation of a general synod, the which he did so often sue for to the Emperor Theodosius, for that purpose. Pope Simplicius affirmed, that Petrus Moggus, “having been by a common decree condemned as an adulterer” (or usurper of the Alexandrian See), ‘‘ could not, without a common council, be freed from condemnation.”’* 5. Particular instances do not ascertain right to the person who assumeth any power; for busybodies often will ex- ceed their bounds. 6. Emperors did sometimes restore bishops. Constantine, as he did banish Eusebius of Nicomedia and others, so he did revoke and restore them ;" so says Socrates, “* They were recalled from banishment by the emperor’s command, and received their churches.”+ Theo- dosius did assert to Flavinus his right, whereof the popes did pretend to de- prive him; which did amount toa res- titution (at least to the Romanists, who do assert Flavianus to be deposed by the popes.) Instantius and _ Priscillianus were, by the rescript of the Emperor Gratianus, restored to their churches.”’t Justinian did order Pope Silverius to be restored, in case he could prove his in- nocence. 7. Commonly restitution was not ef- fectual without the emperor’s consent ; whence Theodoret, although allowed by the great synod, did acknowledge his re- * Oportebat communi decreto damnatum tanquam adulterum eommuni concilio damna- tione liberari.— Lid. cap. 18. Τ ᾿Ανεκλήθησάν re τῆς ἐξορίας ἐκ βασιλικοῦ προσ- τάγματος, καὶ τὰς ἐκκλησίας ἑαυτῶν ἀπέλαθον ---- Soc. i. 14. Ὁ Rescriptum eliciunt, quo calcatis que prius decreta erant, restitui ecclesiis jubebantur: hoc freti Instantims et Priscillianus repetivere Hispanias.—Sulp. Sev. ii. 63. Revocari Ro- mam Silverium jussit, et de literis illis judicium fieri, ut—si falsee fuissent probate, restituere- tur sedi suze.—Liberat. Breviar. cap. 22. 5 Theod. v. 29, A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. stitution especially due to the emperor ; as we shall see in reflecting on his case. Now, to the particular instances pro- duced for the pope, we answer: 1. They pretend that Pope Stephanus did restore Basilides and Martialis, Span- ish bishops, who had been deposed ; for which they quote St. Cyprian’s Epistle, where he says, ‘ Basilides going to Rome imposed upon our colleague, Ste- phen, who lived a great way off, and was ignorant of the truth of the matter ; seek- ing unjustly to be restored to his bish- opric, from which he had justly been de- posed.”’* But we answer: the pope did attempt such a restitution by way of influence and testimony, not of jurisdiction ; where- fore the result of his act, in St. Cyprian’s judgment, was nuli and blameable ; which could not be so deemed if he had acted as a judge; for a favourable sentence, passed by just authority, is valid, and hardly liable to censure.t The clergy of those places, notwithstanding that pre- tended restitution, did conceive those bishops uncapable ; and did request the judgment of §t. Cyprian about it; which argueth the pope’s judgment not to have been peremptory and prevalent then in such cases. St. Cyprian denieth the pope, or any other person, to have power of restoring in such a case; and exhort- eth the clergy to persist ‘in declining the communion of those bishops.”¢ Well doth Rigaltius. ask, why they should write to St. Cyprian, if the judgment of Stephanus was decisive ;|| and he addeth, * Romam pergens Stephanum collegam nos- trum longe positum, et geste rei ac tacite ver- itatis ignarum fefellit, ut exambiret reponi se injuste in episcopatum, de quo fuerat juste de- positus.—Cypr. Ep..68. t quare esti aliquid de collegis nostris extiterunt, qui deificam disciplinam negligen- dam putant (Nec censure congruit sa- cerdotum mobilis atque inconstanus animi levitate reprehendi.—Jd. Ep. 55.) episcopatum gerere, et sacerdotium Dei administrare non oportere. Desiderastis solicitudinem vestram vel solatio vel auxilio sententiz nostre suble- vari. Nec personam in ejusmodi rebus acci- pere, aut aliquid cuiquam largiri potest huma- na indulgentia; ubi intercedit et legem tribuit divina preescriptio. + —-— quantum possumus adhortamur, ne vos cum profanis et maculatis sacerdotibus communicatione sacrilega misceatis. || Sed cur ad Cyprianum si Pp ar infinita penes Romaaum ?—Rigalt. ibid. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. that indeed “the Spaniards did appeal from the Roman bishop to him of Car- thage.”* No wonder, seeing the pope had no greater authority, and probably St. Cyprian had the fairer reputation for wisdom and goodness. Considering which things, what can they gain by this instance ὃ which indeed doth consider- ably make against them. 2. They allege the restitution of Atha- nasius, and of others linked in cause with him, by Pope Julius. ‘“ He,” says Sozomen, “ as having the care of all by reason of the dignity of his See, restor- ed to each his own church.”’+ I answer, the pope did not restore them judicially, but declaratively ; that is, declaring his approbation of their right and innocence, did admit them to communion. Julius in his own defence did allege, that Athanasius was not legal- ly rejected ;{ so that, without any pre- judice to the canons, he might receive him ; and the doing it upon this account, plainly did not require any act of judg- ment. Nay, it was necessary to avow those bishops as suffering in the cause of the common faith. Besides, the pope’s pro- ceeding was taxed, and protested against as irregular ; nor did he defend it by vir- tue of a general power that he had judi- cially to rescind the acts of synods. And, lastly, the restitution of Athanasius and the other bishops had no complete effect, till it was confirmed by the synod of Sar- dica, backed by the imperial authority ; which in effect did restore them. This instance, therefore, is in many respects deficient as to their purpose. 3. They produce Marcellus being re- stored by the same Pope Julius.’ But that instance, beside the foremen- tioned defects, hath this, that the pope was grievously mistaken in the case ; whence St. Basil much blameth him for his proceeding therein. “4, They cite the restitution of Eusta- * —— datis ad Cyprianum literis appella- vere Carthaginiensem adversus Romanum.— _Rigalt. Ola δὲ πάντων κηδεμονίας αὐτῶ προσηκούσης διὰ τὴν ἀξίαν τοῦ θρόνου, ἑκάστῳ τὴν ἰδίαν ἐκκλησίαν ἀπέ- δωκε.----30Ζ. ii. 8. t Ὡς ὄξους αὐτοὺς εἰς κοινωνίαν προσήκατο. ---- Soz. ini. os Jul Epist. apud Ath. “ιν 2. 1 Soer. i. 36. 3 es. Ep. 10. Vor. IT. 33 257 thius (bishop of Sebastia) by Pope Libe- rius, out of an Epistle of St. Basil, where he says, ‘“* What the most blessed bishop Liberius proposed to him, and to what he consented, we know not; only that he brought a letter to be restored, and upon shewing it to the synod at Tyana, was restored to his See.”* I answer, that restitution was only from an invalid deposition by a synod of Arians at Melitine;* importing only an acknowledgment of him, upon approba- tion of his faith professed by him at Rome; the which had such influence to the satisfaction of the diocesan synod at Tyana, that he was restored. Although indeed the Romans were abused by him, he not being sound in faith; for “he now” (saith St. Basil) “ doth destroy that faith for which he was received.” Tt 5. They adjoin, that Theodoret was restored by Pope Leo I.; for in the Acts of the synod of Chalcedon it is said, thatr ‘* he did receive his place from the bishop of Rome.” I answer, the act of Leo did consist in an approbation of the faith, which Theo- doret did profess to hold; and a recep- tion of him to communion therevipon ;|| which he might well do, seeing the ground of Theodoret’s being disclaimed was a misprision, that he (havinz opposed Cyril’s writings, judged orthudox) did err in faith, consenting with Nestori- us. Theodoret’s state before the second Ephesine synod is thus represented in the words of the emperor: ‘* Theodo- ret, bishop of Cyrus, whom we have be- fore commanded to mind only his own church, we charge not to come to the holy synod, before the whole synod being met, it shall seem good to them that he come and bear his part in 11. ἢ * Tiva μὲν ἔστιν & προετέθη air παρὰ τοῦ μακα- ριοτάτου ἐπισκόπου Λιδερίου, τίνα δὲ αὐτὸς συνέθετο dyvootpev’ πλὴν ὅτι ἐπιστολὴν ἐκόμισεν ἐποκαθιστῶ- σαν αὐτὸν, ἣν ἀποδείξας τῇ κατὰ Τύανα συνοδῳ ἅπο- κατέστη τῷ τούπῳ Bas. Ep. 74. ἡ Otros viv πορθεῖ τὴν πίστιν, ig’ ἢ ἐδέχθη .---ἰὰ, Ὁ Τὸν οἰκεῖον ἀπολαβὼν τόπον παρὰ τοῦ ἁγιωτάτου ἀρχιεπισκόπου τῆς μεγαλωνύμου 'Ῥώμης . Act. i. p. 53. ᾿ || Εἰς κοινωνίαν ἐδέξατο----. Vill. p. 368. § Θεοδώ τὸν μὲ τοι τὸν ἐπίσκοπον τῆς Κύρον πόλεως, ὃν ἤδη ἐκελεύσαμεν τῇ ἰδίᾳ αὐτοῦ μόνη ἐκκλη- oK ¢ ολάζειν, θεσπίζομεν μὴ πρότερον ἐλθεῖν εἰς τὴν Sor. iv. 24. Syn. Chale. Act. 258 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. He was not perfectly deposed, as oth- ers were, who had others substituted in their places. He was deposed by the Ephesine synod.* The pope was indeed ready enough to assume the patronage of so very learned and worthy a man, who in so very suppliant and respectful a way had addressed to him for succour ; for whom doth not courtship mollify? And the majority of the synod (being inflamed against Dioscorus and the Etychian party) was ready enough to allow what the pope did in favour of him. Yeta good part of the synod (the bishop of Egypt, of Palestine, of Illyricum), not- withstanding the pope’s restitution (that is, his approbation in order thereto), did stickle against his admission into the sy- nod ; ‘* Crying out, Have pity on us; the faith is destroyed ; the canons proscribe this man, cast him out, cast out Nestori- us’s master.”t So that the imperial agents were fain to compromise the busi- ness, permitting him to sit in the synod, as one whose case was dependent, but not in the notion of one absolutely re- stored. ‘* Theodoret’s presence shall prejudice no man, each one’s right of impleading being reserved both to you and him.”¢ He therefore was not entirely restored, till upon a clear and satisfactory profes- sion of his faith he was acquitted by the judgment of the synod. The effectual restitution of him proceeded from the emperor, who repealed the proceedings against him; as himself doth acknowl- edge: ‘All these things” (says he) ‘has the most just emperor evacuat- ed|| to these things he premised the redressing my injuries ;”§ and the impe- ἁγίαν σύνοδον, ἐὰν μὴ πάσῃ ἁγίᾳ συνόδῳ συνελθούσῃ δίξη καὶ αὐτὸν παραγενεσθαι, καὶ κοινωνὸν γενέσθαι τῆς αὐτῆς ἁγίας ovv6dov.—Imp. Theod. Epist: ad Diose. in Syn. Chale. Act. i. p. 53. * Pro Theodoreto autem et Eusebio nullus ordinatus est.—Liherat. 12; vide Conc. Chale. part. iii. p. 490. Excludi vero ab episcopatu, &c. in imperatoris.— Theod. rescript. + ’Eée6 noav, ἐλεήσατε, ἡ πίστις ἀπόλλυται, of κα- νόνης τοῦτον ἐκθάλλουσιν, τοῦτον ἔξω βάλε, τὸν διδάσ- καλον Νεστοριῳ ἔξῳ Badre.—Id. p. 54. t ΠΠρόκριμα ἀπὸ τοῦ παρεῖναι Θεοδώρητον οὐδενὶ γενήσεται, φυλαττομένου δηλονότι μετὰ ταῦτα παντὸς λόγου καὶ ὑμῖν, καὶ ἐκείνῳ —. Ibid. || ᾿Αλλὰ ταῦτα πάντα λέλυκεν ὃ δικαιότατος βασι- heigs ——. Id. Ep. 139. (ad Asperam.) § Προτέθεικε τούτοις τῆς ἡμετέρας ἀδικίας τὴν ἴα- σιν ——. Ep. 138. (ad Anatol.) » rial judges in the synod of Chalcedon join the emperor in the restitution—* Let the most reverend Theodoret enter, and bear his part in the synod; since the most holy archbishop Leo and sacred emperor have restored his bishopric to him.”’* Hence it may appear that the pope’s restitution of Theodoretus was only opinionative, dough baked, incom- plete ; so that it is but a slim advantaze which their pretence can receive from it. IX. It belongeth to sovereigns to re- ceive appeals from all lower judicatures, for the final determination of causes; so that no part of his subjects can ob- struct resort to him, or prohibit his revis- ion of any judgment. | This power, therefore, the pope doth most stiffly assert to himself. At the synod of Florence, this was the first and great branch of authority, which he did demand of the Greeks explicitly to avow :—** He will’ (said his three cardi- nals to the emperor) “ have all the privi- leges of his church, and that appeals be made to him.”+ When Pope Alexander III. was advised not to receive an appeal in Becket’s case, he replied in that pro- fane allusion: “This is my glory, which [ will not give to another.”t He hath been wont to encourage all people, even upon the slightest occasions, 2267" arriperé (as the phrase is obvious in their canon law), to run with all haste to his audi- ence; ‘‘ Concerning appeals for the smallest causes we would have you hold, that the same defence is to be given them for how slight a matter soever they be made, as if they were for a greater.”’|| See, if you please, in Gratian’s Decree, Caus. 1i. queest 6, where many papal de- crees (most indeed drawn out of the spu- rious epistles of ancient popes, but ratifi- ed by their successors, and obtaining for * Kicirw καὶ ὃ εὐλαδέστατος Θεοδώρητος κοινωνή- σων τῇ σύνόδῳ, ἐπειδὰν καὶ ἀπεκατέστησεν αὐτῷ τὴν ἐπισκοπὴν ὃ ἁγιώτατος ἀρχιεπίσκοπος Λέων, καῖ θει- ὅτατος βασιλεὺς Act. 1. p. 53, Ἵ Θέλει τὰ προνόμια πάντα τῆς ἐκκλησίας αὐτοῦ, καὶ θέλει ἔχειν τὴν ἔκκλητον Syn. Flor. sess. XXv. p. 846. +t Heec est gloria mea, quam alteri non dabo, || De appel lationibus pro minimis causis volumus te tenere, quod eis pro quacunque levi causa fiant, non minus est, quam si pro major- ibus fierent, deferendum. Alex. 11]. Ep. ad Vigorn. Episc. in Decret. Greg. lib. ii. tit. 28, cap. Ll. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. current law) are made for appeals to the See of Rome.! It was indeed one of the most ancient encroachments, and that which did serve most to introduce the rest; inferring _ hence a title to an universal jurisdiction : ** They are thecanons,”’ says Pope Nicho- | las L., * which will that all appeals of the whole church be brought to the exami- nation of this See, and have decreed that no appeal be m¥de from it, and that | thus she judge of the whole church; but herself goes to be judged by none oth- er;”* and the same pope, in another of his Epistles, says, ‘** The holy statutes and venerable decrees have committed the causes of bishops, as being weighty matters, to be determined by us “bi * As the synod has appointed and usage requires, let greater and difficult cases be always referred to the apostolic see,” says Pope Pelagius I].t ‘“'They are the canons which will have the appeals of the whole church tried by this See,” saith Pope Gelasius I.|| But this power is upon various accounts unreasonable, grievous, and vexatious to the church; as hath been deemed, and upon divers occasions declared, by the ancient Fathers, and grave persons in all times ; upon accounts not only blaming the horrible abuse of appeals, but imply- ing the great mischiefs inseparably ad- herent to them. The synod of Basil thus excellently declared concerning them:§ “ Hitherto * Ipsi sunt canones, qui appellationes totius ecclesiz ad hujus sedis examen voluere deferri ; ab ipsa vero nusquam prorsus appellari debere Sanxerunt, ac per hoc illam de tota ecclesia judicare ipsam ad nullius commeare judicium. —P. Nich I. Ep. 8. + Sacra statuta, et veneranda decreta epis- coporum causas, utpote majora negotia nostre definiendas censure mandarunt.—P. Nich. | I. Ep. 38. _ ἢ Majores vero et difficiles questiones (ut sancta synodus statuit, et beata consuetudo ex- igit) ad sedem apostolicam semper referantur. P. Pelag. Il. Ep. 8. || Ipsi sunt canones, qui appellationes totius ecclesie ad hujus sedis examen voluere defer- ri.—P. Gelas. 1. Ep. 4. ᾧ Concil. Basil. sess. xxxi, (p. 86.) Inole- verunt autem hactenus intolerabiliam vexatio- num abusus permulti, dum nimium frequenter ἃ remotissimis etiam partibus ad Romanam curiam, et interdum pro parvis et minutis re-~ bus ac negotiis quamplurimi citari, et evocari consueverunt, atque ita expensis et laboribus ' Caus. ii. qu. 6; iii. 6; ix. 3, cap. 16. 259 many abuses of Intolerable vexations have prevailed, whilst many have too often been called and cited from the most remote parts to the court of Rome, and that sometime for small and trifling mat- ters, and with charges and trouble to be so wearied, that they sometime think it their best way, to recede from their right, or buy off their trouble with great loss, rather than be at the cost of suing in so remote a country.” St. Bernard complaineth of the mis- chiefs of appeals in his times, in these words : ** How long will you be deaf to the complaints of the whole world, or make as if your were so? Why sleep you? When will the consideration of so great confusion and abuse in appeals awake in you? They are made without right or equity, without due order, and against custom. Neither place, nor man- ner, nor time, nor cause, nor person, are considered : they are every where made lightly, and, for the most part, unjustly,”’* with much more passionate language to the same purpose. But in the primitive church the pope had no such power. 1. Whereas in the first times many causes and differences did arise, wherein they who were condemned and worsted would readily have resorted thither, where they might have hoped for rem- edy, if Rome had been sucha place of refuge, it would have been very famous for it; and we should find history full of such examples ; whereas it is very silent about them. 2. The most ancient customs and can- ons of the church are flatly repugnant to such a power ; for they did order causes finally to be decided in each province. So the synod of Nice did decree ; as the African Fathers did allege, in defence of their refusal to allow appeals to the pope : * The Nicene decrees” (said they) ‘** most evidently did commit both clergy- men of inferior degrees and bishops to their metropolitans.”’t fatigari, ut nonnunquam commodius arbitren~ tur juri suo cedere, aut vexationem suam gravi lamno redimere, quam in tam longinqua regi- one litium subire dispendia, &c.— Vide Opt. * Bern. de Consid. lib. iii. cap. 2.—Quous- que murmur universe terre aut dissimulas, aut non advertis ? ke. + Decreta Nicena sive inferioris gradus cler- icos, sive episeopos suis metropolitanis apertis- 260 So Theophilus in his Epistle : “1 sup- pose you are not ignorant what the can- ons of the Nicene council command, or- daining that a bishop should judge no cause out of his own district.”* 3. Afterward, when the diocesan ad- ministration was introduced,the last resort was decreed to the synods of them (or to the primates in them), all other appeals being prohibited,t “as dishonourable to the bishops of the diocese ; reproaching the canons, and subverting ecclesiastical order : to which canon the Emperor Justinian referred : “Ἢ For it is decreed by our ancestors, that against the sentence of these prelates there should be no ap- peal.”t So Constantius told Pope Libe- rius: “that those things which hada form of judgment passed on them could not be rescinded.”’||_ ‘This was the prac- tice (at least in the eastern parts of the church) in the time of Justinian ; as is evident by the Constitutions extant in the Code and in the Novels.™ 4. In derogation to this pretence, di- vers provincial synods expressly did pro- hibit all appeals from their decisions." That of Milevis: ‘* Let them appeal only to African councils or the primates of provinces ; and he who shall think of appealing beyond sea, let him be admit- ted into communion by none in Afric.’’§ “ For if the Nicene council took this care of the inferior clergy, how much sime commiserunt.—Syn. Afr. in Ep.ad P. Celest. * Arbitror te non ignorare quid precipiant Niceni concilii canones, sancientes episcopum non judicare causam citra terminos suos—— nam. Pallad. cap. 7. + Note. That the Synod of Constantinople (Can. 6), mentioning appeals to the Emperor, secular judicatories, a general synod, saith, ᾿Ατιμάσας τοὺς τῆς διοικήσεως ἐπισκόπους, ὅζο.--- Syn. Const. Can. 6 ; Concil. Constantinop. can. ii. 6; Concil. Chale. Can. 9. 17. t Nam contra horum antistitum sententias non esse locum appellationi a majoribus nos- tris constitutum est.—Cod. Lib. i. tit. 4, cap. 29. || Ta 4dn τύπον ἐσχηκότα ἀναλύεσθαι οὐ δύναται. —Theod. xi. 16. § Non provocent nisi ad Africana concilia, vel ad primates provinciarum; ad transmarina autem qui putaverit appellandum, a nullo infra Africam in communionem suscipiatur.—Conc. Milev. cap. 22; Conc. Afr. Can. 7% ™ Nov. exxiii. cap. 22; Cod. Lib. i. tit. 4. ὁ vide Gree. * Can. 12; Conc, Ant.Can. 15; Con. Carth. Can 31. 29 ; A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. more did they intend it should relate om bishops also ἢ 5. All persons were ὩΣ to Ἀν tain communion with bishops condemned by any one church ; which is inconsistent with their being allowed relief at Rome. 6. This is evident in the case of Mar- cion, by the assertion of the Roman church at that time. 7. When the pope hath offered to re- ceive appeals, or to meddle in cases be- fore decided, he hath found opposition and reproof. Thus when Felicissimus and Fortunatus, having been censured and rejected from communion in Afric, did apply themselves to Pope Cornelius, with supplication to be admitted by him ;° St. Cyprian maintaineth that fact to be irregular and unjust, and not to be coun- tenanced, for divers reasons.’ Likewise, when Basilides and Martialis, being for their crimes deposed in Spain, had re- course to Pope Stephanus for restitution, the clergy and people there had no re- gard to the judgment of the pope; the which their resolution St. Cyprian did commend and encourage. When Athanasius, Marcellus, Paulus, &c., having been condemned by synods, did apply themselves for relief to Pope Julius, the oriental bishops did highly tax this course as irregular; disclaiming any power in him to receive them, or meddle in their cause. Nor could Pope Julius by any law or instance disprove their plea; nor did the pope assert to himself any particular authority to revise the cause, or otherwise justify his proceeding, than by right common to all bishops of vindi- cating right and innocence, which were oppressed, and of asserting the faith for which they were persecuted. Indeed at first the oriental bishops were contented to refer the cause to Pope Julius as arbi- trator ; which signifieth that he had no ordinary right; but afterward, either fearing their cause or his prejudice, they started, and stood to the canonicalness 0 the former decision. The contest of the African church with Pope Celestine, inthe cause of Apiarias, * Nam si de inferioribus clericis in concilio Niceno hoe precaverunt; quanto magis de episcopis voluit observari ?—Cone. Afr. Can. 105. (vel Epist.) * Cypr. Ep, 55. (ad Cornelium.) P Cypr. Ep. 68. ee -μ------ : 7, A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 161 pope had a peculiar right of revising judgments. 10. Pope Damasus (or rather Pope Siricius) doth affirm himself incompetent to judge in a case which had been before determined by the synod of Capua: “ but”? (says he) ‘* since the synod of Capua has thus determined it, we per- ceive we cannot judge it.”* is famous; and the reasons which they assign for repelling that appeal are very notable and peremptory. [ 8. Divers of the Fathers allege like reasons against appeals. St. Cyprian allegeth these :—* Ait. 1. Because there was an ecclesiastical law against them. | 2. Because they contain iniquity ; as prejudicing the right of each — bishop granted by Christ, in governing his flock. 8. Because the clergy and people should not be engaged to run gadding about. 4, Because causes might better be de- cided there, where witnesses of fact might eusily be had. 5. Because there is everywhere acom- petent authority, equal to any that. might be had otherwhere. 6. Because it did derogate from the gravity of bishops to alter their cen- sure 7. Pope Liberius desired of Constantius - that the judgment of Athanasius might be made in Alexandria for such reasons, “ because there the accused, the ac- cusers, and their defender were.” 8. St. Chrysostom’s argument against | Theophilus meddling in his case may be set against Rome as well as Alexandria. 9. St. Austin, in matter of appeal, or rather of reference to candid arbitration (more proper for ecclesiastical causes), doth conjoin other apostolical churches _ with that of Rome; “ For the business” (says he) ** was not about priests and dea- cons, or the inferior clergy, but the col- leagues [bishops] who may reserve their cause entire for the judgment of their colleagues, especially those of the apos- tolical churches.”* He would not have said so, if he had apprehended that the * Refer. ad § 7; vide supr.—Oportet utique eos quibus prasumus non circumcursare, nec episcoporum concordiam coherentem sua sub- dola et fallaci temeritate collidere, sed agere illic causam suam, ubi et accusatores habere, et testes sui criminis possint —Cypr. Ep. 55. t ἔνθα b ἐγκαλούμενος, καὶ οἱ ἐγκαλοῦντές εἰσι, καὶ 6 ἀντιποιούμενος αὐτῶν heod. xi. 16. ¢ Nexue enim de presbyteris aut diaconis, aut inferioris ordinis clericis, sed de collegis agebatur qui possunt aliorum collegarum ju- dicio, presertim apostolicarum ecclesiarum, oe suam integram reservare.—Aug. Ep. 162. 11. Anciently there were no appeals (properly so called, or jurisdictional) in the church; they were, as Socrates tell- eth us, introduced by Cyril of Jerusa- lem; who “first did appeal to a greater judicature, and custom.”t This is an argument, that about that time (a litile before the great synod of Constantinople) greater judicatories, or dzocesan synods, were established ; synods were the last resorts. against ecclesiastical rule whenas before provincial 12. Upon many occasionsappeals were not made to the pope, as in all likelihood they would have been, if it had been supposed that a power of receiving them did belong to him. did appeal to the emperor. tists did not appeal to the pope, but to the emperor. Paulus Samosatenus The Dona- ‘Their cause was by the em- peror referred not to the pope singly (as it ought to have been, and would have been by so just a prince, if it had been his right), but to him and other judges as the emperor’s commissioners.|| Athan- asius did first appeal to the emperor. St. Chrysostom did request the pope’s succour, but he did not appeal to him as judge ; although he knew him favoura- bly disposed, and the cause sure in his hand ; buthe appealed to a general coun- cil: the which Innocent himself did con- a * Sed cum hujusmodi fuerit concilii Capuen- sis judicium ——advertimus quod a nobis ju- dicandi forma competere non possit. + Τοῦτο piv οὖν μόνος καὶ πρῶτος παρὰ τὸ σύνηθες τῷ ἐκκλησιαστικῷ κανόνι Κύριλλος ἐποίησεν, ἐκκλῆ- τοις ὡς ἐν δημοσίῳ δικαστηρίῳ χρησάμενος —Socr, il. 40. Kadatpebets δ' οὖν ὅμως ἐκκλῆτου βιβλίον τοῖς καθελοῦσι διαπεμψάμενος μεῖζον ἐπικαλέσατο δι- καστήριον.---ἸὈϊὰ.. ΝΣ deposed, he sent ἃ li- bel of appealto them who deposed him, ap- pealing to a greater judicature. ¢ lllos vero ab ecclesiastico judicio provo- casse, &c —Ang. Ep. 162. Ad imperatorem appellaverunt.—Aug. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 16. I Quid quod nec ipse usurpavit; rogatas imperator judices misit eprscopos quicam ipso sederent, et de tota illa causa quod justum vi- deretur statuerent.—Anug. Ep. 162. 262 ceive “ necessary” for decision of that cause.* [There are in history innumerable in- stances of bishops being condemned and expelled from their Sees, but few of ap- peals; which isa sign that was no ap- proved remedy in common opinion. } Eutyches did appeal (infra) to all the patriarchs. Theodoret did intend to ap- peal (ἐξα) to all the western bishops. 13. Those very canons of Sardica (the most unhappy that every were made to the church) which did introduce appeals to the pope, do yet upon divers accounts prejudice his claim to an original right, and do upon no account favour that use of them, to which (to the overthrow of all ecclesiastical liberty and good disci- pline) they have been perverted. For, 1. They do pretend to confer a privi- lege on the pope; which argueth that he before had no claim thereto. 2. They do qualify and restrain that privilege to certain cases and forms; which isa sign, that he had no power therein flowing from absolute sovereign- ty; for it is strange, that they who did pretend and intend so much to favour him should clip his power. 3. It is not really a power which they grant of receiving appeals in all causes ; but a power of constituting judges, quali- fied according to certain conditions, to re- vise a special sort of causes concerning the judgment and deposition of bishops. Which considerations do subvert his pre- tence to original and universal jurisdiction upon appeals. 14. Some popes did challenge jurisdic- tion upon appeals, as given them by the Nicene canons, meaning thereby those of Sardica; which showeth they had no bet- ter plea, and therefore no original right. And otherwhere we shall consider what validity those canons may be allowed to have. 15. The general synod of Chalcedon (of higher authority than that of Sardica) derived appeals, at least in the eastern churches, into another channel; namely to the primate of each diocese, or to the patriarch of Constantinople.: That this was the last resort doth appear, from * ’Αναγκαία tori διάγνωσις συνοδική.---- 302. viii. 20. 4 Can. 9, 17. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. that otherwise they would have menti ed the pope. 16. Appeals in cases of faith or eral discipline were indeed sometimes made to the consideration of the pope; but not only to him, but to all other patri- ; 7 archs and primates, as concerned in the common maintenance of the common faith or discipline. So did Eutyches ap- peal to the patriarchs. 17. The pope, even in later times, - even in the western parts, hath found — rubs in his trade of appeals. Consider the scuffle between Pope Nicholas I, and -Hinemarus, bishop of Rhemes.* 18. Christian states, to prevent the intolerable vexations and mischiefs arising from this practice, have been constrained to make laws against them.* _ Particus larly England. In the twelfth age Pope Paschal IL. complained of King Henry I. ‘that he deprived the oppressed of the benefit of appealing to the apostolical 566. ὁ It was one of King Henry I.’s laws,— — ‘‘none is permitted to cry from thence, no judgment is thence brought to the apostolic see.” * Foreign judgments we utterly remove,”’||—“ there let the cause be tried where the crime was commit- ted."§ It was one of the grievances sent to Pope Innocent IV., “that English- men were drawn out of the kingdom by the pope’s authority, to have their causes heard.’’{] Nor in after-times were appeals by law in any case permitted without the king’s leave ; although sometimes by the facility of princes, or difficulty of times, — the Roman court (ever importunate and vigilant for its profits) did obtain a re- laxation or neglect of laws inhibiting ap- peals. . 19. There were appeals from popes to * Statutes of provisors, premunire, &c. + Vos oppressis apostolicee sedis appellatio- nem subtrahitis.—Eadm. p. 113. ¢ Nullus inde clamor, nullum inde judicium ad sedem apostolicam destinantur.—Jbid. || Peregrina judicia modis omnibus submo- vemus.— Hen. 1. Leg. cap. 31. § Ibi semper causa agatur, ubi crimen ad- mittitor.— Ibid. 4 Quod Anglici extra regnum in causis auc- toritate apostolica trahuntur.— Matt. Paris. p. 699, 10. τ Baron. ann. 865—; P. Nic. I. Ep. 37, &e. * Vide Matt. Paris, ann. 1094. - A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. general councils very frequently. Vide ‘he senate of Paris after the concor- dates between Lewis XI. and Pope _ Leo X. 20. By many laws and instances it ap- peareth, that appellations have been made _ tothe emperors in the greatest causes ; _and that without pope’s reclaiming or _ taking it in bad part. St. Paul did ap- _pealto Cesar.* Paulus Samosatenus did appeal to Aurelianus.t So the Do- natists did appeal to Constantine. Atha- nasius to Constantine.t The Egyptian bishops to Constantine." Priscillianus to Maximus.t~ Idacius to Gratian.t So _ that canons were made to restrain bish- ops from recourse ad comitatum. 21. Whereas they do allege instances for appeal, those well considered do pre- _ judice their cause; for they are few, in _ comparison to the occasions of them, that ever did arise; they are near all of them late, when papal encroachments had grown; some of them are very im- pertinent to the cause; some of them may strongly be retorted against them ; all of them are invalid. If the pope originally had such a right (known, unquestionable, prevalent), there might have been producible many an- cient, clear, proper, concluding instan- ces. All that Bellarmine’ (after his own search, and that of his predecessors in controversy) could muster, are these fol- lowing ; upon which we shall briefly re- flect(adding a few others, which may be alleged by them.) He allegeth Marcion, as appealing to the pope. (An. 142.) The truth was, that Marcion, for hav- ing corrupted a maid, was by his own father, bishop of Sinope, ‘driven from the church ;”’|| whereupon he did thence “fly to Rome,” there “* begging admit- tance to communion, but none did grant it ;"t at which he expostulating, they re- * Πᾶσα Yuyi.—Rom. xiii. 1; Acts xxv. 15. + Ad imperatorem appellaverunt.—Ang. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 16. : ὁ Ad principem provocavit.—Sulp. Sev, ii. 64 ἊΣ ii. 63; Cone. Ant. Can. P. de Marca. iv. 4 ——. || Epiph. Awr. 42.—'ELeotrac τῆς ἐκκλησίας. § ᾿Αποδιδράσκει καὶ ἄνεισιν εἰς τὴν Ρώμην. © Apol. ii. p. 504. * Ath. Apol. ii. p. 797, 798. * Bell. ii. 21. 263 plied, “‘ We cannot, without the permis- sion of thy honourable father, do this ; for there is one faith, and one concord; and we cannot cross thy father our good fellow-minister.”* This was the cause and issue; and is it not strange this should be produced for an appeal, which was only a supplication of a fugitive criminal to be admitted to communion ; and wherein is utterly disclaimed any power to thwart the judgment of a par- ticular bishop or judge, upon account of unity in commop faithand peace ὃ Should the pope return the same answer to every appellant, what would become of his privilege? So that they must give us leave to retort this as a pregnant instance against their pretence. He allegeth the forementioned address of Felicissimus and Fortunatus to Pope Cornelius (An. 252) ;" the which was but a factious circumcursation of despe- rate wretches ; the which, or any like it, St. Cyprian argueth the pope in law and equity obliged not to regard; because a definitive sentence was already passed on them by their proper judges in Afric, from whom in conscience and reason there could be no appeal. So Bellar- mine would filch from us one of our in- vincible arguments against him. He also allegeth the case of Basilides ;* which also we before did shew to make against him; his application to the pope being disavowed by St. Cyprian, and proving ineffectual. These are all the instances which the first three hundred years did afford; so that all that time this great privilege lay dormant. He allegeth the recourse of Athana- sius to pope Julius (An. 350); but this was not properly to him as to a judge, but as to a fellow bishop, a friend of truth and right, for his succour and coun- tenance against persecutors of him, chiefly for his orthodoxy.t The pope did undertake to examine his plea, partly as arbitrator upon reference of both par- ties ; partly for his own concern, to sat- ᾧ Οὐ δυνάμεθα ἄνευ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς τοῦ τιμίου mare ρὸς σοῦ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι" μία γάρ ἐστι πίστις, καὶ μία δμόνοια, καὶ οὐ δύναμεθα ἐναντιωθῆναι τῷ καλῷ συλ- λειτουργῷ πατρὶ τῷ σῷ. * Διδάφσκοντες ἐπὶ καταλύσεως τῆς πίστεως τὰς καθαιρίσεις yevécOar.—Socr. 11. 90, ~ Cypr. Ep. 55. * Cypr. Ep. 68. 264 isfy himself whether he might admit him tocommunion. And having heard and weighed things, the pope denied that he was condemned ina legal way by competent judges; and that therefore the pretended sentence was null; and consequently he did not undertake the cause as upon appeal. But whereas his proceeding did look like an exercise of jurisdiction, derogatory to a synodical resolution of the case, he was opposed by the oriental bishops, as usurping an undue power. Unto which charge he doth not answer directly, by asserting to himself any such authority by law or custom; but otherwise excusing him- self.y In the issue, the pope’s sentence was not peremptory ; until, upon exam- ing the merits of the cause, it was approved for just, as to matter, by the synod of Sardica.* These things other- where we have largely shewed ; and con- sequently this instance is deficient. He allegeth St. Chrysostom, as ap- pealing to Pope Innocent [.; but if you read his Epistles to that pope, you will find no such matter ;+ he doth only com- plain, and declare to him the iniquity of the process against him, not as to a judge, but as to a friend and fellow bishop con- cerned, that such injurious and mischiev- ous dealings should be stopped;{_ re- questing. from him, not judgment of his cause, but succour in procuring it by a general synod ; to which, indeed, he did appeal, as Sozomen expressly telleth us; and as indeed he doth himself affirm.|| Accordingly Pope Innocent did not as- sume to himself the judgment of his cause, but did endeavour to procure a synod for it, affirming it to be needful: why so, if his own judgment, according to his privilege, did suffice? Why, in- deed, did not Pope Innocent (being well satisfied in the case, yea, passionately * "Oore (Athanasius et Paulus) τὰ κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς καὶ τὰ τῆς πίστεως ἐπὶ οἰκουμενικῆς συνόδου τέλος λαβεῖν.--- Ὁ. + Tom. vil. Epist. 122, 123.--- Πρὸς τὴν ὑμετέ- ραν ἀναδραμεῖν ἀγάπην. Ἰ]αρακαλῶ τὴν ὑμετέραν ἀγάπην διαναστῆναι, καὶ συναλγῆσαι, καὶ πάντα ποιῆσαι, ὥστε στῆναι ταῦ- τα τὰ κακά. || Οἰκουμενικὴν ἀπεκαλεῖ τὸ σύνοδον .----δοΖ. Vili. 17. ᾿Αλλ’ ἀπόντων ἡμῶν καὶ σύνοδον ἐπικαλουμέ- vwv.—TLheod. v. 34. Οἰκουμενιεκὴν δὲ σύνοδον συ- ναγεῖραι σπουδάζων ----ἶδοΖ. vill. 26. ᾿Αναγκαία ἐστι διάγνωσις συνοδική.----Ἰ bid. Υ Socr. ii. 20. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. — δι. .»υυ..-. ἃ touched with it) presently summon Theophilus and his adherents, undertak-— ing the the trial? Did Pope Nicholas I. proceed so in the case of Rhotaldus? © Why was he content only “to write con- solatory letters to him, and to his peo- ple ;’* not pretending to undertake the decision of his cause? If the pope had been endowed with such a privilege, itis morally impossible that it should not have shown forth clearly upon this occasion ; it could hardly be that St. Chrysostom himself should not in plain terms avow it; that he should not formerly apply to it, as the most certain and easy way of finding relief; that he should notearnest- ly mind and urge the pope to use his privilege: why should he speak of that tedious and difficult way of a general synod, when so short and easy a way was at hand? But the truth is, he did not know any such power the pope, had by himself. St. Chrysostom rather did conceive all such foreign Judicatures to be unreasonable and unjust; for the ar- gument which he darteth at Theophilus doth as well reach the papal jurisdiction upon appeals; for, “It was” (saith he) ‘not congruous, that an Egyptian should judge those in Thrace :”* why not an Egyptian as well as an Italian? And,f “Tf”? (saith he) ‘* this custom should pre- vail, and it become lawful for those who will to go into the parishes of others, even from such distances, and to cast out whom any one pleaseth, doing by their own authority what they please, know that all things will go to wreck—.” Why may not this be said of a Roman as well as of an Alexandrian? St. Chrysostom also (we may observe) did not only ap- ply himself to the pope, but to other western bishops;|| particularly to the bishops of Milain and Aquileia, whom he * Ἰννοκέτιος δὲ 6 Ῥώμης, καὶ Dabravds ’Avrioye fas οὐκ ἐκοινώνησαν τῇ ἐκθολῇ ᾿Ιωάννου, ἀλλὰ διὰ γραμμάτων τῆς πόλεως τὸν κλῆρον παρεμύθῃσαν, καὶ ἐδυσχέραινον τοῖς roAnfpaot.—Theoph. Soz. Vill. 9 + Οὐ γὰρ ἀκόλουθον ἣν τὸν ἐξ Αἰγύπτου rots ἐν Θράκη διάζειν. t Ei γὰρ τοῦτο κρατήσειε τὸ ἔθος καὶ ἐξὸν γένοιτο τοῖς βουλομένοις εἰς ἀλλοτρίας ἀπιέναι παροικίας, καὶ ἐκ τοσούτων διαστημάτων, καὶ ἐκθάλλειν ovs ἂν ἐθέλοι τις, κατ᾽ ἐξουσίαν ἰδίαν πράττοντας ἅπερ ἂν ἐθέλωσιν, ἴστε ὅτι πάντα οἱ χήσεται Epist. 122. | Scripsimus ἰδία et ad Venerium Mediola- nensem, et ad Chromatium Aquilegiensem episcopum.—Pallad, cap. 2. _— called Beatissimi Domini: did he appeal to them ἢ He allegeth Flavianus, bishop of Con- staniinople, appealing to Pope Leo ;* but let us consider the story. Flavianus, for his orthodoxy (or upon other accounts), very injuriously treated and oppressed by Dioscorus, who was supported by the favour of the imperial court, having in his case no other remedy, did appeal to the pope ; who alone among the patri- archs had dissented from those proceed- ings. ‘The pope was himself involved in the cause, being of the same persua- ‘sion; having been no less affront- ed and hardly treated (considering their power, and that he was out of their reach) and condemned by the same ad- versaries. To him, therefore, as to the leading bishop of Christendom, in the first place interested in defence of the common faith, together with a synod, not to him as sole judge, did Flavianus appeal. “He” (saith Placidia, in her letter to Theodosius) “ did appeal to the apostolic see, and to all the bishops of these parts : ὁ that is, to the rest of Christen- dom, which were not engaged in the party of Dioscorus: and to whom else could he have appealed ? Valentinian, in his Epistle to Theodo- 'sius, in behalf of Pope Leo, saith, that he did appeal “ according to the manner of synods;”’t and whatever those words signify, that could not be to the pope, as a single judge: for before that time, in whatever synod was ‘such an appeal made? what custom could there be favourable to such a pretence ὃ _ But what his appeal did import is best interpretable by the proceeding conse- quent; which was not the pope’s assum- ing to himself the judicature, either im- ‘mediately or by delegation of judges, but ᾿ς * Plavianus autem contra se prolata senten- tia per ejus legatos sedem apostolicam appella- vit libello—Liber. cap. 12. Necessitate coac- tus fuit ita agere, eo quod reliqui patriarche essent Mare. vii. 7. + ‘Qs προηγούμενον Placidia. ἀποστολικὸν θρόνον καὶ πρὸς πάντας ἐπισκόπους τῶν μερῶν rotrwy.—Syn. Chale. Act. i. p. 26. $ Kara τὸ ἔθος τῶν evvédwv.—p. 25. Vou. Il. | 34 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. II rds τὸν 265 endeavouring to procure a general synod for ii; the which endeavour doth appear in many Epistles to Theodosius and to his sister Pulcheria, soliciting that sucha synod might be indicted by his order: ** All the bishops,” saith Pope Leo, “ with sighs and tears do supplicate your grace, thai because our agents did faithfully re- claim, and bishop Flavianus did present them a libel of appeal, you would com- mand a general synod to be celebrated in Italy.”’* Dioscorus and his party would scarce have been so silly as to condemn Flavia- nus, if they had known (which, if it had been a case clear in law, or obvious in. practice, they could not but have known) that the pope, who was deeply engaged in the same cause, had a _ power to re- verse (and revenge) their proceedings. Nor would the good Emperor Theodosius so pertinaciously have maintained the proceedings of that Ephesine synod, if he had deemed the pope duly sovereign governor and judge; or that a right of ultimate decision upon appeal did apper- tain to him. Nor had the pope needed to have taken so much pains in procuring a synod, if he could have judged without it. Nor would Pope Leo (a man of so much spirit and zeal for the dignity of his See) have been so wanting to the maintenance of his right, as not immedi- ately to have proceeded unto trial of the cause, without precarious attendance for a synod, if he thought his pretence to such appeals as we now speak of, to have been good or plausible in the world at that time. The next case is that of Theodoret. His words, indeed, framed according to his condition, needing the patronage of Pope Leo, being then high in reputation, do sound favourably ; but we, age from the sound of words, must regar the reason of things. His words are these : “1 expect the suffrage of your apostolic see, and beseech and earnestly entreat your holiness to succour me, who * Omnes mansuetudini vestre cum gemiti bus et lachrymis supplicant sacerdotes, ut quia et nostri fideliter reclamarunt, et eisdem libel- jum appellationis Flavianus episcopus dedit, generalem synodum jubeatis intra ltaliam cel- ebrari——. _ P. Leo. Epist. 20. 266 appeal to.your right and just judica- ture.”* He never had been particularly or personally judged, and therefore did not need to appeal, as to a judge; nor, therefore, is his application to the pope to be interpreted for such; but rather as to a charitable succourer of him in his distress,t by his countenance and en- deavour to relieve him. He only was supposed erroneous in faith, a perilous abettor of Nestorianism, because he had smartly contradicted Cyril ; which prejudice did cause him to be prohibited from coming to the synod of Ephesus; and there in his absence to ‘be denounced heterodox. His appeal, then, to the pope (having no other recourse, in whom he did con- fide, finding him to concur with himself in opinion against Eutychianism) was no other than (as the word is often used in common speech, when we say, 1 appeal to your judgment in this or that case) a referring it to the pope’s consideration, whether his faith was sound and _ ortho- dox :|| capacitating him to retain his of- fice : the which, upon his explication and profession thereof, (presented in terms of extraordinary respect and deference), the pope did approve; thereby (as a good divine, rather than asa formal judge) acquitting him of heterodoxy: the which approbation (in regard to the great opin- ion then had of the pope’s_ skill in those points, and to the favour he had obtained by contesting against the Eutychians) did * Eye δὲ τοῦ ἀποστολικοῦ ὑμῶν θρόνου περιμένω τὴν ψῆφον, καὶ ἱκετεύω καὶ ἀντιδολῶ τὴν σὴν ἁγιότη- τα ἐπαμῦναι μοι τὸ ὀρθὸν ὑμῶν καὶ δίκαιον ἐπικαλου- μένῳ kptrfpcov.—Theod. Ep. 113, (ad P. Leo- nem.) + Vide Ep. 112, ad Domnum.—'’Adda κἀμὲ τὸν ἀπόντα ὁμοίως καλάμῳ κατέσφαξεν, οὔτε καλέσας εἰς δικαστήριον, οὔτε παρόντα κρίνας μετὰ τοσού- τους ἱδρῶτας καὶ πόνους μὴ δικασάμενος κατεκρίθην. Οἱ δὲ δικαιότατοι δικασταὶ τὸν ἀπόντα κατέκριναν οὐ δικάσαντες, μᾶλλον δὲ καὶ λίαν ἐπαινέσαντες τὰ δῆθεν εἰς κατηγορίαν ἡμῶν ἐπιδοθέντα συγγράμματα.--- Epist. 138. t Βασιλικοῖς γὰρ ἡμᾶς τῇ ἱκύρκρῳ προσδήσαντες γράμμασιν ν Epist. 149 ; vide Theod. E pist. supr. et Ep. 127, 129. Kai pe νόμος ἐνθάδε xa- θείργει βασιλικός. Βασιλικοῖς γράμμασι κωλυθέντες καταλαθεῖν τὴν "ξφεσον ——. Ep. 138, 139. Ma- θεῖν ἀντιθυλῶ rap’ ὑμῶν εἴτε χρή pe στέρξαι τὴν ἄδι- κον ταύτην καθαίρεσιν, ) μή. Ep. 113, “ὥστε καὶ τὰς τῆς ἀνατολῆς ἐκκλησίας τῆς ὑμετέρας ὁπολα σαι κηδεμονίας.---- ΕἸ Ὁ. 118. || ‘La yap rap’ ὑμῶν κριθησύμενα στέρξόμεν ὁποῖα ἂν ἢ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. δὰ J Ἧ bear great sway in the synod; so t (although not without opposition of many, and not upon absolute terms) he was permitied to sit among the Fathers of Chalcedon. on Κι Observations. » 1. We do not read of any forall trial the pope made of 'Theodoret’s case 5 that he was cited, that his accusers did appear, that his cause was discussed ; but only a simple approbation of him. | 2. We may observe, that Theodoret did write to Flavianus in like terms: ‘“ We entreat your holiness to fight in behalf of the faith which is assaulted, and to defend the canons which are trampled under foot.”’* ‘ 3. We may obseve, that Theodoret, expecting this favour of Pope Leo, and thence being moved to commend the Ro- man see to the height, and to reckon its special advantages, doth not yet mention his supremacy of power, or universality of jurisdiction: for those words, ‘‘it be- fitteth you to be prime in all things,”? are only general words relating to the advantages which he subjoineth; of which he saith, ‘‘ For your throne is adorned with many advantages,”{ ina florid enumeration whereof he passeth over that of peculiar jurisdiction; he nameth the magnitude, splendour, majes- ty, and populousness of the city; the early faith praised by St. Paul, the sep- ulchres of the two great apostles, and their decease there ; but the pope’s being universal sovereign and judge (which was the main advantage whereof that See could be capable) he doih not mei- tion: why? because he was not aware thereof, else surely he would not have passed it in silence.|| * "δὴν σὴν ἀγιωσύνην παρακαλοῖμεν τῆς πολεμοῦ- μένης πίστεως ὑπερμαχῆσαι, καὶ τῶν πατηθέντων ὑπε- ραγωνίσασθαι κανόνων .----ΓΠ οί. Epist. 86. Ἷ Διὰ πάντα γὰρ ὑμῖν πρωτεύειν dppérres —— t Πολλοῖς γὰρ ὁ ὑμέτερος θρόνος Koopetrac mheo~ νεκτήμασι. ἔχει γὰρ ὃ πανάγιος θρόνος ἐκεῖνος τῶν κατὰ τὴν οἰκουμένην ἐκκλησιῶυ τὴν ἡγεμονίαν, διὰ πολλὰ, καὶ πρὸ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων, ὅτι αἱρετικῆς pe μένηκε δυσωδίας dpinros, καὶ οὐδεὶς τἀναντία φρονῶν εἰς ἐκεῖνον ἐκάθισεν, ἀλλὰ τὴν ἀποστολικὴν χάριν ἀκ- ἤρατον dtepbraée.—Theod. Ep. 116. (ad ena- tum. Presb.) || That holy See has the prineipality over the churches in all the world, for many reasons; δ 4. We may also observe, that what- ever the opinion of Theodoret was now concerning the pope’s power, he not long before did hardly take him for sucha judge, when he did oppose Pope Celestine, concurring with Cyril, at the first Ephe- }sine synod. [16 then indeed, looking on Pope Celestine as a prejudiced adversary, ‘did not write to him, but to the other bish- ‘ops of the west, as we see by those words ‘in his Epistle to Domnus: “ And we have written to the bishops of the west about these things, to him of Milain, I jsay, to him of Aquileia, and him of Ravenna, testifying,”* &c. | 5. Yea, we may observe, that Theo- doret did intend, with the emperor's leave, to appeal, or refer his cause, to the whole body of western bishops, as himself doth express in those words to Anatolius : “1 do pray your magnificence, that you | would request this favour of our dread sovereign, that 1 may have recourse to the west, and may be judged by the most religious and holy bishops there.”’t Bellarmine further doth allege the ap- | peal of Hadrianus, bishop of Thebes, to |Pope Gregory 1.5 the which he re- |ceived and asserted by excommunicat- \ing the archbishop of Justiniana Prima, ‘for deposing Hadrianus, without regard to that appeal. I answer, _ 1. The example is late, when the popes had extended their power beyond the ancient and due limits: those maxims i had got in before the time of that worthy pope; who thought he might use the | +g of which he found himself possess- \ ed. _ 2. It is impertinent, because the bish- op of Justiniana had then a special de- |pendence upon the Roman See; from whence an universal jurisdiction upon | appeal cannot be inferred. but especially because she continued free from the taint of heresy, and none otherwise minded ) ever sat in her, she having kept the apostolic ᾿ State always unmixed. | ™ Kat τοῖς θεοφιλεστάτοις δὲ τῆς δύσεως ἐπισκό- ποις͵ τῷ Μεδιολάνου φημὶ, καὶ τῷ ᾿Ακυιλείας καὶ τῷ Ῥαδέννης περὶ τούτων ἐγράψαμεν, διαμαρτηρόμενοι ὡς τῆς ᾿Απολιναρίου ταῦτα καινοτομίας πεπλήρωται. —Theod. Epist. 112. t ᾿Αντιδολῶ τὴν ὑμετέραν μεγαλυπρίπειαν, ταύτην | αἰτῆσαι τὴν χάριν τὴν καλλίνικον κορυφὴν, ὥστε με | thy ἑσπέραν καταλαβεῖν, καὶ raph τοῖς ἐν ἐκείνη θεοφ- | τλεστάτοις καὶ ἁγιωτάτοις ἐπισκόποις δικάσασθαι.---- Theod. Ep. 119. (ad Anatol.) * Greg. lib. ii; Indict, 11, Ep. 6. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. =e? ee ee ee PF 267 3. It might be an usurpation ; nor doth the opinion or practice of Pope Gregory suffice to determine a question of right ; for good men are liable to prejudice, and its consequences. To these instances produced by Bellar- mine, some add the appeal of Eutyches to Pope Leo ; to which it may be except- ed, that if he did appeal, it was not to the pope solely, but to him with the other patriarchs ; so it is expressly said in the Acts of the Chalcedon synod, “" His de- position being read, he did appeal to the holy synod of the most holy bishop of Rome, and of Alexandria, and of Jerusa- lem, and of Thessalonica :”* the which it is an argument that he did not apprehend the right of receiving appeals did solely or peculiarly belong to him of Rome. Liberatus saith, that ‘* Johannes Ta- laida went to Calendion, patriarch of Antioch, and taking of him intercessory synodical letters, appealed to Simplicius, Bishop of Rome, as St. Athanasius had done, and persuaded him to write in his behalf to Acacius, bishop of Constanti- nople.”t In regard to any more instances of this kind we might generally propose these following considerations :— 1. It isno wonder, that any bishop be- ing condemned, especially in causes re- lating to faith or common interest, should have recourse to the Roman bishop, or to any other bishop of great authority, for refuge or for relief; which they may hope to be procured by them by the in- fluence of their reputation, and their power among their dependents. 2. Bad men, being deservedly correct- ed, will absurdly resort any whither with mouths full of clamour and calumny, if not with hope of relief, yet with design of revenge; as did Marcion, as did Fe- licissimus, as did Apiarius to the pope. 3. Good men being abused will ex- press some resentment, and complain of * ᾿Αναγινωσκομένης τῆς καθαιρέσεως, ἐπεκαλέσατο τὴν ἁγίαν σύνοδον τοῦ ἁγιωτάτου ἐπισκόπου 'Ῥώμης, καὶ ᾿Αλεξανδρείας, καὶ 'ἱεροσολύμων, καὶ Θεσσαλονΐ- «ns.—Syn. Chale. Act. 1. + Ingressus est ad Calendionem Antiochenum patriarcham, et sumptis ab eo intercessionis synodicis literis Romanum pontificem Simpli- cium appellavit, sicut B. fecerat Athanasius, et suasit scribere pro se Acacio Constantinopo- litano episcopo Liber. cap. 18; Baron, ann. 483, ὁ 1. 268 their wrongs, where they may presume of a fair and favourable hearing: so did Athanasius, Flavianus, St. Chrysostom, Theodoret, apply themselves to the same bishops, flourishing in so great reputa- tion and wealth. | So did the monks of Egypt (Ammonius and Isidorus), from the persecutions of Theophilus, fly to the protection and succour of St. Chrysostom ; which gave occasion to the troubles of that incom- parable personage; the which is so il- lustrious an instance, that the words of the historian relating it deserve setting down. “They jointly did endeavour, that the trains against them might be examined by the emperor as judge, and by the bishop John ; for they conceived that he, having conscience of using a just free- dom, would be able to succour them ac- cording to right; but he did receive the men applying to him courteously, and treated them respectfully, and did not hinder them from praying in the church.— He also writ to Theophilus to render comn- munion to them, as being orthodox ; and if there were need of judging their case by law, that he would send whom they thought good to prosecute the cause.’”* If this had been to the pope, it would have been alleged for an appeal; and it would have had as much colour as any instance which they can produce. 4, And when men, either good or bad, do resort in this manner to great friends, it is no wonder if they accost them in highest terms of respect and with exag- gerations of their eminent advantages ; so inducing them to regard and favour their cause. 5. Neither is it strange that great per- sons favourably should entertain those who make such addresses to them, they always coming crouching in a suppliant posture, and with fair pretences ; it be- ing also natural to men to delight in see- ing their power acknowledged ; and it * Kowy re ἐσπούδαζον παρὰ βασιλεῖ κριτῇ καὶ Ἰωάννῃ τῷ ἐπισκόπῳ ἐλέγχεσθαι τὰς κατ᾽ αὐτῶν ἐπι- βουλάς" ᾧοντο γὰρ ἐνδίκου παῤῥησίας αὐτὸν ἐπιμελού- μενον δυνάσθαι τὰ δίκαια βοηθεῖν αὐτοῖς" ὃ δὲ προσελ- θόντας αὐτῷ τοὺς ἄνδρας φιλοφρόνως ἐδέξατο, καὶ ἐν τιμῇ εἶχε, καὶ εὔχεσθαι ἐπὶ ἐκκλησίας οὐκ ἐκώλυσε ἔγραψε δὲ Θεοφίλῳ κοινωνίαν αὐτοῖς ἀποδοῦναι, ὡς ὀρθῶς περὶ Θεοῦ δοξάζουσιν" εἰ δὲ δίκῃ δίοι κρίνεσ- θαι τὰ κατ᾽ αὐτοὺς, ἀποστέλλειν ὃν αὐτῷ δοκεῖ δικασόύ- pevoy.—Soz. vill. 13. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. being a glorious thing to relieve the af- flicted: for ** eminence is wont to incline ~ , toward infirmity, and with a ready good- will to take part with those who are un- der.”** So when Basilides, when Mar- cellus, when Eustathius Sebastenus, when Maximus the Cynic, when Apiarius, were condemned, the pope was hasty to engage for them; more liking their application io him than weighing their cause. 6. And when any person doth con- tinue long in a flourishing estate, so that such addresses are frequently made to him, no wonder that an opinion of law- ful power to receive them doth arise both in him and in others; so that of a volun- tary friend he become an authorized pro- tector, a patron, a judge of such persons in such cases. X. The sovereign is fountain of all ju- risdiction ; and all inferior magistrates derive their authority from his warrant and commission, acting as his deputies or ministers, according to that intimation in St. Peter,—whether to the king as supreme, or to governors as sent by him.* Accordingly the pope doth challenge this advantage to himself, that he is the fountain of ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; pretending all episcopal power to be de- rived from him. ᾿ «ς The rule of the church” (saith Bel- larmine) ‘* is monarchical ; therefore all authority is in one, and from him is de- rived to others ;’+ the which aphorism he well proveth from the form of creat- ing bishops, as they call it: ‘* We do provide such a church with such a per- son: and we do prefer him to be father and pastor and bishop of the said church ; committing to him the administration in temporals and spirituals, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.” Pope Pius II., in his Bull of Retracta- tion, thus expresseth the sense of his ᾿ See: ‘In the militant church, which re- * Dire μάλιστα κάμπτεσθαι τὸ προέχον πρὸς τὸ ἀσθενὲς, καὶ du’ εὐνοίας ἑκουσίου τῷ ἐλαττωμένῳ προσ- ré0cc0ar.—Greg. Naz. Orat. 29. 7+ Regimen ecclesiz est monarchicum; ef Ὁ omnis auctoritas est in uno, et ab illo in alios derivatur.— Bell. iv. 24; Epiph. Her. 42. Ὁ Providemus ecclesiz tali de tali persona, et preficimus eum in patrem, et pastorem, et episcopum ejusdem ecclesia, committentes Εἰ administrationem in temporalibus et spirituali- bus; in nomine, &c.— Jd. Δ 1 Pet. ii. 13. i J i - sembleth the triumphant, there is one _ moderator and judge of all, the vicar of Jesus Christ,* from whom, as from the head, all power and authority is derived to the subject members; the which doth immediately tlow into it from the Lord Christ.” A congregation of cardinals, appoint- ed by Pope Paulus III., speaking after the style and sentiments of that See, did say to him, “* Your holiness doth so bear the care of Christ’s church, that you have very many ministers, by which you man- age that care; these are all the clergy, on whom the service of God is charged ; especially priests, and more especially curates, and above all, bishops.” Ὁ Durandus, bishop of Mande, accord- ing to the sense of his age, saith, ‘ The pope is head of all bishops, from whom they as members from an head descend, and of whose fulness all receive ; whom he calls toa participation of his care, but admits not into the fulness of his power. ἢ This pretence is seen in the ordinary titles of bishops, who style themselves bishops of such a place, “" by the grace of God and of the apostolic see.”’|| O shame ! The men of the Tridentine conven- tion (those great betrayers of the church to perpetual slavery, and Christian truth to the prevalency of falsehood, till God pleaseth) do, upon divers occasions, pre- tend to qualify and empower bishops to perform important matters, originally be- * In ecclesia militanti, que instar trium- phantis habet, unus est omnium moderator et arbiter Jesu Christi. vicarius,a quo tanquam capite omnis in subjecta membra potestas et authoritas derivatur, αὐ ἃ Christo Domino sine medio in ipsum influit—P. Pius 11]. in Bull. Retract.. 7 Sanctitas vestra‘ita gerit curam ecclesiz Christi, ut ministros plurimos habeat, per quos curam exerceat; hi autem sunt clerici omnes, quibus mandatus est cultus Dei; presbyteri preesertim, et maxime curati, et pree omnibus episcopi——. Apud Cham. de Pont. Gicum., 10, 13. Ἐ Summus pontifex caput est omnium pon- tificum, a quo illi tanquam a capite membra descendunt, et de cujus plenitudine omnes acci- piunt quos ipse vocat in partem solicitudinis, non in plenitudinem potestatis—Duraant. Mi- mat. Offic. ii. 1, 17. ΠΝ. Dei et apostolice sedis gratia episco- pus Colon ——. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 269 longing to the episcopal function, as the pope’s delegates.* But contrariwise, according to the doc- trine of holy scripture, and the sense of the primitive church, the bishops and pastors of the church do immediately re- ceive their authority and commission from God ; being only his ministers. The scripture calleth them the mznis- ters of God,and of Christ (so Epaphras, so Timothy, in regard to their ecclesias- tical function are named), the stewards of God, the servants of God, fellow-ser- vants of the apostles." The scripture saith that the Holy Ghost had made them bishops to feed the church of God ;° that God had given them, and constituted them in the church; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ ;* that is, to all effects and purposes concerning their office ; for the work of the ministry compriseth all the duty charged on them, whether in way of order or of governance ;+ as they now do precariously and ground- lessly in reference to this case distin- guish ; and edifying the body doth import all the designed effects of their office ; particularly those which are consequent on the use of jurisdiction; the which St. Paul doth affirm was appointed for edifi- cation ; according (saith he) to the au- thority which God hath given me for edification, and not for destruction.* They do preside in the Lord. ‘They al- low no other head but our Lord, from whom all the body,t δε. The Fathers clearly do express their sentiments to be the same. ᾿ St. Ignatius saith, that the bishop “doth preside in the place of God ;”’|| and that **we must look upon him as our Lord himself,” (or as our Lord’s rep- resentative ;) that therefore ‘‘ we must be subject to him as unto Jesus Christ.”§ * This was an expedient.— Vide Concil. + Ordo confertur a Deo immediate, jurisdic- tio mediate. — Bell, iv. 25. $ Προιστάμενοι ἐν Kvpio.—l Thess. v. Eph. iv. 16. || Προκαθημένου rod ἐπισκόπου εἰς τύπον Θεοῦ. --- Ign. ad Magnes. ᾧ Τὸν οὖν ἐπίσκοπον δῆλον ὅτι ὡς αὐτόν τὸν Ké- δ Col. i. 7; iv. 7; 1 Thess. iti. 2; 1 Tim. iv. 6; Tit. i. 7; 2 Tim. ii. 24. * Acts xx. 28; Naz. Or. 30. 4 Eph. iv. 11; 1 Cor. xu. 29. * 2 Cor. x. 8; xiii. 10. 12; 270 St. Cyprian affirmeth “ each bishop to be constituted by the judgment of God and of Christ ;” and “" that in his church he is for the present a judge in the place of Christ ;’—and ‘that our Lord Jesus Christ, one and alone, hath a power both to prefer us to the government of his church, and to judge of our acting.”’* St. Basil: “Α prelate is nothing else but one that sustaineth the person of Christ.”’+ St. Chrysostom: ** We have received the commission of ambassadors, and come from God; for this is the dignity of the episcopal office.”’¢ ** It behoveth us all, who by divine authority are constituted in the seal hood, to prevent,’’|| ὅσα. Wherefore the ancient bishops did all of them take themselves to be vicars of Christ, not of the pope, and no less than the proudest pope of them all; whence it was ordinary for them in their addresses and compellations to the bish- op of Rome, and in their speech about him, to call him their brother, their col- league, their fellow-minister ; which had not been modest or just, if they had been his ministers or shadows.’ Yea, the popes themselves, even the highest and haughtiest of them, who of any in old times did most stand on their presumed pre-eminence, did yet vouchsafe to call other bishops their fellow-bishops and fellow-ministers. Those bishops of France with good reason did complain of Pope Nicholas I. “for calling them his clerks; when- as, if his pride had suffered him, he ριον det προσθλέπειν.---ἶ an. al Ep. “Ὅταν ἐπισκό- πῳ ὑποτάσσεσθε ὡς ᾿Ϊησοῦ Χριστῷ.---Ἰσῃ. ad Trall. * De Ὁ 6: οἵ Christi ejus judicio.—Cypr. Ep. 52, et alibi sepe. Unusin ecclesia ad tempus sacerdos, et ad tempus judex, vice Christi.—ZJd. Ep.55. Sed expec temus universi judicium Domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui unus et solus habet potestatem et preponendi nos in eccle- size suz gubernatione, et de actu nostro judi- candi.—JId.in Conc. Carthag. t ὋὉ γὰρ καθηγούμενος οὐδὲν ἕτερόν ἐστιν, ἣ ὃ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἐπέχων rodowrov.— Bas. Const. Mon. Cap. 22. t Ἡμεῖς τοίνυν πρεσδείας ἀνεδεξάμεθα λόγον καὶ ἥκομεν παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, τοῦτο γάρ ἐστι τὸ Ps ἐπισκο- πῆς dgiwpa.—Chrys. in Coloss. Orat. || Oportere nos omnes, qui Deo nuriors su- mus in sacerdotio constituti illius certaminibus obviare, &c.—Anatol. in Syn. Cha'c. p. 512. ‘ Leo Ep. 84. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. should have acknowledged them for his brethren, and fellow-bishops.* | In fine, the ancient bishops did not al lege any commission from the pope to warrant their jurisdiction, but from God: ‘If Moses’s chair were so venerable, that what was said out of that ought therefore to be heard, how much more is Christ’s throne so?* We succeed him, from that we speak, since Christ has committed to us the ministry of recon- ciliation.”"¢ “That which is committed to the priest, it is only in God’s power to give.”’|| ‘Since we also, by the mercy of Christ our King and God, were made ministers of the gospel.’’§ This is a modern dream, born out of ambition and flattery, which neyer came into the head of any ancient divine. It is a’ ridiculous thing to imagine that Cyprian, Athanasius, Basil, Chrysostom, Austin, &c., did take themselves for the vicegerents or ministers of the popes; if they did, why did they not, so frequent occasion being given them in all their volumes, ever acknowledge it? why cannot Bellarmine and his complices, after all their prolling, shew any passage in them importing any such acknowledg- ment; butare fain to infer it by far-fetch- ed sophisms, from allegations plainly im- pertinent or frivolous ? The popes, indeed, in the fourth cen- tury, began to practise afine trick, very serviceable to the enlargement of their power; which was to confer on certain bishops, as occasion served, or for con- tinuance, the title of their vicar or lieu: — tenant; thereby pretending to impart authority to them: whereby they were enabled for performance of divers things, which otherwise by their own episcopal * Sciesque nos non tuos esse ut te jactas et extollis clericos, quos ut fratres et coepiscopos recognoscere Si elatio permitteret, debueras.— Ann. Pith. Ἷ Ἡμεῖς τοίνυν ἌΝ} Chrys. sup. t Ei 6 Μωσέως bobvog οὕτως ἦν αἰδέσιμος, ὡς δι' ἐκεῖνον ἀκούεσθαι, πολλῷ μᾶλλον ὃ Χριστοῦ θρόνος; ἐκεῖνον ἡμεῖς διεδεξάμεθα, ἀπὸ τούτου φθεγγόμεθα, ἀφ᾽ οὗ καὶ ὃ Χριστὸς ἔθετο ἐν ἡμῖν τὴν διακονίαν τῆς κα’ ταλλαγῆς. —Chrys. in Coloss. Orat. 3. || "A γὰρ ἐγκεχείρισται ὃ ἱερεὺς, Θεοῦ μόνοῦ ἐστὶ δωρεῖσθαι, ὅζο. -- hrys. in Joh. Orat, 83. Exel οὖν καὶ ἡμεῖς ἐλέει rod σουμδασιλέως (. παμθασιλέως) ἡμῶν Χριστοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἱερουργοὶ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου ἐκληρώθημεν Flavian. in Chale. Act. i. p. 4. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. or metropolitical power they could not perform. By which device they did engage such bishops to sucha _ depend- ence on them, whereby they did promote the papal authority in provinces, to the oppression of the ancient rights and liberties of bishops and synods, doing what they pleased under pretence of this vast power communicated to them; and for fear of being displaced, or out of affection to their favourer, doing what might serve to advance the papacy. Thus did Pope Celestine constitute Cyril in his room.¢ Pope Leo appointed Anatolius of Con- stantinople. Pope Felix, Acacius of Constantino- ple.® Pope Hormisdas, Epiphanius of Con- stantinople. Pope Simplicius, to Zeno, bishop of Seville—* We thought it convenient that you should be held up by the vicariat au- thority of our See.”’* So did Siricius and his successors con- stitute the bishops of Thessalonica to be their vicars in the diocese of Illyricum, Wherein being then a member of the western empire they had caught a spe- cial jurisdiction ; to which Pope Leo did refer in those words, which sometimes are impertinently alleged with reference to all bishops, but concern only Anasta- lius, bishop of 'Thessalonica : “ We have intrusted thy charity to be in our stead, so that thou art called into part of the solicitude, not into plenitude of the au- thority. ”’+ So did Pope Zozimus bestow a like ‘pretence of vicarious power upon the bishop of Arles, which city was the seat of the temporal exarch in Gaul.' So to the bishop of Justiniani Prima in ‘Bulgaria (or Dardania Europea), the like privilege was granted [by procure- ment of the Emperor Justinian, native of that place. ] Afterwards temporary or occasional v.cars Were appointed (suchas Austin in * Congruum duximus vicaria sedis nostra te auctoritate fulciri— Baron. ann. 482, ὁ 46. + Vices enim nostras ita tue credidimus charitati, ut in patrem sis vocatus solicitudinis, non in plenitudinem potestatis.—P. Leo. Ep. 84 (ad Anastas. Thess.) δ Evagr. Act. Eph. p. 134. * Act. Cone. sub. Menna., p. 70. ' P. Joh. VIII. Ep. 93. 271 England, Boniface in Germany), who in virtue of that concession did usurp a paramount authority; and by the ex- ercise thereof did advance the papal in- terest; depressing the authority of me- tropolitans and provincial synods. So at length legates, upon occasion de- spatched into all countries of the west, came to do there what they pleased, using that pretence to oppress aud abuse both clergy and people very intolerably. Whence divers countries were forced to make legal provisions for excluding such legates,j finding by much experience that their business was to rant and domi- neer in the pope’s name, to suck money from the people, and to maintain luxurious pomp upon expense of the countries where they came. Of this, John XXII. doth sorely com- plain ;* and decrees that all people should admit his legates, under pain of inter- dicts. In England, Pope Paschal finds the same fault in his letter to King Henry I. ‘“‘ Nuncios, or letters from the apostolic see, unless by your majesty’s command, are not thought worthy any admittance or reception within your jurisdiction: none complains thence, none appeals thence for judgment to the apostolic see.” Tt The pope observing what authority and reverence the archbishops of Canterbury had in this nation, whereby they might be able to check his attempts, did think good to constitute those archbishops his legates of course (/egatos natos), that so they might seem to exercise their juris- diction by authority derived from him; and owing to him that mark of favour, or honour, with enlargement of power, might pay him more devotion, and serve his interests, Bellarmine doth from this practice prove the pope’s sovereign power ;* but he might from thence better have de- * Extrav. commun. i. 1 (p. 310.) Occulti inimici regni.— Matt. Par. p. 524. _ + Sedis apostolicee nuncii ve! liters preter jussum regiz mayjestatis nuliam in potestate tua susceptionem aut aditum promerentur, nul- lus inde clamor, nullum judicium ad sedem apostolicam destinantur.—Jl’. Pasch. 11. Eadm. #13. ; ) P. Pasch. 11. Epist. apud Eadm. p. 113, &e. * Bell. ii. 10. ‘ 272 monstrated their great cunning. might, from such extraordinary designa- tion of vicegerents, with far more reason be inferred, that ordinarily bishops are not his ministers. ΧΙ. It is the privilege of a sovereign, that he cannot be called to account, or judged, or deposed, or debarred commun- ion, or anywise censured and punished ; for this implieth a contradiction or confu- sion in degrees, subjecting the superior to inferiors; this were making a river run backwards ; this were to dam up the fountain of justice ; to behead the state; to expose majesty to contempt. Wherefore the pope doth pretend to this privilege, according to those maxims in the canon law, drawn from the say- ings of popes (either forged or genuine, but all alike) obtaining authority in their court.' And according to what Pope Adrian let the eighth synod know, ‘ because” It) A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. had not effect, because the cause was not just and plausible; the truth and equity of the case appearing to be on the pope’s side. St. Isidore Pelusiota denieth of any bishop’s office, that it is ἀρχὴ ἀνυπεύθυ- voc, “δῇ uncontrollable government.” In the times of Polycrates and Pope Victor, the whole eastern church did for- bear communion with the pope.* Fir- milian told Pope Stephanus, that by con- ceiting he might excommunicate all other bishops, he had excommunicated himself. The Fathers of the Antiochene synod did threaten to excommunicate and depose Pope Julius. ‘They did promise to Julius peace and communion, if he did admit the deposition of those whom they had expelled, and the constitution of those whom they had ordained ; but if he did resist their decrees, they denounce the contrary.”*+ The oriental bishops at Sar- dica did excommunicate and depose St. (says he) ‘‘ the apostolic church of Rome |} him.™ Hilary did anathematize stoops not to the judgment of lesser| Pope Liberius, upon his defection to the churches.”* They cite also three old|j Arians.¢ Dioscorus did attempt to ex- synods (of Sinuessa, of Rome under| communicate Pope Leo.|| Acacius of Pope Silvester, of Rome under Sextus) Constantinople renounced the communion IIl.); but they are palpably spurious, | of Pope Felix." 'Timotheus A‘lurus curs- and the learned amongst them confess! ed the Pope.° The “ African bishops” it. ‘did 2 * synodically excommunicate Pope But antiquity was not of this mind ;/ for it did suppose him no less obnoxious to judgment and correction than other bishops, if he should notoriously deviate | from the faith, or violate canonical dis- | cipline. The canons generally do oblige bish- ops, without exception to duty, and (up- on defailance) to correction: why is not he excepted, if to be excused or exempt- ed? It was not questioned of old, but that a pope, in case he should notoriously de- part from the faith, or notably infringe . . . . . | discipline, might be excommunicated : | the attempting it upon divers occasions doth shew their opinion, although it often | *% Διὰ τὸ τὴν ἀποστολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν τῆς Ῥώμης | τῇ τῶν ἐλαττόνων μὴ ὑποκύπτειν κρίσει.----Ῥ. Adrian. | in Syn. VUII. Act. vii. p. 963. ' Bell. ii. 26; de Cone. ii. 17; Grat. Dist. xl. cap. 6; xxi.7; trav. comm. lib. i. tit. 8, cap. 1; P. Ep. i. cap ae al P. Nich. 1. Ep. 8. (p. 504 ;) P. Job. VIM. Ep. 75. (Ρ. 31;) P.Gelas. Ep. 4. (Pp. 625, 626; ἣν ὧρ. 13. (p. 640 ;) P. Greg. VII. p. 8, 21. Caus. ix. qu. 3, cap. 10—; Ex- | Leo IX. | wr his own shi sir Pope Constantine, by the people ;! and so was Pope Leo VIIL" Diverse bishops of Italy and * "Ev re χρόνοις Ἰ]ολυκράτους καὶ Bixrwpos ὡς ἧ ἀνατολὴ πρὸς τὴν δύσιν διαφερομένη εἰρηνικὰ rap’ ἀλ- | λήλων οὐκ édéyovro.—LEpiph. Her. 70. Audia- norum. Dum enim putas omnes abs te absti- neri posse, solum te ab omnibus abstinuisti.— Firm. apud Cypr. Ep. ἡ Δεχομένῳ μὲν ᾿Ιουλίῳ τὴν καθαίρεσιν τῶν πρὸς αὐτῶν ἐληλαμένον, καὶ τὴν κατάστασιν τῶν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν χειροτονηθέντων, εἰρήνην καὶ κοινωνίαν ἐπηγγέλλον- | ro’ ἀνθισταμένῳ δὲ τοῖς δεδογμένοις τἀναντία προηγό- | ρευσαν. —Soz. ili. 8. + Anathema tibi, papa Liberi.— Hl. fragm. | {᾿Ετόλμησε δὲ καὶ ἀκοινωνησίαν ὑπαγυρεῦσαι κατὰ τοῦ ἀρχιεπισκόπου τῆς μεγάλης “Ῥώμης A éovros.— | Evag. 1]. 4. hee, ‘Africani antistites Vigilium Rom, epise. damnatorem capitulorum synodaliter a catholi- ca communione, reservato ei poenitentiz loco, recludunt (1. excludunt.)— Vict. Tun. post. Cons. | Basilii V. C. an, LU. m Soz. iii. 11. n Niceph. xvi. 17; Baron. ann. 484, § 35. * Baron. ann. 457, § 25. » Plat. p. 131, et Dist. xix. cap. 21, 22. 4 Plat. p. 223, τ Id. p. 291. Iilyricum did abstain from the pope’s communion for a long time, because they did admit the fifth synod.s Photius did excommunicate and depose Pope Nicholas [.* Maurus, bishop of Revenna, did anathematize Pope Vitalianus.t+ The emperor Otho II. having with good ad- vice laboured to reclaim Pope John XII. without effect, did “indict a council, calling together the bishops of Italy, by the judgment of whom the life of that wicked man should be judged ;”i and the issue was, that he was deposed. _ Pope Nicholas I. desired to be judged by the emperor." The fifth synod did in general terms condemn Pope Vigilius; and the Emperor Justinian did banish him for not complying with the decrees of it. The sixth and seventh general synods did anathematize Honorius by name, when he was dead, because his heresy was not before confuted; and | they would-have served him so if he had ‘been alive. Divers synods (that of Worms, of Papia, of Brescia, of Mentz, of Rome, &c.), did reject Pope Gregory ὙΠ1." Pope Adrian himself, in the eighth synod (so called), did confess, that a | pope being found deviating from the faith ‘might be judged, as Honorius was. _ Gerbertus (afterwards Pope Sylvester II.) did maintain, that popes might be held as ethnics and publicans, if they “ did not hear the church.”* The synod of Con- stance did judge and depose three popes. The synod of Basil did depose Pope _Eugenius; affirming, that “ the Catholic church hath often corrected and judged popes, when they either erred from the faith, or by their ill manners became no- toriously scandalous to the church.”’|| | *® ἸΚαβαίρεσιν ὡς tvéuice καὶ ἀναθεματισμὸν én’ οὐ- devi λόγῳ ποιεῖται ΝΝικολαοῦ.---- 1. Ignatii. Patr. apud Bin. p. 892; Baron. ann. 863. wai Communi totius sancti concilii con- sensu depositus.—Lwuitprand. vi. 6. ~ —— Concilium indicit, convocatis epis- copis Italie, quorum judicio vita sceleratissimi Hhominis dijudicaretur.— Plat. in Joh. XITI. (pro X11.) Vide Baron. ann. 960, et Binium. || Ecclesia catholica sepenumero summos pontifices sive a fide delirantes, sive pravis ‘moribus notorie ecclesiam scandalizantes cor- 'rexit, et judicavit Conc. Bass. sess. 12. * P. Pelag. II. Ep. iii. 13. t Baron. ann. 669, §. 2. ® Grat. Caus. ii. qu. 7, cap. 41. * Ann. 1076; vide Baron. ann. 1033, ὁ 3. ~ Baron. an. 992, § 44 —; Conc. Bas. sess. 35 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 273 The’ practice of popes, to give an ac- count of their faith (when they entered upon their office) to the other patriarchs and cheif bishops, approving themselves thereby worthy and capable of commun- ion, doth imply them liable to judg- ment.* Of the neglect of which prac- tice Euphemius, bishop of Constantino- ple, did complain.* Of this we have for example the Syn- odical Epistles of Pope Gregory I. XII. To the sovereign in ecclesiastical affairs it would belong to define and de- cide controversies in faith, discipline, mora! practice ; so that all were bound to admit his definitions, decisions, inter- pretations. He would be the supreme interpreter of the divine law, and judge of controversies. No point or question of moment should be decided without his cognizance. This he therefore doth pre- tend to; taking upon him to define points, and requiring from all submissions to his determinations. Nor doth he allow any synods to decide questions. But the ancients did know no such thing. In case of contentions, they had no recourse to his judgment; they did not stand to his opinion, his authority did not avail to quash disputes. They had recourse to the holy scriptures, to Catho- lic tradition, to reason; they disputed and discussed points by dint of argu- ment. Ireneeus, Tertullian, Vincentius, Li- rinensis and others, discoursing of the methods to resolve points of controversy, did not reckon the pope’s authority for one. Divers of the Fathers did not scru- ple openly to dissent from the opinions of popes; nor were they wondered at, or condemned for it. So St. Paul did withstand St. Peter.” So Polycarpus dissented from Pope Elu- therius. So Polycrates from Pope Vic- tor. So St. Cyprian from Pope Stephen. So Dionysius Alex. from Pope Stephen. All which persons were renowned for wisdom and piety in their times. Highest controversies were appeased * Mos est Romane ecclesiw sacerdoti novi- ter constituto formam fidei sux ad sanctas ec- clesias prerogare.—P. Gelas. I. Ep. 1, ad Laur. * Gelas. Ep. 9; Baron. ann. 492, ᾧ 10; wide Tract. de. Unit. Eccl. y Gal. ti. 11, ἀντέστην. 274 by synods out of the holy scripture, Catholic tradition, the analogy of faith, and common reason, without regard to the pope. Divers synods in Afric and Asia defined the point about rebaptiza- tzon without the pope’s leave, and against his opinion. The synod of Antioch con- demned the doctrine of Paulus Samosa- tenus, without intervention of the pope, before they gave him notice. In the synod of Nice, the pope had very small stroke. The general synod of Constan- tinople declared the point of the divznity of the Holy Ghost against Macedonius, without the pope ; who did no more than afterward consent: this the synod of Chalcedon, in their compellation to the Emperor Marcian, did observe: “The Fathers, met in Sardica to suppress the relics of Arianism, communicated their decrees to the eastern bishops; and they who here discovered the pestilence of Apolinarius, made known theirs to the western.’”* The synod of Afric defined against Pelagius, before their informing Pope Innocentius thereof; not seeking his judgment, but desiring his consent to that which they were assured to be truth. Divers popes have been incapable of deciding controversies, themselves having been erroneous in the questions contro- verted; as Pope Stephanius (in part), Pope Liberius, Pope Felix, Pope Vigilius, Pope Honorius, &c. And in our opin- ion, all popes for many ages. It is observable how the synod of Chal- cedon, in their allocution to the Emperor Marcian, do excuse Pope Leo for ex- pounding the faith, in his Epistle (the which it seems some did reprehend as a novel method disagreeable to the canons:) “Let not them” (say they?) ‘ object to us the Epistle of the marvellous prelate of Rome, as obnoxious to imputation of %* Kai of μὲν ἐκ Σαρδικῆς κατὰ τῶν "Apetov λει- ψάνων ἀγωνισάμενοι τοῖς ἐν ἀνατολῇ τὴν κρίσιν ἐξέ- πεμπον, οἱ δὲ ἐνταῦθα τὴν ᾿Απολιναρίου λύμην φωρά- σαντες τοῖς ἐν δύσει τὴν ψῆφον éyvadptSov.—Conc. Chalced. ad Mare. Orat. p. 468. + 'Ὡς ξένην τινὰ καὶ rots κανόσιν οὐ νενομισμένην τῆς ἐπισπολῆς διαθάλλῇ τὴν σύνταξιν.---Αοἴἱ, Syn. Chalc. p- 465. Mi τοίνυν ἡμῖν τοῦ θαυμαστοῦ τῆς Ρώμης προξδρου τὴν ἐπιστολὴν, ὡς καινοτο- μίας ἔγκλημα, προσφερέτωσαν' ἀλλὰ εἰ μὴ σύμφωνος ταῖς γραφαῖς, ἐλεγχέτωσαν. εἰ μὴ τοῖς προλαδοῦσι πατράσιν ὁμύδοξος" εἰ μὴ πρὸς ὁνσσεθδῶν κατηγορίαν γιγένηται -----ς. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. novelty ; but if it be not consonant to scriptures, let them confute it; or if it” be not consentaneous to the Fathers who have preceded ; or if it be not apt to confute the irreligious,” We. . It was not his judicial authority they did insist upon to maintain his Epistle, but the orthodoxy and _ intrinsie usefulness of it to confute errors; upon which account they did embrace and confirm it by their suffrage. XIII. If the pope were a sovereign of the church, as they make him, it were at least expedient that he should be in- fallible ; for why otherwise should he undertake confidently to. pronounce in all. cases, to define high and difficult points, to impose his dictates, and require assent from all? If he be fallible, it is very probable that often he doth obtrude errors upon us for matters of faith and practice. Wherefore the true fast friends of pa- pal interest do assert him to be infallible, when he dictateth as pope, and setting himself into his chair doth thence mean to instruct the whole Church.” And the pope therefore himself, who countenan- ceth them, may be presumed to be of that. mind. Pighius said bouncingly, ‘‘ The judg- ment of the apostolic see, with a council of domestic priests, is far more certain than the judgment of an universal coun- cil of the whole earth without the pope.””* This is the syllogism we propose :— The supreme judge must be infallible ; The pope is not infallible: therefore— The major, the Jesuits, canonists, and courtiers are obliged to prove, it being their assertion; and they do prove it very wisely and strongly. The minor is asserted by the French” doctors ; and they do with clear evidence maintain it. The conclusion we leave them to infer who are concerned. It is in effect Pope Gregory’s argumen- tation: no bishop can be universal bishop (or universal pastor and judge of the * Longe certius est unius apostolice sedis cum concilio domesticorum sacerdotum judici- um, quam sine pontifice judicium universalis concilii totius orbis terrarum.—Pighius de Hier. lib. 6. * Bell. lib. iv. ’ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. church), because no bishop can be infal- lible ; for that the lapse of such a pastor would throw down the church into ruin, by error and impiety. ‘Therefore the universal church (which God forbid !) falls, when he falls who is called univer- sal.*—The state and order of our Lord’s family will decay, when that which is required in the body is not to be found in the head.” , But that he is not infallible, much ex- perience and history do abundantly shew. The ancients knew no such pretender to infallibility ; ‘otherwise they would have left disputing, and run to his oracu- lar dictates for information. They would have only asserted this point against here- tics. Weshould have had testimonies of itfinnumerable. It had been the most fa- mous point of all.7 I will not mention Pope Stephanus universally approving the baptism of heretics against the decrees of the synod of Nice and other synods. Nor pope Liberius complying with Arianism. Nor Pope Innocent I. and his followers, at least till Pope Gelasius, first asserting the Communion of infants” for needful.* Nor Pope Vigilus dodging with the fifth synod. Nor Pope Honorius condemned by so many councils and popes for mo- nothelitism. But surely Pope Leo and Pope Gelasius were strangely deceived when they condemned “ partaking in one kind.”” Pope Gregory was foully out when he condemned images ;” and when he so declaimeth against the title of “ universal bishop ;” and when he avowed himself a subject to the Emperor Mauritius; and when he denied the books of Maccabees to be “ canonical :᾽) and when he asserted the — of holy scripture. Pope Leo . was mistaken, when he did charge his * Universa ergo ecclesia, quod absit, a statu suo corruit, quando is qui vocatur universalis cadit— Greg. M. Epist. iv. 32. Totius familie Domini status et ando nutabit, si quod requiri- tur in corpore, non inveniatur in capite.—P. Leo, Ep. 87. Ἷ In nullo aliter sapere quam res se habet angelica perfectio est.—Aug. de Bapt. Contr. Don. ii. 5. Not to think of a thing otherwise than it is, is an angelical perfection. * P. Gelas. i. Ep. ix. p. 636. ἡ De Consecr. Dist. ii. cap. 12. * Greg vi. 30 ; In Job. lib. xix. cap. 13; xviii. 14. “the worship of| guiltless of this heresy ! Ep vii. 110; ii 62; iv. 32, 36, 38;] cam. Celestinus on infallible predecessor Honorius of mo- nothelitism ; Pope Nicholas was a little deceived, when he determined the “ at- trition of Christ’s body.”* Pope Urban Il. was out, when he allowed it lawful for good catholics to commit murder on persons excommunicate.‘ Pope Inno- cent [V. erred, when he called kings ‘the pope’s slaves.”’t Surely those popes did err, who con- firmed the synods of Constance and Ba- sil; not excepting the determinations in favour of general councils being superior to popes. All those popes have dev- lishly erred, who have pretended to dis- pose of kingdoms; to depose princes ; to absolve subjects of their oaths. Pope Adrian II. did not take the pope to be in- fallible, when he said he might not be judged, excepting in case of heresy ; and thereby excuseth the orientals for anathe- matizing Honorius, he being accused of heresy. There is one heresy, of which, if all histories do not lie grievously, divers popes have been guilty ; a heresy defin- ed by divers popes; the “heresy of simony.”t How many such heretics ‘have satin that chair! of which how many popes are proclaimed guilty with aloud voice in history! ‘* The hand” (says St. Bernard) “‘does all the papal business: shew me a man in all this greatest city who would admit thee to be pope without the mediation of a bribe !”’|| Yea, how few for some ages have been It may be an- swered, they were no popes, because their election was null; but then the * If many popes had been writers, we should have had more errors to charge them with. + Mancipia pape.— Matt. Paris. ann. 1253. t P. Greg. VII. Ep. lib. iii. 7.—Simoniaca heeresis. P. Jul. If. Cone. Lat. Sess, 5. (p. 57.) —lIdem electus non apostolicus, sed apostati- cus, et tanquam heresiarcha, &c. Ibid. Tract. iv. § 12, 16.—Decernimus, quod sed eti- am contra dictum sic electum vel assumptum a simoniaca labe opponi et excipi possit sicut de vera et indubitata heresi || Omne papale negotium manus agunt; quem dabis mihi de tota maxima urbe, qui te in papam receperit pretio non intercedente ?— Bern, de Consid. iv. 2. 4 Gratt. de Consecr. ii. Dist. 11. cap. 42; Grat. Caus. xxiii. qu. 5, cap. 47. * Joh. XXII. Gerson. Serm. in Pasch. Oc- ; Alph. a Castro. Har. i. 4; Bin. tom. vii. p. 994. 276 church hath often and long been without ahead. ‘Then numberless acts have been void; and creations of cardinals have been null; and consequently there hath not probably been any true pope for a long time. In the judgment of so many great di- vines, which did constitute the synod of Basil, many popes (near all surely) have been Ἰωον μὰ ; who have followed or countenanced the opinion that popes are superior to general councils; the which there is flatly declared heresy. Pope Eugenius by name was there declared ** a pertinacious heretic, deviating from the faith.”’* It often happeneth that the pope is not skilled in divinity, as Pope Innocent X. Was wont to profess concerning himself (to wave discourse about theological points ;) he therefore cannot pronounce, in use of ordinary means, but only by miracle, as Balaam’s ass. So pope Inno- cent X. said, that ‘“‘ the vicar of Jesus Christ was not obliged to examine all things by dispute; for that the truth of his decrees depended only on divine in- spiration.”+ What is this but downright quakerism, enthusiasm, imposture ? Pope Clemens Y. did not take himself to be infallible, when in his great synod of Vienna, the question, whether, beside remission of sin, also virtue were con- ferred to infants, he resolved thus very honestly,—‘* The second opinion, which says, that informing grace and virtues are in baptism conferred both upon in- fants and adult persons, we think fit, with the consent of the holy council, to be chosen ; as being more probable, and more consonant and agreeable to the di- vinity of the modern doctors.’’i Which of the two popes was in the right,—Pope Nicholas [V., who decided that our Lord was so poor that he had * A fide devius, pertinax hereticus ——. Concil. Basil. sess. xxxiv. p. 96, 107. + Le pape respondit, que le vicaire de J. C. n’estoit point oblige d’examiner toutes choses par la dispute; que la verite de ses decrets de- pendoit seulement de 1» inspiratione divine.— Memor. Hist. de 5, Propos. Opinionem secundam, que dicit tam parvulis quam adultis conferri in baptismo in- formantem gratiam et virtutes, tanquam pro- babiliorem ac doctorum modernorum theologiz magis consonam et concordem sacro approbante concilio duximus eligendam.—Clem. in Tit. 1. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. right to nothing—or Pope John XXIL, who declared this to be a heresy, charg- ing our Lord with injustice ?* authority superior to any number of sub- jects, however conjoined or congregated ; as a head is above all the members, how- ever comnacted : he is not supreme, who is anywise subject or inferior to a senate, or any assembly in his territory. Therefore the pope doth claim a supe- riority over all councils ;* pretending that their determinations are invalid with-— out his consent and confirmation; that he can rescind or make void their de- crees ; that he can suspend their consult- ations, and translate or dissolve them. And Baronius reckons this as one er- ror in Hincmarus, bishop of Rheims, “that he held as if the canons of coun- cils were of greater authority in the church of God than the decrees of popes, which,” says he, ** how absurd and un- reasonable an opinion it is,” &c.* “Ὁ That the authority of the apostolic see, in all Christian ages, has been pre- ferred before the universal church, both the canons of our predecessors and man- ifold tradition do confirm.”’+ This is a question stiffly debated among Romanists: but the most (as /Eneas Syivius, afterward Pope Pius IL. did acutely observe), with good reason, do adhere to the pope’s side, because the pope disposeth of benejfices, but councils give none. But in truth, anciently the pope was not understood superior to councils ; for ‘“‘oreater is the authority of the world that of one city,”t says St. Jerome. He was but one bishop, that had nothing to do out of his precinet. He had but his * Plane significat majoris esse fauctoritatis in ecclesia Dei canones conciliorum decretis pontificum : hee quam sint absurda et ab om- ni ratione penitus aliena, 4&c.—Baron. ad ann. 992,§ 56; Conc. Later. V. sess. 11, p. 152; Th. ’Cajet. Orat. in Conc. Lat. p. 36. + Apostolic vero sedis auctoritas, quod cunctis seculis Christianis ecclesia prelata sit universe, et canonum serie paternorum, et multiplici traditione firmatur.— P. Gelas. I. Ep. 8. (ο impudentiam !) t+ Major est auctoritas orbis quam urbis.— Hier. et Evag. f Bell. iv. 14. (p. 1318;) Confer Sext. lib. v. tit. 12; cap.3; Extrav. Joh. XXII. tit. xiv. cap. 3-5. € Bellarm. de Concil. ii, 17. . XIV. A sovereign is in dignity and : »ν 1. =, A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. vote in them; he had the first vote, as the patriarch of Alexandria the second, of Antioch the third—but that order neither gave to him or them any advan- tage, as to decision; but common con- sent, or the suffrages of the majority, did prevail. He was conceived subject to the canons no less than other bishops. Councils did examine matters decreed by him, so as to follow or forsake them as they saw cause. The popes them- selves did profess great veneration and observance of conciliar decrees. Pope Leo I. did oppose a canon of the synod of Chalcedon (not pretending his supe- riority to councils, but the inviolability of the Nicene canons), but it, notwithstand- ing that opposition, did prevail. Even in the dregs of times, when the pope had clambered so high to the top of power, this question in great numer- ous synods of bishops was agitated, and positively decided against him, both in doctrine and practice." The synod of Basil affirmeth the mat- ter of these decrees to be a “ verity of the Christian faith, which whoever doth pertinaciously resist, is to be deemed a heretic.”’** Those Fathers say, that “none of the skilful did ever doubt of this truth, that the pope, in things belong- ing to faith, was subject to the judgment of the same general councils that the council has an authority immediately from Christ, which ihe pope is bound to obey.” ‘Those synods were confirmed by popes, without exception of those de- terminations. Great churches, most famous universi- ties, a mighty store of learned doctors of the Roman communion, have re- verenced those councils, and adhered to their doctine. Insomuch that the cardin- al of Lorrain did affirm him to be an heretic in France, who did hold the con- trary. * Veritas catholice fidei, cui pertinaciter re- pugnans est censendus hereticus.— Concil. Bas. sess. 33. + Nec unquam aliquis peritorum dubitavit summum pontificem in his que fidem concer- nunt jadicio eorundem conciliorum universali- um esse subjectum.—Conc. Basil. Decret. p. 117. Concilium habet potestatem immediate a Chris- to, cui papa obedire tenetur ——. Conc. Bas. Sess. 38, p. 101. » Concil. Const. sess. iv. (p. 1003;) Cone. Bass. sess. 2, 33. 277 These things sufficiently demonstrate that the pope canont pretend to suprema- cy by universal tradition ; and if he can- not prove it by that, how can he prove it? Not surely by scripture, nor by decrees of ancient synods, nor by any clear and convincing reason. XV. The sovereign of the church is by all Christians to be acknowledged the chief person in the world, inferior and subject to none ; above all commands; the greatest emperor being his skeep and subject. He therefore now doth pretend to be above all princes.* Divers popes have affirmed this superiority. They are al- lowed, and most favoured by him, who teach this doctrine. In their Missal he is preferred above all kings, being pray- ed for before them. But in the primitive times this was not held; for St. Paul requires every soul to be subject to the higher powers.' Then the emperor was avowed the first per- son, next toGod: ‘To whom” (says Tertullian), ‘“‘they are second, after whom they are first, before all and above all gods. Why? &e. we worship the emperor asa man next to God, and less only than God.”+ And Optatus, ‘Since there is none above the emperor but God who made him.’”,—— ** While Donatus extolleth himself above the emperor, he raises himself as it were above humanity, and thinks himself to be God, and not man. For the king is the top and head of all things on earth.”’t Then even “ apostles, evangelists, pro- phets, all men whoever, were subject to the emperor.’ ‘The emperors did com- mand them, ‘‘even the blessed bishops * As in Israel, Saul was the head.—1 Sam. Bak: + ——a quo sunt secundi, post quem primi ante omnes, et super omnes deos; quidni? cum super omnes homines, qui utique vivunt. —Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. Colimus imperatorem ut hominem a Deo secundum, et solo Deo mi- norem.— Tertul. ad Scap. cap. 2. ¢ Cum super imperatorem non sit nisi so- lus Deus, qui fecit imperatorem.—Opt. 3; vide Ty. v.$ 14. Dum se Donatus super im- peratorem extollit, jam quasi hominum exces- serat modum, ut se ut Deum non hominem wstimaret.—Jd. ihid. Βασιλεὺς yap κορυφὴ καὶ κεφαλὴ τῶν ἐπί τῆς γῆς ἐστιν ἁπάντων.---ΟἾγγ5. ᾿Ανδρ. β΄. Ρ. 403. ' Rom. xiii. 1. ) Chrys. in Rom. xiii. 1. 278 A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. and patriarchs of old Rome, Constantino- ple, Alexandria, Theopolis, and Jeru- salem.”* Divers popes did avow them- selves subject to the emperor. XVI. The confirmation of magistrates, elected by others, is a branch of suprema- cy which the pope doth assume.* Baronius saith that this was the ancient custom ;' and that Pope Simplicius did confirm the election of Calendion, bish- op of Antioch. “ Meletius confirmed the most holy Gregory in the bishopric of Constantino- ple.”’7 But the truth is, that anciently bishops being elected did only give an account of their choice unto all other bishops ; espe- cially to those of highest rank, desiring their approbation and friendship, for pre- servation of due communion, correspond- ence, and peace. So the synod of An- tioch gave account to the bishops of Rome and Alexandria, “and all their fellow ministers throughout the world,” &c. of the election of Domnus after Paulus Samosatenus. So the Fathers of Constantinople acquainted Pope Damasus and the western bishops with the constitu- tion of Nectarius, Flavianus, &c. This was not to request confirmation, as if the pope or other bishops could re- ject the election, if regular, but rather to assure whom they were to communicate with. ‘* We have” (say the Fathers of the syond against Paulus Samosatenus) “‘ signified this (our choosing of Domnus into Paulus’s room), that you may write to him, and receive letters of communion from him.”’||—And St. Cyprian, “ That you and our colleagues may know to * Jubemus igitur beatissimos episcopos et patriarchas, hoc est senioris Rome, et Constan- tinopoleos, et Alexandriz. et Theopoleos, et Hierosoly moram.—Justinian. Novel. cxxiii. cap. 3; P. Greg. M. Ep. ii. 62, supra in pref. § iv. Tract. 5, § 14. + ᾿Ἐδεδαίωσε τῷ θειοτάτῳ Γρηγορίῳ τὴν τῆς Κων- σταντινουπύλεως προεδρίαν. —Theod. ν. 8. t Kai τοῖς κατὰ τὴν “οἰκουμένην πᾶσι συλλειτουρ- ots Euseb. vil. 30. || ᾿Εδηλώσαμέν re ὑμῖν ὅπως τούτῳ γράφητε, καὶ τὰ παρὰ τούτου κοινωνικὰ δέχησθε γράμματα Euseb. ibid. k Vide § 5, Dist. Ixili. cap. 4; P. Nic. I. Ep. Y ann. 482, 6 1. whom they may write, and from who they may receive letters.”* Thus the bishops of Rome themselves” did acquaint other bishops with their elee tion, their faith, &c." So did Cornelius; whom therefore St. Cyprian asserteth as — established by the consent and approba- tion of his colleagues: “ When the place of Peter and the sacerdotal chair was — void, which by God’s will being occupi- — ed, and with all our consents confirm- ed,”’+ &c.—“* and the testimony of our fellow bishops, the whole number οὗ which all over the world unanimously consented.”’¢ The emperor did confirm bishops, as we see by that notable passage in the synod of Chalcedon; where Bassianus, bishop of Ephesus, pleading for himself saith,—‘** Our most religious emperor knowing these things, presently ratified it, and by a memorial published it, con- firming the bishopric; afterwards he sent his rescript by Eustathius, the sil- entiary again confirming it.”’|| XVII. It is ἃ privilege of sovereigns to grant privileges, exemptions, dispensa- tions. This he claimeth ;" but against the laws of God and rights of bishops; against the decrees of synods—against the sense of good men in all times. XVII. It is a prerogative of sovereign power, to erect, translate spiritual presi- dences. Wherefore this the pope claimeth. Cum ex illo, &e.° But at first he had nothing to do there- * Ut scires tu, et college nostri quibus scri- bere, et literas mutuo a quibus vos accipere oporteret Cypr. Ep. 55. (ad Cornel.) + Cum locus Petri, et gradus cathedre sa- cerdotalis vaearet, quo occupato de Dei volun- tate, atque omnium nostrum consensione fir- mato ——. Cypr. Ep. 52. t et coepiscoporum testimonio, quorum numerus universus per totum mundum con- cordi unanimitate consensit.—Jbid. || Τνοὺς δὲ ταῦτα ὃ εὐσεθδέστατος ἡμῶν βασιλεὺς, εὐθὺς τοῦτο αὐτὸ ἐδεδαίωσε, καὶ εὐθέως διὰ ὑπομνησ- τικοῦ ἐδήλωσεν ἐν φανερῷ, βεδαιῶν τὴν ἐπισκοπήν" μετὰ ταῦτα ἀπέστειλε σάκραν πάλιν διὰ Εἰὐσταθίου τοῦ Σιλεντιαρίου βεβαιοῦσαν τὴν ἐπισκοπήν. — Conc. Chale. Act. xi. (p. 404.) = Vide P. Greg. Tract. de Unit. Eccl. " Vide Bern. ° P. Innoc. III. in Greg. Deer. lib. i. fit. 7. cap. 1,—&e. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. . » in, except in hisown province or dio- cese. As Christianity did grow and enter into cities, so the neighbour bishops did ordain bishops there. Princes often, as they did endow, so they did erect episcopal sees, and did, as was suitable, change places. Pope Paschal II. doth by complaining attest to this, writing to the archbishop of Poland, ‘‘ What shall 1 say of the trans- lations of bishops, which among you are presumed to be made, not by apostolic authority, but the king’s command ?””* XIX. It is a great prerogative of sove- reignty to impose taxes on the clergy or le. Wherefore the pope doth assume this ; as for instance that decree of Pope Inno- cent IV. in the first synod of Lyons: * By the common consent of the council we ordain that all the clergy, as well those who are under the authority as the prelates, pay for three years a twentieth part of their ecclesiastical revenues to- wards the assistance of the Holy Land, into the hands of those who shall be thereto appointed by the prudence of the apostolic see.—And let all know, this they are bound faithfully to do under pain of excommunication.”’+ But antiquity knew no such imposi- tions: when the church, the clergy, the poor, were maintained and relieved by voluntary offerings, or obventions. Even the invidious splendour of the Roman bishop was supported by the “ ob- lations of matrons,” as Marcellinus ob- serveth.{ * Quid super episcoporum translationibus Joquar, que apud vos non auctoritate apostoli- ca, sed nutu regis presumuntur?—P Pasch. 1. Ep. 6. Preter authoritatem nostram epis- coporum translationes prasumitis ——. Eadm. Ῥ. 115. + Ceterum ex communi concilii approbati- one statuimus, ut omnes omnino clerici, tam Subditi quam prelati, vigesimam ecclesiarum proventuum usque ad trieunium conferant in Subsidium terre sancte, per manus eorum, qui ad hoc apostolica fuerint providentia ordinati. — sciantque se omnes ad hoc fideliter obser- vandum per excommunicationis sententiam ob- ligatos.— Lugdon. Concil. 1. (anno 1245.) $ Ur ditentur oblationibus matronaruam.— Marcel. 27 ; vide Const. Apost. ii. 25. Nam qui constituerunt vel fundarunt sanctissimas eccle- sias pro sua salute et communis reipublice, 279 This is an encroachment upon the right of princes, unto whom clergymen are subjects, and bound to render tribute to whom tribute belongeth.» SUPPOSITION VII. A farther grand assertion of the Roman party isthis, “ That the papal supremacy is inde- fectible and unalterable.” But good reasons may be assigned, why, even supposing that the pope had an universal sovereignty in virtue of his succession to St. Peter conferred on him, it is not assuredly consequent, that it must always, or doth now belong to him. For it might be settled on him, not abso- lutely, but upon conditions, the which failing, his authority may expire. It might be God’s will that it should only continue fora time. And there are di- vers ways whereby, according to com- mon rules of justice, he might be dis- seized thereof. 1. If God had positively declared his will concerning this point, that sucha sovereignty was by him granted irrevoca- bly and immutably, so that in no case it might be removed or altered, then indeed it must be admitted for such ; but if no such declaration doth appear, then to as- sert it for such is to derogate from his power and providence, by exemption of this case from it. It is the ordinary course of providence so to confer power of any kind or nature on men, as to re- serve to himself the liberty of transfer- ring it, qualifying it, extending or con- tracting it, abolishing it, according to his pleasure, in due seasons and exigencies of things. Whence no human power can be supposed absolutely stable, or im- moveably fixed in one person or place. 2. No powercan have a higher source, or firmer ground, than that of the civil government hath; for all such power is from heaven: and in relation to that it issaid, There is no power but from God ; the powers that are, are ordained reliquerunt illis substantias, ut per eas debeant sacre liturgie fieri, et ut illis a ministrantibus Ψ clericis Deus colatur.—Cod. Lid. i. tit, 3, 42 P Rom. xiii. 7. 280 by God :+ but yet such power is liable to various alterations, and is like the sea, having ebbs and flows, and ever chang- ing its bounds, either personal or local. Any temporal jurisdiction may be lost by those revolutions and vicissitudes of things, to which all human constitutions are subject; and which are ordered by the will and providence of the Most High, who ruleth in the kingdom of men, appointing over it whom he pleaseth ; putting down one, and setting up anoth- er.” Adam, by God’s appointment, was sovereign of the world; and his first- born successors derived the same power from him: yet in course of time that order hath been interrupted, and divers independent sovereignties do take place. Every prince hath his authority from God, or by virtue of divine ordination,, within his own territory; and according to God’s ordinance the lawful successor hath a right to the same authority ; yet by accidents such authority doth often fail totally, or in part, changing its ex- tent. Why then may notany spiritual power be liable to the same vicissitudes? Why may not a prelate be degraded as well as a prince? Why may not the pope, as well as the emperor, lose all, or part of his kingdom ? Why may not the successor of Peter, no less than the heir of Adam, suffer a defailure of jurisdiction ? That spiritual corporations, persons, and places, are subject to the same con- tingencies with others, as there is like reason to suppose, so there are examples to prove :—God removed his sanctuary from Shiloh; Go ye now unto my place, which was in Shiloh, where I set my name at first,» &c. He deserted Jerusalem. He removeth the candlesticks.t He placed Eli (of the family of Ithamar) in the high priesthood, and displaced his race from it; I said indeed (saith God) that thy house and the house of thy fa- ther, should walk before me forever: but now the Lord saith, Be it far from me," &e. John. xix. 11; Rom. xiii. 1—. Dan. v. 21; Psal. lxxv. 7. Jer. vii. 12, 14. * Rev. ii. 5. 1 Sam. ii. 30; 1 Kings ii. 27. ae". A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. - 3. The reason and exigency of things might be sufficient ground for altering an universal jurisdiction ; for when it should — prove very inconvenient or hurtful, God — might order such an alteration to happen, and men be obliged to allow it. As God first did institute one universal monarchy, but that form (upon the mul- tiplication of mankind, and _peopling of the earth) proving incommodious, Provi- dence gave way for its change, and the setting up of particular governments ; to which men are bound to submit: so God might institute a singular presidency of the church; but when the church grew vastly extended, so that sucha govern- ment would not conveniently serve the whole, he might order a division, in which we should acquiesce. 4. It hath ever been deemed reasona- ble, and accordingly been practised, that the church, in its exterior form and po- litical administrations, should be suited to the state of the world, and constitution of worldly governments, that there might be no clashing or disturbance from each to other. Wherefore, seeing the world is now settled under so many civil sovereignties, itis expedient that ecclesiastical disci- pline should be 80 modelled, as to com- ply with each of them. And it is reasonable, that any pretence of jurisdiction should vail to the publie good of the church and the world. That it should be necessary for the church to retain the same form of policy, or measure of power affixed to persons or places, can nowise be demonstrated by sufficient proof, and it is not consist- ent with experience ; which sheweth the church to have subsisted with variations of that kind. There hath in all times been found much reason or necessity to make altera- tions, as well in the places and bounds of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, as of secular empire. Wherefore St. Peter’s monarchy, rea- son requiring, might be cantonized into divers spiritual supremacies ; and as other ecclesiastical jurisdiction have been chop- ped and changed, enlarged or diminish- ed, removed and extinguished, so might that of the Roman bishop. ‘The pope cannot retain power in any state against the will of the prince: he is not bound ee" A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 281 to suffer correspondence with foreigners, | 8. However or whencesover the pope especially such who apparently have had his authority, vet it may be forfeited interests contrary to his honour and the | by defects and defaults incurred by him. good of his people. | If the pope doth encroach on the rights 5. Especially that might be done, if and liberties of others, usurping ἃ law- the continuance of such a jurisdiction less domination, beyond reason and should prove abominably corrupt, or in- | measure, they may in their own defence tolerably grievous to the church. be forced to reject him, and shake off his 6. ‘Thai power is defectible, which ac- | yoke. cording to the nature and course of things, If he will not be content to govern doth sometime fail. otherwise than by infringing the sacred Bui the papal succession hath often | laws, and trampling down the inviolable been interrupted by contingencies (of | privileges of the churches, either granted sedition, schism, intrusion, simoniacal | by Christ, or established by the sanctions election, deposition, &c., as before | of general synods; he thereby depriveth shewed), and is often interrupted by va- | himself of all authority ; because it can- cancies from the death of the incum- not be admitted upon tolerable terms, bents. |without greater wrong of many others 7. If, leaving their dubious and false | (whose right outweigheth his), and with- suppositions (concerning divine institu- | out great mischief to the church, the tion, succession to St. Peter, &c.), we consider the iruth of the case, and in- deed ihe more grounded plea of the pope, that papal pre-eminence was ob- tained by the wealth and dignity of the | Roman city, and by the collation or | countenance of the imperial authority ; then by the defect of such advantages it may cease or be taken away ; for when good of which is to be preferred before his private advantage. This was the maxim of a great pope, a great stickler for his own dignity ; for when the bishop of Constantinople was advanced by a general synod above his ancient pitch of dignity, that pope oppos- ing him did say, that ‘* whoever doth. af- fect more than his due, doth lose that Rome hath ceased to be ihe capital city, ; which properly belongeth to him ;”* the pope may cease to be head of the | the which rule, if true in regard to anoth- church. When the civil powers, which |er’s case, may be applied to the pope; have succeeded the imperial, each in its | For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall respective territory, are no less absolute | be judged ; and with what measure ye than it, they may take it away, if they | mele, it shall be measured to you again.* judge it fit; for whatever power@Was| On such a supposition of the papal en- granted by human authority, by the same croachment, we may return his words may be revoked ; and what the emperor | upon him: “Ii is too proud and immod- could have done, each sovereign power erate a thing to stretch beyond one’s now may do for itself. bounds, and, in contempt of antiquity, to An indefectible power cannot be set- | be willing to invade other men’s right, tled by man; because there is no power |and to oppose the primacies of so many ever extant at one time greater than | metropolitans, on purpose to advance the there is ai another; so that whatever | dignity of one.’’t power one may raise, the other may de-| “ For the privileges of churches, being molish ; their being no bounds whereby brarersio by the canons of the holy Fa- the present time may bind all posterity. | thers, and fixed by the decrees of the ven- However, no human law can exempt ‘erable synod of Nice, cannot be plucked any constitution from the providence of | God; which at pleasure can dissolve | whatever man hath framed. And if the | ghee divested of all adventitious | + Superbum uimis est et immoderatum ul- i ’ Ι . κ Α " power, obtained by human means, he | tra lines proprios tendere, et anuquitate calea- would be lefi very bare; and hardly | ta alicnum jus velle preripere; utque unius would take it worth his while to contend | crescat dignitas, toi metropolitanoruim impug- for jurisdiction. aare primatus . PB. Leo 1. Bp. 55. Vou. Ill. ¥ Matt. vii. 2. * Vropria perdit, qui indebita concupiscit,— P. Leo I. Ep. 54. 36 282 up by any wicked attempt, nor altered by any innovation.”* “ Far be it from me, that I should in any church infringe the decrees of our ancestors made in favour of my fellow priests ; for! do myself injury, if I dis- turb the rights of my brethren.” The pope surely (according to any ground of scripture, or tradition, or an- cient law) hath no title to greater prin- cipality in the church, than the duke of Venice hath in that state: now if the duke of Venice, in prejudice to the pub- lic right and liberty, should attempt to stretch his power to an absoluteness of command, or much beyond the bounds allowed him by the constitution of that commonwealth, he would thereby surely forfeit his supremacy (such as it is), and afford cause to the state of rejecting him ; the like occasion would the pope give to the church by the like demeanour. 9. The pope, by departing from the doctrine and practice of St. Peter, would forfeit his title of successor to him; for in such a case no succession in place or in name could preserve it; ‘* The popes themselves had swerved and degener- ated from the example of Peter.”’t ‘** They are not the sons of the saints, who hold the places of the saints, but they that do their works.”|| Which place is rased out of St. Jerome.) ‘They have not the inheritance of Peter, who have not the faith of Peter, which they tear asunder by ungodly di- vision.”’§ So Gregory Nazianzen saith of Atha- nasius, that ““ he was successor of Mark no less in piety than presidency: the which we must suppose to be properly succession ὉΠ otherwise the mufti of * Privilegia enim ecclesiarum, sanctorum patrum canonibus instituta, et venerabilis Ni- cence synodi fixa decretis, nulla possunt impro- bitate convelli, nulla novitate mutari.—Jbid. + Absit hoc a me, ut statuta majorum con- sacerdotibus meis in qualibet ecclesia infrin- gam, quia mihi injuriam facio, si fratrum me- orum jura perturbo.—Greg. I. Epist. ii. 37. ¢ Pontifices ipsi a Petri vestigiis discesse- rant.—Plat. in Joh. x. (p. 275.) || Non sanctorum filii sunt, qui tenent loca sanctorum, sed qui exercent opera eorum Hieron. ad Heliod. apud Grat. Dist. x\. cap. 2. § Non habent Petri hereditatem qui Petri fidem non habent, quam impia divisione dis- cerpunt.—Ambr. de Pen. i. 6. ¢ Ody’ ἧττον τῆς εὐσεδεὶας, ἢ τῆς προεδρίας διά- A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. Constantinople is successor to St. An — drew, of St. Chrysostom, &c.; the mufti of Jerusalem to St. James. If then the bishop of Rome, instead of teaching Christian doctrine, doth propa- gate errors contrary to it; if, instead of guiding into truth and godliness, he se- duceth into falsehood and impiety ; if, instead of declaring and pressing the laws of God, he delivereth and imposeth pre- cepts opposite, prejudicial, destructive of God’s laws; if, instead of promoting © genuine piety, he doth (in some instances) violently oppose it; if, instead of main- taining true religion, he doth pervert and corrupt it by bold defaleations, by super- stitious additions, by foul mixtures and alloys ; if hecoinethnew creeds, articles of faith, new scriptures, new sacraments, new rules of life, obtruding them on the consciences of Christians; if he conform- eth the doctrines of Christianity to the interests of his pomp and profit, making gain godliness; if he prescribe vain, profane, superstitious ways of worship, turning devotion into foppery and pa- geantry ; if, instead of preserving order and peace, he fomenteth discords and factions in the church, being a make- bait and incendiary among Christians; if he claimeth exorbitant power, and exerciseth oppression and _ tyrannical domination over his brethren, cursing and damning all that will not submit to his dictates and commands; if, instead of nae a shepherd, he is a wolf, worrying. and tearing the flock by cruel persecu- tion: he, by such behaviour, zpso facto depriveth himself of authority and office ; he becometh thence no guide or pastor to any Christian; there doth in such case rest no obligation to hear or obey him ; but rather to decline him, to discost from him, to reject and disclaim him.* This is the reason of the case ; this the holy scripture doth prescribe ; this is according to the primitive doctrine, tra- dition, and practice of the church. For, δοχος ἣν δὴ καὶ κυρίως ὑποληππέον διαδοχήν" τὸ μὲν γὰρ ὁμόγνωμον καὶ budOpovoy τὸ δὲ ἀντιδοξον καὶ ἀντίθρονον Greg. Naz. Or. 91. * Non facit ecclesiastica dignitas Christia- num.—Hier. Ecclesiastical dignity makes not a Christian. Non omnes episcopi episcopi sunt.—Jd. All_bishops are}not bishops. rap’ αὐτοῖς κατάσκοποι, οὐ yap éxloxono..—Athan. Const. Ap. viii. 2. They with them are scouts or spies, not overseers or bishops. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 10. In reason, the nature of any spirit- ual office consisting in instruction in truth and guidance in virtue toward at- tainment of salvation; if any man doth lead into pernicious error or impiety, he thereby ceaseth to be capable of such office : as a blind man, by being so, doth cease to be aguide; and much more he that declareth a will to seduce; for, Who so blind as he that wiil not see 2* No mancan be bound to follow any one into the ditch ;* or to obey any one in prejudice to his own salvation ; to die in his imiquity. Seeing God saith in such a case, μάτην σέθονταί ue, In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the precepts of men.* They themselves do acknowledge, that heretics. cease to be bishops; and so to be popes. Indeed they cease to be Chris- tians; for, ἐξέστραπται 6 τοιοῦτος, * such a one is subverted.” 11. According to their principles, the __ pope hath the same relation to other bish- ops and pastors of the church, which they have to their people; he being pas- tor of pastors: but if any pastor should teach bad doctrine, or prescribe bad practice, his people may reject and diso- -bey him; therefore, in proportion, the pastors may desert the pope misguiding or misgoverning them. In such cases any inferior is exempted from obligation . te comply with his superior, either truly or pretendedly such. 12. The case may be, that we may not hold communion with the pope, but may be obliged to shun him; in which case his authority doth fail,and no man ‘is subject to him. 13. This is the doctrine of the scrip- ture. The high priest and his fellows, un- der the Jewish economy, had no less au- thority than any pope can now pretend un- to; they did sit in the chair of Moses," and therefore all their true doctrines and lawful diréctions the people were obliged to learn and observe ; but their false doctrines and impious precepts they were bound to shun ;+ and consequently * Luke vi, 39.—Mifrt δύναται τυφλὸς τυφλὸν δῥηγεῖμ : t Matt. xvi. 6.—Opare καὶ προσέχετε ἀπὸ τῆς ν Matt. xv. 14. * Ezek. iii. 18 ; Matt. xv. 9. 7 Bell. de P. R. 2, 30. (p. 1083.) * Matt. xxii 2; xv. 6. 283 to disclaim their anthority, so far as em- ployed in urging such doctrines and pre- cepts: "Agete αὐτοὺς, Let them alone, saith our Saviour, they are blind leaders of the blind.* Under the Christian dis- pensation the matter is no less clear: our Lord commandeth us to beware of false prophets ; and to see that no man deceive us ;> although he wear the clothing of a sheep, or come under the name of a shepherd (coming in his mane.‘) St. Paul informeth us, that if an apostle, if an angel from heaven, doth preach be- side the old apostolical docrine (introduc- ing any new gospel, or a divinity devised by himself), he is to be held accursed by us.’ He affirmeth, that even the apostles themselves were not lords of our faith,nor might challenge any power inconsistent with the maintenance of Christian truth and piety: We (saith he) can do nothing against the truth, bui for the truth:* the which an ancient writer doth well apply to the pope, saying, that he * could do nothing against the truth more than any of his fellow priests could do ;”* which St. Paul did in practice shew, when he resisted St. Peter, declining from the truth of the gospel. He chargeth, that if any one doth ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν, leach heterodoxies, we should stand off from him ;+ that if any brother walketh dis- orderly, and not according to apostolical tradition, we should withdraw from him ;t that if any one doth raise divisions and scandals beside the doctrines received from the apostles, we should decline from him ;}} that we are to refuse any heretical per- son.‘ He telleth us, that grievous wolves should come into the church, not’ sparing the flock ;§ that from among Christians there should arise men speaking perverse things, to draw disciples afler them :* Vers. |2. Beware of the doc- ζύμης ἀπὸ τῆς διδαχῆς. and take heed of the leaven trine. * Nec aliquid contra veritatem, sed pro veri- tate, plus suis consacerdotibus potest.— Fac. Hermian, ii. 6, Gal. ii. 11, 14, “Ὅτι οὐκ ὀρθοπο- δοῦσι πρὸς τὴν ἀλήθειαν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου. 11 Tim. vi. 8, ὅ..---Ε τις ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ ἀφίστασο ἀπὸ τῶν τοιούτων. 1 2 Thess. iil. θ0..--τ-οοστέλλεσθαι ἀπὸ παντὸς dded- pot ——. ! Rom. xvi. 17.—'Exedivew ἀπὸ αὐτῶν. § Acts xx. 29.-- εἰσελεύσονται εἰς ὑμᾶς. « Matt. xv. 14. » Matt. vii. 15. * Matt.xxiv.4. | 4 Gal. i. 8, 9. * 2 Cor. i. 24; xiii. 7, 8. f Tit. iii, 10. © Acts xx. 30. (284 but no man surely ought to follow, but to shun them. These precepts and admonitions are general, without any respect or excep- tion of persons great or small, pastor or layman: nay, they may in some respect more concern bishops than others ; for that they declining from truth, are more dangerous and contagious. 14. The Fathers (in reference to this case) do clearly accord, both in their | doctrine and practice. St. Cyprian tell-. eth us, that “a people obedient to the | Lord’s commandments, and fearing God, ought to separate itself from ἃ sinful bishop ;°* that is, from one guilty of such sins which unqualify him for Chris- tian communion, or pastoral charge ; and, “ Let not” (addeth he) ‘* the com- mon people flatter itself, as if it could be free from the contagion of guilt, if it communicate with ἃ sinful bishop ;”+ whose irreligious doctrine or practice doth render him uncapable of commun- | ion; for, ‘* How” (saith he otherwhere) | “can they preside over integrity and continence, if corruptions and the teach- | ing of vices do begin to proceed from them ?” “They who reject the commandment of God, and labour to establish their own tradition, let them be strongly and stout- ly refused anid rejected by you.”’|| St. Chrysostom, commenting on St. Paul’s words, Jf I, or an angel saith, thai St. Paul * meaneth to shew, that dig- nity of persons is not to be regarded | A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. shall speak things contrary, or over all, but if they preach any small m beside the apostolical doctrine, alt the least point whatever, they are lable — to an anathema.’”* WOR | And otherwhere, very earnestly pers ‘suading his audience to render due re- spect and obedience to their bishop, he — 1% — ν- vet interposeth this exception: “ If he hath a perverse opinion, although he be an angel, do not obey him: but if be teachcth right things, regard not his life, but his words.”7 a | “ς Ecclesiastical judges, as men, are for the most part deceived.”¢ “For neither are catholic bishops to _ be assented to, if peradventure in any case they are mistaken, so as to hold anything contrary to the canonical serip- tures of God.”’|| “Tf there be any church which re- jects the faith, and does not hold the fundamentals of the apostolieal doctrine, ‘it ought to be forsaken, lest it infeet others with its heterodoxy.’”’9 If in such a case we must desert any church, then the Roman ; if any chureh, ‘then much more any bishop, particular. ily him of Rome. : This hath been the doctrine of divers popes. “Which not only the apostolical pre- late, but any other bishop may do, viz. discriminate and sever any men, and any place, from the catholic communion, ae- cording to the rule of that fore-condemm ed heresy.’’¢] where truth is concerned : ὃ that “if. one of the chief angels from heaven should corrupt the gospel, he were to be accursed : 4 that “not only, if they * Plebs obsequens preceptis Dominicis et Deum metuens a peccaiore preposito separare se debet.—Cypr. Ep. 68. + Nec sibi plebs blandiatnr, quasi immunis esse a contagio delicti possit cum sacerdote peccatore communicins.—Cypr. ep. 68. + Quomodo enim possunt integritati et con- tinentia praesse, si ex ipsis incipiant corrupte- le οἱ vilioram magisteria procedere?—Cypr. Ep. 62. ! Qui mandatuiwn Dei rejiciunt, et traditio- nem suam statuere conantur, iortiter a vobis et firmiter respuantur.—Cypr. Ep. 40. (p. 73.) § ᾿Αλλὰ δεῖξαι βουλόμενυς, drt ἀξίωμα προσώπων οὐ = tegen ὅταν περὶ ἁληδείας ὃ λόγος j.—Chirys. in Gal. 4 Kav ὧν τῶν πρώτων ἀγγέλων ἦ τις τῶν ἐξ οὐ- pavod, διαφθείρων τὸ κῆρυγμα, ἀνάθεμα Lorw.—)bid. 1.8 * [fai οὐκ εἶπεν, ἐὰν ἐναντία καταγγέλωσιν, ἢ ἀνατρέ: moot τὸ πᾶν, ἀλλὰ κἂν Μικρόν τι εὐαγγελίζων- | ται παρ᾽ ὃ εὐαγγελισάμεθα; κἀν τὸ τυχὸν παρακινή- ' σωσι, ἀνάθεμα é Zerwoav.—Ihid. | 6 Bi μὲν) γὰρ δόγμα ἔχει διεστραμμένον, Kav ἄγγε- Nos ἥ, μὴ or εἰ δὲ ὀρθὰ διδάσκει, ph τῷ βίῳ προ- ] σεχο ἀλλὰ τοῖς ῥήμασι. —Chrys. in 2 Tim. Orat. 2. feclesiastic) judiecs ut homines plerunque ! ΠΥ. ee Aug. Contr Crese. il. 21. || Quio nee eatholicis episcopis consentien= dum est, sicubi forie flluntur, ul contra ¢a- nonicas Dei seripturas aliquid sentiant.—Aug. de Unit. Ecel, cap. 10. § Si quo est ecelesia, que fide respuat, nec apostolice praedicationis fundamenta pos- sideat, ne quam Jahbem pertidiz possil aspergere deserenda est.—Ambr. in Luc. ix. (p. 85.) J Quod non soluin preesuli apostolico facere licet, sed cuicunque, pontifiei, ut quoslibet et quemlibet locum, secundum regulam heereseos ipsius ante damnata, ae: wholica communone discernant.—P. Gelas. 1. Ep. 4. SE . _— A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. “Faith is universal, common to all, and belongs, not only to clergymen, but also to laics, and even to ali Christians.”* * Therefore the sheep which are com- mitted to the cure of their pastor ought not to reprehend him, unless he swerve and go astray from the right faith.”+ 15. That this was the current opinion, common practice doth shew, there being so many instances of those who rejected their superiors, and withdrew from their communion, in case of their maintaining errors, or of their disorderly behaviour ; such practice having been approved, by general and great synods, as also by di- vers popes. When Nestorius, bishop of Constanti- nople, did introduce new and strange doctrine,i “ divers of his presbyters did rebuke him, and withdraw communion from him ;” which proceeding is approv- ed in. the Ephesine synod. Particularly Charisius did assert this proceeding in those remarkable words presented to that same synod: “It is the wish and desire of all well-affected per- sons, to give always all due honour and ‘reverence especially to their spiritual fathers and teachers: but if it should so oo ae tO? 185 said he, ** to whom the Lord did afford to judge about its own pasture.”* St. Jerome did presume to write very briskly and smartly in reproof of John, bishop of Jerusalem, in whose province he a simple presbyter did reside. ** Who makes a schism in the church ὃ we whose whole house in Bethlehem communicate wiih the church, or thou, who either believest aright, and proudly concealest the truth, or art of a wrong belief, and really makest a breach in the church? Art thou only the church? and is he who offendeth thee excluded from Christ ?”’+ Malchion, presbyter of Antioch, dis- puted against Paulus Samosatenus, his bishop. Beatus, presbyter, confuted his bishop Elipandus of Toledo. “But if the rector swerve from the faith, he is to be reproved by those who are under hirm.”’|| 16. The case is the same of the pope ; for if other bishops, who are reckoned successors of the aposiles, and vicars of Christ within their precinct; if other patriarchs, who sit in apostolical sees, and partake of a like extensive jurisdie- happen, that they, who oughi to teach,| tion, by incurring heresy or schism, or shou!d instil unto those who are sei under | committing notorious disorder and \njus- them such things concerning the faith, as | tice, may be deprived of their authority, are offensive to the ears and hearts of all ‘men, then of necessity the order must be inverted, and they. who teach wrong doc- trine must be rebuked of those who are their inferiors.”’|| Pope Celestine I. in that case did com- ‘mend the people of Constantinople de- ‘serting their pastor: “ Happy flock,” * Pides universalis est, omnium communis est, non solum ad clericos, verum etiam ad ja- icos. et ad omnes omnino pertinet Christianos. P. Nich. 1. Ep. viii. p. 506. 7 Oves ergo qu pastori svo coimmisse fne- rint, eum nee reprehendere, nisi 2 recta fide exorbitaverit, debent ——-. WP. Joh. J. Ep. 1. (apud Bin. tom. iii. p. 812.) t Ev τῷ συνεδρίῳ πολλάκις τινὲς τῶν εὐλαδεστά- τῶν πρεσδυτέρων ἤλεγξωαν αὐτὸν, καὶ διὰ τὴν ἀπείθειαν αὐτοῦ τῆς αὐτοῦ κοινωνίας αὑτοὺς ἐξέβαλον Conc. Epi. part. i. p. 220. || Εὐχὴ μὲν ἅπασι τοῖς εὖ φρονοῦσι, τιμὴν ἀεὶ Kat | πρέπουσαν αἰδῶ πνευματικοῖς μάμιστα πατράσι καὶ διδασκάλοις ἀπονέμειν" εἰ δέ που συμβῆ τοὺς διδάσκειν. ὀφείλοντας τοιαῦτα τοῖς ὑπηκόοις ἐνηχεῖν περὶ τῆς mie στεως, οἷα τὰς ἁπάντων ἀκοὰς καὶ καρδίας καταῆλάπ- ret, ἀνάγκη τὴν τάξιν ἀνταλλάττεσθαι, καὶ τοὺς κακῶς διδάσκειν ἑλομένους ὑρὸ τῶν ἡσσόνων διελέγχεςθαι.-τε: Charis. in Cone. Eph. Act. vi. p. 358. so thai their subjects may be obliged to forsake them, then may the pope lose his: fortruth and piety are not affixed to the chair of Rome more than to any other; there is no ground of asserting any such privilege, either in holy scrip- ‘ture or in old tradition; there can no | promise be alleged for ii, having any pro- bable show (ibat of Oravi pro te being a Ἔ Μακάριος δὲ ὅμως ἡ ἀγέλη ἦ παρέσχεν ὑ ἱζύριος | κρίνειν περὶ τῆς ἰδίας vopis.—Celesi. 1. i Cone. | ph. p. 190. + Quis κοί παῖς ceclesiam ? nos quorum om- | ais domus in Bethlehem in ecclesia communi- eal; an tv qui aut bene credis, ei superbe de fide taces, out male ct vere scindis ecclesiam? — An tusolus ecclesia es: 61 ani te offen- derit a Christo excluditur ?—-Hier. Ey. xt. cap. 16, Ep. Ixii. ὁ Malchion disertissimus Aniiochens eccle- sie presbyter, adversus Paulum Samosatenum, , qui Antiochene ecclesim episcopus dogma Ar- iemonias instaurarat, disputavit.—Hieron. in Catal. || Quod sia fide exorbitaverit rector, tune arguendus erit 9 subditis.—J/sid. Hisp. de Offic. iii. 39; vide Thomam. Aq. in 4, Dist. xix. Art. 2 ~~. 286 ridiculous pretence), it cannot stand with- out a perpetual miracle ; there is in fact no appearance of any such miracle; from the ordinary causes of great error and impiety (that is, ambition, avarice, sloth, luxury) the papal state is not ex- empt; yea, apparently, it is more sub- ject to them than any other; all ages have testified and complained thereof. 17. Most eminent persons have in such cases withdrawn communion from the popes; as otherwhere we have shewed by divers instances. 18. The canon law itself doth admit the pope may be judged if he be a here- tic :—‘‘ Because he that is to judge all persons is to be judged of none, except he be found to be gone astray from the faith.”* The supposition doth imply the possi- bility ; and therefore the case may be put that he is such, and then he doth (ac- cording to the more current doctrine an- cient and modern) cease to be ἃ bishop, yea a Christian; hence no obedience is due to him; yea no communion is to be held with him. 19. This in fact was acknowledged by a great pope, allowing the condemna- tion of Pope Honorius for good, because he was erroneous in point of faith: * For” (saith he, in that which is called ihe eighths ynod) ‘although Honorius was anathematized after his death by the oriental bishops, it is yet well known that he was accused for heresy; for which alone it is lawful for inferiors to rise up against superiors.”*+ Now that the pope (or papal succes- sion) doth pervert the truth of Christian A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. those extravagant doctrines and practi ces which the highflying doctors teach, and which the fierce zealots upo occasion do act; for the whole succes. sion of popes of a long time hath most cherished and encouraged such folks, looking squintly on others, as not well affected to them ; but we shall only toue those new and noxious or dangerous po- — sitions, which great synods, managed and confirmed by their authority, have defin- ed, or which they themselves have mag- — isterially decreed ; or which are gene- rally practised by their influence or countenance. . | It is manifest, that the pope doth sup- port and cherish as his special favourites, the ventors of wicked errors; such as those who teach the pope’s infallidility, his power over temporal princes, to cashier and depose them, to absolve sub- jects from their allegiance—the doctrine of equivocation, breach of faith, with heretics, &c.; the which doctrines are heretical, as inducing pernicious practice; whence whoever doth so much as com-— municate with the maintainers of them, according to the principles of ancient Christianity, are guilty of the same crimes. = The holy scripture and catholic an- | tiquity do teach and enjoin us to worship and serve God alone, our Creator; for- bidding us to worship any creature, oF fellow-servant ;» even not angels: “ For I who am a creature will not endure to worship one like to me.”* But the pope and his clients do teach ‘and charge us to worship angels and dead men; yea even to venerate “ the doctrine, in contradiction to the holy | relics and dead bodies of the saints.” scripture, and primitive tradition; that he doth subvert the practice of christian mands; that he teacheth falsehoods, and maintaineth impieties, is notorious in many particulars, some whereof we shall touch. We justly might charge him with all nothing (about the present or future state piety, in opposition to the divine com- | of men, absoluteiy) before the time, til the Lord come, who will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of hearts, and | The holy scripture teacheth us to judge * Κτίσμα γὰρ ὧν οὐκ ἀνέξομαι τὸν ὅμοιον προσκὺυ- * Quia cunctes ipse judicaturus ἃ nemine | vety.—Bas. apud Sozom. vi. 16. est judicandus, nisi deprehendatur a fide devi- | us.—Grat. Dist. xl.cap. 6; vide P. Innoc. III. apud Laun. contra Baron T Kai γὰρ εἰ καὶ τῷ ‘Ovopio ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνατολικῶν μετὰ θάνατον ἀνάθεμα ἐῤῥέθη, ὅμως γνωστόν ἐστιν, ὅτι ἐπὶ αἱρέσει κατηγορήθη. δι' ἣν καὶ μόνον ἔξεστι τοὺς ὑποδεεστέρους τῶν μειζόνων κατεξανίστασθαι.---ϑγῃ. VILL. Act. vii. p. 963. + Similiter et sanctos una cum Christo reg=- /nantes venerandos atque invocandos esse :— ! atque horum reliquias esse venerandas.—Pi IV. Profess. Fid. Bonum atque utile esse 605. invocare sanctorum quoque corpora ——— @ fidelibus veneranda esse. Conc. Trid. xxii. 9; Col. » Matt. iv. 10; Rev. xix. 10; ii. 18; Rom. i. 25. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. then each man shall have praise of God.” But the pope notoriously (in repug- mance to those precepts, anticipating God’s judgment, and arrogating to him- self a knowledge requisite thereto) doth presume to determine the state of men, canonizing them, declaring them to be saints, and proposing them to be wor- shipped ; and on the other side, he dam- neth, curseth, and censureih his fellow- —— «ν. 287 Setrete.: them ;”* so that if the an- cient Fathers should live now, they would live under this curse. The holy scripture, under condition of repentance and amendment of life, upon recourse to God and trust in his mercy, through Jesus Christ our Saviour, doth offer and promise remission of sins, ‘acceptance with- God, justification and ‘salvation ;* this is the tenor of the evangelical covenant; nor did the primi- servants. : ; tive church know other terms. God in his law doth command us not| But the pope doth preach another doc- to bow down ourselves unto any image, trine, and requireth other terms, as ne- or worship the likeness of any thing in cessary for remission of sins and salva- heaven, or earth, or under thg earth;* | tion; for he hath decreed the confession the which law (whether moral or posi- of all and each mortal sin, which a man tive) the gospel doth ratify and confirm, | of recollection can remember, to a priest, charging us to keep ourselves from idols, to be necessary thereto; anathematizing and to fly worshipping of idols,) that is, all who shall say the contrary; although to observe the Second Commandment; | the Fathers (particularly St. Chrysostom the validity whereof the Fathers most | frequently) have affirmed the contrary. expressly assert; and divers of them) The which is plainly preaching another were so strict in their opinion about it, gospel (forged by himself and his abet- that they deemed it unlawful so much as tors), as offering remission upon other to make any image. __ _ |terms than God hath prescribed; and ed ys τὰς ome faa denying ty upon those which Christianity point blank opposition to divine law and | proposeth. primitive doctrine) require us to fal’, He teacheth that no sin is pardoned down before and to worship images. without absolution of a priest. ** Moreover we decree, that the images | He requireth satisfaction imposed by a of saints be especially had and retained priest, besides repentance and new obe- π᾿" that nee etd and frown as wagsch Which is also veneration imparted to them so | another gospel. that by those images which we kiss, and| He dispenseth pardon of sin upon before which we uncover the head and ‘condition of performances unnecessary fall down, we adore Christ, and venerate land insufficient; such as undertaking the saints whose likeness they bear.”+ ἐς pilgrimages to the shrines of saints, yea om satisfied to ΠΣ visiting churches,” making ‘“‘ war upon ecree these unwarrantabie venera- tions, but (with a horrible strange kind | * Siquis autem his decretis contraria docue- of uncharitableness and ferity) doth he | Mt, aut senserit, anathema sit.—ZJdid. : Si quis dixerit in sacramento peenitentie “anathematize those who teach” οὐ απο πω ὦ » . . ad remissionem peccatorum necessarium non think “ any thing opposite to his decrees | esse jure divino confiteri omnia et singula pec- cata mortalia, quorum memoria cum debita et | diligenti premeditatione habeatur —— anath- }ema sit.— Sess. xiv. de Pan. Can. 7. If any * Exod. xx. 4.—O8 ποιήσεις σεαυτῷ εἴδωλον, | one shall say, that in the sacrament of penance οὐδὲ παντὸς ὁμοίωμα ς it is not necessary by divine right to confess + Imagines porro —— sanctorum in tem- plis presertim habendas, et retinendas; eisque debitum honorem et venerationem impertien- —— ifa ut per imagines, quas osculamur, et coram quibus caput aperimus, et procumbi- mus, Christum adoremus, et sanctos quorum ille similitudinem gerunt, veneremur.—Conce. Trid, sess. 25. _* 1 Cor. iv. 5; Rom. xiv. 4. 41 John v. 21; 1 Cor. x. 14, 7; Clem. Alex. Tertul. all and singular mortal sins, the remembrance whereof may be had by due and diligent pre- | meditation, let him be anathema. t Si quis negoverit ad integram et perfectam peccatorum remissionem requiri—coninuonem, confessionem, et satisfactionem — Sess. Xiv. Can. 4. If any shall deny that contrition, confession, and satisfaction, is required, to the entire and perfect remission of sin. * Ezek. xviii.; Luke xv.; Rom. x. 9; Mark i. 15. 288 infidels or heretics, contributing money, | repeating prayers,” undergoing “ corpo- | ral penances,” &c.* which is likewise | to frame and publish another gospel. These doctrines are highly presumptu- ous and well may be reputed heretical. ' God hath commanded that every soul’ should be subject io the higher powers temporal, as to God’s ministers ; so as. to obey their laws, to submit to their! judgments, to pay tribute to them. And: ihe Fathers expound this law to the ut-, most extent and advantage: “If every. soul, then yours; if any attempt to ex- cept you, he goes abont to deceive νου. Τὶ But the pope countermandeth, and exempteth all clergymen from those du- ties, by his canon law ; excommunicating lay judges, who shall perform their office in regard to them. ‘ Because indeed some lay persons constrain ecclesiastics, yea and bishops themselves, to appear before them, and to stand to iheir judg- ment, those that henceforth shall presume to do so, we decree that they shall be separate from the communion of the | faithful.’ The scriptures do represent ihe king (or temporal sovereign) as supreme over his subjects, to whom all are obliged to yield special respect and obedience : the Fathers yield him the same place, above all, next to God; and subject to God alone: the ancient good popes did | acknowledge themselves servants and | subjects to the emperor.” But later popes, like the man of sin in St. Paul," have advanced themselves * Ei qui Hicrosolyman proficiscuniur, et ad Christionam gentein defendendam, et tyranni- dein infidelium debellaudum efitcaciter auxili- um praebnerint, quoram peciaiorum remissio- | nem concedimus ——. Cone. Lot. [. Can. 11. And whoever go io Jerusalein, and powerfully | afford heln to defend Christian people, aud το | subdue the tyranuy of infidels, io them we | gram forgiveness oi their sins ——. + Siomnis et vesirs —— ΟἹ auis reniai CXCi- | pere, conoiur decipere.—Lern. ip. 19 | t Lex cauonica siinpliciter eos eximit.— Bell. de Cler. cap. 1. Sane quia laici quidam | ecclesiasticas personas Θ᾽ ipsos ctiaw episcopos | sno judicio stare compellunt, cos quicde ezetero | id presumpserint, 9 commnnione fideliuin de- | cernimus segregandos.—Conc. Lat. {1]. Can. | 14; Ibid. lL. 15; Steph. VI. Ep. 1. (tom. i. p. | 130 .) Nich. 1. Ep. ὃ. (tom. vi. p. 513.) / ‘Rom. xii, 1L—; Tit. iil, 1; 1 Pet. κἂν azécroxos ——. Chrys. = Tertul. Opt. Cyril. &c. alibi; Greg. Ep. ii. 62; Agatho, &c. » 2 Thess. i. 4, A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. above all civil power; claiming to ! selves asupereminency, not only ¢ rank, but of power, over all Christis princes; even to depose them. ‘“ Ch hath committed the rights both of terrest- rial and celestial government to that bless- _ ed man who bears the keys of eternal life.””* - “If the secular power be believers, — God would have them subject to the priests of the church—Christian emperors ought — j Ι} } {ἘΠ ~~ | ᾿ to submit, and not prefer the execution — of their laws to the rulers of the chureh.”+ _ God by indispensable law hath obliged us to retain our obedience to ihe king, even pagan; charging us under pain οὗ damnation to be subject to him, and uot to resist him ' But the pope is ready upon occasion to discharge subjects from that obligation, to absolve them from their solemn oaths of allegiance, to encourage insurrection against him, to prohibit obedience ᾧ “76 observing the decrees of our holy predecessors, by our apostolical authority absolve those from their oath who were bound by their fealty and oath to excom- municated persons: and we forbid them by all means that they yield them no al- legiance, till they come and make satis- faction.” ι Thus doth he teach and prescribe redel- lion, perjury—together with all the mur- ders and rapines consequent on them: which is a far greater heresy, then if he should teach adultery, murder, or theft [ὦ to be lawful. ‘For they are enjoined — by no authority to perform the allegiance which they have sworn to a Christian — prince, who is an adversary to God and = 3 ATT ic ESE eA * Christus beato.eterne vite clavigero ter- reni simul et celestis: imperii jara commisit— P. Nich. 11. apud Grat. Dist. xxii. eap. 1; Greg. VII. Ep. viii. 21; Caus. xv. qu. 6. cap. vw. + Beculi potestates si fideles sum, Deus, et- clesice sacerdotibus voluit esse subjectas—im- peratores Christiani subdere debeni executiones suas ecclesiasticis preesulibus, non preeferre.— P. Joh. VIII. apud Grat. Dist. xevi. cap. 11. ¢ Nos sanctorum predecessorum nostroram β siatuia tenentes, eos qui excommunicatis fideli- iate aut sacramento constricti sunt, apostolica aucioritate ἃ sacramento absolvimus ; et ue eis fidelitatem observent omnibus modis prohibe- | tus, quousque ipsi ad satisfactionem veniant. —Greg. VII. in Syn. Rom. Grat. Caus. XV. qu. 6, cap. 4. ge BS ee ge Ce al A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. his saints, and contemns their cem- mands.””* Not only the holy scripture,° but com- mon sense doth shew it to be an enormous presumption to obtrude for the inspirations, oracles, and dictates of God, any writ- ings or propositions which are not really such. This the pope doth notoriously, charg- ing us to admit divers writings (which the greatest part of learned men in all ages have refused for such) as sacred and canonical ; anathematizing all those who do not hold each of them for such ;—7 even as they are extant ina translation, not very exact,and framed partly out of Hebrew, partly out of Greek, upon divers accounts liable to mistake ; as its author St. Jerome doth avow. According to which decree, all who consent with St. Jerome, St. Austin, St. Athanasius, &c., with common sense, with the author of the Second of Mac- cabees himself, must incur a curse. What can be more uncharitable, more unjust, more silly, than such a definition? He pretendeth to infallibility, or en- courageth them who attribute it to him; which is a continual enthusiasm, and pro- fane bold imposture. The scripture doth avow a singular reverence due to itself, as containing the oracles of God—. But the pope doth obtrude the oral tra- ditions of his church (divers of which evidently are new, dubious, vain—) to be worshipped with equal reverence as the holy scripture.t ‘ And also receives and venerates, with the like pious re- * Fidelitatem enim quam Christiano princi- pi jurarunt, Deo ejusque sanctis adversanti, eorum precepta calcanti, nulla cohibentur auc- toritate persolvere——. P. Urb. Il. apud Grat. Caus. xv. qu. 6, eap. 5. + Si quis autem libros ipsos integros cum Suis partibus, prout in ecclesia catholica legi consueverunt, et in veteri vulgata Latina edi- tione habentur, pro sacri$ et canonicis non sus- ceperit —— anathema sit.—Conc. Trid. sess. 4. But if any shall not receive for sacred and ca- nonical those whole books, with the parts of them, according as they have been wont to be read in the catholic church, and are had in the old vulgar Latin edition; let him be anathema. Ἐ —— nec non traditiones ipsas ——contin- ua successione in ecclesia catholica conserva- tas pari pietatis affectu ac reverentia suscipit, et veneratur.— Syn. Trid. sess. 4. * Ezek. xiii. 3, &c. Vou. ΠῚ. 37 289 spect and reverence, the traditions them- selves—which have been preserved by continual succession in the catholic church.” Among which traditions they reckon all the tricks and trumpery of their mass service ; together with all their new no- tions about purgatory, extreme unction, &c.— ** He also used several ceremonies, as mystical benediction, lights, incens- ings, garments, and many other such things, from apostolical discipline and tradition.””* The scriptures affirm themselves to be written for common instruction, comfort, edification in all piety; they do there- fore recommend themselves to be studied and searched by all people; as the best and surest means of attaining knowledge and finding truth. ‘The Fathers also do much exhort all people (even women and girls) constantly to read, and diligent- ly to study the scriptures.” But the pope doth keep them from the people, locked up in languages not un- derstood by them; prohibiting transla- tions of them to be made, or used.t The scripture teacheth, and common sense sheweth, and the Fathers do assert (nothing indeed more frequently or more plainly), that all necessary points of faithe and good morality are with sufficient evi- dence couched in holy scripture, so_ that aman of God, or pious men, may thence be perfectly furnished to every work ;% but they ‘contrariwise blaspheme the scriptures, as obscure, dangerous, &c. Common sense dictateth, that devotions should be performed with understanding and affection; and that consequently * Ceremonias item adhibuit,ut mysticas bene- dictiones, lumina, thymiamata, vestes, aliaque id genus multa ex apostolica disciplina et tra- ditione Conc. Trid. sess. xxii. cap. 5, 11, de Sacrif. Miss. + N. P. Pius IV. did authorize certain rules for prohibition and permission of books; in which it is permitted to bishops to grant a fac- ulty of reading the scriptures translated but to this rule there is added an observation, that this power was taken from bishops by com- mand of the Roman universal inquisition.—Ind. Lib. Prohib. aClem VIII. P 2 Tim. iii. 15; Rom. xv. 4; 1 Cor.ix. 10; x. 11; 2 Pet. i. 20; ἐκδρέφους, John v. 39; Acts xvii. 11; Psal. cxix.—; Hier. ad Let. Epitaph. Paul. Vit. Hilar—Chrys. in Colos. Or. 9; Aug. Serm, 55, de temp. 9 2 Tim iii. 17. SS ————— Oe ee Ole 290 they should be in a known tongue : and St. Paul expressly teacheth, that it is requisite for private and public edifica- tion: “‘ From this doctrine of Paul it ap- pears, that it is better for the edification of the church, that public prayers, which are said in the audience of the people, should be said in a tongue common to the clergy and the people, than that they should be said in Latin.”’* All ancient churches did accordingly practise ; and most others do so, beside those which the pope doth ride. But the pope will not have it so, requir- ing the public liturgy to be celebrated in an unknown tongue; and that most Christians shall say their devotions like parrots. He anathematizeth those who **think the mass should be celebrated in a vulgar tongue ;”’7 that is, all those who are in their right wits, and think it fit to follow the practice of the ancient church. The holy scripture teacheth us that there is but one head of the church; and the Fathers do avow no other (as we have otherwhere shewed. ) But the pope assumeth to himself the headship of the church, affirming all ** power and authority to be derived from him into the subject members of the church.”’¢ *‘ We decree that the Roman pontiff is the true vicar of Christ, and the head of the whole church.”’|| The scripture declareth, that God did institute marriage for remedy of incon- tinency and prevention of sin ;* forbid- ding the use of it to none, who should think it needful or convenient for them ;$ reckoning the prohibitation of it among heretical doctrines ;{] implying it to be imposing a snare upon men.** * 1 Cor. xiv. 14.—Ex hac Pauli doctrina habetur quod melius est ad ecclesize edificatio- nem orationes publicas, que audiente populo dicuntur, dici lingua communi clericis et popu- lo, quam dici Latine.—Cajet. in 1 Cor. xiv. + —— aut lingua tantum vulgari missam celebrari debere—anathema sit.—Sess. xxii. Can. 9. , ty ¢ A quo tanquam capite omnis in subjecta membra potestas et authoritas derivetur.—P. Pius 11. in Bull. Retract. || Definimus Romanum pontificem ve- rum Christi vicarium totiusque ecclesiz caput. Defin. Syn. Flor. § Μὴ οὐκ ἔχομεν ἐξουσίαν ;—1 Cor. ix. 5. ΙζΚωλυόντων γαμεῖν"----Ἶ Tim, IV. 3. ** Bodyov ἐπιθάλλειν'---οἱ Cor. vii. 35. * Matt. xix. 11. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. But the pope and his complices do pro- hibit it to whole orders of men (priests, &c.) engaging them into dangerous vows.”’s Our Lord forbiddeth any marriage law- fully contracted to be dissolved, other- wise thanin case of adultery.* But the pope commandeth priests mar- ried to be divorced. ‘* And that marriages contracted by such persons should be dissolved.’”* as He dissolveth matrimony agreed, by the profession of monkery of one of the espoused.? ‘‘If any shall say, that matri- mony confirmed, not consummate, is not dissolved by the solemn profession of re- ligion of either party, let him be anathe- ma.” Our Saviour did institute and enjoin us (under pain of damnation, if we should wilfully transgress his order) to eat of his body, and drink of his blood, in par- ticipation of the holy supper.t The Fathers did accordingly practise, with the whole church, till late times. But ‘notwithstanding Christ’s institu- tion’’|| (as they express it), papal synods do prohibit all laymen, and priests not celebrating, to partake of Christ’s blood ; so maiming and perverting our Lord’s institution: ‘“‘and yet they decline to drink the blood of our redemption.”’§ In defence of which practice, they confound body and blood; and undera curse would oblige us to believe that one kind doth contain the other; or thata part doth contain the whole.¥ * Cuntracta quoque matrimonia ab hujus- | modi personis disjungi.—Conc. Lat. 1. cap. 21, Lat. 11. Trid. Sess. xxiv. Can. 9, —— + Si quis dixerit matrimonium ratum non consummatum, per solennem religionis pro- fessionem alterius conjugum non dirimi, ana- thema sit.— Sess. xxiv. Can. 6. 1 Πίετε ἐξ αὐτοῦ wévres.—Matt. xxvi. 27. ᾿Εὰν pi—ninre αὐτοῦ τὸ αἷμα, οὐκ ἔχετε (whv.—Joh. Vi. 53. || Non obstante.—Conc. Const. Sess. xiii; Conc. Trid. Sess, xiii. cap. 8, Can. 3; Sess. xxi. cap. 4, Can. 3. § This Pope Leo I. condemneth. De Quadr. Serm. iv. (p. 38.)—Sanguinem redemptionis nostre haurire declinant P. Gelasius call- eth the division of the sacrament a grand sac- tilege.—Gratian. in De Consecr. Dist. ii. cap. 12. * Vide Tom. vii. Cone. p. 465; Syn. Trid. sess. xxiv. de Matr. Can. 9. ‘ Matt. v.32; xix. 7; 1 Cor. vii. 10. Y ’ Cone. Trid. Sess. xxi. Can.3; Sess. Xiil. Can. 3. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY, 291 Whereas our Lord saith, that whoso | ing a body at once present in innumera- ealeth his flesh and drinketh his blood: ble places; insensible, &c. divested of hath eternal life;* and consequently : the properties of our body; thereby de- supposeth, that bad men do not partake | stroying his human nature, and in effect of his body and blood ; yet they condemn | agreeing with Eutyches, Appollinarius, this assertion under a curse.* The holy scripture, and the Fathers} after it, commonly do call the elements | of the eucharist, after consecration, bread and wine ; affirming them to re- tain their nature.t But the popish Cabal anathematizeth those who say, ‘‘ that bread and wine do then remain.” “Tf any shall say, that in the holy sacrament of the eucharist the substance | of bread and wine remain—let him be! anathema.”’t The nature of the Lord’s supper doth | imply communion and company; but they forbid any man to say, that a priest | ἐς may not communicate alone ;” so es- | tablishing the belief of nonsense and | contradiction. | The holy scripture teacheth us, that our Lord hath departed, and is absent from us in body ; until that he shall come to judge, which is called his presence ; that heaven, whither he ascended, and where he sitteth at God’s right hand, must hold him till the times of the resti- tution of all. things.|| But the pope, with his Lateran and Tridentine complices, draw him down from heaven, and make him corporally present every day, in numberless places here. The scripture teacheth us, that our Lord is a man, perfectly like to us in all things.§ But the pope and his adherents make him extremely different from us, as hav- * Si quis dixerit tantum in usu, &e.— Trid. Conc. Sess. xiii. cap. 8, Can. 4. t "Aprov rodrov.— 1 Cor, xi. 26; Theod. Ge- as. ¢ Si quis dixerit in sacrosancto eucharistia sacramento remanere substantiam panis et vi- ni anathema sit.—Trid. Conc. de LEuch. Sess. xiii. Can. 2. Si quis dixerit missas in quibus sacerdos solus sacramentaliter commu- nicat, illicitas esse, anathema sit.—Sess. xxii. de Sacr. Miss. Can. 8; Sess. xiii. Can. 8. || 2 Cor. v. 6—; Act. ii. 33; Col. iii. 1. Eis πὸ dinvexis ἐκάθισε.----Ἐ ΘΟ Ὁ. x. 12. Ὃν δεῖ οὐρανὸν déyeo0ar.—Acts ili. 21. ζ "Ὥφειλε κατὰ πάντα τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς ὁμοιωθῆναι .---- Heb. ii. 17. ~ John vi. 54. and other such pestilent heretics. The scripture representeth him born once for us; but they affirm him every day made by a priest, uttering the words of consecration ; as if that which before did exist, could be made; as if a man could make his Maker. The scripture teacheth, that our Lord was once offered for expiation of our sins;* but they pretended every day to offer him up as a propitiatory sacrifice. These devices, without other founda- tion than a figurative expression (which they resolve toexpound in a proper sense, although even in that very matter divers figurative expressions are used, as they cannot but acknowledge), they with all violence and fierceness obtrude upon the belief, as one of the most necessary and fundamental articles of the Christian re- ligion. The scripture teacheth us humbly to acknowledge the rewards assigned by God to be gratuitous and free; and that we, after we have done all, must ac- knowledge ourselves unprofitable ser- vanis.* But the papists curse those who, al- though out of humility and modesty, will not acknowledge the good works of justified persons to be truly meritorious ;° ἐς deserving the increase of grace, eter- nal life, and augmentation of glory :”” so forcing us to use saucy words and phrases, if not impious in their sense. The scripture teacheth one church diffused over the whole world; whereof each part is bound to maintain charity, peace, and communion with the rest, upon brotherly terms. But the Romanists arrogate to them- selves the name and privilege of the only church; condemning all other churches besides their own, and censur- ing all for apostatical who do not adhere to them, or submit to their yoke ; just like * Heb. ix. 26; x. 10, 12, 14.---ἰφάπαξ, μιᾷ προσφορᾷ. « Eph. ii. 8, 9; Tit. iii.5; Rom. ii. 24; Luke xvii. 10. Υ Sess. vi. de Justif. Can. 32. 292 the Donatists, who said that ‘the world had apostatized,” excepting those who upon their own terms did communicate with them; ‘‘only the communion of Donatus remained” the true church.* The holy scripture biddeth us take care of persons pretending to extraordinary inspirations ; charging on the Holy Spirit their own conceits and devices.” Such have been their synods, boldly fathering their decrees on God’s Spirit.— And their pope is infallible, by virtue of inspiration communicated to him, when he pleaseth to set himself right in his chair.— Whence we may take them for bodies of enthusiasts and fanatics: the difference only is, that other enthusi- asts pretend singly, they conjunctly and by conspiracy. Others pretend it in their own direction and defence, these impose their dreams on the whole church. If they say that God hath promised his Spirit to his church, it is true; but he hath no less plainly and frequently prom- ised it to single Christians, who should seek it earnestly of him.* The ancient Fathers could in the serip- tures hardly discern more than two sacra- ments, or mysterious rites of our religion, by positive law and institution of our Saviour to be practised.” But the popes have devised others, and under uncharitable curses propound them to be professed for such ;7 affirming them to confer grace by the bare per- formance of them. Every clergyman and monk is bound by Pius IV. to profess ‘ there are just seven of them;’t and the Trridentine synod ““ anathematizeth all those who do say there are more or fewer ;”|| although the ancients did never hit on that num- ber. * Orbis terrarom apostatavit, et sola reman- sit Donati communio.—Amg. de Unit. 12. + Si sacramenta essent pauciora, magna im- pietas fuisset, et superstitio, &c.— Bell. de Sacr. ji. 25. If the sacraments were fewer, there would have been great impiety and supersti- tion, &c. + Profiteor quoque septem esse proprie et vere sacramenta.—Bulla Pii IV. || Si quis dixerit —— esse plura vel paucio- Ta quam septem anathema sit.— Syn, 7 γιά, sess. vil. Can, 1. « 1 John. iv. 1; Jer. xxix. 8—. * Luke xi. 13; Jamesi.5; 1 Johnii. 27; Heb. viii. 11; Rom. viii. 9. * Actsv.32; Aug. Doctr. Christ. Ep. ad Jen. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. “= Yn - =. ‘“‘ But these our sacraments both con- tain grace, and also confer it upon thos who worthily receive them.”* “_ They require men to believe undera _ curse that each of those were instituted of Christ, and confer grace by the bare performance. | Particularly, they curse those who do not hold ‘matrimony for a sacrament instituted by Christ, and conferring στᾶσα. What can be more ridiculous than to say, that marriage was instituted by Christ, or that it doth confer grace ? Yet with another anathema they prefer __ virginity before it:* and why, forsooth, is — not that another sacrament? And then they must be comparing the worth of these sacraments, condemning those heavily who may- conceive them equal, as being divine institutions. “ΤΠ any shall say that ‘these seven sacraments are so equal one to another that one is in no respect of more worth than another, let him be anathema.” The first, as it seemeth, who reckoned the sacraments to be seven, was Peter Lombard; whom the schoolmen did fol- low; and Pope Eugenius IV. followed them; and afterward the Trent men formed it into an article backed with an anathema. || Upon which rash and peremptory sen- tence touching all ancient divines, we may note :— , - 1, Is it not strange, that ἂπ article οὐ faith should be performed upon an am- biguous word, or a term of art, used | with great variety ? | 2. Is it not strange to define a point, — whereof it is most plain that the Fathers 1 * Hee vero nostra et’continent gratiam, et ipsam digne suscipientibus conferunt. — P. Eug. in Inst. Arm. Si quis dixerit per ipsa nove legis sacramenta ex opere operato, non conferri gratiam anathema sit. — Jbid. Can. 8. | + Si quis dixerit matrimoniam non esse vere ac proprie unum ex septem legis evangelica sacramentis, a Christo Domino institutum —— neque gratiam conferre, anathema sit.—Sess. xxiv. Can. 1 | t Si quis dixerit hac septem sacramenta ita esse inter se paria, ut nulla ratione aliud sit alio dignius, anathema sit.— Sess. vii. Can 3. 1 Nove legis septem sunt sacramenta, ὅσα. —P. Eug. in Instr. Arm. Bellarmine could . find none before him.—Vide de Sacram. ii. 28. ¢ Sess. xxiv. Can. 10. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. were ignorant, wherein they never did agree or resolve anything ὃ 3. Yea, whereof they speak variously. 4. Is it not odd and extravagant to damn or curse people for a point of so little consideration or certainty ? _ 5. Is it not intolerable arrogance and presumption to define, nay, indeed, to make an article of faith, without any _ manner of ground or colour of authority _ either from scripture or the tradition of _ the ancient Fathers?* _ The holy scripture forbiddeth us fo call any man master upon earth, or ab- solutely to subject our faith to the dictates | of any man ; it teacheth us that the apos- _ tles themselves are not lords of our faith, soas to oblige us to believe their own inventions : it forbiddeth us to swallow _ whole the doctrines and precepts of men without examination of them. It forbid- deth us to admit “‘ various and strange doctrines.”’+ But the pope and Roman church ex- act from us a submission to their dictates, admitting them for true, without any further inquiry or discussion, barely upon his authority. ‘* They who are provid- ed of any benefices whatever, having cure of souls, let them promise and swear obedience to the Roman church.”’¢ They require of us without doubt to believe, to profess, to assert innumerable propositions, divers of them new and strange, nowise deducible from scripture or apostolical tradition, the very terms of them being certainly unknown to the primitive church, devised by human sub- tilly, curiosity, contentiousness—divers ‘of them being (in all appearance, to the judgment of common sense), uncertain, obscure, and intricate; divers of them bold and fierce ; divers of them frivolous and vain; divers of them palpably false : * Multa dicuntur a veteribus sacramenta preeter ista septem.— Bell de Sacr. ii. 24. Many things are by the ancients called sacraments besides these seven. ἢ Διδαχαῖς ποικίλαις, καὶ ξέναις μὴ ρεριφέρεσθε. -ττ Heb. xiii. 9. t Provisi de beneficiis quibuscunque curam animarum habentibus in Romane eccle- siz obedientiam spondeant ac jurent.—Conc. Trid. Sess. xxiv. cap, 12, de Ref. —— nec non veram obedientiam summo pontifici spondeant et profiteantur.— Sess. xxv. cap. 2, de Ref. ἃ Matt. xxiii. 8; 2 Cor. i. 24; 1 Thess. y. 21; Col. ii.8 ; Matt. xv. 9. ΨΥ ΌΤΙ ͵ ΜΜΨΨΦΦΠρσσπ ᾽Ψσ““Π ον W 293 namely, all such propositions, as have been taught by their great juntos allow- ed by the pope, especially that of Trent. ** Moreover, all other things deliver- ed, defined, and declared by the sacred canons and ecumenical councils, and especially by the holy synod of Trent, I undoubtedly receive and profess; and also all things contrary thereunto, and all heresies whatsoever condemned, and re- jected and anathematized by the church, I in like manner do condemn, reject, and anathematize—. This is the true Catholic faith, out of which there can be no sal- vation.” This usurpation upon the consciences of Christians (none like whereto was ever known in the world) they prosecute with most uncharitable censures, curs- ing and damning all who do not in heart and profession submit to them, obliging all their consorts to join therein, against all charity and prudence. The scripture enjoineth us to bear with those who are weak in faith, and err in doubtful or disputable matters.* But the popes with cruel uncharitable- ness, not only do censure all that cannot assent to their devices, which they ob- trude as articles of faith ; but sorely per- secute them with all sorts of punishments, even with death itself; a practice incon- sistent with Christian meekness, with equity, with reason, and of which the Fathers have expressed the greatest de- testation. “They have unwoven and altered all theology from head to foot, and of divine have made it sophistical.’’*+ The pope, with his pack of mercenary clients at ‘Trent, did indeed establish a scholastical or sophistical, rather than a Christian theology ; framing points, de- vised by the idle wits of latter times, in- ** Cetera item omni a sacris canonibus et cjcumenicis conciliis, ac praecipue a sacrosanc- ta Tridentina synodo tradita, definita, et de- clarata, indubitanter recipio atque profiteor ; sumulque contraria omnia, atque bwreses quas-~ cunque ab ecclesia damnatas et rejectas et an- athematizatas ego pariter damno, respuo, et anathemauzo,—P. Pi 1V. profess. Hane ve- ram catholicam fidem, extra quam nulla salus esse potest.— hid. + Totam theologiam a capite usque ad cal- cem retexuerunt, et ex divina sophistisam fece- runt.—Erasm. pref. ad Hieron. * Rom. xiv. 1; xv. 1, 7. 294 to definitions and peremptory conclusions, backed with curses and censures: con- cerning which conclusions it is evident, That the apostles themselves would not be able to understand many of them.* That the ancient Fathers did never think anything about them.? That divers of them consist in applica- tion of artificial terms and phrases de- vised by human subtilty.z That divers of them are in their own nature disputable ; were before disputed by wise men; and will ever be disputed by those who freely use their judgment. That there was no need of defining many of them. That they blindly lay about them, con- demning and cursing they know not who, Fathers, schoclmen, divines, &c. who have expressly affirmed points so damned by them. That many truths are uncharitably backed with curses, which disparageth them (seeing a man may err pardona- Ὀ]Υ---πολλὰ γὰρ πταίομεν ἅπαντες), in many things we offend all.‘ For instance, what need was there of defining, what need of cursing those, who think concupiscence to δὲ truly and properly sin,? upon St. Paul’s au- thority calling it so? That ““ Adam presently upon his trans- gression did lose the sanctity and justice in which he was constituted ?”’}| What need of cursing those, who say that men are justified ““ by the sole remis- sion of sins,”’ according to St. Paul’s no- tion and use of the word justification 3" What need of cursing those, who say the “ grace of God, by which we are justified, is only the favour of God ; ἡ whereas it is plain enough that God’s grace there in St. Paul doth signify no- thing else, applied to that case? Or that faith is “nothing else but a * Formaliter justos.— Svss. vi. Can. 10. + Ex opere operato.— Sess. vii. Can. 8. t Character.— Sess. vii. Can. 9. |} Cam mandatam Dei in paradiso fuisset transgressus, statim sanctitatem et justitiam in qua constitutus fuerat amisisse.— Sess. v. Can. § Sess. vi. Can. 11.—Aut etiam gratiam qua justificamur esse tantum favorem Dei. f James iii. 2. ἐξ Sess. v.Can. 5; Rom. vii. » Sess. vi. Can. 1l—. A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. reliance in God’s mercy, remitting sin: for Christ ;"' seeing it is plain that § Paul doth by faith chiefly mean lief of that principal point of the gospel? — Or that good works “ do not cause Ε΄. increase of justification :”* seei St. Paul doth exclude justification by w and it is a free work of God ican of degrees ? Or that after remission of sin inj rH fication “ἃ guilt of paying temporal pain | — doth abide δ᾽ ἢ Or that a man cannot “ by his works merit increase of grace, and glory, and eternal life ;') seeing a man is not to be blamed, who doth dislike the use of so saucy a word; the which divers good men have disclaimed ? What need of cursing those who do not take the sacraments to be “ precisely seven ?” or who conceive that some one of their seven may not be “truly and properly” a sacrament; seeing the word sacrament is ambiguous, and by the Fathers applied to divers other things, and defined generally by St. Austin, signum rei sacre ;t and that before Peter Lombard ever did mention that number. What need of damning those, who do conceive the sacraments equal in digni- ty ἢ" What need of defining, that sacra- ments do confer grace ex opere operato Ὁ" which is an obscure scholastical phrase. What need of cursing those, who say that a ‘“‘ character is not impressed in the soul” of those who take “ baptism, confirmation, or orders ;”|| seeing what this character is (or “ this spiritual and indelible mark : ὁ) they do not them- selves well understand or agree ? What need of cursing those, who do not think that the validity of sacraments (and consequently the assurance of our * Sess. vi. Can. 24.—Non autem ipsius aa- gendz causam + Ut nullus remaneat reatus pene tempora- lis exolvende Sess. vi. Can. 30. Sess. xiv. de Penit. Can. 15. t De sacramentis. Si quis dixerit —— esse plura vel pauciora quam septem.—‘Séss. Vil. Can. 1. || Non imprimi characterem in anima.— Sess: vii. Can. 9. ‘ ὁ Hoc est signum quoddam spiritualle, et in- delebile.— Ibid. i Sess, vi. Can. 12. k Sess. vii. Can. 3. } Sess. vi. Can. 32. ! Sess. vii. Can. 8. — | | being Christians) dependeth on the in- oe of the minister ὃ" | What need of cursing those, who think that a pastor of the church may change the ceremonies of administering the sacrament ;" seeing St. Cyprian of- ten teacheth, that every pastor hath full ‘authority in such cases within his own πε: ᾿ What need of defining the Second Book of Maccabees to be canonical,° against the common opinion of the Fathers (most expressly of St. Austin himself), of the most learned in all ages, of Pope Gelasius himself (in Decret.), which the author himself (calling his work an epitome, and asking pardon for | ™ Sess. vii. Can. 11. 5. Sess, vii. Can. 13. 4 Sess. iv. | | ' | / { | | | ᾿ ᾿ A TREATISE OF THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 295 his errors) disclaimeth, and which com- mon sense therefore disclaimeth ?* Their new creed of Pius IV. contain- eth these novelties and heterodoxies :-— 1. Seven sacraments. 2. Trent doctrine of justification and original sin. 3. Propitiatory sacrifice of the mass. 4. Transubstantiation. 5. Communicating under one kind. 6. Purgatory. 1. Invocation of saints. 8. Veneration of relics. 9. Worship of images. 10. The Roman church to be the mother and mistress of all churches. 11. Swearing obedience to the pope. 12. Receiving the decrees of all synods, and of Trent. * Fidem minutis disseeant ambagibus Ut quisque lingua nequior, Solvunt ligantque questionum vincula Per syllogismos plectiles ——. Prudent.in Apotheos. SYNOPSIS OF THE TREATISE ON THE POPEH’S SUPREMACY. The ensuing analysis of Barrow’s disquisition on the Pope’s Supremacy was com- piled by Dr. Hughes; and as it includes in a condensed form the cardinal principles and arguments of the entire Treatise, it was deemed advisable to append it to the original work. The Student of this important Controversy, will find, by the use of it, his acquaintance with the topics in controversy essentially facilitated. INTRODUCTION. I. Boast of the Roman party in the points of unity, certainty of doctrine, decision of controversies, &c. Yet in matters of great importance it is hard to descry how they agree, or of what they are certain. Many of their laws and rites shown to have been drawn from di- verse authorities. Disagreement among the Roman doctors concerning the na- ture and extent of papal authority ; so that in the Council of Trent the agita- tion of that question was not permitted : reasons of this. II. There are among them some, who ascribe to the Pope an universal, abso- lute empire, over all persons and in all matters, conferred on him by Divine im- mutable sanction. Authors quoted, who acknowledge this power. III. The opinion of Bellarmine, giv- en as the general opinion of Catholics, does not differ in effect from this, though veiled and disguised by words. IV. Such an universal power hath been claimed by divers Popes, succes- sively, for many ages. Instances quoted at great length. V. This doctrine may reasonably be supposed the sentiment of all Popes con- tinually for more than five hundred years to the present day. Reasons for this alleged. VI. All Romanists, consistently with their principles, seem obliged to hold it: this shown. | VII. Yet so loose and slippery are the principles of the party, that many in communion with the Roman Catholic Church will not allow this doctrine of the Pope’s universal and absolute pow- er: this point enlarged on. , VIII. Neither are the adherents of the Roman Church more agreed concerning the extent of the Pope’s authority, even in spiritual affairs: this shown. IX. No wonder that their doctrine in this matter is various and uncertain, since interest is concerned in it, and principles are defective towards the reso- lution of it. X. Even Popes themselves have shift- ed their pretences, and varied in style, according to circumstances, &e. : shown. XI. Hence a statement of this ques- ΠΥ ον ΡΟ THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. tion is not difficult, and the mark to _ which'this discourse should be levelled is ᾿ plain. XII. But on account of the preceding _ observations, all discussion of the Pupe’s temporal dominion is omitted; his ec- _clesiastical authority alone being can- Ι vassed. XIII. And here the doctrine contested _ against is that in which the cordial par- _ tisans of the Papacy, &c. do seem to con- _ sent. XIV. This doctrine of absolute pow- er explained, in the words of the Flor- entine Syned’s definition, &c. XV. It is known that many within / _ the Roman communion contract the Pa- pal sovereignty within narrower limits : the doctrine of many such stated. XVI. Nevertheless, the former opin- ion seems to be the genuine doctrine of _the Roman,Church, if it has any: this enlarged on. “be XVII. No distinct regard therefore will paid to the opinion of these semi-Ro- led at the Pope, as he pretends to be, ab- | manists, exceptin part. Discourse level- solute in authority. have reason to require sufficient grounds: | XVIII. Of such vast pretences we this shown. XIX. Such demands they cannot | | wholly baulk, and therefore they call in St. Peter; which plea of theirs involves _ the following main suppositions ; " ἡ I, That St. Peter had by our Lord’s appointment a primacy over the Apos- ἢ 88. _ IL. That St. Peter’s primacy, with its tights and prerogatives, was not person- al, but derivable and transmitted to his successors. __ If. That St. Peter was bishop of Rome. ᾿ | IV. That St. Peter did continue bish- op of Rome afier his translation, and was so at his decease. V. That the bishops of Rome (accord- ing to God’s institution, and by original | right derived thence) should have an uni- versal supremacy and jurisdiction over the Christian Church. VI. That in fact the Roman bishops continually from St. Peter’s time have -enjoyed and exercised this sovereign power. | Von. Il. 38 297 VII. That this power is indefectible and unalterable. TREATISE. Matruew, Cuap. X. Verse 2. Importance of thiscontroversy. The suppositions on which it rests on the side of the Romanists stated. SUPPOSITION I. In order to the resolution of this point, we may consider that there are several kinds of pri- macy: these enumerated, and the title which . Peter might have to each. 1. A primacy of worth, or personal ex- cellency. Various personal endowments, natural and moral, enumerated, in which it may be granted that St. Peter possess- ed this superiority over the other disci- ples ; though one afterwards arose who can hardly be called inferior to him. 2. A primacy of repute; which St. Paul means in Gal. ii. 2, 6, 9; 2 Cor. xi. 5, &c. Norcan this advantage, con- sequent, on the preceding, be refused him. 3. A primacy of order, or bare digni- ty. This probably may have been con- ceded to him for use and convenience. Various reasons for this probability stat- ed. 4. A primacy, importing superiority in power, command, or jurisdiction. This asserted by the Romanists: but we have great reason to deny it, from the following considerations: that such a power ought to be conspicuously and clearly instituted, &c.: there is no ex- press mention of it; no time for its insti- tution can be assigned: it would proba- bly have been indicted by some title or name : there was indeed no office above that of an Apostle known to the disci- ples, or the primitive church: our Lord himself several times declared against such superiority: in serveying particu- lars we shall not find any peculiar juris- diction, &c. conferred on St. Peter, which was not on the other Apostles— no intimation of it in the Catholic Epis- 298 tles of St. Peter—none in the apostoli- cal history—none in any incidental con- troversies relating to doctrine or practice, where we should expect an appeal made to him: the proceedings of the Apos- tles in converting people, in founding churches, and in administering special affairs, exclude it; nature of the apos- tolical office, state of things, and man- ner of St. Peter’s life; whence he will appear incapable, or unfit to manage such a jurisdiction: it was requisite that every Apostle should have a complete, absolute, independent authority in the affairs of his office; in particular, the discourse and behaviour of St. Paul to St. Peter” shows that he acknowledged no dependence on him. If St. Peter had been appointed sovereign of the Church, it seems requisite that he should have outlived all the other Apostles. On the same grounds with St. Peter, other Apostles might have challenged a superiority over their brethren, ὅσο. The Fathers both in express terms, and by inference, assert the co-equality of the Apostles: none of them mention the su- periority of St. Peter. The last argu- ment here used against this primacy is the insufficiency of those arguments and testimonies which are produced to prove it. I. The words of our Saviour are al- leged. Thou art Peter, &c.: where, it is said, St. Peter is declared to be the foundation, that is, the sole supreme governor of the church. . Answers to this given; by which it is shown, 1. that those words are metaphorical, &c.; which sense, 2. is confirmed by the Fa- thers and ancient divines: 3. that the Apostles did not understand them lite- rally: 4. that a literal interpretation does not suit our Lord’s answers to the contests and inquiries of his disciples : δ. that even literally the words a rock do not imply government: 6. it is not said that the Apostles or apostolical office should be built on him: 7. if St. Peter himself be taken for the rock, then the best import of the words is, that our Lord designed him for a prime instrument in the support and propaga- tion of the gospel: 8. St. Peter, before these words were spoken by our Lord, may seem to have had a primacy, inti- THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. mated by the Evangelists, &¢.; therefore it cannot be founded on place. 3 Il. The next words, spoken in the se- quel by our Lord, are alleged ; to thee will I give the keys, &c.; that is, su- preme power over the Church. 2 To this divers answers are given: I. these words are figurative: 2. they ad- mit and have admitted various interpr tations: 3. the Apostles did not so un- derstand them: 4. they cannot be tak- en asexcluding others: 5. the Fathers affirm that all the Apostles received t same keys: 6. whatever the phrase im ports, itis shown plainly to have be longed to them all: 7. many of the Fathers suppose the words apply to ᾧ Peter, ποῖ asa single person, but as a representative of the Church: 8. these answers confirmed by the words which immediately follow: 9. if‘we grant any thing peculiar to St. Peter, it can only be that he should be a prime instrument in propagating the gospel, &c.: 10. itis absurd that he should exercise this power of the keys in respect of the Apostles: 11. the words explained by a referen to Luke v. 10. and Matt. iv. 19. ΠΠ. Those words of our Saviour + also produced, feed my sheep ; that is, be universal governor of my Church. — To this allegation it is answered, 1. these words might have properly been said to any Christian pastor; no pe culiar privilege to St. Peter therefore can be deduced from them: 2. from mm- definite words, a definite conclusion can- not be drawn: 9. by them no new power is assuredly instituted by Ὁ Lord; for the Apostles had a similar command before: 4. they seem only ad- monitory or exhortative: 5. the Ὁ office which they express belonged e¥i- dently to all the apostles: 6. St. Peter's charge could not be more extensive than that of the others: this shown: 7." words are applicable to all Christian bishops and governors of the Church: opinions of the Fathers: 8. the therefore were not the apostles, but the common believers or people of God, called by St. Peter the flock of orn 10. take feeding for what you please, Apostles were not fit objects of it: if St. Peter was obliged solely to feed - oo as. 4 THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. all Christ’s sheep, he must have had an i: possible task. | ἷν . The Romanists, in confirmation of this doctrine, produce a shoal of tes- timonies to divers prerogatives, as they are called, of St. Peter. These enume- rated ; forexample, his change of name; his walking on the sea; his myaculous draught of fish, &c. &c. These an- ‘swered by similar ones indicating the primacy of St. John. _ VY. They argue from the constant placing of St. Peter’s name before the other Apostles in catalogues and narra- \tions concerning him and them. Answers: 1. this order is not so strict as to admit no exceptions: 2. still position of names does not imply de- gree, or superiority of power: 3. other ‘sufficient causes have been assigned why St. Peter had this place. | VI. Farther and most plausibly, they allege the titles and eulogies given to St. Peter by the Fathers: such enu- merated. Answers : 1. we might say that we are not accountable for all their flourishes, ὅχο.: 2. such are not found in the more ancient Fathers: 3. they are ambigu- ous, and applicable to any kind of su- |premacy: 4. and so they are sometimes ‘explained by the writers themselves: 5. ‘moreover, those that give these titles to St. Peter expressly declare other Apos- ‘tles equal to him in power and dignity : 6. if Leo I. or any other ancient Pope, seems to mean farther, we may except against his opinion as. singular, and ‘partial towards his see: 7. the ancients, when their subject allures them, adorn ‘other Apostles with like titles: instances “quoted. SUPPOSITION 11, That St. Peter’s primacy, with its rights and prerogatives, was not personal only, but de- rivable to his successors. Admitting St. Peter’s primacy, the | rest does not follow. A rule of the Canon Law; that a personal privilege follows the person, and és extinguished with the person: and such is that of St. Peter: for, 1. His primacy was grounded on 299 personal acts, personal graces, gifts, en- dowments, &c. 2. All pretence of primacy granted to St. Peter is grounded on words directed to his person, characterised by most per- sonal adjuncts, &c. 3. Particularly the grand promise of founding the church on him cannot reach beyond his person. 4, The apostolical office, as such, was personal and temporary, and there- fore not successive, &c. 5. Accordingly, since the other Apos- tles, as such, had no successors, so any primacy of St. Peter did cease with him. 6. If some privileges of St. Peter were derived to Popes, why were not all ὁ 7. Answer to the objection that the Fathers ‘commonly call. bishops succes- sors of the Apostles. 8. It may be said that not one single bishop, but all bishops together do suc- ceed St. Peter, or any other Apostle. 9. This the notion which St. Cyprian so much insists on. Also the Synod of Carthage, and St. Chrysostom; who says that the sheep_of Christ were com- mitted to him by St. Peter, and to those after him. 10. Such, and no other power, St. Pe- ter might devolve on any bishop ordain- ed by him in any church; and such did the other Apostles communicate. 11. Consequently, in those churches, whereof the Apostles were never account- ed bishops, yet the bishops are called successors of the Apostles, &c. 12. 'The pretence, that the other Apos- tles had an extraordinary charge, which had no succession, but that St. Peter had a peculiar one, as pastor of the whole church which survives, is shown to bea mere figment or shift. 13. If such power had existed, we should have had some authentic record of the same. 14. It would also surely have been mentioned in the Fathers. SUPPOSITION III. That St, Peter was Bishop of Rome. This may with great reason be deni- ed: and it may be said, 1. That St. Peter’s being bishop of Rome would confound the offices which God made distinct. 2. The offices of Apostle and bishop shown to be not in their nature consist- ent. 3. It would not have been decorous in St. Peter, the prime Apostle, to have as- sumed the charge of a particular bish- op. 4. It was not likely that St. Peter, sensible of a superior charge belonging to him, would have undertaken an infe- rior one. 5. His general charge of converting and inspecting the Jews dispersed over the world, would not well agree with the other. 6. The consideration of his life will show him incapable of this office. 7. It was needless that he should be bishop, as he might, whenever he was at Rome, by virtue of his Apostleship, exercise episcopal authority. 8. Had he been such, he would have set a bad example of non-residence, &c. 9. He would also have offended against many other good ecclesiastical rules. 10. It was against rule that a bishop of one church should be bishop of anoth- er. NowSt. Peter is admitted by Ro- manists to have been bishop of Antioch for seven years together. 11. It was anciently deemed a very irregular thing, and denounced by syn- ods and Popes, that there should be two bishops of one place. But the same au- thority which makes St. Peter bishop of Rome reckons St. Paul bishop of the same: this shown. SUPPOSITION IV. That St. Peter did continue bishop of Rome af- ter his translation, and did continue so to his decease. Against which assertions the follow- ing considerations are offered. 1. Ecclesiastical writers affirm that St. Peter (either alone, or together with St. Paul) did constitute other bishops ; wherefore he never was bishop, or did not continue bishop there : instances giv- en. Y. Even on the supposition that he THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. νι was bishop, he could not well lay a his office and subrogate another, accord- ing to the ancient rules of discipline: this shown. ~~ 3. Supposing him to have been bish- op once, yet by the constitution of Lin- us, or Clemens in his place, he ceased to be so,gnd divested himself of his of- fice. 4. In fine, when St. Peter ordained others, either he did retain the episcopa- cy, and then there were concurrently di- vers bishops of Rome at the same time, or he did finally relinquish the office himself. 5. To avoid all which difficulties, it is reasonable to understand those ancient authors, who call St. Peter bishop of Rome, as meaning that he was bishop or superintendent of that Church ina large sense: this explained. 6. This notion confirmed by divers observations. 7. It is also remarkable that in the recensions of the Roman bishops, some- times the Apostles are reckoned in, some- times excluded: instances given. 8. Divers churches were called Apos- tolical Thrones, or Chairs, not because the Apostles did sit as bishops there, but for other reasons mentioned: instances given. | 9. The author of the Apostolical Con- siitutions, reciting the first bishops of several churches, does not reckon any of the Apostles. 10. Again, any Apostle, wherever he resided, was qualified by his office to preside there and exercise a full author- ity: it was needless therefore for him to take the character of a bishop.. . 11. It may possibly be alleged that St. James, our Lord’s near kinsman, al- though he was an Apostle, was made bishop of Jerusalem, &c. Answers to this objection. SUPPOSITION V. That by consequence, the bishops of Rome, ac- cording to God’s institution, and by original tight derived thence, should have an univer- sal supremacy and jurisdiction over the Christian Church. This assertion shown to be very un- THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. certain, or rather most false, by various considerations. Ϊ " 1 ooo 1. If any of the former suppositions be uncertain or false, this, standing on such ground, must partake of the same defects. ᾿ 2. Even admitting all those supposi- tions, the inference from them is not as- suredly valid. Even if St. Peter had an universal supremacy, this at his de- cease might be transferred to the eccle- siastical college of bishops, and of the church whilst his episcopal and inferior authority over the province of Rome was transmitted to his followers in that chair. 3. And that such was the case is the general opinion of the ancient Fathers, councils, &c. ' 4, The bishops of any other churches founded by the Apostles, in the Fathers’ style are successors of the Apostles, just as the bishop of Rome is by them ac- counted successor of St. Peter; yet they never claimed jurisdiction beyond their provinces. . δ. This instanced in the case of St. James, bishop of Jerusalem, and his successors. : 6. St. Peter, before he came to Rome, probably founded other churches, as An- tioch was anciently his see. Why then might not the elder bishop of Antioch pretend to succeed St. Peter in his uni- versal supremacy ? 7. It is said that the ground of this reference in the case of Rome, was St. eter’s will; but where is that will to be found ? 8. Bellarmine asserts that God did command St. Peter to fix his see at Rome ; but the proofs of this are weak and ridiculous. 9. Antioch indeed has a fair plea; for it ever held the repute of an Apos- tolical church ; and on that score some deference was paid to it: but would this have been done if St. Peter had trans- ferred his see and all its prerogatives to another place ? 10. Other persons also might have been found, who, according to equal judgment, had a far better title to, suc- ceed Peter in his universal supremacy than the Pope; St. John, for example, or any other Apostle. 11. The bishop of Jerusalem in par- 301 ticular, might have put in his claim as being successor to our Lord himself, &c. 12. Equity itself would rather have required that a successor, by election of the whole church, should have been ap- pointed, &c. 13. If God had designed this deriva- tion of universal sovereignty, it is pro- bable that he would have prescribed some certain, standing rule of election, χε. 14. From the premises, to conclude the Pope’s title to St. Peter’s authority, it is requisite to show that the power demised by him is according to God’s institution’ and intent, immutable and indefectible. 15. That God did intend his Church to subsist perpetually united in any one political frame of government, is assum- ed by the Romanists, but not proved. 16. Really the sovereign power (such as is pretended) hath often failed; and for a long time there have been no Ro- man bishop at all; which is a sign that the Church may subsist without it: in- stances quoted. Some arguments are next levelled at the main conclusion of the Romanists. J. Their pretence is destitute of any good warrant, either from divine or hu- man testimony: this shown from vari- ous considerations :— 1 The want of God’s declared will, &c. 2. Such institution unnoticed by the Evangelists. 3. No precept relat- ing to it in Scripture. 4. They who so carefully exhort men to honour and obey the temporal authority, why do they forget the spiritual? 65. Neglect of St. Peter in particular, who was most interested. 6. Also of St. Paul. 7. How comes it even that tradition is here so defective ? 8. Also ecclesiasti- cal history? 9. Why is it inserted in no ancient summary? 10. Why in no ancient exposition of the Creed, no catechetical discourse of Cyril, Ambrose, &c., no system of Divinity by St. Aus- tin, Lactantius, &c.? 11. Why is this point defined by no ancient synod ? 19, If it had been so, it would not have been overlooked by the negligence of Popes. 13. Whereas some perons disclaimed this authority, why are not such reckon- ed in the large catalogues of hereticks ? 14. Is it not strange that no Pagans 302 should loudly exclaim against it? Rea- sons why it would be likely to move their indignation. 15. One would wonder that Constantine, if he had smelt such a doctrine in Christanity, should have been so ready to embraceit. 16. Absence of it in the Apostolical Canons, and the Constitutions of Clement. 17. Not mentioned by the old writer, under the name of Dionysius the Areopagite. 18. Nor by Ignatius. 19. We have many letters from and to Popes, in which it is not assumed, nor given. 20. Not mentioned in the epistle of Clemens Romanus. 21. Nor in the epistles of St. Cyprian to several Popes, or in those of many others here quoted. 22. Neither is it brought forward in disputes managed by the. Fathers against here- ticks. 23. And though many of those Fathers purposely treat on methods of converting hereticks, it is strange that none of them hit on this method of de- ciding points in question. 24. Tertul- Jian in such cases recommends the au- thority of the Churches, but not this: 25. Both he and Ireneus produce the Roman Church asa principal authority ; but what is this to its bishop’s judicial power? 26. Even Popes themselves in elaborate tracts against hereticks content themselves with urging testimonies of Scripture and arguments thence deduced, but never their own definitive authority. 27. Itis matter of wonder, if the Pope were such as he is represented, that this supreme power of his should not be no- ticed in so many bulky volumes of ec- clesiastical writers. 28. It is monstrous that there should not be one canon, in the code of the Catholic Church, direct- ly declaring his authority. Ij. It is next shown that this pretence, on several accounts, is contrary to the doctrine of Holy Scripture. 1. It thwartsthe Scripture, by assign- ing to another the prerogatives and pe- culiar titles appropriated therein to our Lord: instances given. 2. It accords not with Scripture, in that it transforms the Church from ἃ spiritual society, as it was consituted by God, into a world- ly frame of policy, &c. 3. It thwarts Scripture by destroying that brotherly co-ordination and equality which our Lord appointed among the bishops and chief pastors of his Church: 4. also by THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. not only trampling down the dignity ς bishops, but infringing the rights gra ed by our Lord to his Church, and to its governors: this shown. 9. Also by robbing all Christian people of the lib- erties and rights with which by the di- vine charter of Scripture they are en- dowed, and which they are obliged to keep inviolate: this explained. 6. In particular it thwarts Scripture by wrong- ing princes, and pretending to govern their subjects without their leave, &c. III. Farther, since the Romanists little regard any allegation of Scripture against them, it must still be observed that this their pretence crosses also tra- dition, and the common doctrine of the Fathers. For, ©. 1. Common usage, (which is a good’ interpreter of right) shows that no such right was known in the primitive church. 2. Its state indeed did not allow of such. 3. The Fathers supposed no or- der in the church, by original right or divine institution higher than a bishop: this shown and enlarged on, IV. Moreover, this pretence may be impugned by many abstract arguments, showing that such an authority could not be practicable without much iniqui- ty and injury to the interests of religion and the welfare of mankind. I. The Christian Church (especially in the extended limits which we expect it to obtain) is far too immense and un- wieldly for the inspection and guidance of one person: this fully shown. 2. Such an authority as this pretence claims, must necessarily, (if not with- held by continual miracle) throw the Church into sad bondage: this explain- ed. 3. It would also necessarily pro- duce ἃ depravation of Christian doctrine, in the promotion of its worldly designs and interests. 4. Such errors in doc- trine, and miscarriages in practice,would be established immovably, to the irrevoc- able oppression of ‘truth and piety: there would exist no hope of reforma- tion. 4. This authority would also pro- duce a general depravation of manners: 6. which it would moreover perpetuate, thereby rendering the state of things incorrigible. 7. It would also . spoil him in whom it was seated, corruptin his morals, and rendering him a scand to religion. 8, This pretence on many _— a a ee eee obvious accounts, is apt to create great mischief in the world, to the disturb- ance of civil societies, and to the de- struction of temporal authority, which is certainly of God’s ordinance: this fully shown. 9. Consequently it is apt to engage Christian princes againts Christianity. 10. Whereas Christen- dom is now split into many parcels, sub- ject to various civil authorities, it is ex- pedient that there should be distinct, in- dependent, ecclesiastical governments, which may comply with the respective civil authorities in promoting the good ‘and peace of church and state. 11. This pretended authority is needless and useless, not serving the ends which it proposes: they being ‘better compass- ed without it: this shown. VY. The ancients asserted to each bishop a free, absolute, independent au- thority, subject to none, in the adminis- tration of affairs concerning his particu- lar church. This shown from the writings of St. Cyprian; from those of St Austin: from a document addressed by the Ro- man clergy to Cyprian, by acts of the synods of Antioch and Chalcedon, &c. VI. The ancients held all bishops, as to their office, originally according to divine institution, to be equal, as being all successors of the Apostles, &c. This ‘dilated on. Quotations from Jerome, &c. First then, common practice, a good interpreter, shows that in the primitive church the Pope was not deemed to have a right of universal ‘sovereignty: this explained. Secondly, . the state of that church did not admit such an authority : this dilated on. VII. The ancients, when occasion re- quired, maintained their equality of office and authority; particularly in re- spect to the Roman bishop, both by practice and express assertion in plain terms. Various instances of this enu- merated. VIII. The style used by the primi- tive bishops in their applications to him denotes such equality: this fully shown. IX. This pretence is shaken by the very ground of that eminence which the Roman bishop did obtain in the church. This ground shown to be, not divine “mstitution, ὅσο. but the dignity, size, opulence, and conveniency of the city THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 303 wherein he resided, &c. Other bishops, as those of Alexandria, Antioch, Cesa- rea, shown to have obtained a _ prece- dence on the same ground. X. The truth is, all ecclesiastical presidencies and subordinations, &c. were introduced merely by human ordi- nance, on prudential accounts, according to the exigency of circumstances. Hence the prerogatives of other sees proceeded ; and hence any dignity, privilege, or au- thority which the Pope with equity might claim. ᾿ This point investigated ; some obser- vations propounded concerning the an- cient forms of discipline; or the origin and growth of metropolitical, primati- cal, and patriarchal jurisdiction. Twelve heads of observations on the interest of the Roman bishop, in refe- rence to these circumstances: manner in which he assumed authority, and evaded obstacles, &c. described; also the resistance made to his encroachments. Twenty heads of observations, or corollaries, drawn from the preceding historical account of the growth of me- tropolitical, primatical, and patriarchal jurisdiction; showing that patriarchs are a human institution, &c.; that the patriarchate of the Pope, beyond his own diocese, subsists not on any canon of a general synod, &c.; that it is not really a patriarchal power which the Pope exercises, &c.; and that the prac- tice of Christianity does not depend on the subsistence of such a form instituted by man. It having been shown that this uni- versal sovereignty over the Christian church has no foundation in Scripture or elsewhere, it becomes requisite to show by what ways and means so groundless a claim should gain cre- dence and submission to such an extent. Reasons of this: 1. in the voluntary deference paid to eminency of any kind, which thus passes into power, &c.: 2. in the aptitude of power to grow and spread itself: 3. particularly in the case of spiritual power: 4. in the case with which power is attained and augmented on occasion of dissensions: 6. as also through the co-operation of those who are sheltered under it and enjoy its privileges : 6. in the assistance which even an idle potentate possesses from 304 partisans: 7. in the little scruple which persons, otherwise just and good, have to augment their power by encroach- ment, &c.: 8. in the commendations of men inferior in condition, which are liable to be interpreted for acknowledg- ments or attestations of right, &c.: 9. in the facility with which good and easy men are apt to yield to encroachments : 10. in the little power of counteraction, which a few wise men possess in such cases: 1]. in the strange enchantment of words, working on the fancies of men, especially those of the weaker sort: 12. in the Pope’s power being much ampli- fied by persons who ran to it as toa place of refuge: 13. in the forwardness of all princes to heap honour on the bishop of their imperial city: 14. in the advantage which the Popes had of being at hand to suggest what, they pleased to the court, &c.: 15. in the wealth, repute, and power at court, which they thus obtained over the provincial bish- ops: 16. inthe want of foresight in princes who favoured them: 17. in the favourable seasons and junctures for its growth, which power, once rooted, al- ways finds: 18. in the ignorance of the times: 19. in the Pope’s forwardness to support factious churchmen against prin- ces: 20. in his engaging most able heads, tongues, and pens, in his favour, &c.: 21. in his cherishing so greata party with exorbitant liberties, &c.: 22. in his founding divers militias, or bands of spiritual Janizaries, to be combatants for his interests: 23. in the drawing to himself vast stores of riches, which are the sinews of power: method of doing this enumerated: 24. in his transforming, by help of his mercenary divines, most points of divinity to the accommodation of his interests: 25. in pretences, slen- der in themselves, which acquired va- lidity by length of time, consent of au- thors, &c.: 26. in the histories of some ages, composed by friars and monks, and other such of his clients: 27. in his helping temporal and spiritual pow- ers against each other from his own in- terest: 28. in his incessant clam- our, when his will was opposed, that St. Peter was injured: 29. in the for- gery of the Decretal Epistles, &c.: 90, in his forming grants wherein privileges THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. were feigned to be derived from him: 31. in the opportune convention οἵ. servient synods: 32. in his having — hampered all the clergy with strict oaths of universal obedience to him: 33. in the compositions which he made with struggling and afflicted princes: in- stances given: 34. in the revocation of pragmatical sanctions: 35. in the use of an absolving and dispensing power ; 36. in the device of indulgencies. . SUPPOSITION VI. That in fact the Roman bishops, continually from St. Peter’s time, have enjoyed and ex- ercised this sovereign. power. This is a question of fact, which will best be decided by a particular conside- ration of the several branches of sove- reign power; by which we shall find that the Pope has no just title to them, in reason, law, or ancient practice: wherefore they yield arguments against him. : I. If the Pope were sovereign of the Church, he would have.power to con- voke its supreme councils, and would have constantly exercised it. This pow- er consequently he claims, and did so, long before he could obtain the exercise of it. It is shown, however, that he can claim it by no ecclesiastical law, canon, or practice. It was always deemed. the right of the emperors, and was constantly exer- cised by them: this shown by a multi- tude of examples, &c. This power shown peculiarly to be- long to princes: the same illustrated from Holy Writ. Other reasons stated why such a rightshould belong to them. An objection answered. 7 II. It inseparably belongs to sove- reigns, in the general assemblies of their states, to preside and moderate afiairs, Xe. This privilege therefore the Po claims ; not allowing any council to legitimate in which he does not preside personally, or by his legates. It is shown that for this prerogative there is no express grant from God, no ancient canon, no certain custom or prac- tice. — THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 305 In all the first synods, the emperors | presided, in person, or by deputies. | This shown by numerous instances ; _ end the presumptuous attempts of some Popes noticed. em given why it is unfit that this _ privilege should be attached to the Pope- dom. Ill. If the Pope were sovereign of the Church, the legislative power, whol- ly or in part, would belong to'him; so _ far indeed, that no synod could without his consent prescribe any thing; at _ least he should have a negative on their Proceedings, &c. This therefore is Claimed by him. Papal declarations | given, signifying that no decrees of syn- ods are valid without the Pope’s con- firmation. Yet this pretence not only has no _ ground in the divine law, old canons, and primitive customs, but it crosses the sentiments and practice of antiquity. It is shown by various instances that in ancient synods various things were | ordained without the Pope’s consent, and against his pleasure. It is also shown that the effectual | confirmation of synods, which gave | them the force of laws, depended on the imperial sanction. Instances cited. It is opposed that the decrees of some _ synods, as that of Ariminum, have been declared invalid, for want of the Pope’s confirmation. Answers given to this | exception. | IV. It is proper to an absolute sove- | reignty, that its will, declared in way of precept or proclamation, concering the ) Sanction, abrogation, or dispensation of laws, should be observed. _ This privilege therefore in a high ' strain the Pope challenges to himself, asserting to his decrees, &c. the force and obligation of laws, &c. _ Aphorisms cited from Gratian con- _ cerning this privilege. | This power shown to be assured on usurpation and unwarrantably, without | ground for it in original right or an- cient practice. | Originally the Church had no other | general Lawgiver, beside our one Lord and one Lawgiver. With regard to practice, many argu- | ments are brought to show that no such | practice anciently did or could exist. Vou. Ul. 39 V. Sovereign power, immediately by itself, when it pleases, exercises all parts of jurisdiction, setting itself in the tri- bunal; or mediately executes it by others, as its officers or commissioners. This universal jurisdiction therefore over the clergy is claimed by the Pope. This claim shown to rest originally or anciently on no good grounds; such jurisdiction being prohibited by our Saviour; when introduced into the Church, exercised by others as well as the Pope; his superior claim to it re- sisted by bishops and synods ; and ren- dered subordinate to that of the em- perors. VI. To the sovereign of any state belongs the choice, constitution, and confirmation of all inferior magistrates. Wherefore the Pope claims and ex- ercises these prerogatives as far as he can; and they are by great advocates on the highest terms asserted to him. In this matter may be distinguished, 1. the designation of the person by election, &c.: 2. the confirmation of this : 3. the ordination of him to his office: 4. the authority by which he acts. Into all of which the Pope has intruded himself: this shown. But no such privileges have any foundation in holy Scripture, in ancient doctrine, or in primitive usage. This shown by a survey of rules and practices concerning it, from the ordina- tion of Mathias, to the times of the synods of Nice and Chalcedon. Ex- tracts from the works of ancient Fathers. To al! such evidences of facts the Ro- manists oppose some instances of Popes constituting and confirming bishops. To the former instances it may be answered, they are so few that they strengthen ourargument. With regard to the latter, presumptuous pragmatical intrusions or usurpations of power do not found a right in this or in any other case: to which purpose, and wholly to invalidate any such pleas, various ob- servations are subjoined ; showing that divers instances occur of bishops whe did meddle in the ordination of others who did not thereby pretend to univer: sal jurisdiction; that general synods undertook to regulate this matter; that if examples determined right, such right would more properly belong to the em- Ἔ 306 perors; that general synods by para- mount authority have assumed such to themselves, &c., &c. VII. Sovereigns have a power to cen- sure and correct all inferior magistrates, and, if need be, to discharge them. This prerogative therefore is claimed, as from divine sanction, by the Pope. This power was allowed him by the Convocation of Trent, thwarting the an- cient laws, and betraying the liberties of the Church thereby, &c. But such a power did not anciently, by any rule or custom, in a peculiar manner belong to the Roman bishop. What was generally said about juris- diction being premised, it is here re- marked, 1. that the exercising of judg- ment and censure on bishops, when needful, was prescribed to be done by synods, provincial or patriarchal : instances alleged. 2. In some cases a kind of deposing of bishops was assum- ed by bishops, as defenders of the faith, and executors of canons: instances quoted. 3. Cyprian asserts the power of censuring bishops, on needful and just occasion, to belong to all bishops, for maintenance of common faith, dis- cipline, and peace: 4. this also is con- firmed in some cases by the nature of such censures: 5. indeed in such cases every Christian had a right, or even ob- ligation, to desert his own bishop. 6. If any Pope assumed more than was allowed in this case by the canons, or was common to other bishops of his rank, it was an usurpation: 7. when the Pope hath attempted this, his power has been disavowed. 8. Other bishops have taken on themselves, when they saw cause, to discard and depose Popes. 9. Popes, when there was great oc- casion, and they had a great mind to exert their utmost power, have not yet presumed by themselves, without joint authority of synods, to condemn bish- ops: 10. what has been thus done, is not to be ascribed to the authority of Popes as such. 11. If instances were arguments of right, there would be oth- er pretenders to the deposing power: 12. the people, for instance, would have it; for they have sometimes deposed Popes. 13. There are many instances of bishops being removed or deposed by the imperial authority: instances given, THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 14. The instances alleged to prove th Pope’s authority in this case are incon clusive and invalid: this shown ina variety of cases. ‘ae VIII. If Popes were sovereigns οὗ the Church, they could effectually, x whenever they should see it just and fit, absolve and restore any bishop ex- communicated from the Church, or de- posed by ecclesiastical censure. Wherefore the Pope assumes this power, as his special prerogatives: quotations on this point. It is shown however that such a pow- er of old did not belong to him: 1. from no traces existing of it in any ancient canon: 2. from decrees of synods: 3, from the apostolical canons: 4. from the circumstance that hence in elder times Popes were opposed and checked when they offered to receive bishops re- jected in particular synods. But they allege some instances of such a power. These therefore are answered, first, by some general consideration, relatin chiefly to the import of restitution ; aa next by replies to the particular instances produced for the Pope. IX. It belongs to sovereigns to receive appeals from all lower judicatures, for the final determination of causes, &c. This power therefore the Pope stiffly asserts to himself; and this at the syn- od of Florence was the first and great branch of authority which he demanded of the Greeks explicitly to avow: this was one of his most ancient encroach- ments,avhich served to introduce the rest. — But this power is unreasonable and, grievous to the Church: so deemed by ancient synods and Fathers: instances given. In the primitive church the Pope had no such power. This fully shown both by negative and positive testimonies. — If the Pope had such a known and unquestionable right, there might have been produced many ancient, clear and convincing proofs of it. Some alleged by Bellarmine. These examined and refuted ; particularly those of Theodoret and Hadrianus, bishop of Thebes. | Some general observations proposed, (in regard to any other instances of this kind,) in the motives and conduct of bad and even good men, when induced to make appeals to superiors. X. The Sovereign is the fountain of all jurisdiction ; and all inferior magis- trates derive their authority from him, Accordingly the Pope challenges this advantage, &c.: instances from various documents. This pretence appears in the ordinary titles of bishops: also in the Council of Trent. But on the contrary, according to Ho- ly Scripture, and to the sense of the primitive church, bishops and pastors re- ceive their commission immediately from God ; being only his ministers. ᾿ This fully shown from Scripture ; from the writings of the Fathers; from addresses of ancient bishops to the Pope. This a modern invention: shown to have arisen in the fourth century, by the appointment of vicars and legates. XI. It is the privilege of a sovereign, that he cannot be called to account, judg- ed, deposed, &c. ‘To this privilege also the Pope pretends, from maxims of the Canon Law ; from that of Pope Adrian ; | and from the three old synods, which are palpably spurious. Antiquity however was not of this mind. It is shown that the canons and ancient practice are opposed to this pre- ~ tence. XII. To the sovereign in ecclesiasti- cal affairs it would belong to define and decide all controversies in faith, disci- pline, and moral practice, &c. This power therefore he claims, and allows no synods to decide questions. But the ancients knew no such thing. They had recourse to the Scriptures, to Catholic tradition, to reason and argu- ment. Instances of holy Fathers passing over such authority, or openly dissenting from the opinions of Popes. Highest controversies were appeased by synods, sometimes without the Pope’s leave, and against his opinion: instances ‘quoted. XIII. If the Pope were such a sover- eign, it were at least expedient that he should be infallible. Wherefore the true and fast friends of papal interest assert this; and the Pope, who countenances le te i ΜΉ συ ψ as ae THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. 307 them, may be presumed to be of their mind. That he is however not infallible, is shown by experience and history. XIV. A sovereign is in dignity and autherity superior to any number of sub- jects however congregated. Therefore the Pope claims a superiority over all councils, pretending that he can rescind their decrees, or dissolve them, &c. _ This is indeed a question stiffly debat- ed among Romanists, but most adhere to the Pope’s side: reason of this given. But anciently he was not thought supe- rior to councils: this shown. Even in the very height of his power this au- thority was at times questioned and de- cided against him: instances given. XV. The sovereign of the Church is by all Christians to be acknowledged the chief person in the world, above all com- mands, &c. This pretended to: this claimed in their Missal. But this was not so in primitive times ; for St. Paul requires every soul to be sub- ject to the higher powers, when the em- peror was avowedly the first person next to God. Divers Popes avowed them- selves subject to the emperor. XVI. The confirmation of magistrates, elected by others, is a branch of suprem- acy affected by the Pope: instances quoted. This pretence shown to have arisen from the ancient custom of new- ly-elected bishops giving notice of their election to other bishops, especially those of highest rank: reasons for this cus- tom. Anciently the emperors confirm- ed bishops. XVII. It is a privilege of sovereigns to grant privileges, exemptions, and dis- pensations. This also he claims against the laws of God; the rights of bishops; the decrees of synods; and the sense of good men in all times. XVIII. It isa prerogative of sover- eignty to erect and translate spiritual presidences. This he claims, without reason. Princes often exerted such a aon γι this attested by Pope Paschal XIX. It is against prerogative of sov- ereignty to impose taxes on the clergy or people ; wherefore the Pope assumes this. But antiquity knew nothing of eee, eee, Αἰ eee ee such impositions ; when the church, the clergy, and the poor were maintained and relieved by voluntary offerings, &c. This is an encroachment on the right of princes, unto whom the clergy are sub- jects, being bound to render tribute to whom tribute belongeth. SUPPOSITION VII. That the Papal Supremacy is indefectible and uncharitable. But good reasons may be assigned, why, even supposing this supremacy conferred on the Pope in virtue of his succession to St. Peter, it is not assured- ly consequent that it must always or does not belong to him. For it might have been settled on him on conditions, &c., or so that it should continue but for atime. ‘There are also other ways, whereby, according to the common rules of justice he might be disseized thereof. 1. If God had given any positive declaration that such a power was grant- ed irrevocably, then it must have been admitted: but this he has not done; and no human power can be supposed im- moveable, &c. 2. No power can have a higher source or firmer ground than that of the civil government, for all such power is from heaven: yet such power is liable to alterations, and may be lost, &c. 3. The reason and exigency of things might be sufficient ground for altering an universal jurisdiction. 4. It is according to reason and practice that the church, in its exterior form and po- litical administrations, should be suited to the state of the world, and_ political governments, &c.: wherefore St. Peter’s monarchy might be parcelled out into divers spiritual supremacies: 5. espe- cially if such a continued jurisdiction should prove corrupt and grievous to the Church. 6. That power is defectible which according to the course of things does sometimes fail; but the Papal suc- cession has often been interrupted. 7. If, leaving dubious suppositions, we con- sider that Papal pre-eminence was ob- tained by the wealth and dignity of the Roman city, and countenance of the im- perial authority, then by defect of such advantages it may cease, ἄς. 8, From THE POPE’S SUPREMACY. ss whatever source the Pope had his au- thority, yet it may be forfeited by his — ᾿ own defects and faults. 9. By depart- ing from the doctrine and practice of St. Peter he would forfeit it. 10. By leading men into pernicious error or impiety. 11. According to Romanists the Pope has the same relation to other bishops and pastors, as they bear to their people: butif any pastor should mis- lead his flock by bad doctrine or prac- tice, they may reject him. 12. The case may be that we may be obliged to hold no communion with the Pope; and then his authority ceases. 13. This shown to be the doctrine of Scripture with respect to pastors and teachers. 14. With this the Fathers accord: in- stances quoted. 15. This shown also to have been the current opinion: in- stances given. 16. This shown to ap- ply to the Pope. 17. Most eminent per- sons have in such cases withdrawn com- munion from the Pope. 18. The Canon Law itself admits that the pope may be judged, if he bea heretick. 19. This fact was acknowlenged by a great Pope, allowing the condemnation of Pope Ho- norius. It is lastly shown thatthe Pope (or Pa- pal succession) hath perverted the Chris- tian doctrine in contradiction to Scripture and primitive tradition; hath subverted the practice of Christian piety ; hath taught falsehoods and maintained impieties. This shown, in the encouragement of extravagant doctrines and practices of high-flying doctors and fierce zealots, &c.; in the teaching us to worship an- gels and dead men; in the canonising of saints, and anticipating of God’s judgment, &c.; in the worship of ima- ges; in absolution and the dispensation of pardon for sin; in arrogating superi- ority over all civil powers, &c. ; in ob- truding on the Church writings, as sa- cred and canonical, which the greatest part of learned men have refused as such ; in pretending to infallibility; im ordering oral traditions of the Roman church to be venerated like the holy Scripture, &c.; in keeping the Serip- tures from the people, locked up in lan- guages not understood by them ; in cele- brating the Liturgy in an unknown tongue; in assuming to himself the THE POPE'S SUPREEACY. 309 headship of the Christian Church, con-;ed by our Saviour; in exacting sub- trary to Scripture; in forbidding mar-/ mission to the various and strange doc- riage to the priests; in dissolving the |trines of the Roman Church; particu- matrimonial tie; in prohibiting the cup) larly in exacting consent and obedience to the laity at the holy communion ; in| to those of the Council of trent ; in per- the doctrine of transubstantiation ; in the | secuting those who do not obey the doc- | propitiatory sacrifice of the, mass; in/|trines and dictates of the Roman Church; the doctrine of justification ; in arrogat-|in altering the whole of theology from ing the name and privilege of the only head to foot and rendering it sophistical church; in the institution of seven instead of divine. sacraments, instead of the two appoint- i a al ae POA THREE, Ἵ SrA,’ ΗΝ ἜΣ Ki tomies a Hay ΟΣ {7 ΠΟ τς } uarertty-wt ἡ Hin | Bice οι υὴν ΜΗ ΠΝ leet ΟΥ̓ nt etait ὶ 0] Va TS ware) ati! ocean ys ‘Wait | ale US abe πον πο, Ν᾿ bolt So . int?) 4th to ΤΣ ὙΠ ἥν Ψ ἊΝ “el ad? γᾷ: J te Sit ‘in teed re aia ‘ νὴ , yi. is, 7 th roe a aa ind ua a " 3 δὲ ἢ ai vf pt We ain ΠῚ ᾿ ΠῚ 9 thy Bey brews erin ΝῊ faite ee δ ie: 2. deh Te Ναὶ oa ὶ A DISCOURSE CONCERNING THE | Epues. iv. 4.—One body, and one spirit. | Tue unity of the church is a point which may seem somewhat speculative, and re- mote from practice ; but in right judg- ments it is otherwise; many duties de- pending upon a true notion and consider- ation of it; so that from ignorance or mistake about it we may incur divers of- fences or omissions of duty; hence in holy scripture it is often proposed asa . considerable point, and useful to practice. And if ever the consideration of it were needful, it is so now, when the church is 50 rent with dissensions, for our satisfac- tion and direction about the questions and cases debated in Christendom ; for » on the explication of it, or the true reso- lution wherein it doth consist, the con- troversies about church-government, her- esy, schism, liberty of conscience, and _ by consequence many others, do depend ; _ yea, indeed, all others are by some parties _ made to depend thereon. τς $t. Paul, exhorting the Ephesians, his disciples, to the maintenance of charity and peace among themselves, doth for _ inducement to that practice represent the unity and community of those things which jointly did appertain to them as _ Christians : the unity of that body where- of they were members; of that spirit | which did animate and act them; of that _ hope to which they were called; of that Lord whom they all did worship and UNITY OF THE CHURCH. Non habet charitatem Dei, qui ecclesie non diligit unitatem.—Ave. DE Barr. 3. serve ; of that faith which they did pro- fess; of that baptism whereby they were admitted into the same state of duties, of rights, of privileges ; of that one God and universal Father, to whom they had all the same relations. He beginneth with the wnity of the body ; that is,of the Christian church ; concerning which unity, what it is, and wherein it doth consist, | mean now to discourse. In order to clearing which point, we must first state what the church is, of which we discourse ; for the word church is ambiguous, having both in holy scrip- ture and common use divers senses some- what different. For, 1. Sometimes any assembly or com- pany of Christians is called a church ; as when mention is made of the church in such a house ;* (whence Tertullian saith, ‘“‘ Where there are three, even laics, there is a church.’’*) 2. Sometimes a purticular society of Christians, living in spiritual communion, and under discipline; as when, ¢he church at such a town ;” the churches of such a province ;* the churches; all the * Ubi tres, ecclesia est, licet laici.— Tert. de Exh. Cast. cap. 7. * Rom. xvi. 5; Col. iv. 15; Philem. u. > Acts vill.1; xiv. 27; v.11; 1LCori.1; Col. iv. 16; 1 Thess. i.1; 2 Cor. i. 1; Rev. ii. 1, ὅτε. ; Rom. xvi. 1. * Acts ix. 31; Gal. i. 2; Cor. viii. 1. 1 Cor. rvi 1,19; 2 312 churches,*.are mentioned ; according to which notions St. Cyprian saith, that there is a “church,”’ where there is “‘ a people united toa priest, and a flock adhering to their shepherd:”* and so Ignatius saith, “that without the orders of the clergy a church is not called.” 3. A larger collection of divers particu- lar societies combined together in order, under direction and influence of a com- mon government, or of persons acting in the public behalf, is termed a church ; as the church of Antioch, of Corinth, of Jerusalem, &c., each of which at first probably might consist of divers congre- gations, having dependencies of less towns annexed to them; all being united under the care of the bishop and presby- tery of those places; but however, soon after the apostles’ times, it is certain that such collections were, and were named churches. 4. The society of those who at pres- ent or in course of time profess the faith and gospel of Christ, and undertake the evangelical covenant, in distinction to all other religions; particularly to that of the Jews; which is called the syna- gogue.° 5. The whole body of God’s people that is, ever hath been, or ever shall be, from the beginning of the world to the consummation thereof, who having (form- ally or virtually believed in Christ, and sincerely obeyed God’s laws, shall final- ly, by the meritorious performances and sufferings of Christ, be saved, is called the church.‘ Of these acceptions the two latter do only come under present consideration ; it being plain that St. Paul doth not speak of any one particular or present society ; but of all at all times who have relation to the same Lord, faith, hope, sacra- ments, &c. Wherefore, to determine the case be- tween these two, we must observe, that to the latter of these (that is, to the catho- * Ecclesia, plebs sacerdoti adunata, et pas- tori suo grex adherens.—Cypr. Ep. 69. 7 Xapis τούτων ἐκκλησίο οὐ καλεῖται.----Ἰ gnat. ad Tral. 4 Rom. xvi. 4; 1 Cor. iv. 17; xi. 16; Acts xvi.5; Rev. ii. 7, 11; Kor’ ἐκκλησίαν, Acts xiv. 23. * Matt. xvi. 18; Eph. iii. 10; Gal. i. 13; 1 Tim. iii. 15; Acts xii. 1; ii. 47; xx. 28. {1 Cor. x. 32; xii. 28; xv.9; xiv. 12. A DISCOURSE CONCERNING Ι i lic society of true believers and fai servants of Christ, diffused through Ὶ ages, dispersed through all countries, — whereof part doth sojourn on earth, part _ doth reside in heaven, part is not yet extant; but all whereof is described in” the register of divine pre-ordination, and shall be re-collected at the resurrection of the just;* that, I say, to this church) especially all the glorious titles and ex- cellent privileges attributed to the church in holy scripture do agree. This is the body of Christ, whereof he is the head, and Saviour.* This is the spouse, and wife of Christ; whereof he is the bridegroom and _ hus- band.' This is the house of God; whereof our Lord is the master; which is dwilt upon arock, so that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. This is the city of God; the new, the holy, the heavenly Jerusalem, the mother of us all.* This is the Sion, which the Lord hath chosen, which he hath desired for his habitation, where he hath resolved to place his rest and residence for ever.' This is the mountain of the Lord, seat- ed above all mountains, unto which all nations shail flow.™ This is the elect generation, royal priest-hood, holy nation, peculiar people This is the general assembly, and church of the first-born, who are enrolled in heaven.° This is the church which God hath purchased with his own blood ; and for which Christ hath delivered himself, that he might sanctify it, and cleanse it, with washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, nor any such thing; but that it might be holy and unblemished.” To this church, as those high elogies most properly do appertain, so that unity © Eph. i. 10. » Col. i. 18, 20. ' Eph. v. 25, 32; Rev. xix. 7. } Matt. xxii. 2; xxv. 1; Matt. xxi. 13; 1 Tim iii. 15; Heb. iii.5; 1 Pet. ii.5; Eph. ii. 21; Matt. xvi. 18. « Rev. iii. 12; xxi. 2, 10; Gal. iv. 26; Heb. xii. 22. ' Psal. cxxxii. 13. m Isa. ii. 22; Mic. iv. 1. » J Pet. ii. 9. * Heb. xii. 23. » Acts xx. 28; Eph. v. 25, 26, 27. is often attributed to the church nares belong thereto. that one body, into which we tized by one spirit ; which is ἘΞ together, and compacted of paris mutual aid, and supply to its ishment and increase ;+ the mem- whereof du hold a mutual sympathy complacence; which is joined to one , deriving sense and motion from it; which is enlivened and moved by one rit." » This is that one spiritual house, reared upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ being the chief corner-stone ; inwhon all the building filly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in ihe Lord. _ This is that one family of God,‘ where- of Christ is the οἰκοδεσπότης, whence good Christians are οἰκεῖοι Θεοῦ. - _ This is that one city, or corporation, endued with an ample charter and noble privileges, in regard to which St. Paul Saith we are συμπολῖται τῶν ἀγίων (fel- low-citizens of the saints), and that our πολίτευμα (our civil state and capacity) ἐς an heaven, or that weare citizens thereof." _ That one holy nation, and peculiar people (the spiritual Israel),’ subject to same government and law (that which is called the kingdom of heaven ;) enjoying the same franchises and _priv- ileges ; followi ing the same customs and fashions ; using the same conversation and language; whereof Jesus Christ is the Lord and King. _ This is the one flock, under one Shep- w . » This is the society of those for whom Christ did pray, that they might be ail one.* » Itis true, that divers of these charac- Jers are expressed to relate to the church afier Christ ; but they may be allowed to extend to all the faithful servants of God before, who in effect were Christians, ieee saved upon the same account; i EGE SE eS Ss seinen lense GS ees ir eames NR Sle ane eae LL A OLA LIL A ES OIE SS TLE: 4 1 Cor. xii. 13; Rom. xii.5; Eph. iv. 16; a ii. 19; | Cor. xii. 26. t | Cor, xii. is. 81 Pet. ii. 5; Eph. ii. 20. -» * Heb. ui. 6; 1 Tim. iit. 15; Matt. x. 25. a= Heb. xii. 22; Rev. iit. 12; xxi. 2, 10; Eph. ii. 19; Phil. iii. 20. _* 1 Pet. li. 9; Ezek. xxxvii. 22. ΟΝ Jobo x. 16; Ezek. xxxvii, 24; xxiv. 23. Ϊ 5 John xvii. 20. a ves. [Π. 40 THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. 313 0A ite eA pees 1 and therefore did belong to the same body.* To this church in a more special and eminent manner all.those titles, and par- ticularly that of weity, are ascribed ; but the same also in some order and measure do belong and are attributed to the uni- versal church sojourning upon earth. For because this visible church doth enfold the other (as one mass doth con- tain the good ore and base alloy ;7 as one floor the corn and the chaff; as one field the wheat and the tares ; as one net the choice fish and the refuse; as one fold the sheep and the goats;” as one tree the living and the dry branches :*) because this society is designed to be in reality what the other is in appearance, the same with the other: because there- fore presumptively every member of this doth pass for a member of the other (the time of distinction and separation not being yet come :') because this in its profession of truth, in its sacrifices of devotion, in its practice of service and duty to God, doth communicate with that: therefore commonly the titles and attributes of the one are imparted to the other. All (saith St. Paul) are not Israel who are of Israel; nor is he a Jew that is one outwardly ;» yet in regard to the con- junction of the rest with the faithful Is- raelites, because of external consent in the same profession, and conspiring in the same services, all the congregation of Israel is styled ὦ holy nation and peculiar people.t * Ex quo voeantur sancti, est, ecclesia in ter- ra.—Aug.in Psal. 128. Since men are called saints, there isa church upon earth. Sancti ante legem, sancti sub lege, sancti sub gratia, omnes hi perficientes corpus Domini in mem- bris sunt ecclesie consututi.—Greg. Mag. Epist. 24. Saints before the law, saints under the law, saints under the gospel, all these make up the body of Christ, and are reckoned among the members of the church. + One great house hath vessels of honour and dishonour.—2 Tim. ii. 20; (Rom. ix. 31.) ¢ Sicut liliam iamedio spinarum, ita proxi- ma mea in medio filiarum Unde filias appellat, nisi propter communionem sacramen- torum? Aug. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 13. As the lily among thorns, so is my love among the daughters Why doth he call them daughters, but for the communion and agree- ment in sacraments ? y Matt. iii, 12; xiii. 38, 47; xxv. 32, * John xv. 2. * Matt. xiii. 30, * Rom. ix. 6; ii. 28; John i. 18. 314 A DISCOURSE So likewise do the apostles speak to all members of the church as to elect and holy persons, unto whom all the pri- vileges of Christianity do belong; al- though really hypocrites and bad men ** do not belong to the church,” nor are “‘ concerned in its unity,”* as St. Austin doth often teach. The places therefore of scripture which do represent the church one, as unquestionably they belong (in their prin- cipal notion and intent) tothe true uni- versal church (called the church mysti- cal and invisible ;) so may they by analo- gy and participation be understood to concern the visible church catholic here on earth; which professeth faith in Christ, and obedience to his laws.7 And of this church (under the due refe- rence to the other) the question is, Whereiz the unity of it doth consist, or upon what grounds it is called one; being that it compriseth in itself so many persons, societies, and nations ? For resolution of which question, we may consider, that a community of men may be termed one upon several accounts and grounds; as, ] For specifical unity of nature, or as unum genus ; so are all men one by par- ticipation of common rationality ; τὸ ἀνθρώπινον humanum genus. 2 For cognation of blood ; as, gens una ; so are all Jews, however living dispers- edly over the world, reckoned one nation * Non ad eam pertinent avari, raptores, fe- neratores. Videntur esse in ecclesia, non sunt.— Aug. de Bapt. Contr. Don. iv. 1; vi. 3. Ecclesiam veram intelligere non audeo nisi in sanctis et justis—Jbid. v.27. I dare not un- derstand the true church to be but among holy and righteous men. Pax autum hujus unitatis in solis bonis est—sicut autem isti qui intus cum gemitu tolerantur quamvis ad eandem Co- lumbz unitatem et illam gloriosam ecciesiam, non habentem maculam aut rugam, aut aliquid ejusmodi non pertineant.—Jdem. de Bapt. iii. 18. Nec regenerati spiritualiter in corpus et mem- bra Christi comdificentur nisi boni, 4c.—Aug. de Unit. 18. Multi tales sunt in sacramento- rum communione cum ecclesia, et tamen jam non sunt in ecclesia.—Idem. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 20. There are many such who communicate in sacraments with the church, and yet they are not in the church. Omnes mali spirituali- ter a bonis sejuncti sunt.—De Bapt. vi. 4. All evil men are spiritually severed from the ood. + ᾿Εκκλησίαν καλῶ τὸ ἄθροισμα τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν --- Clem. Alex. Str. p. 514. I call the church the congregation of the elect. ie ee! ν, i «ες. . CONCERNING or people; so all kinsmen do co stitute one family : and thus also all me as made of one blood, are one people. — For commerce of language ; so Italie and Germans are esteemed one peoy although living under different la governments. For consent in opinion, or confo a in manners and practices; as, men of the same sect in religion or philosophy, — of the same profession, faculty, trade: so Jews, Mahometans, Arians ; so ora- tors, grammarians, logicians ; so divines, lawyers, physicians, merchants, artisans, rustics, &c. ὶ ᾿ -For affection of mind, or compacts οὐ good will; or for links of peace and — amicable correspondence; in order to — mutual interest and aid; as, friends and confederates. For being ranged in order under one law and rule; as, those who live under one monarchy, or in one commonwealth; as the people in England, Spain, France; in Venice, Genoa, Holland, &c. ' Upon such grounds of unity, or union, a society of men is denominated one; and, upon divers such accounts, it is plain that the catholic church may be said to be one. For, I. It is evident that the church is one by consent in faith and opinion concern- ing all principal matters of doctrine, especially in those which have conside- rable influence upon the practice of piety toward God, righteousness toward men, and sobriety of conversation : ¢o teach 8 ““΄': ἣν ΖΦ». jus which the grace of God did appear.* As he that should in any principal doe- trine differ from Plato (denying the “im- mortality of the soul,” the “ providence of God,” the “ natural difference of good and evil,’”’* would not be a Platonist; so he that dissenteth from any doctrine of importance, manifestly taught by Christ, doth renounce Christianity. All Christians are delivered into one form of doctrine ; to which they must stiffly and steadfastly adhere, keeping the depositum committed to them :* must strive together for the faith of χα * Regula fidei sola immobiliset irreformabi- | Tert. de virg. vel 1. - My sheep hear my voice.—John x. 16, 27. © Tit. ii. 22. ¢ Rom. vi. 17; Col. ii. 7; Heb. iii. 6; xiii. 9; 1 Cor. xv. 58; Eph. iv. 14. lis THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. spel,{ and earnestly contend for the | in Christ Jesus ; that great salvation, which at first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto them by his hearers, God also bearing them wit- ness with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy | Ghost, according to his own will.® They are bound to mind, or think, one and the same thing; to stand fast in one'spirit with one mind ; to walk by the same rule ; to be joined together in the | same mind and in the same judgment ; | with one mind and mouth to glorify God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. They are obliged to disclaim consort- | ship with the gainsayers of this doctrine ; to stand off from those who do ἑτεροδοξεῖν or who do not consent to the wholesome _ words—of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine whichis according to godliness ; to mark those who make di- visions and scandals beside the doctrine | which Christians had learned, and to de- cline from them; to reject heretics ; to beware of false prophets, of seducers ; of those who speak perverse things to draw disciples after them ; to pronounce | anathema upon whoever shall preach any . other doctrine. Thus are all Christians one in Christ | Jesus :* thus are they (as Tertullian speaketh) ““ confederated in the society of . ἃ sacrament,’’* or of one profession. “This preaching and this faith the church having received, though dispersed over the world, doth carefully hold, as inhabiting one house ; and alike _believ- eth these things, as if it had one soul, and the same heart, and consonantly doth preach, and teach, and deliver these things, as if it had but one mouth.”’+ * De societate sacramenti confoderantur.— ro in Marc. iv. 5. otro τὸ κήρυγμα παρειληφυῖα, καὶ ταύτην τὴν f Phil. i. 27. ΡΩΝ ; κ ἘΝ 8. b 2 Tim. i. 13 ; Heb. ii. 3, 4. 1 Te ὃν καὶ αὐτὸ poovetyv,—Phil. ii. 2; 2 Cor. xiii. 11; Phil. i. 27; iii. 16; 1 Cor. i. 10; Rom. xv. 6. ) AdgioracOa:.—1 Tim. vi. 5, 3; 2 Thess. iii. 6; Rom. xvi. 17; Tit. iii. 10; Matt. vii. 15; xxiv. 11; Acts xx. 29, 30; 2 Pet. ii. 1; Eph. iv. 14; Gal. i. 8. * Gul. iii, 28, (26.) 315 “ As for kings, though their kingdoms | faith which was once delivered to the| be divided, yet he equally expects from | saints :* they must hold fast the form of sound words—in faith and love which is every one of them one dispensation, and one and the same sacrifice of a true confession and praise. So that, though there may seem to be a diversity of tem- poral ordinances, yet an unity and agree- ment in the right faith may be held and maintained among them.’* In regard to this union in faith pecu- liarly the body of Christians, adhering to itgwas called the catholic church, from which all those were esteemed ipso facto to be cut off and separated who in any point deserted that faith ; swch a one (saith St. Paul), ἐζέστραπται, is turned aside, or hath left the Christian way of life! He in reality is no Christian, nor is to be avowed or treated as such, but is to be disclaimed, rejected, and shunned. ‘*He” (saith St. Cyprian) “ cannot seem a Christian, who doth not persist in the unity of Christ’s gospel and ἐδ ἢ." ἢ “If (saith Tertullian) “aman be a heretic, he cannot be a Christian.”{ Whence Hegesippus saith of the old heretics, that they “did divide the unity of the church by pernicious speeches against God and his Christ.”’|| ‘*¢ The virtue” (saith the pastor Hermes, cited by Clemens Alex.) “" which doth keep the church together, is faith.”’§ So the Fathers of the sixth council tell the emperor, that “they were members one of another, and did constitute the one πίστιν ἣ ἐκκλησία Kai περ tv ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ διεσπαρ- μένη ἐπιμελῶς φυλάσσει ὡς ἕνα οἶκον οἰκοῦσα' καὶ ὁμοίως πιστεύει τούτοις ὡς μίαν ψυχὴν καὶ τὴν αὐτὴν ἔχουσα καρδίαν" καὶ συμφώνως ταῦτα κηρύσσει καὶ δι- δάσκει, καὶ παραδίδωσι, ὡς ὃν στόμα κεκτημένη.---- Iren. i. 3. (apud Epiph. Her. 31.) * Reges quorum etsi divisa sunt regna, equaliter tamen de singulis dispensationem ex- igit, unamqué de eis vere de se confessionis hos-~ tiam laudis exspectat—ut esti disposionem tem- poralium videatur esse diversitas, circa ejus fidei rectitudinem unitatis’ consonantia tenea- tur.—P. Leo 11. Epist.5; (ad Ervigium R. Hisp.) + Nec Christianus videri potest, qui non per- manet in evangelii ejus et fidei veritate-—Cypr. de Unit Ecel. ¢ Si heretici sunt, Christiani esse non pos- sunt.— Tert. de Prescr. cap. 37. || Olreves ἐμέρισαν τὴν ἕνωσιν τῆς ἐκκλησίας φθο- ριμαίοις λόγοις κατὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, καὶ κατὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ avrov.—Eus, Hist. iv. 22. Ἢ συνέχουσα τὴν ἐκκλησίαν ἀρετὴ, ἡ πίστις ἐστί, —Herm. apud Clem. Strom. ii. p. 281. 1 Ἐξέστραπται ὃ rowodros.—Tit, ui. 11; Rom. xvii. 17; 2 John 10. faith.”** “We ought in ail things to hold the unity of the catholic church; and not to yield in anything to the enemies of faith and trath.”+ “]ὴ each part of the world this faith is one, faith.”"¢ “* He denies Christ, who confesses not all things that are Christ’s. Ἢ - Hence in common practice, whoever did appear to differ from the common faith, was rejected as an apostate from Christianity, and unworthy the com- munion of other Christians. There are points of less moment, more obscurely delivered in which Chris- tians without breach of unity may dis- sent, about which they may dispute, in which they may err—without breach of unity, or prejudice to charity.§ The faith of Christians did at first con- sist in few points, those which were pro- fessed in baptism, whereof we have di- vers summaries in the ancients—by analogy whereto all other propositions were expounded, and according to agree- | ment whereto sound doctrines were dis- | tinguished from false:” so that he was accounted orthodox who did not violate | them. | * So he that holds thatimmovable rule | of truth which he received at his baptism, will know the words and sayings and parables which are taken out of the scriptures,” {] &e. because this is the Christian * ΜΜελῶν ἀλλήχγων ὄετων ἡμῶν, καὶ τὸ ἕν σῶμα συ- νιστώντων Kotcrod διὰ τῆς πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ ἀλλήλους abil καὶ riorews.—Conc. VJ. Act. xviii. p. 71 + Per omnia dehemus ecclegie catholice unitatem tenere, nec in aliquo fide et veritatis hostibus cedere—Cypr. Ep. 71 (ad Quiat. de Steph. P.) i Utriusque partis terraram fides ista una est, quia et fides ista Christiana est.—Aug. Contr. Jul. i. 2 (p. 203, 2 3 || Negat Christam, qui non omnia que | Christi sunt confitetur. '—Ambr. in Luc. lib. vi. cap. 9, p. 90 (vide p. 89.) Alia sunt in Buibas inter se aliquando etiam doctissimi atqne optimi regule catholi- ex defensores, salva fidei compage non conso- | nant, &¢c.—Aug. contr. Jul. i. 2, p. 205. Totum hoc genus liberas habet observationes.—Aug. ad Jan. Ep. 118, 86 (ad Casal.) 4 Sic autem qui regulam veritatis immobi- lem apud se habet quam per baptismum accepit, ™ Tren. i. 2. ful, courteous each to other ; 316 ΠΑ DISCOURSE CONCERNING» body of Christ, by consent in opinion| [Π. It is evident, that all Christ with him’ and one another ; and by united by the bands of mutual : and -will. εἱ They are all bound to wish one; well, to have a complacence in the and a compassion of the evils incident each other, to discharge all office kindness, succour, consolation to” other! ve This is the command of Christ to (This is my commandment, saith he That ye love one another ;) this 1 s th common badge by which his dise are discerned and distinguished, He by saith he, shall ali men know that ye ar my disciples, if ye love one another they must have he same love ; they n love as brethren, be compassionate, they bear one another’s barons 3 and, cially, as they have opportunity, aiid ; to the household of faith. If one mei re i all the members must φατε D ; and if onemember be honoured, the members musi rejoice. The ἐμεῖο of them who believe must be (I that in the Acts) of one heart and ὁ one soul. ‘They must walk in he do all things in love. “i Whoever therefore doth highly « offen against charity, maligning or mischie his breathren, doth thereby separate h self from Christ’s body, and cease to ἢ a Christian. ** They that are enemies to brot charity, whether they are openly out the chureh, or seem to be within, © are Pseudo-Christians and Anti-Chri When they seem to be within the cht they are separated from that invisi conjunction of charity ; whence St. They went out from us, but were ne us. He saith not, that by their g out they were made aliens, “but sed Ξ they were aliens, therefore he declare that they went out.”’* ζω, s sin hzec quidem que sunt ex - seripturis nomina | dictiones et parabolas cognoscet, &c. Tren. videGr. (p.4.) , * Hujus autem fraterne charitatis init sive aperte foris sint, sive intus esse videantu Pseudo Christiani sunt et Antiéhristi de Bapt. iii. 19. Cum intus videntur, invisibili charitatis compage separati 5 John xv. 12; 1 John ἐπ 11; ae 9; John xifi. 35; Phil. ii.2; 1 Pet i Gal. vi. 2, 10; 1 Cor. xii. 26 ; Acts. i Eph. v. 2; 1 Cor. xvi. 14. | ae THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. - Wherefore the most notorious viola- tions of charity being the causing of dissensions and factions in the church, the causeless séparation from any church, the unjust condemnation of churches whoever was guilty of any such unchris- tian behaviour was rejected by the Fa- thers, and held to be no Christian. Such were the Novatians, the Donatists, the _ Meletians, the Luciferians,—and other schismatics. “For what can be more acceptable _and pleasant, than to see those who are severed and scattered into so many places, yet knit and joined together in the bond and union of charity, as_har- monious members of the body of Christ.’”* ~ “In old time—when the church of God flourished, being rooted in the same faith, united in love: there being, as it Were, one conspiracy or league of dif- ferent members in one δοῦν." “For the communion of the Spirit is wont to knit and unite men’s minds; which conjunction we believe to be be- tween us and your charitable affection.”’t “They therefore who by the bond of charity are incorporated into the building settled upon the rock.”’|| “ But the members of Christ are joined together by the charity of union, and by the same cleave close to their head, which is Christ.”§ If. All Christians are united by spirit- ual cognation and alliance; as being all regenerated by the ‘same incorruptible seed, being alike born, not of blood, nor ᾿ nde Johannes (1 John ii. 19.) Ex nobis ex- erunt, sed non erant ex nobis.—— Non ait quod exeundo alieni facti sunt, sed quod alieni erant, propier hoe eos exisse declaravit.—Jbid. * TE yap ἂν γένοιτο χαριέστερον, ἣ τοὺς τοσούτῳ τῷ πλήθει τῶν τόπων διειργμένους τῇ διὰ τῆς ἀγάπης ἑνώσει καθοῤᾷν εἰς μίαν μελῶν ἁομονίαν ἐν σώματι Χριστοῦ dedficbar.—Bas. Ep. ii. 220. 1 ‘Eni τῶν ἀρχαιῶν καιρῶν ------- ἡνίκα ἤνθουν ai ἐκκλησίαι τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐῤῥιζώμεναι τῇ πίστει, ἡνωμέναι τῇ ἀγάπη" ὥσπερ ἐν ἑνὶ σώματι μιᾶς συμπνοίας διαφό- pov μελῶν ὑπαρ yotons.—Bas. Ep. 338. ὁ Ἢ κατὰ Πνεῦμα συνάφεια ἐμποιεῖν πίφυκε τὴν οἰκείωσιν, ἣν ἡμῖν εἶναι πρὸς τὴν ἀγάπην ὑμῶν πεπισ- retxapev.— Bas. Epist. 182. || Qui ergo compage charitatis incorporati sunt edificio super petram constituto, &c.-- Aug. de Unit. cap. 18 § Membra vero Christi per unitatis charita- tem sibi copulantur, et per eandem capiti suo coherent, quod est Christus —Ang. de Unit, cap. 2. Omnes sancti sibi charitate coherent —. Aug. de Bapt. vi. 3. 317 of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God; whence, as the sons of God, and brethren of Christ,” they become brethren one to another; so that it isa peculiar title or appellation of Christians, the brethren signifying all Christian people ; and a drother being the same with a Christian professor." IV. The whole Christian church is one by its incorporation into the mystical body of Christ; or as fellow-subjects of that spiritual, heavenly kingdom, whereof Christ is the sovereign head and gover- nor; whence they are governed by the same laws, are obliged by the same insti- tutions and sanctions ;* they partake of the same privileges, and are entitled to the same promises, and encouraged by the same rewards ; (being called in one hope of their calling.) So they make up one spiritual corpo- ration or republic, whereof Christ is the sovereign Lord.t ‘Though the place disjoin them, yet the Lord joins them together, being their common Lord.” &e. Hence an habit of disobedience doth sever aman from this body; for, Not erery one that saith Lord, Lord, shail enter into the kingdom of heaven,” or continue therein. Every such person who denieth God in works* is a rebel, an outlaw, renouncing his allegiance, forfeiting his title to God’s protection and favour. He is not a sheep of Christ, because he doth not hear Ais voice.'|| He is separated from the body, by not holding the head." “Tt isa lie, to call one’s self a Chris- tian, and not to do the works of Christ.”§ “He that does not the work of a * They are under a covenant of allegiance. + 'O γὰρ αὐτὸς Kips révrov.—Rom. x. 12. t Ei δὲ ὃ τόπος ywotter, ἀλλ᾽ ὃ Κύριος αὐτοὺς συνάπτει κοινὸς ὧν, fea. sCarve. in | Cor. Orat. 1; vide. || Qui eum non sequitur, quomodo se ovem _ejus dicere audebit ?—Aug. de Unit, Eccl, cap. 10. § Mendacium est, Christianum se dicere, et opera Christi non facere.—Ambr. ὁ 1 Pet. ji. 33; James i. 18; Johni. 13; Gal. iii. 26; John i. 12. P Heb. ii. 10, 11; Rom. xiv. 10, &c. 1Cor. vii. 155 v.11; 4 Eph. iv. 4. τ Matt. vii. 21. * Tit. i. 16. t John x. 27. " Col. ii. 9. 318 Christian name, seems not to be a Chris- tian.”’* ‘* When instead of the works them- selves he begins to oppose even the most apparent truth, whereby he is reproved, then he is cut off (from the body, or the church.” )t Hence St. Austin often denieth wick- ed persons to be in the church, or to appertain unto its unity.’ “ For when there is one and the same Lord, that dwelleth in us, he every where joins and couples those that are his with the bond of unity.”’¢ V. All Christians are linked together in peaceable concord and confederacy ; so that they are bound ἰο live in good correspondence; to communicate in works of piety and devotion; to defend and promote the common interest of their profession. Upon the entrance of the gospel by our Lord’s incarnation, it was by a ce- lestial herald proclaimed, Peace on earth, and good will among men. It was our Lord’s office to preach peace. It wasa principal end and effect of his death to reconcile all men, and to destroy enmity. He specially charged his disciples εἰρη- μεύειν ἐν ἀλλήλοις, to maintain peace one with another. \t was his will at parting with them, Peace I leave with you. The apostles frequently do enjoin to pursue peace with all them who call upon the Lord witha pure heart; to follow the things which make for peace and edification mutual; to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.* It was, in the prophecies concerning the evangelical state, declared, that un- der it, The wolf should dwell with the lamb, and the leopard should lie down * Qui Christiani nominis opus non agit, Christianus non esse videtur.— Salv. de Gub. ἢ. 4. + Cum pro ipsis operibus etiam verita- ti apertissime, qua redarguitur, resistere ca- perit, tune preciditur—Aug. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 20. ¢ Nam quam Dominus unus atque idem sit, qui habitat in nobis, conjungit ubique et copulat suos vinculo unitatis— Firmil. apud Cypr. Ep. 75. νυ Vide supra. ~ Luke ii. 14; Acts x. 36; Eph. ii. 17; Col. i. 20; Eph. ii. 14; Mark ix. 50; John xiv. 27. x 2 Tim. ii. 22; Rom. xiv. 19; Eph. iv. 3. A DISCOURSE CONCERNING with the kid, and the sucking child should play on the hole of the a that is, that men of all tempers and con- ditions, by virtue of this institution, should be disposed to live innocently, quietly, and lovingly together; so ~ they should not hurt or destroy in God’s holy mountain; for that would be a duty incumbent on the disciples of this institution, which all good Christians" would observe. The evangelical covenant, as it doth ally us to God, so it doth confederate us together: the sacraments of this coven- ant are also symbols of peace and amity between those who undertake it. Of baptism it is said, that so many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ; and thence, Ye are all one in Christ Jesus. All in one spirit have been baptized into one body.” And in the eucharist, by partaking of one individual food, they are transmuted into one body and substance: We (saith St. Paul) being many, are one bread, one body ; for all of us do partake of one bread.* οἷς By which sacraments also our peo- ple appear to be united: for, as many grains collected, and ground, and min- gled together, make one bread; so in Christ, who is the bread of heaven, we may know ourselves to be one body, that our company or number be conjoined and united together.’”’* ‘With us there is both one church, and one mind, and undivided concord.”t *‘ Let us hold the peace of the catholic church in the unity of concord.” ‘The bond of concord remaining, and the individual sacrament of the cath- olic church continuing,” ὅσο. || * Quo etipso sacramento populus noster adunatus ostenditur: ut quaemadmodum grana multa in unum collecta, et commolita, et com- mixta, panem unum faciunt; sic in Christo, qui est panis ccelestis, unum sciamus esse Cor pus, cui eonjunctus sit noster numerus et adu- natus.—Cypr. Ep. 63. + Nobis et ecclesia una, et mens juncta, et individua concordia.—Cypr. Ep. 57. { Catholice ecclesie pacem concordiz uni- tate teneamus.—Ep. 45. || Manente concordiz vinculo, et perseve- rante catholic ecclesiz individuo sacramento, &c.—Ep. 52. (ad Anton. p. 96.) y Isa. xi. 6; Ixv. 25; Ixvi. 12; shall learn war no more. * Gal. ili. 27, 28; 1 Cor. xii. 13, « 1 Cor. x. 7. ii. 4,—They . ΝΣ eee, + ees THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. 319 τ He therefore that keeps neither the unity of the Spirit, nor the conjunction of peace, and separates himself from the bond of the church, and the college (or society) of priests, can have neither the power of a bishop, nor the honour.”* Thus in general. But particularly, all Christians should assist one another in the common defence of truth, piety, and peace, when they are assaulted, in the propagation of the faith, and enlarge- _ ment of the church, which is συγαθλεῖν τῆ πίστει τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, to contend to- gether for the faith of the gospel; to be good soldiers of Christ; warring the _ good warfare ;—striving for the faith once delivered to the saints." Hence if anywhere any heresy or bad doctrine should arise, all Christians should be ready to declare against it ; that it may not infect, or spread a doubt arising, as in the case of celebrating Faster: ‘“* They all, with one consent, declared by letters the decree of the church to all everywhere.” Especially the pastors of the churches are obliged with consent to oppose it.° *“ While we laboured here, and with- stood the force of envy with the whole strength of our faith, your speech assist- ed us very much.” Thus did the bishops of several churches meet to suppress the heresy of - P. Samosatenus. This was the ground of most synods. **So they who afterward in all places and several ways were gathered together against the innovations of heretics, gave their common opinoin in behalf of the ) faith, as being of one mind: what they _ had approved among themselves in a _ brotherly way, that they clearly trans- _ ferred to those who were absent: and they who atthe council of Sardis had earnestly contended against the remain- * Qui ergo nec unitatem Spiritus, nec con- junctionem pacis observat, et se ab ecclesia | vinculo, aique a sacerdotum collegio separat, episcopi nec potestatem potest habere, nec ho- | norem, &c.—IJbid. p. 97. Ἵ Πάντες re ped γνώμῃ δι' ἐπιστολῶν ἐκκλησιαστι- | κὃν δόγμα τοῖς πανταχόσε diervnodvro.—Euseb. v ἃ Laborantes hic nos et contra invidiaw im- petum totis fidei viribus resistentes, multum sermo vester adjuvit, &e.—Cypr. Ep. 23. 5 Phil. i.27; 1 Tim. i. 18; vi. 12; 2 Tim. iv.7; Jude 3. * Cypr. Ep. 67. ders of Arius, sent their judgment to those of the eastern churches: and they who had then discovered the infection of Apolinarius, made their opinions known to the western.”* If any dissension or faction doth arise in any church, other churches, upon notice thereof, should yield their aid to quench and suppress it; countenancing the peaceable, checking and disavowing the factious. Thus did St. Cyprian help to discounte- nance and quash the Novatian βοῇ βγη. Thus, when the oriental churches did labour under the Arian faction, and dis- sensions between the catholics, St. Basil (with other orthodox bishops consorting with him) did write to the western bish- ops (of Italy and France) to yield their succour. * For this, my brother, we must earn- estly endeavour, and ought to endeavour, to have a care, as much as in us lies, to hold the unity delivered to us from the Lord, and by the apostles, whose succes- sors we are; and what lies in us,” &c.t All Christians should be ready, when opportunity doth invite, to admit one an- other to conjunction in offices of piety and charity ; in prayer, in communion of the eucharist, in brotherly conversation, and pious conference for edification or advice.° ‘* So that he who flies and avoids com- munion with us, you in your prudence may know, that such a man breaks him- self off from the whole church.”’¢ St. Chrysostom doth complain of Epi- phanius : ‘Then when he came to the great and holy city Constantinople, he came * Οὕτως of μετὰ ταῦτα παντα χῆ ποικίλως ἐπὶ τοῖς τῶν αἱρετικῶν ἀθροισθέντες καινίσμασι κοινὴν ὡς σύμ- ψυχοι τὴν ὑπὲρ τῆς πίστεως ψῆφον. ἅπερ ἀδελφικῶς ἑαυτοῖς ἐδοκίμασαν, ταῦτα τρανῶς τοῖς ἀποῦσι διαπορ- θμεύσαντες" καὶ οἷ μὲν ἐκ Σαρδικῆς κατὰ τῶν ᾿Δρείου λειψάνων ἀγωνισάμενοι τοῖς ἐν ἀνατολὴ τὴν κρίσιν ἐξέπεμπον. οἱ δὲ ἐνταῦθα τὴν ᾿Α πολιναρίου λύμην φω- pdcavres, τοῖς ἐν δύσει τὴν ψῆφον ἐγνώριζον. -ατ νη, Chalced. ad Imper. Conc. Chale. pars. iii, p. 78. + Hoc enim vel maxime, frater, laboramus, et laborare debemus, ut unitatem a Domino, et per apostolos nobis successoribus traditam quantum possumus, obtinere curemus; et quod in nobis est, &¢.—Cypr. Ep. xlii. p. 78. t “ὥστε ὃ τὴν πρὸς ἡμᾶς κοινωνίαν ἀποδιδράσκων μὴ λανθανέτω ὑμῶν τὴν ἀκριδειαν πάσης ἑαυτὸν τῆς ἐκκλησίας drop; nyvés.—Bas. Ep. 75, 4 Vide Ep. 42. (ad Cornel.), p. 77. * Ep. 398. ge eee πὰ -:-: 320 A DISCOURSE not out into congregation according to custom and the ancient manner, he join- ed not himself with us, nor communicat- ed with us in the word, and prayer, and the holy communion,” &c.* So Polycarp, being at Rome, did com- municate with P. Anicetus.t If dissension arise between divers churches, another may interpose to re- concile them ; as did the church of Car- thage, between that of Rome and Alex- andria.‘ If any bishop were exceedingly negli- gent in the discharge of his office (to the common damage of truth and piety) his neighbour bishops might admonish him thereto; and, if he should not re- form, might deprive him of communion.¢ All Christians should hold friendly correspondence, as occasion doth serve, and as it is useful, to signify consent in faith, to recommend persons, to foster charity, to convey succour and advice, to perform all good offices of amity and peace. ** Siricius, who is our companion and fellow-labourer, with whom the whole world by mutual commerce of canonical or communicatory letters agree together with us in one common society.’”’¢ ‘“* The catholic church being one body, it is consequent thereto, that we write and signify one to another,” &c. || In cases of doubt or difficulty one church should have recourse to others for advice ; and any church should yield it. ** Both common charity and reason re- quires, most dear brethren, that we con- ceal nothing from your knowledge of those things which are done among us, * Elra ris μεγάλης καὶ θεοφιλοῦς Ἰζωνσταντινου- πύλεως ἐπιδὰς οὐκ εἰς ἐκκλεσίαν ἐξῆλθε κατὰ τὸ εἰωθὸς, καὶ τὸν ἄνωθεν κρατήσαντα θεσμὸν οὐχ ἡμῖν συνεγένε- το, οὐ λόγου μετέδωκεν, ἐκ εὐχῆς, οὐ κοινωνίας, ἀλλ᾽’ ἀποθὰς τοῦ πλοίου, &c.—Chrys. ad Innoc. P. (Ep. 122.) + Ἔν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ παρεχώρησεν ὁ ’Avixnros τὴν εὐχαριστίαν τ΄ Ἰ]υλυκάρπῳ, κατ᾽ ἐντροπὴν δηλονότι. —Euseb. v. 24. $ Damaso Siricius hodie, qui noster est soci- us, cur quo nobis totus orbis commercio for- ma'tarum in una communionis societate concor- dant.—Opt. lib. ii. p. 40. || “Ενὸς σώματος ὄντος τῆς καθυλικῆς ἐκκλησίας ἀκόλουθόν ἐστι γράφειν ἡμᾶς καὶ σηναίνειν ἀλλήλοις, &c.—Alex. Alexandria. Socr. i. 6, Theod., f Cod. Afr. Can. 101. © Cod. Afr. Can. 123, CONCERNING that so there may be common ad taken by us concerning the most use way of ordering ecclesiastical affiairs.”* One church should acquaint others o any extraordinary transaction concern- ing the common faith or discipline ; re- questing their approbation and counte- nance.7 a | Thus did the eastern churches give account to all other churches of their proceedings against.P. Samosatenus,” — | ‘** Which letters are sent all the world over, and brought to the notice of allthe — churches, and of all the brethren.”"t When any church, or any pastor, was oppressed or injured, he might have re- course to other churches for their assist- ance, in order to relief. ‘** Let him who is cast out have power to apply himself to the neighbouring bish- ops, that his cause may be carefully heard and discussed.”’|| Thus did Athanasius (being overborne and expelled from his see by the Arian faction) go for refuge to the church of Rome. St. Chrysostom had recourse to the bishop of Rome, and to those of the west, as also to the bishop of Antioch. VI. Now, because in the transacting of these things, the pastors have the chief — hand, and act in behalf of the churches which they inspect, therefore is the church united also by their consent im doctrine, their agreement in peace, their maintaining intercourse, their concur- rence to preserve truth and charity. ‘“* We ought all to be vigilant and care- ful for the body of the whole church, r ni * Et dilectio communis et ratio exposcit, fra- tres charissimi, nihil conscientize vestra su trahere de his que-apud nos geruntur, ut sit nobis circa utilitatem ecclesiastics administra- tionis commuue consilium. Cypr. Ep. 29. (ad Cler. Rom.) ye + The practice of this we see frequently im St. Cyprian’s Epistles; particularly in Epist. 4, 15, 23, 29, 30, 42, 48. (P. Corn.) ᾿ t Que litere per totum mundum miss® sunt, et in notitiam ecclesiis omnibus et uni- versis fratribus perlate sunt—Cypr. Ep. δῷ (ad Anton. p. 92.) Scripsimus ad Cornelium collegam nostram, &c.—Jbid. || Habeat potestatem is qui abjectus est, ut episcopos finitimos interpellet, et causa 6105 a= diatur ac diligentur tractetur, &c¢.—Cone, Can. 17 ; vide Cod. Afr. Can. 125. h Euseb. vii. 30. THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. where members are dispersed through Se many several provinces.””* “ Seeing the church, which is one and catholic, is not rent nor divided, but tru- ly knit and united together by the bond of priests united one to another.”’t “This agrees with the modesty and discipline and the very life of all, that many of the bishops meeting together might order all things in a religious way by common advice.”’t {1 That, since it having pleased God to grant us peace, we begin to have great- er meetings of bishops, we may also by your advice order and reform every- thing.” | * Which that, with the rest of our col- leagues, we may stedfastly and firmly administer; and that we may keep the peace of the church, in the unanimity of concord, the divine favour will vouchsafe to accomplish.”’§ “Α great number ef bishops—we met together.’’{] Bishops being chosen, did acquaint oth- er bishops with it: “It was sufficient” (saith St. Cyprian to Cornelius) ‘ that you should by your letters acquaint us that you were made a bishop.”’** “ Declare plainly to us who is substi- tuted at Arles in the room of Marcian, * Omnes nos decet pro corpore totius ec- > clesiz, cujus per varias quasque provincias membra digesta sunt, excubare.—Cypr. Ep. 30 (Cler. Rom. ad Cypr. P.) Quod sevis Dei, et maxime sacerdotibus.—Cypr. Ep. 42 (ad Cornel.) Idcirco copiosum corpus est sacerdo- tum, &c.—Cypr. Ep. 67 (p. 161.) + Quondo ecclesia, que catholica una est, Scissa non sit, neque divisa, sed sit utique con- Mexa, et cohezrentium sibi invicem sacerdotum > , | glutino copulata.— Cypr. Ep. 69. ¢ Hoc verecundie et discipline et vite ipsi omnium convenit—ut episcopi plures in unum convenientes—disponere omnia consilli com- munis religione possimus.—Cypr. Ep. 14 (Cle- 70 suo.) ! Ut cum pace a Domino nobis data plures pre positi convenire in unum co@perimus, com- municato etiam vobiscum consilio disponere Singula et reformare possimus.—Cypr. Ep. 15 (Clero. Rom.) ᾧ Quod ut simul cum ceteris collegis nos- tris stabiliter ac firmiter administremus, atque ut catholice ecclesia pacem concordim unan- imitate teneamus, pertficiet divina dignatio.— . Ep. 45 (ad Cornel.) Copiosus episcoporum numerus—in unum convenimus.——Cypr. Ep. 52. (ad Anton.) ** Satis erat, ut tute episcopum factum literis nunciares.—Cypr. ad Cornel. (Episi. 42.) Vor. Ill. 41 321 that we may know to whom we should direct our brethren, and to whom we should write.”’* All churches were to ratify the elec- tions of bishops duly made by others, and to communicate with those. And likewise to comply with all reasonable acts for communion.' To preserve this peace and corres- pondence, it was a law and custom, that no church should admit to communion those which were excommunicated by another; or who did schismatically di- vide. ‘“‘ We are all believed to have done the same thing, whereby we are found to be all of us associated and joined together by the same agreement in censure and discipline.’ The decrees of bishops were sent to be subscribed.i VII. All Christian churches are one by a specifical unity of discipline, resem- bling one another in ecclesiastical admin- istrations, which are regulated by the in- dispensable sanctions and institutions of their sovereign. They are all bound to use the same sacraments, according to the forms ap- pointed by our Lord, not admitting any substantial alteration. They must uphold that sort of order, government, and ministry in all its sub- stantial parts, which God did appoint in the church, or give thereto, as St. Paul expresseth it;* it being ἃ temerarious and dangerous thing to innovate in those matters which our Lord hada special care to order and settle. ΝΟΥ can they continue in the church that have not retained divine and ecclesi- astical discipline, neither in good conver- sation, nor peaceable life.”’t * Significa plane nobis quis in locum Mar- ciani Arelate fuerit substitutus, ut sciamus ad quem fratres nostros dirigere, et cui scribere debeamus.—Cypr. Ep. 67; P. ad Steph. + Idem enim omnes credimur operati, in quo deprehendimur eadem omnes censure, et disciplines consensione sociati.—Cler. Rom. ad Cypr. Epist. 31. t ‘Nec remanere in ecclesia possunt qui dei- ficam et ecclesiasticam disciplinam nec actus ‘ Cypr. Ep. 41,42, 52 (pag. 93;) Theod. v. 9; Euseb. de P. Samos. ) Vide Conc. Sard. P. Leonis Il. Ep. 2. (ad Hisp. Episc.) N. B. p. 385, (tom. v.) P. Be- ned. ii. Ep. 16. (p. 404.) * 1 Cor. xii. δὸς Eph. iv. 11; Rom. xii7; Acts xx. 28. 322 In lesser matters of ceremony or dis- cipline (instituted by human prudence) churches may differ, and it is expedient they should do so, in regard to the vari- ous circumstances of things, and qualities of persons to which discipline should be accommodated ; but no power ought to abrogate, destroy, or infringe, or violate the main form of discipline, constituted by divine appointment.' Hence, when some confessors had abetted Novatianus against Cornelius (thereby against a fundamental rule of the church, necessary for preserving of peace and order therein, that but one bishop should be in one church), St. Cyp- rian doth thus complain of their proceed- ing—.* (To act anything) ‘‘ against the sacra- ment of divine ordination and catholic unity, once delivered,makes an adulterate and contrary head out of the church.”’7 “Forsaking the Lord’s priests contrary to the evangelical discipline; a new tradition of a sacrilegious institution starts υρ.ἢ ἢ ‘There is one God, and one Christ, and one church, and one See founded upon Peter by the word of the Lord ; be- sides one altar and one priesthood, anoth- er altar cannot be erected, nor a new priesthood ordained.”’|| Hence were the Meletians rejected by the church, for introducing ordinations Hence was Aérius accounted a heretic, for meaning to innovate in so granda point of discipline, as the subordination of bishops and presbyters. VIII. It is expedient that all churches sui conversatione, nec morum pace tenuerunt. —P. Cornel. apud Cyprian. Ep. 48; vide Ep. 73. (ad Jub.) * Gravat enim me, atque contristat, &c.— Ep. 44. (ad Confess. Rom.) + Contra sacramentum seme] traditum divi- nz dispositionis et catholic nnitatis adulteruam et contrarium caput extra ecclesiam facit.— Cyprian. Epist. 42. (ad Cornel.) t Relictis Domini sacerdotibus contra evangelicam disciplinam nova traditio sacri- lege institutionis exsurgat.—Cypr. Ep. 40. (Plebi sue.) |} Deus unus est, et Christus unus, et eccle- sia una, et cathedra una super Petrum Domini voce fundata; aliud altare constitui, aut sacer- dotium novum fieri preter unum altare, et unum sacerdotium, non potest.— hid. ' Ep. Firmil. (pag. 198;) Aug. Ep. 118 et 86, supra. A DISCOURSE CONCERNING should conform to each other in matters of prudential discipline, alth not instituted or prescribed by God: this is a means of preserving peace, and — is a beauty or harmony. For difference — of practice doth alienate affections, es- pecially in common people. So the synod of Nice: ‘ee ‘‘ That all things may be alike ordered in every diocese, it hath seemed good to — the holy synod, that men should put up their prayers to God standing,”*> (viz. between Easter and Whitsuntide, and up- on the Lord’s day.) The church is like the world; for as the world doth consist of men, all natu- rally subject to one King, Almighty God; all obliged to observe his laws, declared by natural light; all made of one blood, and so brethren ; all endowed with com- mon reason; all bound to exercise good offices of justice and humanity toward each other; to maintain peace and amity together; to further each other in the prosecution or attainment of those good things which conduce to the welfare and security of this present life: even 80 doth the church consist οἵ" persons spirit- ually allied, professing the same faith, subject to the same law and government of Christ’s heavenly kingdom; bound to exercise charity, and to maintain peace toward each other, and to promote each other’s good in order to the future happl- ness in heaven. All those kinds of unity do plainly agree to the universal church of Christ; but the question is, Whether the church is also necessarily, by the design and ap- pointment of God, to be in way of exter nal policy under one singular govern- ment or jurisdiction of any kind; so 888 kingdom or commonwealth are united under the command of one monarch or one senate ? | That the church is capable of such δὶ union, is not the controversy; that it 1s possible it should be so united (supposing it may happen that all Christians may be — reduced to one. nation, or one civil regi * Ὑπὲρ rod πάντα ἐν πάσῃ παροικίᾳ ὁμοίως τάτ- τεσθαι, ἑστῶτας ἔδοξε τῇ ἁγίᾳ συνόδῳ τὰς εὐχὰς ἀπον διδόναι τῷ Θεῷ.---ΟΔη. 20, Πρὸς τούτοις κἀκεῖνο πάρεστι συνορᾷν, ὡς ἐν τηλικούτῳ πράγματι, καὶ τοι- αὔτη θρησκείας ἑορτῇ διαφωνίαν ἄργειν ἐστὶν ἀθέμι- rov.—Const. M. in Epist. ad Eccles. Euseb. Vita Constantini, iti. 18. _— ment; or that several nations spontane- ously may confederate and combine themselves into one ecclesiastical com- monwealth, administered by the same spiritual rules and judges according to the same laws) I do not question; that when in a manner all Christendom did consist of subjects to the Roman empire, ‘the church then did arrive near such an unity, 1 do not at present contest; but that such an union of all Christians is necessary, or that it was ever instituted by Christ, 1 cannot grant; and, for my refusal of that opinion, I shall assign di- ‘vers reasons. \ 1. This being a point of great conside- ‘ration, and trenching upon practice, which every one were concerned to know ; and there being frequent occa- ‘sions to declare it; yet the holy scripture doth nowhere express or intimate such a ‘kind of unity ; which is a sufficient proof jthat it hath no firm ground. We may isay of it, as St. Austin saith of the ‘church itself, ‘I will not that the holy ‘church be demonstrated from human ‘reasonings, but the divine oracles.’’* St. Paul particularly, in divers Epis- es," designedly treating about the unity of the church (together with other points jof doctrine neighbouring thereon), and amply describing it, doth not yet imply vany such unity then extant, or designed -to be. ‘ae He doth mention and urge the unity of ‘spirit, of faith, of charity, of peace, of relation to our Lord, of communion in ‘devotions and offices of piety ; but con- jcerning any union under one singular )visible government or polity he is silent: the saith, One Lord, one faith. one bap- tism ; one God and Father of all; not one monarch, or one senate, or one san- jhedrim—which is a pregnant sign that ‘none such was then instituted; other- wise he could not have slipped over a point so very material and pertinent to ‘his discourse. 2. By the apostolical history it may ‘appear, that the apostles, in the propaga- ‘tion of Christianity, and founding of Christian societies, had no meaning, did * Nolo humanis documentis, sed divinis ora- /eulis sanctam ecclesiam demonstrari.—Aug. de Unit. cap. 3. m™ Eph. iv.; 1 Cor. xii.; Rom. xii.; Gal. ‘ili, 28. THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. take no care, to establish any such polity. They did resort to several places (whither divine instinct or reasonable oc- casion did carry them), where, by their preaching having convinced and convert- ed a “competent number’’* of persons to the embracing Christian doctrine, they did appoint pastors to instruct and edify them, to administer God’s worship and service among them, to contain them in good order and peace, exhorting them to maintain good correspondence of charity and peace with all good Christians oth- er-where: this is all we can see done by them. ᾿ 3. The Fathers, in their set treatises, and in their incidental discourses about the unity of the church (which was de facto, and should be de jure in the church) do make it to consist only in those unions of faith, charity, peace, which we have described, not in this political union. The Roman church gave this reason why they could not admit Marcion into their communion,—they would not do it without his father’s consent, between whom and “them there was one faith and one agreement of mind.”’+ Tertullian, in his Apologetic, describ- ing the unity of the church in his time, saith, ‘* We are one body by our agree- ment in religion, our unity of discipline, and our being in the same covenant of hope.t seve And more exactly and largely in his Prescriptions against heretics, the break- ers of unity: ‘Therefore such and so many churches are but the same with the first apostolical one, from which all are derived: thus they become all first, all apostolical; whilst they maintain the same unity ; whilst there are a com- munion of peace, names of brotherhood, and contributions of hospitality among them; the rights of which are kept up by no other means, but the one tradition of the same mystery.”’|| * "Oy ov ixavév.— Acts xi. 26. ΧΧειροτονῆσαν- res αὐτοῖς πρεσβυτέρους Kar’ ἐκκλησίαν. Acts ΣΟΥ͂. 23. t pla γάρ ἐστιν ἡ πίστις καὶ μία ἡ ὁμόνοια. —-Epiph. Heer. 42. oe pow { Corpus sumus de conscientia religionis et disciplina unitate, et spei faedere.—Apol. 39, \| ILaque tot ac tanta ecclesie una est illa ab apostolis prima, ex qua omnes; 510 omnes pri- ma, et omnes apostolice ; dum unam omnes probant unitatem ; commuaricatio pacis, et ap- 323 324 “They and we have one faith, one God, the same Christ, the same hope, the same baptism ; ina word, we are but one church.”’* And Constantine the Great, in his Epistle to the churches : (Our Saviour) “ would have his catho- lic church to be one: the members of which, though they be divided into many and different places, are yet cherished by one spirit, that is, by the will of God.” And Gregory the Great: “Our head, which is Christ, would therefore have us be his members, that by the joints of charity and faith he might make us one body in himself.”’t Clemens Alexandrinus defineth the church: ‘* A people gathered together out of Jews and Gentiles into one faith, by the giving of the testaments fitted into unity of (δι. iJ “Ὁ This one church therefore partakes of the nature of unity, which heresies violently endeavour to divide into many ; and therefore we affirm the ancient and catholic church, whether we respect its constitution or our conception of it, its beginning or its excellency, to be but one ; which into the belief of that one creed which is agreeable to its own pe- culiar testaments, or rather to that one and the same testament, in times however different, by the will of one and the same God, through one and the same Lord, doth unite and combine together all those who are before ordained, whom God hath predestinated, as knowing that they pellatio fraternitatis et contesseratio hospitali- tatis ; que jura non alia ratio regit, quam ejus- dem sacrameimta una traditio—Tertul. Pre- script. cap. 20. * Una nobis et illis fides, unus Deus, idem Christus, eadem spes, eadem lavacri sacramen- ta; semel dixerim, una ecclesia sumus.— Tert. de Virg. vel. 2. + Kai μίαν εἶναι τὴν καθολικὴν αὐτοῦ ἐκκλησίαν βεβούληται" ἧς εἰ καὶ τὰ μάλιστα εἰς πολλοὺς καὶ δια- φύρους τύπους τὰ μέρη διήρηται, ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως ἑνὶ Πνεύ- ατι, τουτέστι τῷ Θείῳ βουλήματι 6aXrerat.—Const. M. in Ep. ad Eccles. Euseb. Vit. Const. iii. 18. $+ Caput nostrum, quod Christus est, ad hoc sua esse membra nos voluit, ut per compagem charitatis et fidei unum nos in se corpus effice- ret.—Greg. M. Ep. vii. 111. || 'O ἐκ νόμου καὶ ἐξ ἐθνῶν εἰς τὴν μίαν πίστιν συ- ναγόμενος ads.—Strom, vi. init. Τῇ κατὰ τὰς διαθήκας δόσει σκευαζόμενον εἰς ἑνότητα τῆς πίστεως. —Ibid. vii. (p. 516.) en } A DISCOURSE CONCERNING would be just persons, before the founda- tion of the world.””* Many passages in the Fathers, appli- cable to this point, we have alleged in the foregoing discourses.t 4, The constitution of such an unity doth involve the vesting some person or some number of persons with a sove- reign authority (subordinate to our Lord) to be managed in a certain manner; either absolutely, according to pleasure 3 or limitedly, according to certain rules prescribed to it. But that there was ever any such au- thority constituted, or any rules prescrib- ed to it by our Lord, or his apostles, doth not appear ; and there are divers reasona- ble presumptions against it. It is reasonable, that whoever claimeth such authority, should for assuring his: title shew patents of his commission, manifestly expressing it ; how otherwise can he justly demand obedience, or any with satisfaction yield thereto ? It was just that the institution of so great authority should be forfeited with an undoubted charter, that its right might be apparent, and the duty of subjection might be certain. If any such ‘authority had been grant- ed by God, in all likelihood it would have been clearly mentioned in scripture; it being a matter of high importance among the establishments of Christianity conducing to great effects, and grounding much duty. Especially considering that There is in scripture frequent occasion of mentioning it; in way of history, touching the use of it (the acts of sove- reign power affording chief matter to the history of any society ;) in way of direction to those governors how to man- * Τῇ γοῦν τοῦ ἑνὸς φῦσει συγκληροῦται ἐκκλησία ἧ μία, ἣν eis πολλὰς κατατέμνειν βιάζονται αἱρέσεις" κατά τε οὖν ὑπόστασιν, κατά τε ἐπίνοιαν, κατά τε ἂρ- χὴν, (principium, ) κατά τε ἐξοχὴν, μόνην εἶναί φα- pev τὴν ἀρχαίαν καὶ καθολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν εἰς ἑνότητα πίστεως μιᾶς τῆς κατὰ τὰς οἰκείας διαθήκας, μᾶλλον δὲ κατὰ τὴν διαθήκην τὴν μίαν διαφόροις τοῖς χρόνοις, ἑνὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ τῷ βουλήματι de’ ἑνὸς τοῦ Ἰζυρίου cuv- ἄγουσαν τοὺς ἤδη κὰτατεταγμένους, ods προώρισεν, d= καίους ἐσομένους πρὸ καταδυλῆς κόσμου ἐγνωκώς .--- Strom. vil. (p. 549.) + Catholicam facit simplex et verus intel- lectus, intelligere singulare, ac verissimum sa- cramentum, et unitas animorum.—Op?. J. (p. 14.) Ecclesia non parietibus consistit sed in dogmatum veritate, &c.—Hier. Ps. 133. ΝΡ i © — o THE UNITY OF age it; in way of exhortation to inferiors | how to behave themselves in regard wd it; in way of commending the advanta- ges which attend it: it is therefore strange that its mention is so balked. | The apostles do often speak concern- | ing ecclesiastical affairs of all natures, concerning the decent administration of things, concerning preservation of order. and peace, concerning the furtherance of edification, concerning the prevention and removal of heresies, schisms, fac- tions, disorders: upon any of which oc- casions it is marvellous that they should | not touch that constitution which was the. proper means appointed for maintenance of truth, order, peace, decency, edifica- tion, and all such purposes, for remedy of all contrary mischiefs. There are mentioned divers schisms and dissensions, the which the apostles did strive by instruction and persuasion to remove ; in which cases, supposing such an authority in being, it is a wonder that they do not mind the parties dissent- ing of having recourse thereto for de- cision of their causes, that they do not exhort them to a submission thereto, that they do not reprove them for declining such a remedy. It is also strange, that no mention is made of any appeal made by any of the dissenting parties to the judgment of such authority. Indeed, if such an authority had then been avowed by the Christian churches, it is hardly conceivable that any schisms could subsist, there being so powerful a remedy against them ; then notably visi- ble and most effectual, because of its fresh institution, before it was darkened or weakened by age. Whereas the apostolical writings do in- culcate our subjection to one Lord in heaven, it is much they should never consider his vicegerent or vicegerents, upon earth ; notifying and pressing the duties of obedience and reverence to- ward them. There are indeed exhortations to hon- our the elders, and to obey the guides of particular churches ; but the honour and obedience due to those paramount author- ities, or universal governors, is passed over in dead silence, as if no such thing had been thought of. They do expressly avow the secular —- THE CHURCH. 325 preeminence, and press submission to the emperor as supreme: why do they not likewise mention this no less con- siderable ecclesiastical supremancy, or enjoin obedience thereto? why honour the king, and be subjected to principalites so often," but honour the spiritual prince or senate doth never occur? If there had been any such authority, there would probably have been some intimation concerning the persons in whom it was settled, concerning the place of their residence, concerning the manner of its being conveyed (by elec- tion, succession, or otherwise.) Probably the persons would have some proper name, title, or character, to dis- tinguish them from inferior governors ; ‘that to the place some mark of preemi- nence would have been affixed. It is not unlikely, that somewhere some rules or directions would have been prescribed for the management of so high a trust, for preventing miscarriages and abuses to which it is notoriously liable. It would have been declared absolute, or the limits of it would have been deter- mined, to prevent its enslaving God’s heritage. But of these things in the apostolical writings, or in any near those times, there doth not appear any footstep or pregnant intimation. There hath never to this day been any place but one (namely Rome), which hath pretended to be the seat of such an authority ; the plea whereof we largely have examined. At present we shall only observe, that before the Roman church was founded, there were churches otherwhere ;° there was a great church at Jerusalem* (which indeed was the “* mother of all churches,”*t and was by the Fathers so styled, how- ever Rome now arrogates to herself that title.) There were issuing from that mother a fair offspring of churches (those of Judea, of Galilea, of Samaria, of Syria and Cilicia, of divers other places), before there was any church at Rome, or * ᾿Επληθύνετο ἀριθμὸς τῶν μαθητῶν ἐν Ἵερουσα- λὴμ of6dpa.— Acts vi. 7. t Μήτηρ ἁπασῶν τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν ἡ ἐν 'Ἱεροσολύ- pors—Conc. Const in Synod. Ep. Theod. v. 9, " Rom, xiii. 1; Tit. i. 1; 1 Pet. ii. 13, 17; 1 Tim. i. 2. 9 Acts ii. 41, 47; iv. 4; vi. 1; vii. 1. . rr... . — ~~ =. - - eT 2. oe See! 326 that St. Peter did come thither; which was at least divers years afier our Lord’s ascension. St. Paul was converted after five years he went to Jerusalem, then St. Peter was there; after founteen years thence he went to Jerusalem again, and then St. Peter was there ; after that, he met with St. Peter at Antioch.» Where then was this authority seated ? How then did the political unity of the church subsist? Was the seat of the sovereign authority first resident at Jeru- salem, when St. Peter preached there? Did it walk thence to Antiochia, fixing itself there for seven years? Was it thence translated to Rome, and settled there ever since? Did this roving and inconstancy become it? 5. The primitive state of the church did not well comport with such an unity. For Christian churches were founded in distant places, as the apostles did find opportunity, or received direction to found them; which therefore could not, without extreme inconvenience, have re- sort or reference to one authority, any- where fixed. Each church therefore separately did order its own affairs, without recourse to others, except for charitable advice or relief in cases of extraordinary difficulty or urgent need. Each church was endowed with a per- fect liberty, and a full authority, without dependence or subordination. to others, to govern its own members, to manage its own affairs, to decide controversies and causes incident among themselves, without allowing appeals, or rendering accounts to others. This appeareth by the apostolical writ- ings of St. Paul and St. John to single churches ; wherein they are supposed able to exercise spiritual power for es- tablishing decency, removing disorders, correcting offences, deciding causes, &c.4 6. This αὐτονομία, liberty of churches, doth appear to have long continued in practice inviolate; although tempered and modelled in accommodation to the circumstances of place and time. It is true, that if any church did no- P Acts ix. 31; xv. 41; xi. 19; viii. 1; 1 Cor. xvi. 1,19; Rom. xvi.4; Vales. in Eu- seb. ii. 16; Gal. i. 18, 19; ii. 1, 9, 11. 1 Rev. ii, ili.; 1Cor. xiv: 40; 1 Thess. v. 14; 1 Cor. v. 12; vi. 1. A DISCOURSE CONCERNING toriously forsake the truth, or commit disorder in any kind, other churches did sometime take upon them (as the case dic move) to warn, advise, reprove it, and to declare against its proceedings, as pre- judicial, not only to the welfare of that church, but to the common interests of truth and peace: but this was not in way of commanding authority, but of fraternal solicitude; or of that liberty which equity and prudence do allow to equals in regard to common good: 80. : | did the Roman church interpose in re- claiming the church of Corinth from its disorders and seditions;' so did St. Cyprian and St. Denys of Alexandria meddle in the affairs of the Romanchurch, — exhorting Novatian and his adherents to return to the peace of their church. It is also true, that the bishops of seve- ral adjacent churches did use to meet upon emergencies (concerning the main- tenance of truth, order, and peace ; con- cerning settlement and approbation of pastors, &c.) to consult and conclude upon expedients for attaining such ends ; — this probably they did at first in a free way, without rule, according to occasion, — as prudence suggested ; but afterwards, by confederation and consent, those con- ventions were formed into method, and regulated by certain orders established by consent, whence did arise an ecclesi- astical unity of government within certain precincts, much like that of the United States in the Netherlands; the which course was very prudential, and useful for preserving the truth of religion and unity of faith against heretical devices springing up in that free age ; for main- taining concord and good correspond- ence among Christians, together with an harmony in manners and discipline ; for that otherwise Christendom would have been shattered and crumbled into number- less parties, discordant in opinion and practice ; and consequently alienated in affection, which inevitably among most men doth follow difference of opinion and manners; so that in short time it would not have appeared what Chris- — tianity was, and consequently the relig-— ion, being overgrown with differences — and discords, must haye perished. hole | i Thus, in the case about admitting ἱ τ Iren. ili. cap. 2. THE UNITY OF Lapsi to communion, St. Cyprian relates,* “when the persecution” [of Decius] ** ceased, so that leave was now given us to meet in one place together, a consid- erable number of bishops whom their own faith and God’s protection had pre- served sound and entire” [from the late a y and persecution], “ being as- sembled, we deliberated of the composi- | tion of the matter with wholesome mod- | eration,” &c. ** Which thing also Agrippinus of bless- ed memory with his other fellow-bishops who then governed the church of Christ in the African province, and in Numidia, did establish ; and by the well-weighed examination of the common advice of them all together confirmed it.” Thus it was the custom in the churches of Asia, as Firmilian telleth us in those. words :— “ Upon which occasion it necessarily | happens, that every year we the elders and rulers do come together to regulate those things which are committed to our care; that if there should be any things of greater moment, by common advice | they be determined.” —i | Yet while things went thus, in order | fo common truth and peace, every church in more private matters touching its own particular state, did retain its liberty and authority, without being subject or ac- countable to any but the common Lord ; in such cases, even synods of bishops did not think it proper or just for them to interpose, to the prejudice of that liberty and power which derived from a higher source.|| * Persecutione sopita, cum data esset facul- tas in unum conveniendi, copiosus episcoporam numerus, quos integros et incolumes fide sua ac Domini tutela protexit, in unum conyeni- mus, et scripturis diu ex utraque parte prolatis, temperamentum salubri moderatione libravi- mus,‘&c.—Cypr. Ep. 52. (ad Anton.) + Quod pi whl et Agrippinus bone memo- riz vircum crteris coepiscopis suis qui illo tempore in provincia Africa et Numidia eccle- siam Domini gubernabant, statuit et librato consilii communis examine firmavit.—Cypr. Epist. 71. (ad Quint.) ¢ Qua ex causa necessario apud nos fit, ut per singulos annos seniores et preposili in unum conveniamus, ad disponenda ea que cu- Te nostre commissa sunt; ut si qua graviora sunt communi consilio dirigantur ——, Cypr. Ep. 75. || Saperest ut de hac ipsa re singuli quid sentiamus, proferamus, neminem judicantes THE CHURCH. 227 These things are very apparent, as by the course of ecclesiastical History, so particularly in that most precious monu- ment of antiquity, St. Cyprian’s Epistles ; by which it is most evident, that in those times every bishop or pastor was con- ceived to have a double relation or ca- pacity ; one toward his own flock, an- other toward the whole flock : One toward his own flock ;* by virtue of which, he taking advice of his pres- byters, together with ‘the conscience of his people assisting,’* did order all things tending to particular edification, order, peace, reformation, censure, &c., without fear of being troubled by appeals, or being liable to give any account, but to his own Lord, whose vicegerent he was.t Another toward the whole church, in behalf of his people; upon account whereof he did (according to occasion or order) apply himself to confer with other bishops for preservation of the common truth and peace, when they could not otherwise be well upheld, than by the jointconspiring οὗ the pastors of divers churches. aut a jure communionis aliquem si diversum senserit amoventes, &c.—Vide Conc Carthag. apud Cypr. p. 399 ; vide Syn. Ant. Can 9. * Sub populi assistentis conscientia.—Cypr. Ep. 78. + —— Actum suum disponit,et dirigit unus- quisque episcopus, rationem propositi sui Do- mino redditurus.—Cypr. Ep. 52. Every bish- op ordereth and directeth hisown acts, being to render an account of his purpose to the Lord. Cum _ statutum sit omnibus nobis ac gequum sit pariter ac justum, ut uniuscujusque causa illic audiatur, ubi est crimen admissum ; et singulis pastoribus portio gregis sit adscrip- ta, quam regat unusquisque prepositus ratio- nem actus sui Domino redditurus.—Cypr. Ep. 55, ad Since it is ordained by us all, and it is likewise just and equal that every man’s cause should be there judged where the crime is committed, and to each pastor, ἃ por- tion of the flock is assigned, which is to rale and govern, being to give an account of his act tothe Lord. Qua inre nec nos vim cul- quam facimus, nec legem damus, cum habeat in ecclesie administratione voluntatis su libe- rum arbitrium unusquisque prepositus, ratio- nem actus sui Domino rediturus.—Cypr. Ep. 72, ad Steph. P. Vide Ep. \xxiii. p. 186; Ep, Ixxvi. p. 212, In which matter neither do we offer violence to any man, or presenbe any law, since every bishop hath in the government of his church the free power of his will, being to render an account of his own act unto the Lord + Vide Epist. xxviii. 39; xiv. 18. So that the case of bishops was like to that of princes; each of whom hath | free superintendence i in his own territory, but for to uphold justice and peace in the world, or between adjacent nations, the intercourse of several princes is needful. The peace of the church was preserv- ed by communion of all parts together, not by the subjection of the rest to one rt. 7. This political unity doth not well) accord with the nature and genius of the evangelical dispensation. Our Saviour affirmed, that his bing-| dom is not of this world; and St. Paul| telleth us, that it consisteth in a spiritual | influence upon the souls of men; produc- ing in them virtue, spiritual joy, and peace.* It disavoweth and discountenanceth the elements of the world, by which worldly designs are carried on, and worldly frames sustained. It requireth not to be managed by _ po- litic artifices or fleshly wisdom," but by simplicity, sincerity, plain dealing: as every subject of it must lay aside all guile and dissimulation, so especially the officers of it must do so, in conformi- ty to the apostles, who had their con- versation in the world (and prosecuted their design) ἐπ simplicity and godly Sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God; not walking in craftiness, or handling the word of | nearly resembling a worldly state, yeas 7 | in effect soon resolving itself into such a _ It needeth not to be supported or en- | ope ; supposing, as is now pretended, larged by wealth and pomp, or by com- thatits management is committed to am God deceitfully, &c.* pulsive force and violence ; for God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to\ worldly kingdom; for such a polity cou confound the wise ; and the weak things | not be upheld without applying the s A DISCOURSE CONCERNING faith, but did co-operate to their Joy 5 necessary for order and edificatic derogating from the liberty of Chri and from the simplicity of our jolly The government of the Christian s is represented purely spiritual ; admin tered by meek persuasion, not by im rious awe ; as an humble ministry, as a stately domination ; for the apostl themselves did not lord it over men’ they did zot preach themselves, but Chri. Jesus to be the Lord; and themselv their servants for Jesus.* It is expressly forbidden to them, domineer over God’s people.* They are to be qualified with gentle ness and patience; they are forbidden to strive, and enjoined all to be gentle toward all, apt to teach, patient, in- meekness instructing those that oppc themselves.° They are to convince, to rebuke, to ez hort with all long-suffering and doc- trine.** They are furnished with no arms be- side the divine panoply ; they bear no sword, but that of the Spirit ; which the word of God," they may teack reprove, they cannot compel .# They are not to be entangled in the cares of this life.‘t But supposing the church was designed to be one in this manner of political reg iment, it must be quite another thing ecclesiastical monarch, it must become ἃ. of the world to confound the mighty ; _ means and engines, without practiallll ig and base, despicable things, &c., that | no flesh should glory in his presence.* | And, The weapons of our warfare | are not carnal, but God, &c.* It discountenanceth the imposition of new laws and precepts, beside those’ which God hath enjoined, or which are | mighty through t John xviii. 36; Rom. xiv. 17. . Gal. iv. 3, 9; Col. ii. 20. Yh Bet. hy ἢ, © 2 Cor. vi. 4; 1 Tim. iii. 3; Ti. i. δὲ ν 2 Cor. i. 12; iv. 2; ii. 17; 1 Thess. ii. 3,5.| Tim. ii. 24, 25; Chrys. Isid. = 1 Cor. i. 27, 28 ; James ii. 5. 4 2 Tim. iv. 2. * Eph. vi. 17. 52 Cer. x.4. f 2 Tim. ii. 4 * Episcopus preest volentibus, non nole bus.—Hier. Ep. 3. (ad Nepot.) + ᾿Αναλάθετε τὴν πανοπλίαν Θεοῦ —Eph. vi. Ὲ t Μάλιστα γὰρ ἁπάντων Χριστιανοῖς οὐκ ἐῤεῖται πρὸς βίαν ἐπανορθοῦν τὰ τῶν ἁμαρτανόντων πταίσμᾶ- τα . Chrys. de Sacerd. 2, ᾿Ενταῦθα ob 6 αζόμενον, ἀλλὰ πείθοντα det ποιεῖν ἀμείνω τὸν Ττον.- bid. = Matt. xv.9; Colos. ii.8, 20, 21; Gal. iv. 10. ® 2Cor. i. 24; > 1 Pet. v.3; Matt. xx. 25, 26. iv. Ds the same methods and arts, whereby secular governments are maintained.* Its majesty must be supported by con- -spicuous pomp and phantastry. Its dignity and power must be support- ed by wealth; which it must corrade and accumulate by large incomes, by exaction of tributes and taxes. | It must exert authority in enacting of laws for keeping its state in order, and securing its interests, backed with re- wards and pains ; especially considering, iits title being so dark, and grounded on ‘no clear warrant, many always will con- | est it. It must apply constraint and force, for procuring obedience, and correcting trans- ‘gression. _ It must have guards to preserve its safety and authority. It must be engaged in wars, to defend itself, and make good its interests. | It must use subtlety and artifice for promoting its interests, and counterinine he policies of adversaries. | It must erect judicatories, and must de- cide causes with formality of legal pro- cess ; whence tedious suits, crafty plead- ngs, "quirks of law and pettifoggeries, fees and charges, extortion and_bar- vetry, &c. will necessarily creep in.t All which things do much disagree ‘rom the original constitution and design ‘the Christian church, which is averse rom pomp, doth reject ‘domination, doth ot require craft, wealth, or force, to aintain it; but did at first, and may subsist without any such means.t I do not say, that an ecclesiastical so- tiety may not lawfully, for its support, ase power, policy, wealth, in some mea- sure to uphold or defend itself ; but that h constitution needing such things i is not jivine ; or that so far as it doth use them, ‘tis no more than human. Thus in effect we see that it hath suc- eeded, from the pretence of this unity ; he which hath indeed transformed the ᾿ : | | Ϊ ) * "Erepéy τι παρὰ τὰς ΔῊΝ ἀρχὰς οἱ ἄρ- ovres.—Arist. Pol. 1V. + Is modus qui prs te execrabilis απο, et qui non dico ecclesiam sed nec forum veceret, &c.— Bern. de Consid.i. 9. Attendens taque Ἔ. synodus, quod spiritualiasine carna- nner nequeant.— Syn. Bass. sess, xii. | ). 108. ¢ Omnis a filiz regis intrinsecus. Aug. Ep. 6 Vor. fit. 42 THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. church into a mere worldly state ; where- in the monarch beareth the garb of an emperor, in external splendour surpass- ing all worldly princes ; crowned witha triple crown.* He assumeth the most haughty titles of, Our most holy Lord, the Vicar- general of Christ, &c., and he suffereth men tocall him the Monarch of Kings, &e. He hath respects paid him, like to which no potentate doth assume (having his feet kissed, riding upon the backs of men, letting princes hold his stirrup and lead his horse.7*) He hath a court, and is attended witha train of courtiers surpassing in state and claiming precedence to the peers of any kingdom. He is encompassed with armed guards : Switzers. He hath a vast revenue, supplied by tributes and imposts, sore and grievous ; the exaction of which hath made divers nations of Christendom to groan most lamentably. He hath raised numberless wars and commotions for the promotion and ad- vancement of his interests. He administereth things with all depth of policy, to advance his designs. He hath enacted volumns of laws and decrees, to which obedience is exacted with rigour and forcible constraint.t He draweth grist from all parts to his courts of judgment, wherein all formali- ties of suspense, all the tricks of squeez- ing money, Wc. are practised, to the great trouble and charge of parties concerned. Briefly, it is plain, that he doth exer- cise the proudest, mightiest, subtlest dom- ination that ever was over Christians.f 8. The union of the whole church in one body, under one government or sovereign authority, would be inconven- * One crown doth serve an emperor, but he must have a tripple: to kiss the hands of a king is a sufficient respect, but you cannot 58- lute him without kissing his de ssed feet. + That which Seneca. did take for a piece of enormous pride in Caligula.—De Bene/. ui. 12. ¢t Sub mortali. He imposes rigorous oaths of fealty and obedience. ᾿ || Exaltatio, et inflatio, et arrogans ac super- ba jactatio, non de Christi magisterio, qui hu- militatem docet, sed de Antichrist spirita nas- citur.—Cypr. Ep. 55 (ad P. Cornel.) & Cardin. vid. Uss. p. 103. 330 A DISCOURSE ient and hurtful ; prejudicial to the main designs of Christianity; destructive to the welfare and peace of mankind in many respects. This we have shewed particularly con- cerning the pretence of the papacy ; and those discourses being applicable to any like universal authority (perhaps With more advantage, monarchy being less subject to abuse than other ways of government), I shall forbear to say more. 9. Such an union is of no need, would be of small use, or would do little good, in balance to the great mischiefs and _in- conveniences which it would produce. This point also we have declared, in regard to the papacy ; and we might say the same concerning any other like au- thority substituted thereto. 10. Such a connection of churches is not anywise needful or expedient to the design of Christianity; which is to re- duce mankind to the knowledge, love, and reverence of God; toa just and loy- ing conversation together; to the prac- tice of sobriety, temperance, purity, meekness, and all other virtues;" all which things may be compassed without forming men into such a policy. It is expedient there should be particu- lar societies, in which men may concur in worshipping God, and promoting that design by instructing and provoking one another to good practice, in‘a regular, de- cent, and orderly way. It is convenient that the subjects of each temporal sovereignty should live, as in a civil, so in a spiritual uniformity, in order to the preservation of good-will and peace among them (for that neigh- bours differing in opinion and fashions of practice will be apt to contend each for his way, and thence to disaffect one another), for the beauty and pleasant har- mony of agreement in divine things, for the more commodioussuccour and defence of truth and piety by unanimous concur- rence. But that all the world should be so joined is needless; and will be apt to produce more mischief than benefit. 11. The church, in the scripture sense, hath ever continued one; and will ever continue so; notwithstanding that it hath not had this political unity. » Tit. ii. 12. CONCERNING a ἊΝ 12. It is in fact apparent, that churches _ have not been thus united, which yet — have continued catholic and Christian, It were great, no less folly than charitableness, to say, that the Greek ~ church hath been none. a: There is no church that hath in effeet less reason than that of Rome to pre- — scribe to others. 13. The reasons alleged in proof of such _ an unity are insufficient and inconclud- — ing; the which (with great diligence, ale _ though not with like perspicuity) advane- ed by a late divine of great repute, and — collected out of his writings with some care, are those which briefly proposed do follow ; together with answers declaring their invalidity. Arg. 1. The name church is attributed to the whole body of Christians; which implieth unity.’ | Answ. This indeed doth imply an uni- ty of the church, but determineth not the kind or ground thereof: there being sev- eral kinds of unity; one of those which we have touched, or several, or all of them may suffice to ground that compre- hensive appellation. Arg. 11. Our creeds do import the be- lief of such an unity; for in the apostolical we profess to believe éhe holy catholie — church; in the Constantinopolitan, the holy catholic and apostolic church. Answ. 1. The most ancient summa- ries of Christian faith, extant in the first Fathers (Ireneus, Tertullian, Cyprian, &c.) do not contain this point.* The word catholic was not originally in the Apostolical (or Roman) Creed, but was added after Ruffin and St. Austin’s time. This article was inserted into the creeds upon the rise of heresies and schisms, to discountenance and disengage from them. Answ. 2. We do avow a catholi¢ church in many respects one; wherefore not the unity of the church, but the kind and manner of unity being in question, the Creed doth not oppose what we say, nor can with reason be alleged for the special kind of unity which is pretended. Answ. 3, That the unity mentioned in the Constantinopolitan Creed is such as ' Epil. p. 38; Lat. Ὁ. 114. ) Epil. Lat. 144. * Iren. Tert. Cypr. Cone. Nic. , THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. policy, is precariously assumed, and re- lieth only upon their interpretation ob- truded on us. Answ. 4. The genuine meaning of that article may reasonably be deemed this: That we profess our adhering to the body of Christians, which diffused over the world doth retain the faith taught, the | discipline settled, the practices appointed by our Lord and his apostles; that we maintain general charity toward all good Christians ; that we are ready to enter- tain communion in holy offices with all such; that we are willing to observe the | laws and orders established by authority or consent of the churches, for mainte- nance of truth, order, and peace; that | We renounce all heretical doctrines, all disorderly practices, all conspiracy with any factious combinations of people.* Answ. 5. That this is the meaning of ' the article may sufficiently appear from | the reason and occasion of introducing it; | which was to secure the truth of Chris- | tian doctrine, the authority of ecclesiasti- cal discipline, and the common peace of | the church; according to the discourses | ensis), the which do plainly countenance ' our interpretation. and arguments of the Fathers (Irenzus, Tertullian, St. Austin, Vincentius Lirin- Answ. 6. It-is not reasonable to inter- + pret the article so as will not consist with the state of the church in the apostolical and most primitive ages, when evidently there was no such a political conjunction of Christiaas. Arg. Ill. The apostles delivered one rule of faith to all churches, the embrac- ing and professing whereof, celebrated in baptism, was a necessary condition to | the admission into the church, and to con- 'tinuance therein; therefore Christians /are combined together in one political body.' Answ. 1. The consequence is very ‘weak; for from the antecedent it can only be inferred, that (according to the sentiment of the ancients) all Christians | should consent in one faith; which unity we avow ; and who denieth ? Answ. 2. By like reason all mankind must be united in one political body ; be- apacvpaywyat, : ° | 'Ep. p. 40; Lat. p. 144, 151. 331 eur adversaries contend for, of external! cause all men are bound to agree in what the light of nature discovereth to be true and good; or because the principles of natural religion, justice, and humanity are common to all. Arg. IV. God hath granted to the church certain powers and rights, as ju- ra majestatis ;" namely, the power of the keys (to admit into, to exclude from the kingdom of heaven ;) a power to en- act laws (for maintenance of its order and peace, for its edification and wel- fare ;) a power to correct and excommu- nicate offenders ; a power to hold assem- blies for God’s service ; a power to or- dain governors and pastors." Answ. 1. These powers are granted to the church, because granted to each particular church, or distinct society of Christians; not to the whole, as such, or as distinct from the parts. Answ. 2. It is evident, that by virtue of such grants particular churches do ex- ercise those powers ; and it is impossible to infer more from them than a justifica- tion of their practice. Answ. 3. St. Cyprian often from that common grant doth infer the right of ex- ercising discipline in each particular church; which inference would not be good, but upon our supposition; nor in- deed otherwise would any particular church have ground for its authority. Answ. 4. God hath granted the like rights to all princes and states; but doth it thence follow, that all kingdoms and states must be united in one single regi- ment? ‘The consequence is just the same as in our case. Arg. V. Allchurches were tied to ob- serve the same laws or rules of practice, the same orders of discipline and cus- toms; therefore all do make one corpor- ation.° Answ. 1. That all churches are bound to observe the same divine institutions, doth argue only an unity of relation to the same heavenly King, or a specifical unity and similitude of policy, the which we do avow. Answ. 2. We do also acknowledge it convenient and decent, that all churches, - τον p. 37,49; Lat. p. 153, 118; Leges ferre. Lat. p. 171. 5" Lat. p. δά. * Epil. p.42, 49; Lat. P. 151, 2195 1 Cor, xi. 16. Φ ὌΠ ΨΥ. ΨΥ υκνουι σὰν ~~ νβαδον., ἴῃ principal observances introduced by human prudence, should agree so near as may be; an uniformity in suclf things representing and preserving unity of faith, of charity, of peace. Whence the governors of the primitive church did endeavour such an uniformi- ty; asthe Fathers of Nice profess in the canon forbidding of genuflexion on Lord’s day, and in the days of Pente- cost.* Answ. 3. Yet doth not such an agree- ment, or attempt at it, infer a political unity; no more than when all men, by virtue of a primitive general tradition, were tied to offer sacrifices and oblations to God, that consideration might argue all mento have been under the same government; or no more than the usual agreement of neighbour nations in di- vers fashions doth conclude such an uni- ty. Answ. 4. In divers customs and obser- vances several churches did vary, with allowance; which doth rather infer a difference of polity, than agreement in other observances doth argue an unity thereof. Answ. 5. St. Cyprian doth affirm, that in such matters every bishop had a pow- er to use his own discretion, without be- ing obliged to comply with others.” Arg. VI. The Jewish church was one corporation ; and in correspondence there- to the Christian church should be such.* Answ. 1. As the Christian church doth in some things correspond to that of the Jews, so it differeth in others, being * 'Y nip rod πάντα ἐν πάσῃ παροικίᾳ ὁμοίως φυλάτ- τεσθαι.---Οηο. Nic. Can. 20; wide de Paschate. + Vide Aug. Epist. Ixxxvi. (ad Casul.) Ep. exviii. ad Jan. Cypr. Ep. lxxv. Ὁ. 198; Iren. apud Euseb. v. 24 ; Socr. v. 22; vii. 19. Cetera jam discipline et conversationis ad- mittunt novitatem correctionis, hac lege ma- nente, &c.—Tert. de Virg. vel. Thorn. Lat. p. 219; P. Greg. I. In una fide nihil officit sanctez ecclesi@ consuetudo diversa.—P. Greg. I. Epist. i.41; P. Leo 1X. Epist. i. cap. 29. Nil obsunt saluti credentium diverse pro lo- co et tempore consuetudines, quando una fides r dilectionem operans bona que potest uni eo commendat omnes. P. Nic. I. Ep. 6. De consuetudinibus quidem, quem nobis opponere visi estis, scribentes per diversas ecclesias di- versas esse consuetudines, si illis canonica non resistit auctoritas, pro qua eis obviare debea- mus, nil judicamus vel eis resistimus, &c. » Cypr. Ep. 73. 4 Ep. p. 39; Lat. p. 159. A DISCOURSE CONCERNING designed to excel it: wherefore this gumentation cannot be valid ; and as well be employed for our opinion against it. 4 Answ. 2. In like manner it may be ~ argued, that all Christians should annu- ally meet in one place; that all Chris- tians should have one arehpriest on earth; — that we should all be subject toone tem- poral jurisdiction; that we should all — speak one language, ὅσο. | Answ. 3. There is a great difference in the case; for the Israelites were one i small nation, which conveniently might be embodied ; but the Christian church ᾿ς should consist of all nations, which ren- i dereth correspondence in this particular — unpractisable, at least without great in- convenience. Answ. 4. Before the law, Christian religion, and consequently a Christian church, did in substance subsist; but what unity of government was there — then ὃ" Answ. 5. The temporal union of the Jews might only figure the spiritual uni-— ty of Christians in faith, charity, and ace. Arg. Vil. All ecclesiastical power was derived from the same fountains, by suc- cession from the apostles ; therefore the church was one political body.* Answ. 1. Thence we may rather in- fer, that churches are not so united, be- cause the founders of them were several persons endowed with co-ordinate and equal power.* Answ. 2. The apostles did in several churches constitute bishops, independent — from each other; and the like may be now, either by succession from those, or by the constitutions of human prudence, according to emergencies of occasions, and circumstances of things. Answ. 8. Divers churches were αὐτός, vouos and all were so according to St. Cy- prian. Answ. 4. All temporal power is de- rived from Adam, and the patriarchs, an- cient fathers of families: doth it thence follow, that all the world must be under one secular government ? Arg. VIII. All churches did exercise τ Eus. Hist. i. 4; Baron. App. 2. * Ep. p. 51-55; Lat. p. 157. ' Jren. iii. 3; Tert. Preeser. 31, 32. a power of excommunication, or of ex- cluding heretics, schismatics, disorderly and scandalons people." Answ. 1. Each church was_ vested with this power: this doth therefore only infer a resemblance of several churches in discipline ; which we avow. Answ. 2. This argueth that all churches took themselves to be obliged to preserve the same faith, to exercise charity and | peace, to maintain the like holiness of conversation: what then? do we deny this ? Answ. 3. All kingdoms and states do punish offenders against reason and jus- \ tice, do banish seditious and disorderly _petsons,do uphold the principles and practice of common honesty and morali- ty: doth it thence follow that all nations must come under one civil government?* Arg. 1X. All churches did maintain intercourse and commerce with each other by formed, communicatory, pacifi- catory, commendatory, synodical epis- tles.’7 | Answ. 1. This doth signify, that the churches did by admonition, advice, &c. help one another in maintenance of the common faith ; did endeavour to preserve * Excommunication of other chuches is on- iy a declaration against the deviation from hristian truth, or piety, or charity. Com- munio suspensa restituitur demonstrati cau- | Sas, quibus id acciderat, jam esse detersas, et profitenti conditiones pacis impletas.—P. Inn, 1. Ep. 16 (De Attico Constant. Ep.) | ἢ Litere formate.—Optat. 2. Cone. Milev. | Can. 20. Communicatorie—Aug. Ep. 162, 1163. Kai ra παρὰ Tobrov Ko.wwyixad.—Euseb. vil. 130; Cypr. Ep. 55, 67. Τράμματα σνστατικά ---- | Apost. Can. 12. Evpnyixat.—Conc. Chald. Can. 11. Svvodexai.—Soz. vii. 11; Cone. VI. Act. IL. (p. 158, 198, 223 ;) Greg. M. (Ep. ——) P. ) Zach. Baron. ann. 743, § 29. Significa plane nobis quis in locum Marciani Arelate fuerit substitutus, ut sciamus ad quem fratres nos- tros dirigere, et cui scribere debeamus Cypr. ΓΕ 42,67; ad P. Steph. (p. 161,) Ep. 155. (N. B. p. 113.) 'Ἑνὸς σώματος ὄντος τῆς κα- θολιτῆς ἐκκλεσίας, ἐντολῆς re οὔσης ἐν ταῖς θείας γραφαῖς τηρεῖν σύνδεσμον τῆς ὁμονοίας καὶ εἰρήνης, ἀκόλουθόν ἐστι γράφειν ἡμᾶς, καὶ σημαίνειν ἀλλήλοις ra παρ' ἑκάστοις γιγόμενα, &c.—Alexandri Epist. Socr. i. 6. The catholic church being one body, i there being moreover a command in the holy ) scriptures, to preserve the bond of peace and 'concord ; hence it follows, that what things \(happen to, or) are done by any of us, we ought to write, and signify to each other. * Ep. p. 59, 125; Lat. p. 185, 195. * Ep. p. 69; Lat. p. 222. THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. charity, friendship, and peace: this is all which thence may be concluded. Ansu. 2. Secular princes are wont to send ambassadors and cnvoys with letters and instructions for settlement of cor- respondence and preserving peace ; they sometimes do recommend their subjects to other princes; they expect offices of humanity toward their suhjects travel- ling or trading any where in the world: common reason doth require such things ; but may common union of polity from hence be inferred ? Arg. X. The effectual preservation of unity in the primitive church is alleged as a strong argument of its being united in one government.* Answ. 1. That unity of faith and charity and discipline, which we admit, was indeed preserved, not by influence of any one sovereign authority whereof there is no mention), but by the concur- rent vigilance of bishops, declaring and disputing against any novelty in doctrine or practice which did start up; by their adherence to the doctrine asserted in scripture, and confirmed by tradition ; by their aiding and abetting one another as confederates against errors and disorders creeping in. Answ. 2. The many differences which arose concerning the observation of Eas- ter, the rebaptization of heretics, the reconciliation of revolters and scandalous criminals; concerning the decision of - causes and controversies, &c. do more clearly shew that there was no standing common jurisdiction in the church: for had there been such an one, recourse would have been had thereto ; and such differences by its authority would easily have been quashed. Arg. ΧΙ. Another argument is ground- ed on the relief which one church did yield to another, which supposeth all churches under one government, impos- ing such tribute.* Answ. 1. This is a strange fetch ; as if all who were under obligation to relieve one another in need, were to be under one government. ‘Then al! mankind must be so. Answ. 2. It appeareth by St. Paul, that these succours were of free charity, ~ Ep. p. 64; Lat. p. 221. * Ep. p. 119; Lat. p. 209 OO ————— υ Μ τυ ὉὩρβϑ favour, and liberality ; and not by con- straint.* ΄ Arg. ΧΗ. The use of councils is also alleged as an argument of this unity.” Answ. 1. General councils (in case truth is disowned, that peace is disturbed, that discipline is loosed or perverted), are wholesome expedients to clear truth and heal breaches: but the holding them is no more an argument of political unity in the church, than the treaty of Munster was a sign of all Europe being under one civil government.* Answ. 2. They are extraordinary, ar- bitrary prudential means of restoring truth, peace, order, discipline; but from them nothing can be gathered concern- ing the continual ordinary state of the church. Answ. 3. For during a long time the church wanted them; and afterwards had them but rarely; ‘ for the first three hundred years,” saith Bellarmine, “ there Was no general assembly ; afterwards scarce one in a hundred years.”’7 And since the breach between the ori- ental and western churches, for many niet Sy there bath been none. et was the church from the begin- ning one, till Constantine, and long afier- wards. Answ. 4. The first general councils (indeed all that have been with any prob- able show capable of that denomination) were congregated by emperors, to cure the dissensions of bishops: what there- fore can be argued from them, but that the emperors did find it good to settle peace and truth, and took this for a good mean thereto ? Alb. Pighius said, that general coun- cils were an invention of Constantine; and who can confute him ὃ" Answ. 5. They do show rather the unity of the empire than of the charch; or of the church as national under one empire, than as Catholic; for it was the state which did call and moderate them to its purposes. * 2 Cor. viii. 3, Αὐθαίρετοι. Verse 8, Ot car’ ἐπιταχήν. 2 Cor. ix. 7,"Exacros καθὼς προαιρεῖ- ται. Rom. xv. 26, Eidéencuv. Acts xi. 29; xxiv. 17, ᾿Ελεημοσύνας ποιήσων. ἡ Primis trecentis annis nulla fuit congre- gatio generalis; postea vero vix centesimo anno.—De Rom. P. i. 8. y Ep. p. 51; Lat. P. 400. * Bell. de Cone. i. 13. * Aug. reer ees ssn es tess A DISCOURSE CONCERNING Answ. 6. It is manifest that — gregation of them dependeth on the p mission and pleasure of secular powers and in all equity should do so (as othe where is showed.)* | Answ. 7. It is not expedient that the should be any of them, now that Chri tendom standeth divided under dive temporal sovereignties ; for their resc tions may intrench on the interests ¢ some princes ; and hardly can they accommodated to the civil laws and ¢ toms of every state. Whence we see that France will admit the decrees of their Tridentt synod. Answ. 8. There was no such ine venience in them while Christendom ina manner confirmed within one em-— pire ; for then nothing could be decrees or executed without the emperor’s leave or to his prejudice. Answ. 9. Yea-(as things now stand), it is impossible there should be a f council ;> most of the bishops bet sworn vassals and clients to the pope; by their own interests concerned maintain his exorbitant grandeur a domination. Answ. 10. In the opinion of St. 4 nasius,t there was no reasonable cat of synods except in case of new he sies springing up, which may be confut ed by the joint consent of bishops. Answ. 11. As for particular synods they do only signify that it was for neighbour bishops to conspire in pre moting truth, order? and peace, as have otherwhere showed.t 3 Councils have often been convenet for bad designs, and been made engine * The validity of synodical decrees (as 5Ρ1 itnal) doth proceed from the obligation to eael singular bishop; asif princes in confederac do make any sanction, the subjects of each ar bound to observe them, not from any relation to the body confederating, but because of thet obligation to their own prince consenting. + Αἱ δὲ νῦν κινούμεναι παρ᾽ αὐτῶν σύνδοι ποία ᾿ ἔχουσιν εὔλογον αἰτίαν, &c.—Athan. de Syn. ΒΡ. 873. cy ξ Subrependi enim occasiones non pretef= mittit ambitio, et quoties ob intercurrentes catl- sas generalis congregatio facta fuerit sacer tum, ditficile est ut cupidiias improboram noah aliquid supra mensuram suam non moliatur appetere.—Leo M. Ep. 62.(ad Mazimum. Ep. ——) —_ _ Hist. Trid. p. 67—A free council P. - - EP. Sti 4 . 7 THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. to oppress truth and enslave Christen- dom. That of Antioch against Athanasius: of Ariminum for Arianism. The second Ephesine, to restore Eutyches and re- ject Flavianus. The second of Nice, to | impose the worship of babies. The syn- od of Ariminum, to countenance Arian. So the fourth synod of Lateran (sub Inn. III), to settle the prodigious doctrine of transubstantiation, and the wicked doc- trine of papal authority over princes. The first synod of Lyons, to practise that hellish doctrine of deposing kings. The synod of Constance, to establish the maim of the eucharist ; against the Cal- istines of Bohemia. The Lateran (un- der Leo X.) was called (as the archbish- op of Patras affirmed) “for the exalta- tion of the apostolical see.”* The syn- od of Trent, to settle a raff of errors and superstitions. Obj. 11. It may further be objected, | that this doctrine doth favour the con- ceits of the independents, concerning » ecclesiastical discipline. "Ὁ Lanswer, No. For, 1. We do assert that every church is bound to observe the institutions of Christ, and that sort of government which the apostles did ordain, consisting of bishops, priests, and people. 2. We avow it expedient (in conform- ity to the primitive churches, and in or- der to the maintenance of truth, order, peace) for several particular churches or | parishes to be combined in political cor- rations ; as shall be found convenient those who have just authority to frame such corporations: for that otherwise Christianity, being shattered into number- less shreds, could hardly subsist; and that great confusions must arise. | 3. We affirm, that such bodies having | been established, and being maintained | by just authority, every man is bound to endeavour the upholding of them by obedience, by peaceable and compliant demeanour. 4. + We acknowledge it a great crime, * Pro apostolice sedis exaltatione.—Lat. . Sess. ΧΟΡ. 129. + We allow the Apost. Can. 31.—E! ris κα- ταφρονήσας τοῦ ἰδίου ἐπισκόπου χωρὶς συναγάγῃ, καὶ θυσιαστήριον ἕτερον πήξῃ, μηδὲν κατεγνωκὼς τοῦ ἐπι- σκόπου iv εὐσεδείᾳ καὶ δικαιοσύνη, καθαιρείσθω ὡς | pOapyxos, Sc. If any person, despising his own by factious behaviour in them, or by needless separation from them, to disturb them, to divide them, to dissolve or sub- vert them.° 5. We conceive it fit that every people under one prince (or at least of one na- tion, using the same language, civil law, and fashions) should be united in the bands of ecclesiastical polity; for that such a unity apparently is conducible to the peace and welfare both of church and state; to the furtherance of God’s worship and service; to the edification of people in charity and piety; by the encouragement of secular powers, by the concurrent advice and aid of ecclesi- astical pastors; by many advantages hence arising.* 6. We suppose all churches obliged to observe friendly communion ; and, when occasion doth invite, to aid each other by assistance and advice, in synods of bish- ops, or otherwise. 7. We do affirm, that all churches are obliged to comply with lawful decrees and orders, appointed in synods with con- sent of their bishops, and allowed by the civil authorities under which they live: as if the bishops of Spain and France assembling should agree upon constitu- tions of discipline which the kings of both those countries should approve ; and which should not thwart God’s laws; both those churches, and every man in them, were bound to comply in observ- ance of them. From the premises, divers corollaries may be deduced : 1. Hence it appeareth, that all those clamours of the pretended catholics against other churches, for not submit- ting to the Roman chair fare groundless ; they depending on the supposition that all churches must necessarily be united under one government. 2. The injustice of the adherents to that see ; in claiming an empire (or ju- risdiction) over all, which never was de- bishop, shall set up a separate meeting, and build another altar, having nothing to condemn in his bishop, either for his piety or uprightness, let him be deposed as one that ambitiously af- fects to be a governor, &c. * Δίκαιον οὖν ἐστι πάντας τοὺς ἐν τῷ "Ῥωμαίων κόσμῳ διδασκάλους τοῦ νόμου αὐτὰ περὶ τοῦ νόμου φρο- νεῖν, καὶ μὴ διαφόροις διδασκαλίαις τὴν πίστιν praive elyv.—Syn. Rom. apud Theod. ii. 22. © Jude xix.—Oi dwodiepifovres. 336 signed by our Lord; heavily censuring and fiercely persecuting those who will not acknowledge it. 3. All churches, which have a fair settlement in severel countries, are co- ordinate : neither can one challenge a jurisdiction over the other. 4. The nature of schism is hence de- clared ; viz. that it consisteth in disturb- ing the order and peace of any single church; in withdrawing from it obedi- ence and compliance with it; in obstruct- ing good correspondence, charity, peace, between several churches ; in condemn- ing or censuring other churches without just cause, or beyond due measure. In refusing to maintain communion with other churches, without reasonable cause ; whence Firmilian did challenge pope Stephanus with schism.* 5. Hence the right way of reconcil- ing dissensions among Christians is not affecting to set up a political union of several churches, or subordination of all toone power; not for one church to enterprise upon the liberty of others, or to bring others under it (as is the prac- tice of the Roman church and its abet- tors), but for each church to let the others alone, quietly enjoying its freedom in ecclesiastical administrations; only declaring against apparently hurtful er- rors and factions; showing good-will, yielding succour, advice, comfort, upon needful occasion ; according to that excellent advice of the Constantinopolitan Fathers to the pope and western bishops— (after having acquainted them with their proceedings) towards the conclusion they thus exhort them : - We having in a legal and canonical way determined these controversies, do beseech your reverence to congratulate with us, your charity spiritually interced- ing, the fear of the Lord also compress- ing all human affection, so as to make us to prefer the edification of the churches to all private respect and favour toward each other; for by this means the word of faith being consonant among us, and Christian charity bearing sway over us, we shall cease from speaking after that manner which the apostle condemns, I * Excidisti enim teipsum ; noli te fallere ; siquidem ille est vere schismaticus, qui sea communione ecclesiastice unitatis apostatam fecerit.—Firmil. apud Cypr. Ep. 79. ΡΥ ΡΥ ee ee 2 A DISCOURSE CONCERNING am of Paul, and I am of Apollos, but ἣν am of Cephas; for if we all do appear — to be of Christ, who is not divided amongst us, we shalJl then through God’s grace preserve the body of the church from schism, and present ourselves be- fore the throne of Christ with boldness.””* 6. All that withdraw their communion or obeisance from particular churches fairly established (unto which they do be- long, or where they reside), do incur the guilt of schism: for such persons being de jure subject to those particular churches, and excommunicating them- selves, do consequentially sever them- selves from the catholic church; they commit great wrong toward that particu. lar church, and toward the whole church of Christ.t 7. Neither doth their pretence of join- ing themselves to the Roman church ex- cuse them from schism: for the Roman church hath no reason or right to admit or to avow them; it hath no power to ex- empt or excuse them from their duty ; it thereby abetteth their crime, and involvy- eth itself therein; it wrongeth other churches.“ As no man is freed from his allegiance by pretending to put himself under the protection of another prince; neither can another prince justly receive such disloyal revolters into his patronage. It is a rule grounded upon apparent equity, and frequently declared by eccle- siastical canons, that no church shall ad- mit into its protection or communion any persons who are excommunicated by another church, or who do withdraw themselves from it® (for self-excommuni- * Ols εὐθέσμος καὶ κανονικῶς παρ᾽ ἡμῖν κεκρατη- κόσι καὶ τὴν ὑμετέραν συγχαίρειν παρακαλοῦμεν εὐλά- ὄειαν, τῆς πνευματικῆς μεσιτευούδης ἀγάπης, καὶ τοῦ κυριακοῦ φόδου πάσαν μὲν καταστέλλοντος (compres- SING) ἀνθρωπίνην προσπάθειαν, τὴν δὲ ἐκκλησιῶν ol- κοδομὴν προτιμοτέραν ποιοῦντος τῆς πρὸς τὸν καθ᾽ ἕνα συμπαθείας ἢ χάριτος" οὕτω γὰρ τοῦτε τῆς πίστεως συμφωμηθέντος λόγου, καὶ τῆς χριστιανικῆς κυρωθει- σης ἐν ἡμῖν ἀγάπης παυσόμεθα λέγοντες τὸ παρὰ τῶν ἀποστόλων κατεγνωσμένον, ᾿Εἰγὼ μέν εἰμι Ἰαύλου, ἐγὼ δὲ ᾿Απολλὼ, ἐγὼ δὲ Knga πάντες δὲ Χριστοῦ φανέντες, ὃς ἐν ἡμῖν οὐ μεμέρισται ἄσχιστον τὸ σῶμα τῆς ἐκκλησίας τηρήσομεν, καὶ τῷ βήματι τοῦ Κυρίου μετὰ παῤῥησίας παραστησόμεθα.--- Theod, v. 9. + Aug contra Jul. Ep. 2.—Te certe occiden- talis terra generavit, occidentalis regeneravit ecclesia: quid ei queeris inferre quod in ea non invenisti, quando in ejus membra venisti? imo quid, τα. 4 Syn. Sard. Can. 13, Gr. ¢ Thornd. Lat. p, 220. εν : THE UNITY OF THE CHURCH. cation, or spiritual felony de se, doth in- volye the church’s excommunication, de- serving it, and preventing it.'*) Which canon, as the African Fathers do allege and expound it, doth prohibit the pope himself from receiving persons rejected by any other church.t _ So when Marcion, having been excom- municated by his own father, coming to Rome, did sue to be received by that church into communion, they refused, telling him, that “they could not do it without the consent of his reverend fa- _ ther, between whom and them there be- ing one faith and one agreement of mind, they could not do it in opposition to their _ worthy fellow-labourer, who was also his father.”’t St. Cyprian refused to admit Maximus (sent from the Novatian party) to com- munion.° So did Pope Cornelius reject Felicissi- mus, condemned by St. Cyprian, without further inquiry.‘ It was charged upon Dioscorus as a heinous misdemeanour, that ‘he had, against the holy canons, by his proper * EZ res κληρικὸς ἣ λαϊκὸς ἀφωρισμένος, ἤτοι ἄδεκ- τος ἀπελθὼν, ἐν ἑτέρᾳ πόλει δεχθῇ ἄνευ γραμμάτων συστατικῶν, ἀφοριζέσθω καὶ ὃ δεξάμενος, καὶ ὃ δεχθε- is—Apost. an. 12. ἸΚρατείτω ἡ γνώμη κατὰ τὸν κανόνα τὸν διαγορεύοντα τοὺς ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρων ἀποδληθέν- τας, ὑφ᾽ ἑτέρων μὴ rpociesar.—Conc. Nic. Can. 5. If aty clerk, or Jaic, who hath been excommu- nicated, and not yet re-admitted (by his own church), shall depart thence, and be received in another city without letters commendatory, both he who doth receive him, and he that is received, let them be excommunicated. Let the sentence be ratified which is according to that canon which commands others not to ad- mit those whom others have ejected. ἡ Μηδὲ τοὺς rap’ ἡμῶν ἀποκοινωνήτους eis κοινω- νίαν τοῦ λοιποῦ θέλητε δέξασθαι, ἐπειδὰν τοῦτο καὶ τῇ ἐν Νικαίᾳ συνόδῳ δρισθὲν εὐχερῶς εὕροι ἡ σὴ cebac- peérns.—Syn. Afr. Epist. ad P. Celest. 1. Ev τις ὑπὸ τοῦ ἰδίου ἐπισκόπου ἀκοινώνητος γέγονεν, μὴ πρό- repov αὐτὸν rap’ ἱτέρων δεχθῆναι, εἰ μὴ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ πα- ραδιχθείη τοῦ ἰδίου ἐπισκόπου . Cone. Ant. Can. 6; Idem in Concil. Sard. Can, 13, 14, (Gree. ) 1 Ἔλεγε, τί μὴ ἐθελήσατέ με ὑποδίξασθαι; τῶν δὲ λεγόντων, ὅτι οὐ δυνάμεθα ἄνευ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς τοῦ τι- μίου πατρός σου τοῦτο πριῆσαι' μία γάρ ἐστιν ἡ πί- τις, καὶ μία ἡ ὁμόνοια, καὶ οὐ δυνάμεθα ἐναντιωθῆναι εν καλῷ συλλειτουργῷ, πατρὶ δὲ of.—Epiph. Her. 42. Γ Αὐτοκατάκριτος.----Τὶϊ. iii. 11. * Eph. lv. p. 113. f Ep. lv. init. (abs te rejectum. Vid.) vide Rig. p. 79. Vou. 43 337 authority, received into communion per- sons excommunicated by others.’* The African synod (at the suggestion of St. Austin) decreed, that * if it hap- pened that any for their evil deeds were deservedly expelled out of the church, and taken again into communion by any bishop or priest whosoever, that he also who received him should incur the same penalty of excommunication.”’+ ~ The same is by latter papal synods decreed.t The words of Synesius are remarka- ble: he, having excommunicated some cruel oppressors, doth thus recommend the case to all Christians.|| Upon which grounds I do not scruple to affirm the recusants in England to be no less schismatics than any other sepa- ratists.* They are indeed somewhat worse ; for most others do only forbear communion, these do rudely condemn the church, to which they owe obedience; yea, Strive to destroy it: they are most desperate rebels against it. 8. Itis the duty and interest of all * quosdam ἃ diversis conciliis rite dam- natos, in communionem, propria auctoritate, suscepit, sanctis regulis precipientibus excom- municatos ab aliis, in communionem alios non debere suscipere —Epist. Syn. Chaiced. ad Im- per. Act. iv. pag. 286. καθαιρεθέντα κανονι- κῶς παρὰ τοῦ ἰδίου ἐπισκόπου αὐθεντῆσας ἀκανονΐίστως εἰς κοινωνίαν ἐδέξατο.---- να στ. il. 4. + Augustinus episcopus, legatus provincize Numidiz dixit: Hoe statuere dignamini, ut si qui forte merito facinorum suorum ab ecclesia pulsi sunt, et sive ab aliquo episcopo vel pres- bytero fuerint in communionem suscepti, etiam ipse pari cum eis crimine teneatur obnoxius Cod. Afr. Can. 9. ¢ Sanctorum quippe canonum sanxit aucto- ritas, et ea passim ecclesizee consuetudo servat, ut a quolibet juste excommunicatum episcopo, alius absolvere non presumat.—P. Urd. 1]. Epist. 20. (apud Bin.) A suis episcopis ex- communicatos, ab aliis episcopis, abbatibus et clericis in communionem recipi proculdubio prohibemus.—Conc. Lat. J. (sub P. Calixto 11.) cap. 9. —Qui vero excommunicato ante- quam ab eo qui eum excommunicaverit absol- vatur, scienter communicare presumpserit, pari sententiz teneatur obnoxius.—Conc, Lat, 11. (sub Innoc. 11.) Can. 3. || "Emi τούτοις ἡ Πτολεμάϊδος ἐκκλησία τάδε πρὸς τὰς ἀπανταχοῦ γῆς ἑαυτῆς ἀδελφὰς διατάττεται Ei δέ τις ὡς μικροπολῖτιν ἀποσκυδαλίσει τὴν ἐκκλησί- αν; καὶ δέξεται τοὺς ἀποκηρύκτους αὐτῆς (proscribed by it) ὡς οὐκ ἀνάγκῃ τῇ πένηται πείθεσθαι, ἴστω σχί- σας τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, ἣν μίαν ὃ Χριστός εἶναι βούλεται, &c,—Epist. 58, pag. 203, edit. Petav. * P. Leo Ep. Ixxxiv. cap. 9. 328 churches to disclaim the pretences of the Roman court ; maintaining their liberties and rights against its usurpations: for compliance therewith, as it doth greatly prejudice truth*and piety ; (leaving them to be corrupted by the ambitious, cove- tous, and voluptuous designs of those men ;) so it doth remove the genuine unity of the church, and peace of Chris- tians; unless to be tied by compulsory chains (as slaves) be deemed unity or peace. 9. Yet those churches, which, by the voluntary consent or command of prin- ces, do adhere in confederation to the Roman church, we are not, merely upon that score, to condemn or reject from communion of charity or peace; (for in| that they do but use their liberty.) A DISCOURSE CONCERNING, &c. 10. But if such churches do maintain impious errors; if they do prescribe naughty practices ; if they do reject com- munion and peace upon reasonable terms ; if they vent unjust and uncharitable cen- sures ; if they are turbulent and violent, striving by all means to subdue and en- slave other churches to their will or their dictates—If they damn and persecute all who refuse to be their subjects: in such cases we may reject such churches as heretical or schismatical, or wickedly uncharitable and unjust in their proceed- ings.* * Cuicunque heresi communicans merito ju- dicatur a nostra societate removendus.— Gelas. Ep. 1, ad Euphem. An communicare, non est consentire cum talibus?—P. Sym. 1. Ep. 7. OPUSCULA., / eee Le Se’ eS TT ee OU ἐ Ὁ A + Γ a +) ON US areal lakes? Aaa ae + il ae ae “κρῖ ΔΈΝ τὺ ΠΤ x ὶ "Veit Y Ψ | DE SPIRITU SANCTO. . Spiritus Sanctus est Persona distincta, Patri Filioque coessentialis, et ab Utroque procedens. Unvm existere Deum (rerum omnium Authorem, Custodem, Dominum) uni- versus ordo cursusque rerum, nature ra vox, gentium unanimis consensus, perpetuaque traditio, miraculorum ingens ia, oraculorum denique sacrorum ir- refragabilis attestatioluculentissime com- probant, et evincunt.* | Quid sit Deus (cujusmodi nempe per- a attributisque gaudeat)ex operi- bus divinis observationem nostram sensi- biliter incurrentibus, nobis etiam modo ro (hoc est, indistincte et imperfecte) quadantenus innotescat, nam invisibilia Lacreatura mundi per ea que facta intellectu conspiciuntur, cum sempi- ejus potestas, tum divinitas.” _Verum quomodo Deus sit, aut qualis t ejus existentia nulla (revelatione se- clusa) nobis suppetit aut investigandi ra- tio, vel dijudicandi facultas; eam nec discere studio, nec intellectu compre- endere valemus ; quum is lucem habitans inaccessam® nostris a sensibus (naturalis scientie fontibus, naturalis judicii funda- i unicis) plusquam toto ccelo distet, n finito sejungatur intervallo. Unde prudenter sapiens Hebrieus, Dificile (in- | i i “ Mare. xii. 29; 1 Cor. viii, 4; Deut. iv. 39; 4; x. 12. * Rom. i. 20. ¢ 1 Tim. vi. 16. OPUSCULA THEOLOGICA, ORATIONES, } ET POEMATIA. quit) @stimamus que in terra sunt, ei, gue in prospeciu sunt, invenimus cum la- bore: que autem in celis sunt, quis in- vestigabit ? sensum tuum quts sciet, nist iu dederis sapientiam, et miseris Spir- itum tuum de altisstmis ?¢ Sed et existentiz divine modum a no- bis concipi vel exprimi plurimum obstat, quod is ab existendi modo valde dissidet earum rerum omnium, que nobis obver- santur, aut experientiz nostre subjacent ; a quibus nostras elicimus ideas; quibus notiones nostras conformamus; quibus exprimendis vocabula nostra procudi- mus, et accommodamus ; unde fit ei nos- tros conceptus, axiomata nostra, nostra- que verba parum congruere ; quin et necessarium evadit nos de illo cogitantes hesitare sepius, aut intricari; de illo sermocinantes plerumque balbutire οἱ ἀκυρολογεῖν, de illo disquirentes et discep- tantes nil aliud ferme quam Andabatas agere.* Hujusimpotentize (vel inscitiz nostra) manifestum in eo specimen apparet, quod cuicunque nature spirituali (vel incorpo- rez) multee competunt proprietates a no- bis impervestigabiles, incomprehensibiles et ineffabiles.t| Nam quomodo res par- tium expers locum occupet, spatioque co- * Τὸν μὲν οὖν ποιητὴν Kat πατέρα τοῦδε τοῦ παντὸς εὑρεῖν τε ἔργον, καὶ εὑρόντα εἰς πάντας ἀδύνατον λέ- yew.—Plat. Tim. Id enim quod Deus est, secundum id quod est, nec humano sermone edici, nee humanis auribus percipi, nec huma- nis sensibus colligi potest.—Novat. de Trin. cap. 7. ; Phantasmatibus suis illuduntur, quia so- lent videre corporaliter vel animalia tria, vel queecunque tria corpora suis loets separata, d&c. 4 Sap. ix. 16. 342 extendatur ; qua ratione corpora penetret, et ipsis coexistat (illis loco conjuncta, sub- stantia vero discreia;) quo pacto nullis manibus aut machinis utens apprehendat et propellat corpora ; quomoudo denuo nil patiens aut accipiens objecta persentiscat (quale nil experimur in rebus observationi nostre expositis, sed quee spiritibud inesse aliunde discimus), equidem nec assequi distincte, nec limpide valemus effari. Ad- do, fieri posse, quod spiritualibus sub- Stantiis aliz complures proprietates con- veniant, adhuc fando nobis inaudite, ab intellectiis nostri capacitate longitis amo- te. Preesertim vero circa divine nature et operationis (nedum incorporee, sed etiam infinite) modos cogitatione versantibus innumeri se tales objiciunt labyrinthi. Nam, verbi gratia, quaomodo Deus puris- sime simplex et indivisibilis omni spatio preesens sit, hic et illic totus, ubique im- mensus ; quomodo decurrentium tempo- rum successionibus cunctis semper adsit, easque simul et semel prospectui suo sub- jectas habeat ;* quomodo nullas ab objec- tis species admittens aut retinens omnia comprehendit tam futura, quam presen- tia vel preterita, etiam ea que contin- genter futura sunt, et a causis procedent arbitrariis, atque prorsus indeterminatis: quomodo per merum voluntatis actum, et unicum verbum enunciando, stupendam hane rerum moleme nihilo produxerit: quomodo sine mentis ulla distractione vel molestia subtilissimas istas innumerabil- ium cogitationum, dictorum, factorum varietates inspicit ac ordinat—ita curans universos tanquam singulos, ita singulos tanquam solos:* quomodo nullam muta- tionem aut mutationis umbram_ subiens decreta statuit et rescindit ; diligit ac odit ; gaudet et dolet: quomodo cum omnia fa- cillime possit, evenire multa sinat ipsi dis- plicentia, quedam infecta dimittat, quibus valde delectatur: quomodo, versus om- nes creaturas suas admodum bonus et benignus, aliquas ita condiderit, ut in ex- tremam miseriam facile prolabi possent, prolapseque fuerint ; circa hac, inquam, similiaque Dei attributa, decreta, opera, facta (nobis abunde per revelationem ex- plorata ; quoad τὸ ὅτε nempe, non quoad * Τίς ἡ τοιαύτη ὑμῶν φιλονεικία τῶν ἐφευρέσεων, ὥστε ἀνθρωπίνη φρονήσει ὑπὲρ τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην νόησιν bp((eeOar.—Ath. t. 1. 625. * Aug. DE SPIRITU SANCTO. gy - rn Γ΄... ------..ἘἘἘ Ἐ 3ὠὠωἠ.-᾽---» ὠςἘςὠ-Ἐ-Ἠ»-τἡἠ ὀ .--ὀ-ο.--- epee ΨΥΥ τὸ πῶς). si ex nostro sensu concipere, vel ad nostrum modum _ eloqui velimus, con- tinenter innumeris perplexitatibus et ἐναν- τιοφανείαις nos implicari sentiemus ; ut subiturum sit exclamare cum Apostolo, "Q 6600s πλούτου Kai σοφίας καὶ γνώσεως Θεοῦ" dg ἀνεξερεύνητα τὰ κρίματα αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἀνεξιχνίαστοι ab ὁδοὶ αὐτοῦ :* quod de providentiz divine methodo prolatum ad existentiz divine modum ratione quodammodo potiori re- feratur.* Ex his autem colligitur et consectatur : Primo, Quod non est penes nos circa modum existentize, divinee, aliunde quam e ccelesti revelatione, veram ullam noti- tiam acquirere, ullum preeterquam 6 sac- ris testimoniis certum judicium formare :¥ quod adeo in his φρογεῖν ὑπὲρ ὃ γέγραπ- ταις nil aliud est quam desipere. | Secundo, Quod ~cirea illam quicquid (utcunque conceptu arduum, vel absonum dictu) sacris in literis expressum habe- tur,t id nobis haud ita mirum aut incred- ibile videri debeat, ne statim assensu firmo am plectamur ; quod tale videtur, ipsius rei sublimitati, vel imbecillitati eaptis nostri, vel notionum et vocabulorum nos- trorum inopiz imputantes: hoc est, opi nor, quod Apostolus docet, ψυχικὸς ἄν- Gowzos (id est, homo sola ratione naturali utens, anime constans non desuper illu. — minatee) οὐ δέχεται τὰ τοῦ πνεύματος τοῦ Θεοῦ" μωρία γὰρ αὐτῷ ἐστι" καὶ οὐ δύναται γνῶναι, ὅτι πνευματικῶς (id est, 6 Spiritis Sancti revelatione) ἀνακρίνεται, Tertio, Quod omnis proinde que de hujusmodi rebus exoritur, disceptationis cardo precipuus in hoc uno vertitur, aa Deus hoc vel illud dixerit, vel an hoe po- tius vel illud (excluso rationis compro- bantis aut improbantis omni suffragio, vel prejudicio; quoad rerum materiam intelligo, non quoad’ sensum verborum :) an Deus, inquam, dixerit, seu directe ver- bis ipsissimis, vel consequenter aut ver bis equipollentibus ; nam ad illustrandum sacre scripture sensum, ‘ad questiones expediendas, ad errores submovendos, alia subinde vocabula, ex usu comm deprompta, adhiberi non licet modo, sed * Ei γὰρ al οἱκονομίαι dxardynrrot, πολλῷ μᾶλλον atrés.—Chrys. + Τὰ γεγραμμένα καὶ od λέγε καὶ οὐ κινδυνεῦδις "ας Maximus apud Athan. Dialog. I. in M 1 Cor. iv. 6; xiii. 9, 12. 1 Ta σιωπώμενα μὴ περιεργάζεσθαι.----Β88. f Rom. xi. 33 © 1 Cor. ii. LA. a pedit, fermeque necessarium est ;* ut ** fari aliquo modo possimus, quod effari non possumus,”” uti scite Augustinus. | Hine, quarto, temere Socinys, et qui cum eo faciunt, de rebus his agentes, cum ipsorum imaginationi minus adblan- diens aliquid occurrit, utcunque manifes- tis in sacro textu verbis enuaciatum, con- tinuo sanam rationem et sensum commu- em appellant: quasi vero potius non in- . na sit ratio, que res adeo captum nos- trum (τὸν voor τῆς σαρκὸς," quem appel- lat S. Paulus) transcendentes humane rationis trutine subdit; et a communi ensu maxime non abhorreat, de summo erum invisibillum apice nostro ex sen- su dijudicare ;+ quasi non extremas re- um possibilitates a mentis nostre acie discerni, veritatesque cunctas adequate nostris vocibus exprimi posse, non ex- treme vecordie simul et arrogantie sit 2xistimare ; quasi denuo non sobrietatis 2t sapientie multo potius esset, ipsi de se estimonium perhibenti Deo (juxta sen- sus vocum, quas ejus sapientia selegit, sitatis acceptionibus maxime congruas et affines), simpliciter et prompte fidem adhibere. Sane nostris conceptibus par- adoxa, nostris auribus absona videri, de quibus nunc agitur, mysteria, confiteri on verentur S. Patres: quae tamen ve- tissima credunt, divinis testimoniis sub- nixi; M7, θαυμάζης, inquit Nyssenus, εἰ Ζ΄ . ΄ > . s ὃ αὐτὸ συνημμένον καὶ διακεκριμένον εἰναι φαμὲν, καὶ δοξον διακεκριμένην συνάφειαν', ** Cum queeritur quid tres” (in- quit S. Augustinus) ‘* magna inopia huma- um laborat eloquium; dictuin est ta- nen tres Persons, non ut illud dice- retur, sed ne taceretur.’’ Hee, etsi dilutius,ad sanctorum Pa- um exemplum (qui suze adversus het- srodoxorum cavillationes communiende doctrine Dei τὸ ἀκατάληπτον, nostraeeque rationis infirmitatem, preestruere solent) delibare visum est: nunc ad thesin nos- tram imprimis explicandam paullo, tum διάκρισίν. re συνημμένην, καὶ ® Ἰζαινοτομεῖν περὶ τὰ ὀνόματα σαφηνείας ἵνεκα.--: Naz. Orat. ἡ Dignare et tu ista nescire.—Vlicr. ad Cies. ta saltem S. Chrysostomus existimavil, μανίαν yap ἔγωγε εἶναι iy? τὰν φημὶ φιλονικεῖν εἰδέναι τί hv οὐσίαν ἐστὶν ὃ Θεός. Οὐδὲν χεῖρον τοῦ τοῖς λο- ! ἰσμοῖς πνευματικὰ ἐπιτρέπειν. ΠΝ Col. ii. 18. Orat. 9, contra Eunom. | ) Aug. de Trin. v. 9. DE SPIRITU SANCTO. 343 comprobandam accingimur. Ejus au- tem de subjecto primum nonnulla premit- temus. Ex iis que visis aciem effugiunt, at quee manifestis effectibus sese produnt, nihil est ferme quod vento substantia penetraptius, impetu citatius, efficacia validius comperitur; ex hine fit, ut in communi linguarum_ plerarumque omni- um usu, ventiseu spiritas nomen ejusmodi designandis rebus inserviat,quee cum pre substantice puritate vel tenuitate prorsus invisibiles sint, magna pernicilate agi, magna vi pollere censentur: ita constat physicos cujusque corporis quod abstru- sissimum, tenuissimum, agilissimum et ef- ficacissimum est, ejus spiritum nominare. Hine etiam factum, ut ada sensu materia- que discretas, intellectu autem et virtute prepotente dotatas substantias denotan- das translatum sit hoc vocabuli; etiam apud Ethnicos, quibus imprimis anima nostra (quam et ab ἄνεμος deducunt gram- matici) spiritus dicitur: Vita corpore et spiritu continetur: et, ‘* Eodem tempore suscipimur in lucem, et hoc ceelesti spiritu augemur,’* inquit Cicero: preesertim apud Stoicos anima sicaudivit: “ἢ Stoicos,” inquit ‘Tertullianus, “ allego, qui spiritum dicunt animam pene nobiscum.””! Quin et ab illis Deo Opt. Max. nomen hoc tribuitur : Celum ac terram camposque liquentes, Lucentemque globum terre, Titaninque astra, Spiritus intus agit in. vi. Ita cecinit poetarum princeps, Spiritus nomine, interpretantibus Lactantio et Ma- crobio, Deum intelligens ;" imo suam ipse mentem exponit alibi canens, Deum ire per omnes Terrasque tractusque maris, celumque profiundum. Georg. iv. Similiter apud Ciceronem Balbus; “Heaec,” inquit * ita fieri omnibus inter se concinentibus mundi partibus profecto non possent, nisi ea uno divino et continuato Spiritu continerentur : :» clarissimeque Seneca, ** Prope est,”’ inquit, ‘* a te Deus, tecum est, intus est; ita dico, Lucili, sacer intra nos Spiritus sedet, malorum bonorumque nostrorum observator et kK Orat. pro Muren. Orat. de Arusp. resp. ' Tertull. de An. cap. 6; vide Lips. Stoic, Phil. = Lact. i. 5. ® Cie. de Nat. Deor. σὰς custos—Bonus vir sine Deo nemo est.”** Hinc itidem, denuo, captui nostro con- sulentes sacre literze eodem appellamento substantias ejusmodi cunctas (corporez molis et concretionis exsortes), animam humanam, omne genus angelicum, ipsum- que summum, jncomprehensibile Numen adumbrant. Et Deo quidem assignatur hoc nomen ad simplicissimam ejus natur- am et potentissimam energiam signific- anda; reliquis autem ejusmodi substanti- is etiam ad originis sue modum exprim- endum attribui videtur, quoniam eas Deus spiratione quadam produxit : qualem etiam ob causam (ex parte saltem) in sacra scriptura id nominis unicuidam rei signanter, et modo quodam peculiari tribuitur; illi nempe precellentissime rei, circa quam presens instituitur disquis- itio ; que Spiritus Sanctus Spiritus Dei(Dei Patris utique, qui propter ordinis ἐξοχὴν sepe Deus appellatur, significatu per- sonali), Spiritus Christi, Spiritus Dei bonus; sed et ἀπολύτως (haud raro), per excellentiam, Spiritus Sanctus Spiritus vocatur; que res etiam Dez potentia seu virtus nominatur.? Quo de nomine breviter observetur. Cum rei cuilibet intellectuali tres precipuze facultates, voluntas, intellectus, efficacitas, hisque congrue tres perfectiones, bonitas, sapi- entia, potestas, inesse concipiantur ; ha- rum una quedam, juxta mysticam in divinis οἰκονομίαν, (ut inde modus et ordo subsistendi cuique proprius insinuentur), singulz sacre Triadis Persone (ita προ- ληπτικῶς loquor) modo quodam appro- priatur ; Patri nempe, que facienda sunt ex arbitrio decernere ;7 Filio, sapientis- sima ratione disponere; Spiritui Sancto, virtute prepotente exequi et efficere: unde prout Filius Dei Sapientia, ita Spiritus sanctus Dei Potentia (substanti- alis utique) nominatur: huic certe rei, qualiscunque sit (qualis enim, postea comprobandum est), satis liquet proprie et primario Spiritfis Sancti nomen adscri- bi. Verum exinde per figuratam, uti fit, deflectionem seu metonymiam, operati- * Θεὸς ἐστὶ πνεῦμα νοερὸν καὶ πυρῶδες, οὐκ ἔχον μορφὴν, μεταθάλλον δὲ εἰς ἃ βούλεται, καὶ συνεξομοι- ούμενον πᾶσιν, —Posid. apud Stob. Θεὸς ἐστὶ t Pater omnia pro arbitrio ordinare dicitur, et proinde τὸ θέλημα dictus est.— Vide “Ignatium in Epist. * Sen. Epist. 41. P Luc. i. 35; xxiv. 49 DE SPIRITU SANCTO. onis, quam ille Spiritus exerit, mo ejus influxus et efficacia, nec non ejus effectus qualescunque nomen hoc inter- | dum adsumunt. Ita cum ab hoe Spiritu, . modo perquam conspicuo, eximia Vis — ubertim inderetur apostolis opera mirabi- lia perpetrandi, potestas ista (vel ejusce— communicatio manifesta, 7) φαγέρωσις τοῦ πνεύματος, quam 8. Paulus vocat) dicta — est Spiritus Sanctus ;* veluti cum scrip- tum habetur in Evangelio Johannis, οὔπω. ἦν mvedua ἅγιον," hoc est, nondum ejus- — modi potestatem acceperant apostoli, vel — nondum ista Sancti Spiritus efficacia comparuerat: item ubi discipuli quidam — in Actis sibi nondum innotuisse dicunt, — an esset Spiritus Sanctus; id est, an talis © divine vis peculiaris communicatio. Cum vero Spiritus prophetiz, Spiritus — revelationis, Spiritus sapientize, similes- que memorantur (quales Spiritus augeri, auferri, extingui nonnunquam Innuitur),* palam est ejusce phrasibus Spiritus Sane- ti effectus, dona, charismata, fructus, 2vég- γήματα denotari ; qualia proinde numero— plurali πνεύματα vyocantur; ut cum aS. Paulo precipitur, ζηλωταί ἐστε πνεωμάτωνο, οἱ cum ab eo nonnullis διακρίσεις πνεὺ- μάτων donari affirmatur; ut et cum pro- phetarum τι γεύματα prophetis subjici vel subordinari dicuntur τ his autem et ejus- modi (quicunque sunt) sensibus meton- ymicis exclusis, nos de Spiritu Sancto juxta sensum proprium et primarium jam agere premonemus, ” Pro reliquorum terminorum explica- tione pauca jam subdemus. Cum Spiri- tum Sanctum personam dicimus, intel imus rem sinularem_ subsistentem, in lectualem (completam scilicet, vel αὖ- τοτελῆ), vel, ut Boethius definit, ration- alis nature individuam substantiam; Greci ὑπόστασιν (que vox latior etiam res intelligentiz expertes comprehen- dit), hoc est, substantiam, concrete sump- tam, sive rem subsistentem, (τὸ évv- πόστατον), huc adhibuerunt; quod vo- cabuli etiam in sacra scriptura extat, ubi Filius Dei Patris respectu dicitur χαρακτὴρ τῆς ὑποστάσεως αὐτοῦ quo minus cause fuit, cur Aypostasis verbum 4 1 Cor: ai 7) © Joh. vii. 39: * Act. xix. 2; Rom, vili.5; Eph. i. 17; 2 Reg. ii. 9. | Cor. xii. 6; Gal. v. 22 xii. 10; xiv. 32. ‘ | Thess. v.19; « 1 Cor. xiv. 12; * Heb. i 3. DE SPIRITU SANCTO. 345 ita refugerent, aut timidius admitterent Hieronymus, et alii Latini ;~ subverentes quippe, ne illo utentes tres essentias ere viderentur; cum _ usitatiori significatu, ut Augustinus notat, nil aliud denotaret substantia quam essentiam. ** Unde non audemus,” ait ille, ““ di- cere unam essentiam, tres substantias, sed unam essentiam (vel substantiam), tres personas.” Sed _ hoc nil aliud erat, ut subnotabat Nazianzenus,* quam περι λεξειδιωὼν Cvyouazeivy, de voculis discre- pare, cum sive personam, sive hyposta- sin, sive τὸ ἑνυπόστατον dicimus, idem sentiamus. Nos hoc idcirco ponimus, ut Socini et ὁμοδόξων excludamus sen- tentiam, que Spiritum Sanctum nil aliud esse vult quam accidens, aut accidentale quoddam , divinam nempe potentiam, vim, aut efficaciam. - Distinctam adjungimus, ut Praxez | Hermogenis, Noeti, Sabellii, similiumque dogma reprobetur ;+ quod Patrem,Filium, et Spiritum Sanctum, confundens, ipso- rumque proprietates destruens, unam ex omnibus Personam trinominem eflingit, ἐν μιᾷ ὑποστάσει τρεῖς ὀνομασίας asserens, et τὴν τριάδα σωναλοιφὴν efficiens, ut tradit Epipbanius. Distinctionis autem voca- bulum pre reli quis huic mysterio com- modius applicari consent scholastici ; quum diversitas et differentia nonnullum essentiz discrimen subinnuere videantur. ‘In divinis,” inquit Thomas, “ vitare de- bemus nomen diversitatis et differentiz ; possumus autem uti nomine distinctionis, propter oppositionem relativam :”? quam amen cautelam haud morosius observant \Patres; nam apud illos subinde προσώπων Pregores et διαφορὰ quin et nonnunquam ἡεαίρεσις, occurrunt; quanquam δεάκρισιν ubentius adhibere videantur. Nos sim- pliciter asserimus Personas τοῖς ἰδεώμασι διακρίνεσθαι, ut Nyssenus ait, ἄλλον καὶ ἄλλον, ut Nazianzenus, persistere ;t a se ere, plusquam mero conceptu vel no- * Naz. 39, et 32, Orat.—repi τὸν ἤχον μικρο- ογεῖν, circa sonum argutari. t Qs pire τὴν Σαδολλίου νόσον χώραν λαβεῖν υγχεομένων τῶν ὑποστάσιων, εἴτουν τῶν ἰδιοτήτων ναιρουμένων ..----ῬΆΓΓΟ5, Concil. Const. Epist. ad onc. Rom. Thod. v. 9. $ Naz. Orat. 23.—Aidsacxe τοσοῦτον εἰδέναι μό- ov, μονάδα ἐν πριάδι προσκυνουμένην, παράδοξον ἔχου- αν καὶ τὴν διαίρεσιν και τὴν ἵνωσιν. | oY Epist. ad Damasum. Aug. de Trin. | Vou. II. 44 mine, distingui,* propter distinctas per- sonales proprietates, seu relationes. Porro, cum coessentialem (hoc est, ὁμοούσιον, quod vocabulum adeo_per- crebuit olim, et contentione tanta passim exagitatum est, quod σύνδεσμον, πίστεως, et ὀρθοδοξίας propugnaclum, recte sen- tientium, qui proinde ὁμουσιαςταὶ, coes- sentialiste dicti sunt, tesseram appellitant Patres) dicimus Patri Filioque Spiritum Sanctum, intelligimus essentiam Dei (que simplex est et una), cum suis omnibus perfectionibus et attributis (zter- nitate, majestate bonitate, sapientia, potentia) infinitis, Spiritui Sancto inesse, vereque attribui: vel idem brevius effer- endo, Spiritum Sanctum esse Deum; con- tra quam olim semi-Ariani, qui dicti sunt, et princeps inter eos Macedonius, statue- bant. Hasce vero thesis nostre partes S. Augustinus ita bene paucis complexus est: “Pater,” inquit,* “et Filius, et Spirtus Sanctus, et propter individuam substantiam unus Deus est, et propter uniuscujusque proprietatem tres Persone sunt, et propter singulorum perfectionem partes unius Dei non sunt.” Ultimo, Cum Spiritum Sanctum a Pa- tre Filioque, procedere dicimus, modus et ordo designantur originis huic divine Persone convenientis: Spiritui nempe Sancto, peculiari modo (ineffabil: quidem illo, sed qui per hoc processionis voca- bulum utcunque designatur), tam a Filio, quam a Patre, divinam quam habet es- sentiam communicari; contra quam nu- periores Greci dogmatizant. His expositis, thesis nostre singulas partes breviter (etenim ne fusius aut pensiculatius agam, rerum vetat multitu- do) comprobatas dabo. I. Imprimis, Contra Sabellhium dico, Spiritum Sanctum a Patre Filioque vere, plusquam nomine, distingui. Distinguitur a Patre , nam, 1. Patris Spiritus dicitur ; neque pro- culdubio illa relatio commentitia est, aut reali fundamento destitutur: ejus ita- que termini sunt vere distincti.’ 2. Spiritus Sanctus a Patre ἐκπορεύεται (hoe est, egreditur vel procedit ;) alius itaque sit oportet; nec enim ab eo quic- quam vere procedere concipiatur, ἃ quo * Apud Augustinum persone sepe diverse dicuntur. * Contra Maxim. lib. iil. Υ 1 Cor. ii. 10, 11, &c. 346 non nisi: conceptu vel nomine tenus differt.” 3. Consimiliter a Patre mitti, conferri, donari dicitur ; que certe veram aliqua- lem distinctionem arguunt.* 4. Spiritui Sancto tribuuntur nonnulla, que Patri minus congruunt; veluti speciatim quod σωματικῷ εἴδει specie cor- porea apparuerit ;» quod descenderit, et resederit super Christum, adspectante Baptista: Vidi, inquit Johannes, Spzri- tum descendentem quasi columbam, et mansit super eum: Atqui Deum (Patrem utique) nemo vidit unguam, ait idem Evangelista: nec eum, S. Paulus addit, videre quisquam potest.° | 5. Denique Spiritus Sanctus est noster apud Deum advocatus, clamans in cordi- bus nostris, et Patrem interpellans (ὑπε- ρεντυγ χάνων) pro nobis:* id officil, id actus manifeste veram distinctionem supponit. Pares ob causas etiam a Fillo distingui- tur Spiritus Sanctus: nam, 1. Filii Spiritus dicitur ; neque de ni- hilo hec relatio.° 2. A Filio mittitur: ἰδοὺ éy6 ἀποστέλλω, inquit Christus de Spiritu Sancto.* 3. Super Christum descendit et mansit, ipsum replevit, ipsum egit, seu duxit ; ip- sum unxit; sed et ejus operatione Filius carnem suscepit: ergo diversus est a Filio.® 4. Aperte distinguit ipse Christus inter obloqui. Filio, et in Spiritum Sanctum blasphemare." 5. Spiritus Sanctus a Filio accepturus dicitur, quod annunciarit discipulis, ac inde Filium glorificare.' 6. Multa Filius fecit, et passus est, que Spiritui Sancto convenire vel at- tribui nequeunt; quod incarnatus est, et humanam naturam suscepit ; quod passus est, resurrexit, ascendit in ccelos. 7. Exerte demum Spiritus Sanctus di- citur alius a Filio: ᾿Εἰγὼ ἐρωτήσω τὸν Ἰϊατέρα καὶ ἄλλον παράκλητον δώσει ὑμῖν,) ait Dominus. z Joh. xv. 26. ® Joh. xiv. 26, 16; 1 Cor. ii. 12; Gal iv. 6. » Luce. iii. 22. ὁ Joh. i. 32, 33,18; 1 Joh. iv. 12; 1 Tim. vi. 16. ᾿ 4 ἐν ᾧ xpafopev—Rom. vill. 15, 26; Gal. iv. 6; Joh. xvi. 14. * Gal. iv. 6. ® Luc. iv. 1; Job. ill. 34, » Matt. xii. 31. i Joh. xiv. 16. f Lue. xxiv. 49. i Joh. xvi. 14. + a ’ ᾿ Ἂς Ἷ DE SPIRITU SANCTO. Ita separatim Spiritus Sancti ab utro- que distinctio monstratur. Porro con- juncte variis in locis hee distinctio sig- nificatur ; nam tribus illis, constanti qua- dam ceconomia, certus ordo assignatur, propria munia quedam et energize pecu- liares adscribuntur ; id quod absque reali fundamento factum existimare par non est. Per Christum (inquit 8. Paulus) habemus accessum in uno Spiritu ad Patrem:* quor- sum per has ambages hac districta metho- do proceditur, si Pater, Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus solo nomine distinguuntur? qu- orsum et idem apostolus ita benedicit? Gratia Domini nostri Jesu Christi,et cha- ritas Dei, et communicatio Spiritus Sane- tt sit cum omnibus vobis :' quorsum is discerte Patri energematum, Filio minis- teriorum, Spiritui Sancto charismatum, peculiarem adsignat dispensationem ὃ Quorsum etiam S. Petrus sanctorum electionem Patri predestinanti, Filio propitianti, Spiritui sanctificanti adscri- bit?™ Sane divinorum oraculorum gra- vitati, simplicitati sinceritati non conven- it, ita perpetuo tenore tres illos, ut tres, ne- dum nominibus, at reipsa, essendi modo, operatione diversos proponere, si nulla preter notionalem illam subsit distinctio ? quid hoc aliud esset, quam nobis errandi non tam occasionem prebere, quam ne- cessitatem imponere? nisi veritatis un- icos magistros consulto argutos, perplexos et obscuros arbitrari velimus. Porro, tres in ccelo testimonium perhibere Pa- trem, Filium, et Spiritum Sanctum afhr- mat 8. Johannes in Epistola Prima* (saltem, si textus αὐθεντία constet;) quod et indubie, licet non junctim, ut in Epis- tola sua, asseverat in Evangelio; nam Joh. viii. 18. Ego sum inquit Christus) qui testimonium perhibeo de meipso, et testimonium de me perhibet, qui me misit, Pater: rursusque Joh; xv. 26. Cum autem venerit Paracletus, ille testimonium perhibebit de me. Ecce tres in celo testes: atque tria nomina (qualia putes Marcus, ‘Tullius, Cicero), vel tribus nom- inibus insignita res omni modo eadem, tres testes haud confecerint, Denique baptismi forma distinctionem hance evine- it; nam baptismum subeuntes, Patrem, Filium, et Spiritam Sanctum agnoscere k Eph. ii. 18. 1 2 Cor. xiii. 13; 1 Cor. xii. 4, 5, 6. m { Pet. i. 2. ® Joh. v. 7. DE SPIRITU SANCTO. profitemur ; iis singulis cultum preestam- us, et obsequium policemur ; quod agen- tes nos paria facere vult Sabellius, ac si subditi Caio, Julio, Cesarique fidem obstringere juberentur ; quale quid a Deo solenniter institui, nemo non videt quam absurdum sitstatuere. Satis hc, opinor, Sabellianum dogma convellunt, nostre- que thesis unam partem confirmant. II. Dicimus, secundo, Spiritum Sanc- tum esse Personam, non accidentale quid, ut sentiunt assecle Socini. 1. Suadetur hoc imprimis ex lis, que de Patris ac Spiritus Sancti distinctione prelibata sunt. Etenim ejusmodi tenuis, aut ferme nulla, distinctio, qualis inter ens quodpiam et ejus efficaciam versatur (presertim in hoc casu, si Dei simplicis- simam naturam et simplicissimum agendi modum attendamus), minus rem attingit, nec omnino sufficit illi fundande distinc- tioni, quam inter Patrem et Spiritum Sanctum (uti monstratum est) constituit scriptura. Enimveroin hac parte Soc- inus (quanquam is subinde catholicis Sabellianismum impingere solet) a Sabel- lio nihil discrepat ; etenim Sabellius ipse Filium et Spiritum Sanctum Patris alias ac alias energias esse; ut et sic eosa patre, velut a sole lucem ac calorem, dis- tingui professus est ; quod non obstitit ne Patres eumquasi nullam poneret veram distinctionem, redargurent: prout revera Deus a potent, tia vel efficacia sua, quoad rem ipsam, non distinguitur. 2. Porro,Colligitur hoc ex ipso Spiritus nomine, quod certe primario substantiis (tam corporeis quam incorporeis) impos- itum est, ipsi Deo (οὐσιωδῶς intellecto) angelis, anime humane; que res. uni- verse sunt substanti#; unde verisimile fit, ei de qua agimus rei, quoniam et ipsa pariter est substantia, ab optimo vocum arbitro Deo, Spiritus nomen assignari ; Sancti, distinctionis in gratiam, insigni adposito epitheto. Confirmatur hoc ex eo, quod cum ipse Deus οὐσιωδῶς sit Spiritus (ut apud S. Johannem in Evan- gelio habetur expressum), ejus_ efh cacia parum apte sibi nomen hoc idem adsciscat; prout inde quod anima nostra essentialiter est spiritus, incongruum esset ejus vim quampiam anime spiritum appellare.’ [dem amplius exinde confirma- tur, quod qui bono Dei Spiritui opponitur * Joh. iv. 24. : aie 347 spiritus malus non est efficacia Dei, sed res subsistens ; id quod et bonum quoque Spiritum arguit esse rem subsistentem : idem corroboratur ex eo, quod Sanctus Spiritus ab apostolo comparatur ei spir- itul, qui in homine situs ejus intima consilia rimatur et persentiscit; spiritus autem hominis est substantiale quid ; unde παραλλήλως et Spiritum Sanctum esse tale quid innuitur.e His accedit, quod Spiritui Sancto potentia, vis, efficacia ascribuntur ; εἰσ τὸ περισσεῦειν ὑμᾶς ἐν τῇ ἐλπίδι, ἐν δυνάμει πνεύματος ἁγίου, inquit S. Paulus ;* potentiam vero potentiz, vim vi, efficaciam efficacie adscribi, non ita congruum est. 3. Porro, Sacra scriptura (quacum lo- quente sentire nos decet) Spiritum Sanc- tum passim ut Personam describit, per- sonalibus elogiis, officiis, attributis, op- erationibus insignitam ; talibus et illis, que divine tantum efficaci# nec sono nec re conveniunt. 1. Imprimis de Spiritu Sancto loquens, Persone congruum ar- ticulum ipsi consulto et quasi de industria accommodat. Joh. xvi. 13. ὅταν ἔλθῃ ἐκεῖνος, τὸ mvevpa τῆς ἀληθείας. 1 Cor. i). 11. τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ οὐδεὶς οἶδεν, ἐὶ μὴ τὸ τνεῦμα τοῦ Ocotv.* Quorsum ita (ali- oquin preter analogie grammatice ra- tionem) stylum temperare, vel inflectere, nisi ut Spiritus Sancti personalitas sub- indicetur? is si nil aliud quam Dei vis esset, nihil opus esset, imo potius incom- modum foret, ejusmodi phrases adhibere. Rursus. 2. Attribuit illa Spiritui Sancto officia personalia: Magistri ; ἐκεῖνος ὑμᾶς διδά- gcc παντα. Ductoris ; δὲηγήσει ὑμᾶς εἰς πᾶσαν τὴν ἀλήθειαν" Monitoris ; ὑπομνήσει ὑμᾶς πάντα' Testis; ἐκεῖνος μαρτυρήσει περὶ ἐμοῦ" quinimo (quod for- tius evincit) Legati, qui mentem divinam non tamquam a se, verum uta Patre Filioque deputatus ac instructus annun- οἷαι; Οὐ λαλήσει ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ὅσα ἂν ἀκούσῃ λα- λήσει, καὶ τὰ ἐρχόμενα ἀναγγελεῖ ὑμῖν" πάντα ὅσα ἔχει ὃ Ilavrijp ἐμά ἐστι" διὰ τοῦτο εἶπον, ὅτι ἐκ ποῦ ἐμοῦ λήψδται"" que sane nullo pacto di- vine potentie vel efficacie conveniunt, at personam liquidissime _respiciunt : nam quod ab agente quopiam peragitur, id de ejus efficacia, tanquam ab ipso distincta, predicari, preter loquendi ra- tionem atque morem fit; presertimque P 1 Sam. xvi. 14; 1 Cor, ii. 10, 11, 4 Rom. xv. 13, 19. τ Joh. xvi. 13; xiv. 26; xv. 26; 1 Cog, ii, 11. * Joh. xiv. 26; xvi. 13; xv. 26. * Joh. xvi. 13, 15. 348 divine (nos simplicissime planissimeque docendos suscipientis) scripture ab indole abhorret. Dei efficaciam a Patre Fi- lioque mitti, a Patre Filioque (non a seipso; a quo seipso dic sodes ὃ qui ipsum ab ipso Patre non distinguis) loqui, a Patre vel Filio que annunciet audire, quam horride durum et obscurum est? quid non audent, qui sacris literis) ad nos instruendos comparatis) ejusmodi ca- liginem adspergere nonverentur ? Quine- tiam adsimiliter Spiritui Sancti paracleti (seu advocatz) tribuitur officium, qui apud Deum causam nostram agit, pro nobis orat ac intercedit; verum Patris effica- ciam (que vix concipi potest, neque con- cipi debet, a Patre distincta) Deum al- loqui, Patri nobisque mediam _ inter- poni, nimis quam (ut cetera) perplex- um est, et αἰγιγματῶδες. 3. Porro, Spiritui quoque Sancto 8. Scriptura ribuit facultates, et his adnexas op- erationes, plane personales ; quales sunt Intellectus ; Spiritus omnia perscrutatur, etiam profunda Dei: Tis οἶδεν, εἰ μὴ τὸ Πνεῦμα; Voluntas; διαιρεῖ ἐκάστῳ κα- θώς βούλεται. Affectus tristitie et ire ; μὴ λυπεῖτε τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον τοῦ Θεου, ϑρίγιίμηι ejus exacerbarunt ; Sensus; ὅσα ἂν ἁκοῦ- σῃ λαλήσει. Sefmo ;cum ἐπ ἐμ 46 altbi sepe, Non enim vos estis, qui loguimini, sed Spiritus Patris vestri qui loguitur in vobis. Dixit Spiritus Sanctus, Se- parate miht Barnabum atqua Saulum ;* Addo locum illum (ut mihi videtur) lo- culentissimum, Act. x. 19, Petro autem cogitante de visione, dizit Spiritus ei, Ecce tres viri querunt te; surge itaque et vade cum eis, nihil dubitans ; quia ego misi illos. Hee, inquam, et agnata complura liquido personalia sunt ; neque qualitatem aliquam aut energiam, sed hypostasin vivam ac intellectualem re- presentant: hxc omnia ceu per προσω- ποποιΐαν (hoc est, quasi dramatice), pro- lata interpretari, quid fuerit aliud quam oracula Dei velut in Pythios griphos transformare, deque the ologia mythologi- am efficere? ut emphasis causa, in re minus obscura vel ardua, ejusmodi sche- mata nonnunquam adhibeat 8S. Scriptura, nil officit, fateor; sed ut rem gravissi- « Rom. viii. 26. τ 1Cor. ii. 10; xii. 11; Joh. iii. 8; Eph. iv. 30; Psal. evi. 43; John xvi. 33; Matt. x. 20; Act. xiii. 2. DE SPIRITU SANCTO. mam sublimissimamque quasi perpetuo — tortuosis istis loquendi formis involvat equidem ejus sanctissimz simplicissim que majestati consentaneum haud videtur: — certe prout simplicius, clarius et intellig- ibilius, ita majori compendio dici potuis- set, Deus cognoscit, Deus vult, Deus hoe vel illo modo afficitur ; Deus loguitur : quam Dei vis cognoscit, Dei potentia vult, Det eficacia loquitur. Si nihil hi modi loquendi discreparent, at saltem clarior, simplicior ceu expeditior est ille ; nec adeo dubiis aut erroribus ansam pre- bet. Non inepta saltem deberet esse προσωποποιΐα talis, at que rei proposite quam apposite conyeniret; id quod in hoe casu non contingit; nam ex illis saltem attributis personalibus nonnulla sensus istos figuratos vix admittunt; aut plane duriusculum est divinam vim cog- noscere, vel audire; et divinam effica- ciam ira vel meestitia affici (hoc est ἐνέρ- γείαν pati) quis commode dixerit ὃ 4, Spiritus Sanctus simili modo, pari- que jure, quo Pater et Filius, est fidei, cultus, obsequii nostri objectum: addo, cum in Spiritum Sanctum blasphemia committi dicitur, eadem plane loquendi forma, qua in Filium, significatur eodem modo Spiritum Sanctum esse personam quo Filius est persona: alioquin com- paratio minus apte videretur instituta : id quod cum alias plurifariam constet (ut postmodum ostendetur), tum preser- tim e S. Baptismi forma ab ipso Domino instituta; ubi scilicet eque in Spiritus Sancti nomen, ac in nomen Patris et Filii baptizmur; quo significatur, atque solenni contestatione sancitur, e parte: quidem divina tres illos ita junctos et quasi confcederatos nobis conspiranter propitios et faventes esse; nos ab iis in disciplinam, in gratiam, in clientelam accip|; eos nobis (feederis initi leges at- que conditiones implentibus) paratos et promissi jure velnt obstrictos esse bene- ficia quedam eximia elargiri; e parte vero nostra, nos solida fide tres illos pare iter (hoc est penitus) agnoscere et amp- lecti; nos in illis parem (hoc est, sum- mam) spem et fiduciam reponere ; eos omnes et singulos suprema nos reverentia prosequi; quin et iis perpetuum. (et quo- ad ejus a nobis fieri potest, perfeetum) obsequium sancte spondemus: quod ag- entes (sicut Athanasius, vel sub Atha- nasii nomine quis alius vetustus scriptor effatur*) plusquam simpliciter adoramus Spiritum Sanctum (εἰ δὲ μή εἰσι τέλειοι ριστια- vot of κατηχούμενοι, πρὶν ἢ βαπτισθῶσι, βαπτισθέντες δὲ τελειοῦνται᾽ τὸ βάπτισμα ἄρα μεῖζόν ἐστι τῆς προσ- κυνήσεως.) Exhinc quis non perspicit, in hoc religionis nostrz primo prscipuo- | que mysterio Spiritum Sanctum nobis ut) yersonam exhiberi, circa illum ut talem nostri precellentem hanc officii partem, cultum hunc eximium versari? Hue au- tem attendentes adversantium sententiam multis sentiemus incommodis urgeri. Nam si Spiritus Sanctus non est persona, minus apte (vel potius admodum incon- grue) cum duabus aliis personis in eund- em ordinem censumque cooptatur; min- us recte res adeo toto genere diverse bsistentes, et non subsistentes) copul- antur, nobisque forma prorsus eadem tanquam similia cultus abjecta proponun- tur; quin et frustra ac superflue Spiritus | Sancti nomen adponi videtur, si nil pre- ter Dei Patris éfficaciam designat: nam Patrem agnoscentes, ejus una patientiam etefficaciam (divine nature congruam) a imus: Patrem colentes, simul ejus potentiam suspicimus ; Patri nos in obse- ium addicentes, ejus juxta potestati nos subdimus : veluti si quis regi se fidum et obsequentem. pollicitus ac obtestatus est, | eatenus abunde satisfecit officio suo, nihil ut sit opus post fidem sic obstrictam, eti- am se regi potentiz vel efficaci® cuip- jam devotum profiteri. Supervacaneum ) fegem a regia potentia divelli quis non videt? Sciscitari quoque licet, annon | simili ratione par esset in divine bonit- atis, aut divine justitie, vel divine sapi- enti, vel alterius cujusvis attributi divini momen, eque ac in nomen divine po- tentiz nos consecrari? Miras itaque ten- ebras et affanias augusto huic mysterio inducit expositio Sociniana ; q sod tamen decuit clarissime “nobis et simplicissime proponi; ne in ipso Christian τ profes- sionis aditu cespitandi porrigeretur oc- casio. 5. Etiam perspicue Spiritus Sancti personalitatem evincit, quod sub visibili rei subsistentis specie, «idee σωματιχῷ, apparuisse memoratur in Evangelio. Rei scilicet accidentalis res substantialis haud- ) quaquam idoneum est symbolum aut re- | presentamen ; nec ejus nomen adsumat commode. Rei minime subsistenti par- eee eee * Tom. ii. p. 265; Dial. i. eontra Maced. DE SPIRITU SANCTO. 349 um congruit ad instar columbz descend- ere, Christoque incumbere: quod si Spirit- us Sanctus esset tantum efficacia Dei Patris (quandoquidem facultatum et op- erationum effectus suppositis suis aptis- sime tribuuntur), exinde dici posset (idque rectius et magis proprie), Patrem ipsum apparuisse corporea specie, Patrem des- cendisse, Patrem Cliristo insedisse ; Pa- trem S. Baptiste conspectum esse; quod a veri specie nimisquam abludit, et a nobis antea rejectum est. ‘Taceo (quod antehac attigimus) Spiritum Sanctum in- ter tres in σοῖο testificantes recenseri; quod et peccatum in Spiritum Sanctum a peccatis disterminatur in Deum Patrem admissis. Utet pretereo quod Person- arum trinitas, e Patrum complurium sen- tentia, in illa que Abrahamo facta est apparitione (ubi, Apparuit εἰ Dominus ; et Apparuerunt εἰ tres viri, dicitur) re- presentatur ; ut et quod eandem hymnus ille τρεσᾶγιοσ (apud Esaiam et Apocalyp- pten) insinuat ;* ut et quod, Creavit El- ohim Faciamus hominem, et similia, eo- dem re ferantur:* nam e dictis Socinia- nus error abunde refutatus videtur, et altera theseos nostre pars constabilita. lll. Asserimus, tertio (supposita jam ejus personalitate), Spiritum Sanctum esse coessentialem Patri Filioque; seu divinam illam unicam essentiam ei eum Patre et Filio communem esse; seu, quod eodem recidit, Spiritum Sanctum esse Deum (summum illum, absolute propriissimeque dictum.) Cum enim unum esse Deum et sacrz liter passim clament, et omnes facile consentiant, si Spiritus Sanctus sit Deus, Patri Filioque (qui jam Deus esse supponitur) necessario coessentialis erit: quod vero Spiritus Sanctus est Deus (contra Macedonium, et ei ὁμοδόξους) hujusmodi demonstratur argumentis. 1. Spiritui Sancto Dei nomina maxime propria titulique summopere divini passim attribuuntur; ex interpretatione justa ni- mirum, et consequentia perspicua ; quate enus s®penumero (pene dixeraim semper) variis ex occasionibus simul ad Deum et Spiritum Sanctum eadem verba, opera, * Cur non hic accipiamus visibiliter insinu- atam per creaturam visibilem Trinitatis equa- litatem, atque in tribus personis unam eandem- que substantiam ?—Aug. Trin. Il. 11, 12. Je- hovah Eloheim, Deut. vi. 6. * Gen. xviii. |; Esa. vi.3; Apoc. iv. 8. 350 DE SPIRITU SANCTO. factaque. referuntur; quicquid ut Deus dixisse, fecisse, vel utcunque gessisse tradatur, id etiam a Spiritu Sancto juxta dictatum, confectum, transactumque per- hibeatur ; et vicissim ut qnicquid Spirit- um Sanctum quomodocunque spectet, id pariter ad Deum referatur; id quod re- bus Dei Spiritusque Sancti nomine desig- natis essentialem intercedere quandam identitatem vel unitatem arguit. De Is- _ raelitis nequiter incredulis et immorigeris in Psalmo dicitur: Tentaverunt et ex- acerbaverunt Deum excelsum ; id sic ex- primit Esaias : Ad zracundiam provocav- erunt, et afflixerunt Spiritum Sanctum ejus. Ananiam insimulatS. Petrus, quod spiritui Sancto mentitus esset, ac inde quod Deo: Ananias, inquit, cur tentavit Sathanas cor tuum mentirz, Spiritua Sancto 2 mox autem subjicit, Non ment- ilus es hominibus, sed Deo ;* plane, nom- inibus illis eandem rem designat ; plus- quam innuit idem esse mentiri Spiritu! Sancto, atque mentiri Deo. Servator noster, ut homo, conceptus est a Spiritu Sancto, ptoptereaque Dei. natus fuit: Spiritus Sanctus (inquit angelus_ille) superveniet in te, et virtus Altissimi ob- umbrabit {δὲ ; ideoque quod et nascetur ex te sanctum vocabitur Filius Dei ;* quomodo constabit aut consequetur id, nis! Spiritus Sanctus sit Deus ? Dominus etiam nostercum Dei, tum Spiritus Sancti virtute miracula perpetrasse narratur; Si ego (apud Matthzum ait ipse) in Spiritu Dei ejicio demones ; apud Lucam vero, Si ego digito Dei (hoc est, Dei potentia) ejicio demonia.* Eadem in Actis Petrus De- um fecisse dicit. Utramque phrasin equipollenter effert S. Paulus per duvvd- pec πνεύματος ἰἁγίου. Scriptura Sancta, quoniam a Spiritu Sancto dictata, θεόπ- γευστος dicitur.® Dixit in prophetis Spiritus, ait B. Petrus, et idem alii pas- sim; Dixit in tisdem Deus, ait Apostolus ad Hebreos, et itidem alii, toties, quoties S. pagina Dei Verbum appellatur.© Spir- itus Sanctus in cordibus nostris charitatem diffundit, et operatur; ideo θεοδίδακτοι dicimur ad nos mutuo diligendum :* quin Υ Psal Ixxviii. 56; Isa. lxiii. 10; vi. 9; Act. xxviii. 25; vide 1 Cor. xii. 4; Act. v. 3, 4. * Luc. i. 35. ® Matt. xii. 28; Luc. xi. 20; Act. ii. 22, » Rom. xv. 19; 2 Tim iii. 16. ¢1Pet.i.11; Heb.i.1; 2 Peti. 21, &c.; Luce, i. 70. 4 1 Thess. iv. 8, 9. omnis virtus idcirco promiscue Deo Spir- ituique Sancto tanquaam immediatis au- thoribus ascribitur : πνεύματι Θεοῦ ἄγεσ- θαι, et 6 Θεός ἐστιν ἐνεργῶν καὶ Oédeiv καὶ τὸ ἑνερ- - yet”, idem denotant. Unusquisque porro fidelis Christianus ideo temp/um (hoc est, locus Deo sacratus) vocitatur, quatenus ei Spiritus Sanctus speciali modo presens est: Οὐκ οἴδατε, ὅτι ναὸς Θεοῦ ἐστε, καὶ τὸ [πνεῦμα τοῦ Θεοῦ οἰκεῖ ἐν ὑμῖν ; (inquit Paulus ;) Anaon scitis vos esse Dei sacrarium 2° unde sci- tis? inde, quod Dei Spiritus vos incolit; quoniam utique divini Spiritus inhabitatio nil aliud est quam inhabitatio Dei. Rur- sus idem Apostolus, ἐν ᾧ καί dusts συνοι- κοδομεῖσθε εἰς κατοικητὴριον τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐν πνεῦματι" ad habitaculum Dei in Spiritu ;* hoc est, eatenus habitaculum Dei, quatenus Spir- itus Sanctus in vobis habitat. Quomodo disertius aut penitius Spiritus Sancti divi- nitas enunciari poterat? Accedit, quod expresse S Paulus Spiritum Sanctum ap- pellat Dominum ; ‘O δὲ Κύριος τὸ πνεῦμά ἐστι: τὸ πνεῦμα verbis immediate subse- quentibus τὸ πνεῦμα Kvpiovdicitur (quod et pri- usin eodem capite τὸ πνεῦμα Θεοῦ ζῶντος, uti Chrysostomus adnotat;) itaque Domini Spiritus et ipse Dominus est, ad quem Judzi, dempto velamine mentes eorum obtegente, revertentur. Demum §&. Jo- hannes Patrem, Filium, et Sp. Sanctum unum esse testatur; adeoque Spiritus Sanctus est Deus, utrique coessentialis." Exhine corollarii loco, Macedoniano- rum retunditur importunitas, nihil aliud fere, quam ubinam Spiritus Sanctus in sacris literis exerte Deus appellatur, scis- citantium.' Ubi deus appellatur, ais? Ubinon? inquam ego: siquidem cum passim in eodem diplomate, vel in eadem historia, Cesari et lmperatori eadem dic- ta, facta, gesta memorentur, recte pro- nunciari possit, quod ibidem Czesar ap- pellatur imperator; id quod nemo, reor, inficias ibit. 2. Spiritui Sancto expressissime tribu- untur omnigene Dei perfectiones incum- municabiles, divine nature characteres etidiomata. Ipsum imprimis Sancté (ab- solute, αὐτογομαστικῶς, characteristice po- situm) epitheton huc pertinet: siquidem ¢ Rom. viii. 14; Phil. ii, 13; 1 Cor. iii. 16, 17; vi. 19; 2Cor. vi. 16; Rom, vii. 9. ' Ephes, ii. 22. 8 2 Cor. iii. 17, et v. 3. * 1 John v. 7, ' Dial. in Maced. apud 5, Athan. DE SPIRITU SANCTO. ; (ut in Anne hymno habetur), Non esi sanctus ut est Dominus, neque enim est alius extra tei—non est alius nempe pre- ter Deum absolute perfecteque sanctus (hoc est, a rebus omnibus intervallo quam longissimo segregatus, procul exaltatus supra omnia, peculiariter venerabilis et angustus) unde Sanctus ille,“O ἅγιος, Dei nomen est plane διακριτεικόν imo Spiritus ipsius nomen (itidem absolute, et eminenter positum) adeoque summam puritatem et perfectissimam (ut cum bar- baris loquar) actualitatem signans, idem innuere videtur: quin etiam eternitas, immensitas, omniscientia, omnipotentia (quibus utique nullz concipi possunt excel- siores, aut Deo magis proprie perfectio- nes)Spirtui Sancto tribuuntur. A®ternitas; nam αἰώνιον πνεῦμα dicitur Apostolo ad Hebreos; Quanto magis (inquit ille) sanguis Christi, qui per Spiritum Ater- num* semetipsum obtulit immaculatum Dei?' Immensitas; Quo (inquit Psal- mographus) ibo a Spiritu tuo? et quoa facie tua fugiam 2" questio negationem involvit, ejusque manifestam innuit ration- em: a Spiritu tuo fugere non est, quon- jam is ubique presens est. Omniscien- tia; Spiritus (inquit B. Paulus) omnia perscrutatur (id est, omnia, perfecte, fun- ditusqne comprehendit), etiam profunda Dei, καὶ τὰ θάθη τοῦ Θεοῦ." hoe est, om- nia, nulla re exclusa; nam si τὰ δάθη. tum omnia proculdubio, que Deus novit, adeoque que sciri possunt, intelligit ; illa hempe, que comprehendere tam crea- ture sortem longe superat, quam unius hominis captum transgreditur alterius ho- minis cogitationes affectusque presentis- cere (nam hujusmodi comparationem in- stituit S. Paulus:) quod et e Servatoris dicto confirmatur ; Οὐδιὶς γινώσκει τίς ἐστιν ὃ υἱός, si μὴ ὁ Ἰ]ατήρ καὶ τίς ἐστιν 6 Πατὴρ, εἰ μὴ ὃ υἱός" atqui Spiritus Sanctus quis Pater et quis Filius, proculdubio norat: ergo, Spirit- us Sanctus Patri Filioque coessentialis est. Speciatim Spiritui Sancto tribuitur pras- cientia futurorum, que contingentur ev- eniunt (qualis scientia pre reliquis ardua, Deoque summopere propria est, ac inde ) 1 Sam. ii. 2. k Vulg. Sanctum. ' Heb. ix. 14. ™ Psal. cxxix. 7. ® 1 Cor. ii. 10, 11. © Luc. x. 22. Sy Eph. iii. 5; i. 17; Rev. xix. 10; Joh. xv. 351 vulgo divinatio nuncupatur), que pecu- liariter Spiritui Sancto velut ejus immedi- ato principi appropriatur; unde Spiritus prophetiz (vel propheticus), Spiritus rev- elationis, Spiritus sapientie, Spiritus ver- itatis audit.e His accenseri possunt et alia non minus divina Spiritus Sancti at- tributa; velut Independentia quoad vol- untatem et operationem ; nam, hec omnia (gratiarum scilicet istarum eximiarum pro- ductionem ; donorum istorum mirabilium distributionem) operatur unus ac idem Spiritus, dividens singulis prout vult, ait S. Paulus.: Uti ventus ubicungue vult spirat." nec a quoquam determinari po- test, aut inhiberi, ita (quod Dominus nos- ter in Evangelio Johannis insinuat) Sanc- tus Spiritus pro jure suo ac arbitrio quic- quid vult operatur. Bonitas absoluta ; que soli Deo convenit (nam bonus nemo, preterquam unus, Deus ipse:) atqui Spiritus tuus bonus: deduc me in terram rectam (ait Psaltes.*) Veracitas absolu- tissima (que et scientiam perfectam et bonitatem extremam implicat), qualem innuit ei assignata veri tatis abstracte ti- tulus: Spiritus est quit testificatur (ait 8. Johannes) guoniam Spiritus est veritas,* hoc est absolutissime perfectissimeque verax. Demum omnipotentia Spiritui Sancto congruit, ut ex ejus operibus con- stat, que mox sequenti proponemus ar- gumento : Nam, tertio, Operationes divinissime ( create cujuscunque rei potestatem tran- scendentes) adscribuntur Spiritui Sancto, qnales sunt res creare: nam, informi masse Spiritus incubans mundum enixus est: Spiritus Det calos ornavit, inquit B. Job: Verbo Domini (canit Psaltes) cali formati sunt, et Spiritu oris ejus omnis virlus eorum :" qui vero res om- nes condidit, Deus est (ὁ δὲ τιάντα κατασ- κευάσας, Θεὸς), infert Apostolus ad He- bros. Res conservare: Emittes Spir- ijum tuum et creabuntur, et renovabis fa- ciem terre (de rerum continua produc- tione seu conservatione significatur.) Ho- mines speciatim cum primitus, tum con- tinuo producere: nam a Dei Spiritu pro- manavit anima protoplasti; deque seipso 4 1 Cor. xii. 11. τ Joh. iii. 8. Matt. xix. 17; Psal. cxlisi. 10; Neh. ix- 20, Vulg. Christus ; 1 Joh. v. 6. Gen. i. 1; Job xxvi. 13; Dsal. xxxiii. 6. Heb. iii. 4; Psal. civ. 30. δ δ᾽ κυ 352 profitetur ille bonus Elihu, Spiritus Det fecit me, et spiraculum Omnipotentis viv- dficavit me. Sed et (quod aliquanto ma- jus et difficilius estimetur merito) hom- ines denuo creare, vel deformatos ad ima- ginem Dei renovare (hominis quodammo- do demortui spiritum vivificando, cecam illustrando mentem, perversos affectus re- formando ;)" que effecta dare prout Deo, sic et Spiritui Sancto passim attribuitur.* Sed et huic adnexum justificare, vel pec- cata condonare (non ministerialiter, sed, quod soli Deo convenit, principaliter et absolute) nam, sed justificati estis (inquit S. Paulus) iz nomine Domini Jesu, et in Spiritu Dei nosiri.* Ecclesiam influxu suo velut animare ; suo nutu temperare, leges ei prescribere, rectores ei prefi- cere; quin etei extruende, propagande, conservandeque proficua queque charis- muta dispensare (qu sane divine pro- testatis omnino propria, precipuaque sunt opera.) Miracula (hoc est, opera nature legibus adversa vel superiora, Deoque proinde soli congrua) peragere; que nem peculariterattribuuntur Spiritui Sanc- to; in his quod palmam obtinet, resusci- tare corpora mortuorum : . ~ ΄ » . . - e ~ ~ ἐκ μεκρῶν, ζωοποιήσει καὶ τὰ θνητὰ σώματα ὑμῶν διὰ ὃ ἐγείρας τὸν Χριστὸν τὸ ἑνοικοῦν αὐτοῦ πνεῦμα ἐν ὑμῖν, inquit 5. Pau- lus.’ Nullum est denique seu nature, seu providentie, sue gratiz tam sublime, tam arduum opus, quale non adscribitur efficacie Spiritus Sancti, quod potestatem ejus αὐτοκρατορικὴν . potentiam παντοῦσρα- τορικὴν duties ναι. nullis certe luculen- tioribus argumentis demostrari potest ipsa summi Numinis omnipotentia. 4, Exinde porro Spiritui Sancto divina majesta asseritiur, quod ipsi rectissime di- vinus cultus exhibetur. Exhibetar is ex prescripto Dei, quando solemniter in ejus nomen baptizati,t fidem in eur: spemque nostram defigere profitemur, ei cultum protestamur et obsequium. Idem pres- tatur, cum ae Pauline benedictionis nor- ἈΞ Ἢ κτίσις οὐχ ἀγιάζοι xriocyv.—Basil. + ἸΠοίᾳ γὰρ κοινωνίᾳ τῷ κτίσματι πρὸς κτίστην ; διά τι τὸ πεποιημένον συναριθμεῖται τῷ ποιήσαντι εἰς τὴν τῶν πάντων τελείωσιν ;---ΑἸἰἢ, Or. III. contr. Ar. ~ Job xxxiii. 4; Eph. iv. 24; ii.0; 12 Cor. iv. 6; v.17; Coloss. ii. 10; Tit. iii. δ, x Luc. v. 31; 1 Cor. vi. 11; Rom. viii. 2; Tit. iii. 5; 1 Cor. 12,13; Act. 20,28; Com- paratur, Eph. iv. 11; 1 Cor. xii.; Heb. ii, 4. 7 Rom. viii. 11. DE SPIRITU SANCTO. mam unacum Domini Jesu gratia, Γ que Patris charitate, Sancti Spiritus im-— yloratur communicatio.** Idem non ¢ scura significatur, ubicunque (quod h raro fit) divinorum in officiorum et erum (tam eximiorum ac admirabi um) executione Patri Filioque con- junctus et coordinatus reperitur. Et enim hoc a Deo zelotypo, suique honoris admodum curioso (qui gloriam suam al- teri se neutiquam communicaturum* profi- tetur haud semel), creature cuiquam con- cessum esse, ut pari quasi passu secum ambulet, parile dignitatis ad culmen eve- hi videatur, haudquaquam credibile vel ull rationi consonum est. . Adhee, quan- ta Spiritui Sancto dignitas competit, qua- lis ei reverentia debetur, exinde liquide perspicitur, quod in eum prolate blas- phemiz singulatim abjudicatur venia ; cu- jus impetrationem: in Deum Patrem ade missa facinora, nec non Christo Dei filio intentata obloquia minime respuunt; nec enim rei natura fert, ut creature quic- quam detrahere tam capitale sit, aut tan- tam aggravationam capiat ; ut et vix con- cipi potest creature honorem divino sie anteferri.t | 5. Accedit his quod cum Christus, etiam ut homo supra res omnes (i7ég wav ὄνομα, ὑπεράνω πάσης dyyiis, καὶ ἐξουσίας, καί δυγνάμεος," αἱ apostolus nos docet) eleve- tur ac emineat, nihilominus ille eatenus Spiritut Sancto subjacet, atque cedit: nam, ut talis, a Spiritu Sancto naturam suam accepit (τὸ ἐν αὐτῇ γενηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐσ- τιν ἁγίου, inquit evangelista:) verum, πλείονα ri- μὴν ἔχει τοῦ οἴκου ὃ κατασκευάσας αὐτὸν, @dem dig- nilate superat, qui illam extruxit, ἰηααῖξι Apostolas ad Hebreos.: A Spiritus’ Sancto missus est Christus: Dominus (de eo predixit propheta) misit me, et Spir- lus ejus: atqui, non est servus major Domino suo, nec Apostolus major est eo, qui misit illum ; non est major, ait Domi- nus, κατὰ λιτότητα, hoc est, inferior est * 'Accbis οὖυ ἐστι λέγειν κτιστὸν ἢ πκιητὸν τὸ πνεύμα τοῦ Θεοῦ, ὁπότε πᾶσα γραφὴ παλαιάτε καὶ καὶ- νὴ μετὰ πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ συναριθμεῖ αὐτὸ καὶ δοξάζει. —Ath. περὶ ἐνσάρκου ἐπιφ. p. 600, τ. I. + Quomodo inter creaturas audet quisquam Spiritum Sanctum computare? aut quis sic sé obligat, ut si creature derogaverit, non putet sibi hoc aliqua venia relaxandum ?—Amér. * 2 Cor. xii. 14. δ Es. xlii. 8; xlviii. 11. ‘ > Phil. ii. 9; Eph. i. 21. © Matt. i. 20; Heb. tii. 3. 4 _ ᾿ mittente qui mittitur. A Spiritu Sancto - eonsecratus est Christus, et inauguratus officiis suis: Spiritus Domini super me, 80. quod πρὶ! me, (de Christu predixit _ Esaias, interpretantibus evangelistis ;) sed | absyue controversia τὸ ἔλαττον ὑπὸ τοῦ κρείττοτος _ ἐυλογεῖται; subdit author Epistole ad _ Hebreos. A Spiritu Sancto Christus | ubertim et preter mensuram eximiis do- tibus ornatus est; at dJeatius esse dare quam accipere, ex ore Domini prolatum _ est axioma. Spiritus denique Sancti vir- tute Christus miracula patravit ; per Spir- itum AXternum se obtulit Deo immacula- tum; Spiritu resuscitatus est a mortuis ; que certo non obscura sunt argumenta _ Spiritam Sanctum Christo, ut homini, _ precellere.’ Quare cum extra Deum unum nihil Christo, etiam ut homine, | prestantius aut superius sit, necessario _ consectatur Spiritum Sanctum, esse De- um. 6. Addo, Cum rerum creatarum, va- _viis ex occasionibus, ordines et classes _ percenseantur (ut cum ad Dei laudes con- cinnendas ipsarum universus chorus ad- vocatur; angeli nominatim, cceli, terre, _ homines, bestiz, plante citantur; quan- | do census initur rerum a Christo condita- rum ipsique subditarum, quas inter an- _ geli, throni, dominationes, potestates, vir- tutes memorantur;)* mirum sit hunc _ creaturarum (modo creatura sit) apicem, > bune ipsarum praecentorem et choregum _ omino pretermitti: verisimile sit, id si | prophetz scissent, aut sensissent apostoli, tacituros non fuisse ; quod certe si fecis- sent, scrupulos hos tantos erroresque no- bis exemissent ; verum non erat quod fa- ¢reaturum rerum censu non sit; id quod _ jam satis astruxisse videmur, adeoque thesis nostre tertiam partem compro- basse. Premissis autem omnibus haud leve Momentum accedit a tot sanctorum Pa- trum doctrina, tot conciliorum auctoritate, totiusque ecclesiw tot per secula decur- Yrente consensu ; quibus (absque causis _admodum sonticis) obnunciare, tam a 4 (sa. xlviii. 16; Joh. xiii. 16. 9 Luc. iv. 18; fsa. Ixi. 1; Heb. vii. 7. f Joh. iii. 34; il ᾿ & Psal. ciii. 20-22; exlviii.; 1 Pet. iii. 22; Col. i. 16; Eph. i. 21; Rom. viii. 38. Vou. Ill. 45 DE SPIRITU SANCTO. ~— prudentia recedit quam a modestia procul elongatur. Notiora vero sunt illa et ma- gis apud adversarios confessa, quam ut opus sit 115 immorari. Superest, ut quam paucissimis ultimam theseos partem (que Spiritus Sancti ori- ginem spectat) comprobatam demus: nempe Spiritum Sanctum a Patre Filio- que procedere. Quod Spiritus Sanctus a se non est, uti Pater, perspicuum est; quoniam isto po- sito, duo forent prima principia, et plures adeo Dei, unde οὐκ ἀφ᾽ ἑαυτοῦ λαλήσει. Quod ἃ Patre procedit, constat ex eo quod Pater omnis essentie fons est; etiam hoc apud omnes in confesso est ; item a Christo signanter Spiritus Sancius παρὰ Ἰ]ατρὸς ἐκπορεύεσθαι, egredi, vel emanare di- citur a Patre; et τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ Vocatur aS. Paulo.” Quod a Filio quoque pro- cedit, colligitur, Primo, Quod sicuti Patris, ita et Filii Spiritus spe nuncupatur ; quod eum pa- riter ad Filium ac ad Patrem referri sig- nificat; utrumque proinde similiter ad ejus productionem conspirare.' Secundo, Prout a Patre, sic etiam a Fi- lio mitti dicitur : missio vero et ἐκπόρευσες haud differunt (nisi loquendi saltem mo- do; quatenus missio denotat originis ter- minum, ἐκπόρευσις ejusdem actum vel effectum designat:)' nec aliter Spirit- ui Sancto (qui Deus est, ut ostensum), mitti vel egredi convenit, quam per es- sentiz communicationem. Tertio, De Spiritu Sancto dicit Filius ἐκ rod ἐμοῦ λήψεται, de mev accipiet et annuncialit vobis ;* cuicoincidil, ὅσα ἂν ἀκυύσῃ λαλήσει, Qui- bus innuitur Spiritum Sanctum ἃ Filio scientiam accipere, quod aliter non potest (cum Deus sit), quam ab eodem essen- tiam suam accipiendo. Quarto, Spiritus Sanctus est Persona ordine tertia; cum itaque Filius ordine prior (ordine dico, non tempore) divinam essentiam obtineat; hec adeo, cum em- anet Spiritus Sanctus, Filio simul ac Pa- iri communis sit; a Patre seorsum essen- tiam recipere non potest, quin eandem simul a Filio derivet : quomodo Christus " Joh. xvi. 13; Novat.c. 31; Joh. xv. 26; 1 Cor. il. 12; Matt. x. 20. ; ' Gal. iv.6; Rom. viii.9; 1 Pet. i. 11; Phil. i. 19. ‘ ) Joh. xv. 26; xvi. 7; Luc. xxiv. 49. k Joh. xvi. £3, 14. - ipse videtur argumentatus; ubi ait, Om- nia que Pater habet, mea ,sunt ; ideo dizi, quod ex meo accipiet.' Quinto, Hanc demum a se Spiritus Sancti processionem significasse videtur Christus, quum discipulis insufflans Spir- itum Sanctum communicaret ; ut quidem Augustinus et Cyrillus arbitrantur.” Accedit Latinorum Patrum Hilarii, Ambrosii,* Augustini, et reliquorum con- sentiens authoritas, hoc explicite docenti- um. Sed et antiquiores Greci, Athanasius, Basilius, uterque Gregorius, Epiphanius, Cyrillus Alexandrinus, idem (etsi rarius adeo diserie, sepe tamen equipollenter, et quoad sensum) tradunt. Itaque theseos partibus cunctis utcun- que comprobatis concludo : Spiritum Sanctum esse Personam dis- tinctam, Patri Filioque coéssentialem, et ab utroque procedentem. ᾿Ακούεις γέννησιν, τὸ πῶς μὴ περιεργάζου" ἀκούεις τὸ προιὸν ἐκ τοῦ Llarpds, τὸ πῶς μὴ πολυπραγμόνει.---- Naz. Or. XXIX. DE REGIMINE EPISCOPALI. Rejectio regiminis episcopalis, ubi ha- bentur orthodoxi et legiitmi, episcopi, facit proprie schisma mortale. In hanc thesin imprimis nonnulla strictim adnotabimus, tum illam argumentis qui- busdam adstruemus. Episcopale regimen quid designet, uni- cuique perspectum autumo, quatenus il- lud ab aliis ecclesiz administrande for- mis, χθὲς καὶ πρώην introductis, distingui- tur; illud nempe regimen, penes quod, in districtu quopiam ecclesiasticu, singu- laris unus (ad id rite vocatus, dilectus, ap- probatus et consecratus) toti caetui, totique clero preficitur, ceu pastor et inspector su- premus,? in sacris quibuscunque rebus dis- * Deus Pater cowternum sibi et coomnipo- tens genuit Verbum, cum quo Spiritum Sanc- tum produxit.—Ambr. in Symbd. + Cui éxypirws παρὰ τὰς λοιπὰς τάξεις εἰς αὐτουρ- γίαν ὃ θεῖος θεσμὸς ἀπονενέμηκε τὰς θειοτέρας ἱερουρ- ytas.—Dion. Hier. c. ὅ. ! John. xvi. 15; xvii. 10. ™ John xx. 22. δ... DE SPIRITU SANCTO. pensandis et ordinandis, πρεσδεῖα que. dam obtinens et peculiaria munia sibi re- servata, sacros ordines conferendi, bap- tizatos confirmandi, jurisdictionem exer- - cendi; quale S. Cyprianus innuit et ut- cunque describit, quum affirmat ‘ singu- lis pastoribus portionem gregis adserip- tam esse, quam regat unusquisque et gu- bernet, rationem sui actus Domino red- diturus ;”* et quod “inde” (nimiruma Dominica dispositione) “per temporum et successionum vices episcoporum Ὁ natio et ecclesiz ratio decurrit, ut eccle- sia super episcopos constituatur, et omnis actus ecclesiz per eosdem prepositos gu- bernetur ;”* quale denuo regimen ante plurima secula per universum orbem Christianum invaluisse neminem latet. Hujusmodi regimini variis modis ob- rogari potest; veluti primo, Cum epis- copo potestatem exerenti ejus subditi ob- sequium® detrectant ; de quo S. Cypria- nus, ‘* Neque enim aliunde hereses ob- ort sunt, aut nata sunt schismaia, quam inde quod sacerdoti Dei non obtempera- tur, nec unus in ecclesia, ad tempus sa- cerdos, et ad tempus judex, vice Christi cogitatur.””° Secundo, Cum nonnulli, (quibuscunque de causis, aut quocunque pretextu) se ab episcoporum suorum communione (adeo- que penitus ab imperio) subducunt atque segregant ; id quod olim Novatiani, Do- natiste, Melitiani, Luciferiani schismatiei fecere, nec non heretici plerique catholi- corum episcoporum consortium declinan- tes ; quo et illud 8. Cypriani referatur, “ς Quiplantatus non est in preceptis Dei Patris et monitis, solus poterit de ecclesia ille discedere, solus episcopis derelictis cum schismaticis et hereticis in furore remanere.””° _ Tertio, Cum-talis regiminis ipsa spe- cies abdicatur, alia quaquam ecclesiz re- gendz forma subrogata; quod utique vix usquam priscis temporibus attentatum, apud nos saltem nuper factum meminis- tis: Et hic quidem, opinor, episcopale regimen rejiciendi modus in thesi potis- simum innuitur. Schisma proprie divisionem significat, ast inde μετωγυμεκῶς peccatum, aut vitl- um, divisionis in ecclesia causam, desig- nat; quod scilicet admittit, quicunque (contra voluntatem Domini, suos inter * Cypr. Ep. 55. > Ib. Ep. 27, * Ib. Ep. 49. DE REGIMINE EPISCOPALI. discipulos omnes unitatem, charitatem, pacem instituentis) animo turbulento, vel utcunque pravis affectibus occupato, ec- clesie membra, unitate soluta, a se dis- jungit, pacem infringst, ordinem contur- bat, dissidia, factiones, scandala charitati adversa creando, vel fovendo." Scilicet hoc diversimode committi potest : In particulari quapiam ecclesia conten- tiones, factiones, turbas, animorum divor- tia concitando ; quomodo factum apud Corinthios,* cum S. Paulus dixit, ’4xotw σχίσματα iv ὑμῖν ὑπάρχειν, cum et S. Cle- mens iisdem improperat μιαρὰν καὶ ἀνόσιυν στά- σιν, ἣν ὀλίγα πρόσωπα προπετῆ καὶ αὐθάδη----ἐξέκαυ" σαν.ἷ : Etiam committitur, uteunque peregrina perversaque dogmatia recte fidei vel pro- bis moribus adversa serendo, indeque seandala pariendo, cogendoque sectas ab orthodoxa ecclesia devias; de quo eum alias sepe S. Paulus, tum in illo ad Romanos loco signanter effatur; Παρα- καλῶ δὲ ὑμᾶς͵ ἀδελφοὶ, σκοπεῖν rods τὰς dtyooracias * ᾿ pe a a ...- καὶ τὰ σκάνδαλα παρὰ τὴν διδαχὴν ἣν ὑμεῖς ἐμάθετε ποιοῦντας" καὶ ἐκκλίνατε ἀπ᾽’ αὐτῶν. Etiam perpetratur ab illis, qui sibimet arripiunt potestatem indebitam et inordi- natam (ecclesiarum legibus aut moribus adversam) functiones ecclesiasticas obe- undi, concionandi presertim, aut popul- um docendi: quales_ illi pseudapostoli, ἐργάται δόλιοι, μετασχηματιζόμενοι εἰς ἀποστόλους SN ὦ. - τ΄ ... ... .»... .... re Χριστοῦ" illi viri λαλοῦντες διεστραμμένα τοῦ ἀποσ- πᾶν τοὺς μαθητὰς ὀπίσω αὑτῶν" illi ἐνδύνοντες εἰς τὰς οἰκίας, καὶ aiypadwrebovres τὰ γυναικάρια" ili θέ. λοντες εἶναι νομοδιδάσκαλοι" illi ἐξ ἐριθείας τὸν Κρισ- τὸν καταγγέλλοντες." Item ab illis fit, qui pastoribus immori- geri sunt, aut ipsos repudiant ; quales illi|. ἀνυπότακτοι, γογγυσταὶ, αὐθάδεις, τόλμη ταὶ, δόξα, | βλασφημοῦντες, 4105 apostoli perstringunt; illi ἀτάκτως περιπατοῦντες, qui S. Pauli dictata res- j ἌΣ Fraternitatis bene sibi coherentis, et se } iM vicem diligentis concordiam scindendo,” ut Cyprianus loquitur.— Ep, 49. } © Joh. xvii. 20, 21; xv. 12; xiv. 27; Mark ΟΧ, 50, πὸ Cor. xi. 18; i. 10; iii. 4 ; Clem. ad Cor. Ρ. 2. 6 Heb xiii.9; Eph. iv. 14; 1 Tim.i. 3; vi. δι iv, 1; 2 Tim. ii. 18; Tit.i. 11; Rom, xvi. *2Cor. xi. 13,15; Act. xx. 30; 2 Tim. iii. 6; 1 Tim. i. 7; Phil. i. 16. puerunt ; iste ambitiosus Diotrephes, qui S. Johannem non admisit.' Itidem patratur ab illis, qui sine justa vel necessaria causa ab ecclesie cu- juscunque fidelis communione secedunt, aut separando se dirimunt: de qualibus Judas apostolus, Οὗτοι εἰσεν of ἀποδιορίζον- τες" et S. Cyprianus, “ Sibi extra eccle- siam et contra ecclesiam constituunt con- venticulum perdite factionis.”” Denique cum Patrem Dominus obtest- atus fuerit, ut ejus discipuli πάντες ἕν ὦσι, in hoc gravissime impingunt, qui corporis Christi compagem luxant, dum ejus mem- bra precipua, diversas ecclesias, a se divellunt, amicz pacis inter illas, com- munionis sancte, commercii hospitalis, fraterneque charitatis vincula utcunque dissolvendo ;* quod fit cum una ecclesia aliam acerbe taxat, aut temere damnat, aut inique a communione repellit; cum una alterius jura vel privilegia invadit, in alteram indebitum imperium usurpat, aut tyrannicam dominationem exercet ; cum una quepiam ecclesiastice dispens- ationis modum quemcunque generali con- sensu a confcederatis pastoribus, εὐταξίας aut concordie gratia, lege sancitum, vel usu firmatum (nulla cogente necessitate, vel gravi ratione suadente) violat. Ex his schismatis faciendi modis cum omnes ferme, vel certe plusculos incur- rere videantur hi plerique, qui episcopale regimen abrogant, illi saltem intelligun- tur, qui singulis ipsorum molitionibus ap- posite quadrant. Subditur autem epitheton mortalit ; quo nempe delicti gravitas insinuatur ; cujus qui reatum incurrit, penes divinum judicium e«terne morti sese reddit obnox- ium, inde non nisi seria pznitentia et emendatione congrua absolvendus. Ita precipuos thesis absolute sumpta terminos exposuimus. At ne forte casus speciales ejus veritati subinde derogent, dus: merito inseruntur exceptiones : pri- ma est, Ubi habentur orthodoxi episcopt ; recte hoc ; nam episcoporum heterodox- orum nedum regimen, at communionem ipsam rejicere fas est, imo officil est, e sacre scripture, Patrum, ecclesiastice praxis authoritate : i Tit. i, 10; 2 Pet. ii.10; Jud. 8, 16; 2 Thess. iii. 6, 14; 3 Joh. 9. ) Jud. 19; Cypr. Ep. 55. © Joh. xvii. 21, 22; Tertull. de Praser, p. 20. 356 Nam quilibet hereticus, aut ἑτεροδιδασ- καλῶν (etiam episcopus, imo forte magis episcopus, ut criminosior et periculosior) repudiandus, declinandus, et derelinquen- dus est; ab hoc στέλλεσθαι, ἀφίστασθαι, exxhivery, hunc παραιτεῖσθαι jubemur.' Etiam apostolo, imo angelo ceelesti (quan- to magis apostoli vicario, vel angelo ter- restri), aliam ab evangelio doctrinam annuncianti, execratio intentanda est. Consonant his Patres; Cyprianus, “* Plebs obsequens preceptis Dominicis, et Deum metuens, a peccatore, preposi- to separare se debet,”’ (peccatore, id est, fidei desertore.)" Item, “" Nec,” inquit, *“‘sibi plebs blandiatur, quasi immunis esse a contagio delicti possit, cum sacer- dote pecatore communicans.” Idem alibi, “*Quomodo possunt integritati et continentiz preesse, si ex ipsis incipiant corruptele et vitiorum magisteria proce- dere ?””" Chrysostomus, ᾿Α ξίωμα προσώπων οὐ προσίεται, ὅταν περὶ ἀληθείας ὃ λόγος ἧ. Litem, εἰ μὲν γὰρ δόγ- μα ἔχει διεστραμμένον, Kav ἄγγελος 7, μὴ πείθου. Ambrosius, “Si qua est ecclesia” (quanto magis, siquis episcopus) “ que fidem respuat, nec apostolice predica- tionis fundamenta possideat, ne quam iabem perfidie possit aspergere, deseren- da est.”» Augustinus, “* Nec catholicis episcopis consentiendum est, sicubi forte falluntur, ut contra canonicas Dei scripturas aliquid sentiant ;” quanto magis hereticis epis- copis obnunciandum est ὃ Itaque P. Celestinus I. populum Con- stantinopolitanum, a Nestorio falsa dog- mata propinante secedentem, ita laudavit, Μακάριος δὲ ὅμως ἡ ἀγέλη, ἡ παρέσχεν ὃ ἰζύριος κρί- νειν περὶ τῆς ἰδίας νομῆς" Et in Ephesino con- cilio probantur presbyteri, qui eundem Nestorium ἤλεγξαν, οἱ τῆς αὐτοῦ κοινωνίας αὐτὸν ἐκέθαλον, Ἐπ in eodem admittitur illud Charisii presbyteri effatum perquam no- tabile ; Εὐχὴ μὲν ἅπασι τοῖς εὐφρονοῦσι τιμὴν αἰεὶ καὶ πρέπουσαν αἰδῶ πνευματικοῖς μάλιστα πατράσι καὶ διδασκάλοις ἀπονέμειν. εἰ δέ που συμθῇ rods διδάσκειν ὀφείλοντας τοιαῦτα τοῖς ὑπηκόοις ἐνηχεῖν περὶ τῆς πι- στεως͵ υἷα τὰς ἁπάντων ἀκοὰς καὶ καρδίας καταβλάπσει, 1 2 Thess. iii. 6; 1 Tim. vi. 3, 5°; Rom. xvi. 17; 2John 10; Tit. iii. 10; Gal. i. 8. = Cypr. Ep. 68. " Cypr. Ep. 62. * Chrps. in Gal.i. 9; in 2 Tim. Orat. 2. P Ambr. in Luc. ix. p. 85. « Aug. de Unit. Eccl. cap, 10. * Act. Conc. Eph. p. 359; Act. p. 220. DE REGIMINE EPISCOPAL. ἀνάγκη τὴν τάξιν ἀνταλλάττεσθαι, καὶ τοὺς κακῶς de δάσκειν ἑλομένους ὑπὸ τῶν ἡσσόνων διελέγχεσθαι. — Hine octava, que dicitur, synodus pa- pee Honorio ab orientalibus anathema - recte dictum asserit, ὅτι ἐπὲ αἱρέσει κατηγορήθη, de ἣν καὶ μόνον ἔξεστι τοὺς ἀποδεεστέρους τῶν μειζόνων. κατεξανίστασθαι." ΝΜ Ipse, ne plura congeram, P. Nicolaus I. ‘*Fides universalis, et omnium com- munis est, que non solum ad clericos, verum etiam ad laicos, et ad omnes om- nino pertinet;”" itaque procul habendi sunt, qui fidem, rem maxime nostram, ab- latum eunt. Neque mirum hee dici, cum revera qui a sana fide deflectit, non amplius ep- iscopus, quippe nec Christianus sit; nam ἐξέστραπται 6 τοιοῦτος, inquit S. Paulus ; et juxta Tertullianum, ‘Si heeretici sunt, Christiani esse non possunt ;” illudque Cypriani, ‘“‘ Nec Christianus videri potest, qui non permanet in evangelii ejus et fidei veritate.’’" | Porro subditur et altera exceptio, Ubi habeniur episcopi legitimi : hoc est, qui cum rite consecrantur, tum jure populo suo preeficiuntur; Nam ‘ qui” (qualesS. Cyprianus hisce verbis perstringil) “ se. ultro apud temerarios convenas sine divi- na dispositone preeficiunt, qui se preepos- itos sine ulla ordinationis lege consti- tuunt, qui nemine episcopatum dan- te episcopi sibi nomen assumunt ;”” vel “qui” (ut apud S. Augustinum non- nulli) ‘“‘turbide atque inordinate in eos coercendos insiliunt, qui nulla sibi lege subjecti sunt;”* Qui (inquam) in- ordinate (preter Dei voluntatem et ec- clesiz instituta) munus sacrum invadunt, aut regiminis clavum arripiunt, hi jure rejici possunt; quin et merito debent, ne ipsorum vel sacrilega presumptio vel ar- rogans injuria comprobari videantur : eienim πῶς κηρύξωσιν ἐὰν μὴ ἀποσταλῶσι; Net quisquam sibi sumit hunc honorem, nist gui vocatur a Deo, tanquam Aaron; Qui non ἐπ ταί per ostium in ovile ovium, sed ascendii aliunde, ille (non pastor ov- ium, sed) fur est ect latro: Non mi/tebam s Act. Eph. Ῥ. 358. ‘ Syn. VIII. Act. 8, p. 963. " P. Nicol. I. Ep. 8, p. 506. ‘ Y Tit. iii. LL; Tert. de Preeser. 6, 27; Cypre de Un. Ecel. ν Cypr. de Un. Ecel. p. 256. x Jure culpandi sunt qui, &c.—Aag. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 17; Cypr. Ep. 74, Ρ. 181. DE REGIMINE EPISCOPALI. prophetas, et ipsi currebant ; non loque- bar ad eos,et ipsi prophetabant ;* ita nempe tales sacre functionis aggressores divina proscribunt oracula : tales scilicet in ecclesia Romana Novatianus, in Carth- inensi Majorinus, in Alexandrina Gre- gorius et Georgius (Athanasii emuli ;) et universim, quos antiqui Patres ecclesia- rum adulteros predonesque vocitarunt, qui veris extrusis epiScopis ecclesias oc- cuparunt, aut in segreges ceetus genuinis _ pastoribus abductos (adscita spuria qua- piam ordinatione) potestatis umbram ex- ercuerunt; quales episcoporum neuti- quam habendos loco ita graviter monet 5. Cyprianus; ‘Nec episcopus com- _ putari potest, qui, evangelica et aposto- lica traditione contempta, nemini succe- dens a seipso ortus est ;’’’ et, “" Qui nec unitatem Spiritus, nec conjunctionem pacis observat, et se ab ecclesiz vinculo, atque a sacerdotum collegio separat, epi- scopi nec potestatem potest habere, nec honorem.””* | _ Hisce quoad expositionem prelibatis, thesi jam comprobandz nos accingemus. Hoc autem imprimis nimis quam mani- festum sumimus, illos qui episcopale re- gimen abjiciunt, de facto saltem ecclesiz (cujus usitatam praxin deserunt) unitatem atque concordiam infringere, veterisque discipline tenacibus offensionem minis- trare, novam suam quamcunque, tot - seculorum prescriptioni adversam, regi- minis formam invehendo; illud proinde si jure factum excusare non valent, si justas aut necessarias tanti moliminis causas assignare nequeunt, quinimo si res ipsa per se culpabilis sit, ne schisma- tis rei sint, effugere non poterunt. Quod autem res a culpa non sit immn- nis, his elucebit argumentis. 1. Nefas est divinum institutum (vel apostolicam in grandis momenti re con- Stitntionem) abolere. Narn “ adulterum est” (ut S. Cyprianus exclamat), * im- ium est, sacrilegum est, quodcunque mano furore instituitur, ut dispositio divina violetur ;” atqui tale fore regimen iscopale, cum ἃ pluribus doctissimis viris luculente fuseque demonstratum sit, / 7 Rom | Xxili. 21. * Cypr. Ep. 76, p. 208. ® Cypr. Ep. 52, p. 97. » Cypr. Ep. 40, et 68. .x.15; Heb. v. 4; John x. 1—; Jer. ane — . tum hec jam transcursim perstringenda suadent. , [. Id sacra seriptura docet. Rectores enim hee asserit a Deo con- stitutos, eta Spiritu Sancto ecclesiz pre- positos, quos passim ἐπισκόπους, inspec- tores, vel superintendentes, ut S. Hiero- nymus vertit, προεστῶτας, antistites, aut presules, ἡγουμένους, ductores, vel ante- signanos, ἐπιμελητὰς seu curatores, pas- tores denique nuncupat;° quibus ultro cedere subjicique nos jubet, nec aures tantum dociles adhibere, sed et honorem deferre, ac obsequium prestare. Hisce munus nempe demandatum est, ut apostolis (primis ecclesiarum parenti- bus, et pastoribus supremis) duin in vivis superessent, earum in administratione vi- carlam operam, sociasque manus et συν-- εργίαν accommodarent ; et postquam vi- ta excessissent, in ipsorum locum succe- derent, regni ceelestis clavibus acceptis, quas apostolis Deus, et per eos ecclesiz concessit, in eternum duraturas. Liquet enim apostolis (preter extraor- dinaria quedam officia specialibus donis ad ecclesie fundationem necessariis communita), peculiaria nonnulla munia, regiminis episcopalis propria, competisse ; qualia sunt, ecclesiis pastores et ἀξετουρ - yous adsignare, ecclesiz insertis Sancti Spiritus σφραγῖδα imprimere, jurisdictio- nem in disciplina formanda, legibus fe- rendis, defectibus corrigendis, causis di- judicandis, delinquentibus castigandis (*«- τὰ τὴν ἐξουσίαν ἣν ἔδωκεν ὃ Képos,) obire ;* quo- rum cum ad ecclesi# consorvationem et awdificationem (πρὸς τὸν καταρτισμὸν τῶν ἁγίων, tic ἔργον διακονΐας, εἰς οἰκοδομὴν τοῦ σώματος τοῦ “Χριστοῦ ) perpetuus et ordinarius sit usus, ea ad posteros transmitti, adeoque suc- cessoribus committi debuerunt. ltaque rectores ecclesiastici sunt reve- ra (quales ipsos S. Patres, ne quidem 8. Hieronymo excepto, uno ore proclamant) apostolorum in ecclesia pascenda regen- daque heredes succedanei et succenturi- ati; “ quibus” (ut S. Ireneus loquitur) *illi eam que in unoquoqgue loco est ec- clesiam tradiderunt;” per quos cum © 1 Cor. xii. 28; Eph. iv. 11; Act. xx. 28; Hier. Ep. 85, ad Evag. 4 Act. xiii.2; vi.6; viii. 17; Cypr. Ep. 73; Eus. iii. 17; vi. 33; 2 Cor. x. 8; xiii, 10. ~« Eph. iv. 12. ‘ Cypr Ep. 27, 6y, 41, Mare. am. é&c.; Iren. iv. 75; Hier. Ep. 54,ad 63. 358 DE REGIMINE EPISCOPALI. apostolicum officium in secula traducatur,| stat apud eos, sicuti magn! synedrii sen- iis adsisténdo Christus sponsionem suam| exequitur, qua se pollicitus est apostolis ad zvi consummationem affuturum.: | Juxta que satis constat ab apostolis in ecclesiis passim rectores constitutos, tali- bus officiis destinatos. Hinc a S. Paulo Tito demandatum, ut in districtu. suo Cretensi τὰ λείποντα re- formaret, et singulis in civitatibus presby- teros constitueret, instrueret et argueret μετὰ πάσης ἐπιταγῆς, Omni Cum imperio et authoritate ;* Refractariis, et parva docentibus silentium imponeret, h reti- cosque proscriberet. Hinc idem Timotheo commissam om- nigenam jurisdictionem multis innuit, ip- sum ad ejusce rectam administrationem ubertim erudiens excitansque ; scilicet ut presbyteros non aspere jurgaret, ast officii leniter admoneret ; ne temere de- latam adversus illos accusationem susci- peret ;“ ut ipsis pro meritis honoraria la- boris premia dispensaret ; ut delinquen- tes palam argueret et corriperet; ut ne- mini prepropere manum imponeret, aut censuris eximeret; ut sacros ordines in viros idoneos, canine spectabiles, exam- ine preemisso conferret ; ut viduarum ap- tam electionem procuraret; ut liturgias recte confici prospiceret; ut hujusmodi cuncta prudenter, et juste, sine prejudi- cio quopiam, aut partium studio, admin- istraret : quz sane prefecturam illi com- mendatam abunde monstrant. Hine denuo principalibus istis in Asia ecclesiis, plures presbyteros complecten- tibus, unum angelum presedisse, a quo Spiritus Sanctus ecclesiastici status (ut- pote sue cure concrediti) rationem exi- git, ipsi imputans quecunque recte vel perperam gesta sunt, haud obscure divi- nus Apocalyptes indigitat. Il. Hee ex eo nonnihil confirmantur, quod apud veterem Dei populum hujus- modi regimen obtinuit; a cujus forma Dominus noster, novitatis haud amans, in ordinanda populi sui disciplina non facile recessisset ; quin ordinem potius apud il- los constitutum suis institutis adaptasset ; unde nec ob hoe apud Judzos conversos uspiam turbatum legimus. Atqui con- & Matt. xxviii. 20. b Tit. 1. δ; ii, 15; i. 11; iii. 10. ΕἼ Tim. v. 1, 19, 17, 20, 22; iii. 10; v.95 i. 1; v.21. ) Apoc. il. atoribus unus antistes prefuit, ita singu- lis synagogis (quibus utique jam particu- lares ecclesie respondent) ἀρχισυνάγωγον _ Ἐπ ΣΝ )quendam, seu caput coetus, re- liquos inter doctores et presbyteros cum auctoritate presedisse. ‘ Ill. Ecclesie primitive status et prax- is, apostolica tempora statim excipiens, hoc penitus firmat, Εἴ irrefragabiliter qua- si demonstrat; nam episcopale regimen tunc passim invaluisse, certum atque con- fessum est: at vero qui fieri potuit, ut ecclesie tam variis in locis a se longissi- me dissitis (Hierosolymis puta, Antio-— chie, Alexandrie, Ephesi, Corinthi, Ro- mz) ab apostolis nuper fundate, hujus in discipline, agnitione et usu derepente si- mul omnes conspirarent, nisi primitus il- lam ab institutione apostolica derivas- sent ὃ quomodo tam subito, tam facile, sine manifesta quadam confaederatione sine notabili strepitu, sine multa contra- dictione irrepere potuit ab apostolica in- stitutione deflectens regimen? Num ve- risimile sit inter fervidas illas persecutl- ones, ecclesiz magistris potissimum in- cumbentes, adeoque cum eminentia, nil aliud quam gravissima accerseret pericu- la, stolidam hane ambitionem ubique si¢ increbuisse presidentias indebitas occu- pandi? Adeone sanctissimos plerosque fide confessores et martyres ista pestis invasit, ut injustam potestatem vel impo- tenter appeterent, vel improbe arriperent? An alii fortissimi quique viri tam iniqua molientibus facile cessissent, aut prompte consensissent? Cuncti Basen virl sanc- titate juxta ac sapientia illustres, tam c#@- ci fuissent, ut non perspicerent, tam pra- vi, ut ultro comprobarent ingruentem ejusmodi corruptelam? Tota demum ecclesia tanto abusui tam libenter acquie- visset, tam placide succubuisset ἢ Imo potius, cum hee absona sint, et que vix concipi potest ullatenus obvenisse, regi- men episcopale cunctarum ecclesiarum apostolic constitutioni innexum est; et juxta Tertulliani effatum aliis Patribus as- tipulantibus probatum, ‘‘ Constat id esse ab apostolis traditum, quod apud ecclesi- as apostolorum fuerit sacrosanctum ;” Cul et illud accinit Augustini, ‘Illa que non scripta sed tradita custodimus, qua qui- dem toto terrarum orbe observantur, dan- tur intelligi vel ab ipsis apostolis, vel ple- nariis conciliis, quorum est in ecclesia 88- — | DE REGIMINE EPISCOPALI. Juberrima auctoritas, commendata atque statuta retineri.”’* ο΄ TV. Hoe etiam invicte munit historia- rum certa fides, et inconcussa traditio, que in ecclesiis quibusque precipuis _ presidentes episcopos continua ab apos- tolis serie deducit; nam ““ Habemus” (inquit, et aliquoties iterat Irenzeus, testis apostolico «vo finitimus) ‘‘ annumerare eos, qui ab apostolis instituti sunt episco- pi in ecclesiis, et successores eorum us- que ad nos.”! Istam historie fidem, - eonsonumque traditionis suffragium, si morose respuimus, quo sodes fundamen- to religionis nostre veritas nitetur, quo fulchro sacrorum librorum auctoritas sus- tentabitur? quid uspiam sanctum, quid _ sertum apparebit? Hoc certe ratiocinio, cum firmiori non possent, [renzus, ‘Ter- tullianus, aliique patres hzereticos refuta- runt, apostolic doctrine obstrepentes. V. Accedit his veterum Patrum (uno saltem Hieronymo dempto, non antiquis- simo, nec sibi satis in hac re constanti) unanimis consensus, episcopale regimen auctori Domino vel apostolis adscribens ; quem aspernari, nescio certe num imma- niorem arrogantiam an stupidiorem ve- cordiam sapiat: parco testirmoniis, qu et innumera et nimis obvia sunt." —Itaque rejicere hoc regimen est divinam institu- tionem violare idcircoque criminosum. 2. Culpa non vacat ecclesize catholice sanctionem, ‘ toto”? (ut Hieronymus ἰο- ‘quitur) “ orbe decretam,”* communique assensu firmatam, divine legi minime contrariam, abjicere. Hoc qui negat, quem in ecclesia unitati, paci, charitati locum relinquit? anon synodos omnes pa aspernatur, despuit, aut irritas cit ? annon dum totius ecclesiz senten- tiam refigit, etiam singule cujusque, to- tam comprehense ecclesie pessundat auctoritatem ? At episcopale regimen tale saltem est; et si minus apostolica utcunque tamen ecclesiastica potissima constitutione nititur; si nog divina lege, saltem humana prudentia constitutum est. Hoc ex innumeris synodorum de- cretis liquet, que regimen hoc clarissime probant, firmissimeque muniunt; ut quod | | consuetudine quam Dominica dispositionis ve- Fritate presbyteris esse majores.—Héer. ibid. « Tertul. in Mare. iv.5; Aug. Ep. 118. ! Tren. iii. 3 ; iv, 63; v. 20. ™ Cypr. Ep. 55, 52. > = = ecclesiarum praxi vulgate repugnare: hoc ponit apos- tolus, quando suum de feminis inter sa- cra peragenda velandis virisque retegen- dis preceptum hoc urget argumento; Si quis autem videtur contentiosus, esse, nos * In. Tit. i. 5. Episcopi noverint se magis 359 de Paschali jejunio, a synodo Nicena preescripto, graviter inculcat S. Chrysos- tomus, id huic negotio, longe potiori ra- tione, congruat; Τὸ μὲν γὰρ τῷδε } τῷδε χρόνῳ νηστεῦσαι οὐκ ἔγκλημα' τὸ δὲ σχίσαι τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, καὶ φιλονείκως διατεθῆναι, καὶ διχοστασίας ἐμποιεῖν, καὶ τῆς συνόδου διηνεκῶς ἑαυτὸν ἀποστερεῖν, ἀσύγνω- στον, καὶ κατηγορίας ἄξιον, καὶ πολλὴν ἔχει τιμω- ρίαν." Ceterum divine legi non adversari re- gimen episcopale, cum res ipsa mon- strat, (ubinam enim talis lex extat ?) tum eorum precipui fatentur, quibus hoc re- gimen non arridet. 3. Non absimiliter reprehensibile est innocue consuetudini seu talem consuetudinem non habemus, neque ecclesie Dez ;° quod sane frustra dixissit, si pacis gratia consuetudini, non esset obsequendum ; cui ita succinit Augusti- nus: “In his rebus, de quibus nihil certi statuit scriptura divina,” (demus adver- sariis hoc in presenti causa contingere,) “mos populi Dei, vel instituta majorum pro lege tenenda sunt ;”” rursus, ‘* Scrip- turarum a nobis tenetur veritas, cum id facimus, quod universe placuit ecclesiz :” iterum, * Siquid horum per orbem fre- quentat ecclesia, hoe quin ita faciendum sit disputare, insolentissime insaniz est : 4 quanto magis huic censure sub- jacet, orbis totius in retanta consuetudi- nem penitus abjicere ! 4. Etiam culpe affine est regimen ab- jicere rationi consentaneum, ecclesie commodum et salubre, pietatique servan- dz vel fovende apprime conducens. Episcopalem certe presidentiam ratio multiplex exigit, et pluribus ex causis res ipsa postulare videtur. Absque illa vix, aut ne vix fieri potest, ut in divino cultu decora conservetur harmonia, in sacra disciplina firma con- cordia vigeat, scandala propulsentur, fac- tiones reprimantur, a perniciosis here- sibus religio protegatur, ecclesi@ status aliquandiu persistat integer et incolumis, ® Chrys. tom. 6, Orat. 28. * 1 Cor. xi. 16. » Aug. Ep. 86. 4 Aug. c. Cresc. i. 33; Aug. Ep. 118. i ° 360 DE REGIMINE EPISCOPALI. ne in plurimas illa sectas comminuta dis- Sipetur. Sane reipublicee Christiane plurimum interest, societates institui mole quadam et robore non exili preeditas, que collatis - viribus operisque conjunctis religionis veritalem, dignitatem, incremenium, et quecunque commoda tutentur; alioquin 51 ipsa comminuatur in frustula, vel par- ticulis incohzerentibus, tamquam_pulvis aut arena, constet, facile statim quocun- que vento seu invasionis externe seu intestine seditionis dispergetur; quin et Babylonia quadam opinionum rituumque confusione laborans, in sapientibus fas- tidium excitabit, profanis ludibrium de- bebit. Verum nulla societas, grandiuscula presertim, ordinato pacatoque in statu, diutine consistere potest sub potestatibus multis paribus atque coordinatis; vel absque singulari quadam authoritate que ad rempublicam spectantia proponat, inita de his consilia moderetur et ad consensum inflectat, discordes sententias conciliet, dubiis in casibus arbitretur, constituta execution] mandet, repugnantes coerceat ; ita fitenim, ut quod pluribus incumbit, id nemo curet; quod multis committitur, id nullus exequatur. Unde mera democratia, nisi de monarchia mutui quid adsciscat, omnino subsistere nequit ; neque proinde corpus ullum sine capite, ullus exercitus sine duce, ullus senatus absque preeside, vel civitas absque prefecto durare solet. Hoc jugis ex- perientia docet, hoc etiam episcopalis presidentiz adversarii non diffitentur, quin et sua praxi confirmant; itaque varias ipsi subordinationes a se excogita- tas instituunt, et singulis suis ecclesiasticis conventibus moderatorem quendam, velut πρόσκαιρον episcopum, preponunt; ra- tione sic efflagitante, ut Beza docet, imo et Deo ordinante; ‘ Essentiale fuit” (inquit ille vir clarissimus, et paritatis presbyterane patronus accerrimus) ‘* quod ex Dei ordinatione perpetua fuit, est, et erit, ut presbyterio quispiam et loco et dignitate primus actioni gubernandse presit,cum eo quod ipsi divinitus attri- butum est jure ;”’ item “" Nec presbyteror- um” (inquit) “ coetus rite constitutus dici potest, in quo nullus sit ἡγούμενος." Porro, si nulli sint, qui cleri doctrinam τ Beza. de Var. Minist. grad. c. 23, p. 153; c. 22. et mores indesinente cura vigiles inspici- unt, quidvis dicendi agendique licentia confestim ingruet; plerique qu suo genio placebunt, sut populi cupiditatibus adblandientur, aut propriis commodis jn- — servient, sana doctrina posthabita, pro concione venditabunt; complures sue voluptati nihil non indulgentes luxu difflu- ent, socordiaque languebunt; etiam inter se discrepantes sententiis, sermonibusque confligentes sacerdotes plebem in partes distractam dissidiis et factionibus impli- cabunt; unde 8. Hieronymus, ‘“ Eccle- sie salus in summi sacerdous dignitate consistit, cui si non exsors quedam et ab hominibus eminens detur potestas, tot in ecclesia efficientur schismata, quot sa- cerdotes.”* Idem Pater tametsi) propria quadam ex opinatione vel conjectura) primitus ‘¢ Ecclesias communi _presby- terorum consilio gubernatas” aliquando censuerit, ratione tamen suadente, vel cogente necessitate, statim id ubique demutatum addidit,* et ‘in toto orbe decretum, ut unus de presbyteris electus superponeretur czteris, ad quem omnis ecclesie cura pertineret, et schismatum semina tollerentur.” Quinetiam ad institutam a Christo to- tius ecclesie catholicee unitatem retinen- dam, ad Dominici corporis compagem, arctius stringendam, ad communionem ecclesiarum expediendam, admodum util- is aut prorsus necessaria est hujusmodi presidentia; nec enim alias inter ceetus disparatos facile commercium _ institui potest, aut stabilis concordia foveri, quam personarum singularium _ inter- ventu ; quapropter episcoporum cura et consensu catholicam unitatem con- tineri, crebro suggerit sanctissimus il- le prudentissimusque Cyprianus ; “ quan- do,” inquit, ‘* Ecclesia, que catholica et una est, scissa non sit, neque divisa, sed sit utique connexa, et coherentium sibi invicem sacerdotum glutino copulata.”* Kt, “ idcireg copiosum est corpus sacer- dotum concordiz mutue glutino, atque * In schismatis remedium factum est, ne unusquisque ad se trahens ecclesiam Christi rumperet.—Ad. Evag. Ep. 85. Patet quis non scripturarum, sed nostram esse sententi- am,&c.—IJn Tit. i. 5; Hier. in Tit. 1. 5.—— Paullaiim vero ut dissensionum plantaria evel- lerentur, ad unum omnem solicitudinem esse delatam.—Z did. * Hier. contr. Lucif. cap. 1. t Cypr. Ep. 69. — πὔ σσοσαα DE REGIMINE EPISCOPALI. unitatis vinculo copulatum, &c.”* Hu- jusmodi proinde tantis commodis, episco- i imine sublato, qui ecclesiam spoliant, ut de illa pessime merentes, admodum culpandi sunt. 5. Scandala facere ab apostolo inter vissima delicto censetur, et τ zstis Christus denunciat, per quos hec obveni- unt ;* at quenam gravior erga totum populum Christianum offensa committi potest, quam sacratissimum ordinem, ab ipso semper in summo pretio habitum, et precipuo honore, parentum ad instar, cultum, eliminare et expungere ? 6. Episcopi scilicet a profundissima usque antiquitate Summi sacerdotes, Sa- cerdotum principes et apices ;" sacerdotii sublime fastigium, et pontificatus apicem adepti; ecclesie gubernande sublimi ac divina potestate preediti; a quibus minis- terii exordium est, apostolorum προεδρίαν sortiti, Christi vicem gerentes, beati pape (ut alia complura satis obvia taceam ejus- modi elogia), crebro dicti sunt et certo ex- istimati; quorum ideo non aliquos tantum honore exuere, sed omnes radicitus ex- lirpare qualis flagitii res, quanti horroris videatur necesse est ? 7. Item, episcopis antiquitus utcunque obluctari vel obstrepere piaculum erat, et heresium ac schismatum origo censeba- tur; “ Neque enim,” ait Cyprianus,* “aliunde hereses oborte sunt, aut nata sunt schismata, quam inde quod sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur, nec unus in eccle- sia ad tempus sacerdos, et ad tempus judex vice Christi cogitatur.” Et. “ Inde schismata et hereses oborte sunt et ori- untur, dum episcopus, qui unus est et ecclesie preest, superba quorundam presumptione contemnitur;” ‘* nec pu- tent sibi vite aut salutis constare ratio- nem, si episcopis et sacerdotibus obtem- perare noluerint.”* Quanto scelestius et magis schismaticum existimassent, non hujus tantum aut illius episcopi mandatis obsistere, sed omnis episcopatus jugum excutere ? * Cypr. Ep. 55.—Heec sunt initia heretico- rum, et ortus atque conatus schismaticorum, tale cogitantium ut sibi placeant, ut proposi- tum superbo tumore contemnant.—Cypr. Ep. 65, 69. 5 Cypr. Ep. 67. ¥ το “1 17; Matt. xviii. 7. © Tert. de Bapt.17; Opt. 1. Cypr. Ep. 52; Leo Ep. 84; Cypr. Ep. 55; Amb. de Saer. III. 1; Bas. Ep.—Cypr. Ep. 55. ® Cypr. Ep. 62, ΠῚ. 46 8. Quinetiam in prepositos uteunque sibi judicium assumere summe temerita- tis et arrogantie rem arbitrati’sunt Pa- tres; “ Quis enim,” inquit Cyprianus, * hic est superbie tumor, que arrogantia animi, que mentis inflatio, ad cognitio- nem suam prepositos et sacerdotes vo- care ?”¥ quanto gravius autem omnes abjudicare, ipsumque munus episcopale quasi capitis damnatum proscibere ? 9. Istis inseculis “ altare contra altare erigere, “‘cathedram sibi constituere, gliscente discordia,”* (Cypriani verba sunt,) ‘“episcopum sibi constituere, et contra sacramentum semel traditum di- vine dispositionis et catholice unitatis adulterum et contrarium caput extra ec- clesiam facere ; (contra ecclesiasticam dispositionem, contra evangelicam legem, contra institutionis catholice unitatem alium episcopum fieri consentire),” ne- farium et execrandum facinus erat, prop- ter quod admissum Novatiani, Donatiste reliquique ferme schismatici tam pessime audierunt; quale facinus igitur altaria cuncta demoliri, cathedras omnes submo- vere ; non in unius episcopi preejudicium alterum creare, subornare, sed in omnium ruinam nullum pati? quanto damnosius ecclesiam unamquamque capite preciso (quod nostri moliuntur) ἀκέφαλον facere, quam (id quod veteres schismatici fece- runt) bicipites ecclesias erigere ? Episcopalis itaque regiminis abjectio- nem quisquis animo pravo (contentioso scilicet, arrogante, pervicace, fastidioso, vel utcumque perverso) molitur; eum quidni cum doctissimo respondente schis- matis (et quidem mortalis, hoc est, pec- eati gravissimi) reum pronunciem ? “ Quod enim” (ut 5. Cypriani verbis concludam) “ majus potest esse delictum, aut que macula deformior, quam adver- sus Christum stetisse, quam ecclesiam ejus, quam ille sanguine suo paravit et condidit, dissipasse ? quam evangelice pacis ac dilectionis oblitum contra unan- imem et concordem Dei populum hos- tilis discordiw furore pugnasse ?””* κε Inexpiabilis et gravis culpa discor- diz, nec passione purgatur.””* * Optat. Cypr. Ep. 76, 42, 44.—A pastore oves, et filios a parente separare, et Christi membra dissipare.— Ep. 58. ¥ Cypr. Ep. 69. (Ep. 56, p. 112, 117.) * Cypr. Ep. 72. * Cypr. de Unit. Eccl. p. 267. DE TRIBUS SYMBOLIS. Relaxatio fidei trium Symbolorum, in oc- tavo articulo ecclesie Anglicane pro- positorum, admittt non potest, sine scandalo dato apostasie ab ecclesia universalt. ' A nascentis ecclesiz primordiis usu recep- tum apparet, formulas quasdam professio- nis, et sacre doctrine summulas (quales Sanctus Paulus τύπους διδαχῆς, et ὕγιαιν- ὀντων λόγων ὑποτυπώσεις indigitare vide- tur, Tertullianus veritatis et fidei regulas ac leges appellitat), in ecclesiis pros- trare ; quibus veluti symbolis ac tesseris Christiani fideles dignoscerentur, et re- ligio nostra qualis esset omnibus innotes- ceret; quibus ad Christianismum -acce- dentes neophyti ipsius principiis imbue- entur ;* eidemque nomen dantes quous- que profecerant ostenderet, et quid sus- ceperant credendum profiterentur; qui- bus denuo quasi metis aut repagulis in- genia continerentur, ne preter oleas sane doctrine devios in errores_ exorbitarent, aut excurrerent.* Hee primitus admodum erant succine- ta atque simplicia ; nec aliud ferme quam precipua continebant religionis nostre capita, ab aliis illam (Judaismo scilicet, et ethnicismo tunc obtinentibus) distin- guentia; prout ex illis liquet ejusmodi formis, que in sanctis Irenzeo, Tertullia- no, Cypriano proponuntur, aut subindi- catur. Sed postquam emergentes prave curi- osi dogmatiste suis ausi sunt commentis et παραδιατριβαῖς sublimia fidei nostre mysteria pervertere, vel contaminare ;° ecclesiae pastoribus necesse vel ex usu . visum @st, post questiones eventilatas at accurate discussas, alia nova symbola veritatem districtius elucidantia propo- nere ; cum ut ecclesiz filios ad veram dogmatum intelligentiam erudirent, et auctoritate sua damnatis erroribus aditum * Symbolum tessera est et signaculum quo inter fideles perfidosque secernitur. — Maz. Tour. Tertull. Prescrip. 14. 4 Rom. vi. 17; 2 Tim.i. 13; Tert. Apol. or. 47, de vel Virg. i. de Preeser. 13; Heb. vi. 1. i Te. vi. 5. DE TRIBUS SYMBOLIS. precluderent, tum ut illorum profes orthodoxos ab hereticis dispescerent,illos- que gremio foverent, hos procul — ἢ rent. Ita cum P. Samosatenus, ἀποστὰς τοῦ i κανόνος inl κίβδηλα καὶ νόθα διδάγμα- τα μετελήλυθεν.," istis Antiochena synodus a se formatam definitionem opposuit; ejusque vestigiis insistens Nicena synod- us Arii, postmodumque Constantinopoli- tana, πγευματομάχων heterodoxias hac ratione transfixit. , Veruntamen cum prioribus symbolis, catholico consensu receptis, veritas satis definita videretur ; et quo multorum cu- riosa vel contentiosa reprimeretur ambi- tio novas indies fidei confessiones procu- dentium, lacinias suas prioribus assuenti- um (a quibus dissidia succrescebant, et fides perplexa reddebatur), synodo Ephe- sine generali (ut et postea Chalcedonen- si) legem sancire placuit, gravissima peena munitam, ne cui exinde liceret ali- um a Niceno fidei typum componere vel exponere.* ‘ Hine factum, ut reliquis dimissis, tria saltem symbola publicam in ecclesia auc- toritatem tenuerint; que proinde, eccle- sia Anglicana, mater nostra, quo suam cum ecclesia catholica concordiam testa- tam faceret, et semetipsam ab errorum tam contagio quam consortio prestaret immunem, suffragio suo comprobavit (in articulis suis expresso), liturgiis suis inse- ruit, adeoque filiis suis (clericis preser- tim) agnoscenda et usurpanda prescrip- sit : “‘ Symbola” (inquit) * tria, Nicenum, Athanasii, et quod vulgo Apostolorum, appellatur, omnino recipienda sunt, et credenda; nam firmissimis scripturarum testimoniis probari possunt.’’* De quibus singillatim paucula quedam attingamus ad thesin propositam spectan- tia; hoc saltem prenotato, quod in illa fidet relaxatio talis intelligi videatur, qua symbolorum usus publicus obmittatur, aut ipsorum professio, legibus refixis, non exigatur ; reliqua vero tam clara sunt, ut explicationem minime desiderent. Jam apostolicum symbolum (illud ip- sum, vel ei consimile, quod 'Tertullianus appellat ‘‘ regulam veritatis, qua vemiat a Christo transmissa per comites ipsius ;”* ¢ Eus. 7, 30. Α Syn. Eph. Can. 7, Syn. Chal. δῖ. 5, p. 340 ; Evag. 2, 4,—?érépav πίστιν. * Art. 8. f Apol. cap. 47. ἋΣ. β -ΡῸ quod saltem antiquitus in ecclesiis ple- risque, imprimis Romana, baptismum suscipientes profiteri solebant) preecipu- uos complectitur et maxime peculiares Christiane religionis articulos, e sacris literis congestos, et simplicissimus verbis liquido conceptos ; a quo proinde Chris- tianum sibi nomen asserentium nemo fer- me quisquam ullatenus dissentire pre se fert ; adeoque nec quisquam, opinor, in illo comprehense fidei relaxationem ul- lam cogitet aut exoptet; ullam autem admittere quid aliud esset, quam ipsius Christianismi repudiati scandalum accer- sere? de eo proinde nil attinet plura di- cere. Nicenum vero symbolum, ab illo pri- mo celeberrimoque concilio, quod in ipsis écclesiz triumphantis auspiciis, e perse- eutionum flammis emergentes celebra- runt plusquam trecenti antistites ecclesi- arum, fidei Christianze confessores eximii fortissimique athlete ; nam (ut S. Chry- sostomus aureo suo penicillo illos alicu- bi depingit), καθάπερ ἀριστεῖς τινες μυρία στήσαντες τρόπαια, καὶ πολλὰ δεξάμενοι τραύματα, οὕτω παντα- Kev ἐπανήεσαν τότε τῶν ἐκκλησιῶν οἱ προστάται, τὰ στίγματα τοῦ Χριστοῦ βαστάζοντες, καὶ πολλὰς ἔγ- ovres ἀριθμεῖν τιμωρίας, ἃς διὰ τὴν ὁμολογίαν ὑπέμει- vav—xai δια τῶν ἀθλητῶν τούτων ἡ σύνοδος ἅπασα συγκεκρύτητο τότε͵---ἔ ab hujusmodi, inquam, tot Patribus conditum et a secundo generali concilio, Constantinopoli habito, nonnihil adauctum, 8. Trinitatis mysterium, haus- tis e divina scriptura sensibus, luculente tradit, Christi divinam zternamque natu- ram ab Ariane sect commentis, ipsum in creatarum temporaliumque rerum cen- sum deprimentibus, exerte vindicans ; nec non Sancti Spiritus divinitatem asserens a pravis πγευματομάχων heterodoxiis. Hujusce symboli fidem, post tot supe- ratos atque sedatos adversarum molitio- num fluctus ubique prevalentem, adeo- que divine providentie quasi suffragio comprobatam (ne dicam sacrorum oracu- lorum claris testimoniis quoque subnixam) totque seculorum universali consensu stabilitam, jam relaxare, quid aliud esset, quam istorum hereticorum vel in castra transire, vel in consortium nos tradere ? quam orthodoxie prodite nos plane reos facere, vel utcunque suspectos preebere ? quam consopita dissentionum incendia resuscitare; quam defixas a Patribus Chrps. tom. vi. Orat. 28. DE TRIBUS SYMBOLIS. metas amovere; quam ovilis Dominici septa diruere murosque demoliri; quam unitatis catholicee clarissimas tesseras, certissimaque pignora projicere ; quam veritatis simul ac pacis conservandz ex- ploratissima media, falsitatis autem dis- cordizque propulsande potentissima pro- batissimaque remedia subtrahere ; quam ecclesiz (non degeneris, inquinate pon- tificio jugo oppressee, sed) omnino primi- tive, defcecate, liberrime consistoria, summe veneranda, “ quorum in eccle- 518.) si Augustino credimus, “ saluberri- ma est auctoritas,” auctoritate sua prorsus exuere, tamque diuturna possessione fir- mato ab honore deturbare? quam denuo totius ecclesie que fuerunt unquam aut esse poterunt augustissima judicia convel- lere, vel omnino cassare? quorum nihil non apostasiz ab ecclesie universalis vel fide’ vel pace suspicionem ingerat, et scandalum obtrudat. Enimvero si nullam fidei professionem exigat, si nullos communioni su limites preefigat ecclesie, unde que sit ejus mens, qualis doctrina, constabit? quo signo monstrabit, quo testimonio evincet, quo pignore cavebit se quoad intamina- tam fidem cum ecclesia catholica conspi- rare vel cohezrere? vel hereticorum se opinionibus et consortio renunciare? qui- bus notis aut characteribus ab heterodox- is doctoribus orthodoxos pastores, a lupis, a vulpibus, a canibus oves secernet aut disterminabit ? qua ratione τῶν ἑτεροδιὸ-- ασκαλούντωνς et sanctissima mysteria per- vertentium ora frenabit, aut serpentium errorum contagia sistet ? quo pacto tam ab apostolis impense laudate crebroque inculcate ὁμονοίᾳ consulet; vel efficiet, ut juxta S. Pauli mandata constanter om- nes idem sentiamus, idem loquamur ; simusque κατηρτισμένοι ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ vot, καὶ ἐν τῇ αὐτῆ γνώμῃ ; idem sapiamus, ei in eadem regula permaneamus ; in uno Spiritu stemus unanimes ; unitatemque Spiritus in vinculo pacis servemus ?" quomodo denique preceptis apostolicis obseque- tur jubentibus hereticos, ἑτεροδιδασκαλο- ὕντας, aliud evangelium predicantes, aversari, devitare, detestari ὃ Quod si fidei professionem ullam re- quirat, quidni preesertim hujus Nicene, quam tanta commendat antiquitas, tam » 1 Cor. i. 1 10 ; Phil. iii. 15; i. 27; Eph. iv.3, i Tit. iii. 10; é Rom. rri. 17; Gal. i. i ᾿ ] 364 DE TRIBUS SYMBOLIS. venerabilis auctoritas edidit, tot ztatum prescriptio roboravit, adeoque diffusus ecclesiz consensus sacravit? Si quos omnino communioni sue terminos pres- cribat, quidni potissimum hos, ita dudum Christiani populi sensibus infixos, ut sine fidei vel gravi ruina vel periculosa con- cussione vix evelli queant? Denique si Patrum fidem respuimus, annon eo ipso ab ecclesia catholica deflectimus ? sin con- stanter illam amplectimur, quorsum ejus professionem luxamus ? Tertium 8. Athanasio adscriptum, sym- bolum, non auctoris claritate (is enim apud doctos haud adeo certus est) nec antiquitatis comperte gratia (nam dun- taxat a mille circiter annis ejusce notitia percrebuit), neque consensus amplitudine (cum ab occidentali tantum ecclesia reci- piatur) ita commendatum, hoc tamen nomine dignitatem suam tuetur, quod un- dicunque profectum tot per secula tan- tamque per orbis Christiani partem inva- luit; quin et a se intrinsecus hoc habet, quod reliquis quodammodo perfectius et plenius est, nec non ad ὀρθοδοξιαν adse- rendam accommodatius. Etenim preter 8. Trinitatis doctrinam enucleate propositam (non Ario tantum, at Sabellio quoque damnato, quem Nice- num haud ita clare tangit) incarnationis Dominice mysterium dilucidius explicat, juxta synodorum cecumenicarum Ephe- sine et Chalcedonensis definitiones ac- curatas, utramque Christi naturam a Nes- torii illas distrahentis, et ab Eutichetis iisdem confundentis, erroribus asserens ; ut et ab Apollinarii perverso dogmate Domini humanitatem mutilantis ; quineti- am de Sancti Spiritus origine gravissi- mam decidit controversian, adversus Gra- cos hac in parte cespitantes ; (quibus ar- gumentis ut ejus vetustati nonnihil dero- gatur, ita perfectioni prestantixque in- trinsece plurim :m accedit.) Hujus itaque fides eatenus relaxanda non est: ne synodorum istarum, a pri- mis duabus haud longo intervallo proxi- marum, vel puram doctrinam respuere, vel eximize auctoritati detrahere videa- mur; vel saltem ne Grecorum errori vi- deamur astipulari; et generatim propter easdem ferme causas, quas de Nicena fi- de non relaxanda mox attigimus. Hoc sane, una cum reliquis in occi- dentali ecclesia diu receptis, sapienter ecclesia nostra retinendum censuit ; cum ut suam ὀρθοδοξίας. curam zelumque de- monstraret, tum ut concordie studium os- tenderet in iis omnibus, que veritati con- sona Romane partes docent, ultro agnos- cendis; tum etiam ne quam captiosis ho- minibus speciosam offensionis ansam min-— istraret. , In hoe quidem symbolo quibusdam nonnulla minus arrident; illud presertim quod in dogmatum explicatione dissenti- entes tam aspera censura percellit, tan- tisque poenis devovet. Cui exceptioni breviter (etenim ut fuse non vacat) re- spondemus. Primo, Mlud judicium, non ad symboli fidem, adeoque nec ad questionem, per- tinere videtur. Id verborum ipso series innuit ; nam prefatorio judicio subjicitur, Catholica vero fides est hac: item fidei exposite adnectitur epilogus, Hec est catholica fides, quam excipit simile judi- cium; itaque fides ipsa judiciis istis πα- ρεγθετικῶς interclusa jacet. Secundo, JSudicium illud non eque vi- detur ad omnia symboli puncta se exten- dere, verum ad illa presertim, que in universalibus consiliis definita sunt, et quibus adversa dogmata Patres tanquam heeretica sunt execrati. Nam, v. g. Gre- cos hereticis accensere, vel a salute pror- sus excludere, multi theologi non susti- nent, alioquin huic symbolo mardicus ad- herentes; ne id faciant, gravissimis ar- sumentis permou. Nam (ut alia preter- eam) an leve est tantam ecclesiz partem, a Photii saltem tempore (hoc est, plus- quam 800 annis), huic errori adherentem abscindere, vel inferno addicere ? unde factum est, inquiunt, ut plerique Patres Greci presertim de eo hesitent, aut ni- hil exploratum tradant? unde ex illis preecipui docet processionis (vel ὑπάρξε- ws) Sancti Spiritus modum tuto ignorari? ‘unde Constantinopolitana synodus hoe in- definitum transiliit? unde synodi subse- quentes definitioni quicquam adjici pro- hibuerunt ὃ unde Theodoretus hoe dog- ma oppugnavit tam impune,Cyrillo contra nihil hiscente, nee ejus tot adversariis ei propterea erroris. dicam impingentibus ὃ Tertio, Ejusmodi judicia sie temper- anda sunt, ut iis non quilibet ignarus aut simpliciter errans et incredulus subjaceat at 11 saltem, qui pravis affectibus, animo revera hi retico (hoc «st, αὐτοκρατακρίτῷῳ, vel hypocritico, temerario, factioso, arro- gante, contumace), patefactaz circa fidei a | doctrinam veritati prefracte obnituntur atque reclamant, ἄνθρωποι, juxta Aposto- lam, διεφθαρμένοι τὸν νοῦν, ac inde, ἀπεστερημένοι τῆς ἀληθείας. Ita quidem S. Augustinus, « Si mihi” (inquit, ad Honoratum Mani- cheum scribens) “ unum atque idem vi- deretur hereticus et credens hereticis homo, tam lingua quam stylo in hac cau- sa conquiescendum mihi esse arbitrarer ; nunc vero cum inter duo plurimum inter- sit; quandoquidem hereticus est, ut mea fert opinio, qui alicujus temporalis com- modi, et maxime glorie principatusque sui gratia,falsas ac novasopiniones vel gig- nit, vel sequitur ; ille autem qui hujusmodi hominibus credit, homo est imaginatione quadam veritatis ac pietatis illusus.” Et rursus, Donatistarum episcopos alloquens. * Qui sententiam,” inquit, ‘* suam quam- vis falsam atque perversam nulla pertina- ci animositate defendunt, presertim quam non audacia presumptionis suze pepere- runt, sed a seductis atque in errorem lap- sis parentibus acceperunt, quzrunt au- tem cauta solicitudine veritatem, corrigi- raticum invenerint, nequaquam sunt inter hereticos deputandi ; tales ergo vos nisi esse crederem, nullas fortasse vobis literas mitterem.”* Ita nonnullos_ ille Manichzos nonnul'osque Donatistas he- reseos absolvit: quam in rem continere non possum he quoque vetusti piissimique scriptoris (Salvian)' adjungam verba per- quam diserta, de quibusdam Arianis ita proloquentis; “ Heretici sunt, sed non scientes ; denique apud nos sunt heret- ici, apud se non sunt; nam in tantum se catholicos esse judicant, ut nos ipsos titulo heretice appellationis infament: quod ergo illi nobis sunt, hoc nos illis: nos eos injuriam divine generationi facere certi sumus, quod minorem Patre Filium di- cant; illi nos injuriosos Patri existimant, quia wquales esse credamus. Veritas apud nos est, sed illi apud se esse pra- sumunt; honor Dei apud nos est, sed illi hoe arbitrantur honorem divinitatis esse quod credunt; inofficiosi sunt, sed _illis hoc est summum religionis officium ; im- pii sunt, sed hoc putant veram esse pie- tatem ; errant ergo, sed bono animo er- rant, non odio sed affectu Dei, honorare se Dominum atque amare credentes; 11 Tim. vi.5; Aug. de Util. Cred. cap. 1. * Aug. Ep. 162. ' Salv. de Gub. Dei, lib. δ. ANIM HUMAN CORPORIBUS quamvis non habeant rectam fidem, illi tamen hoc perfectam Dei estimant chari- tatem: qualiter pro hoc ipso false opin- ionis errore in die judicii puniendi sint, nullus potest scire nisi Judex. Itaque nihil officit ista exceptio, quo minus hujusce symboli fides merito de- beat retineri, seu relaxari non debeat. ANIMZZ HUMANE CORPORIBUS NON PRAEXISTUNT. Humanz anime, de qua presens insti- tuitur disputatio, nihil magis proprium aut a natura ingenitum esse videtur, quam ut rerum, quas sensu percipit, et quibuseum continuo versatur, causus et origines in- quirat. Eorum enim, qui communiter apparent, effectuum notitia atque historia ultro otiosis et quasi nolentibus se inger- unt, perapertas sensuum fenestras ad ani- mz sedem penetrantes; at hec patientis solummodo personam sustinet, ac velut domi residens advenarum impulsum per- sentiscit. Tum demum se erigit, ac in se dignam activitatem conspirat, quum ut Homericus’ ille hospes peregrinum, ita hee suos compellat, Τίς, τιόθεν εἷς ἀν- δρῶν πόθε 104 πόλις ἠδὲ τοκῆες ; CUM re- rum principia et sortes nascendi, unde orte, quomodo product sint, sedula dis- quisitione investigat: quale scrutinium si indiflerenter m reliqua omnia forinsecus sibi oblata exercere consuescat, mirum non est si ad sui ipsius (cujus sibi intime conscia est, quam semper presentem in- tuetur, cujus omnes motus dum exerit, immediate perspectos habet), originem atque natales indagandos precipuo studio aspiraret: quo conatu dum occupatur, dum 2tatem suam retro percurril, annos- que preteritos cogitatione remetitur, tan- dem infantiz terminum assequitur, ante quem nullibi extitisse, nihil sensisse, mol- itam, aut meditatam fuisse, se recorda- tur; unde circa id tempus existendi ini- tium sumpsisse merito suspicatur. Ut enim me Rome fuisse, quod valde opta- rem, purpuratorum patrum splendidissi- mis pompis interfuisse, magnificas edes tam publicas quam privatas, imaginum pigmentorumque elegantias, et preclara antiquitatis monumenta perlustrasse, ne- 366 mo ut credam adegerit, quia illarum re- rum nulla species animo insidet: ita an- imas in celo olim evum transegisse, ibi nescio que facinora perpetrasse, exinde in hez corpora precipites decidisse, ideo quispiam prona fide-non admittit, quo- niam hujusmodi eventuum nulla in se de- prehendit vestigia. Quod tamen minime effecit, ne plurimi experientiz propriz testimonio diffisi, animas suas presentis vite auspiclis superiores existimarint. Quibus illos non accenseo, qui ex corpo- rea quacunque concretione oriri animas putant ; inter quos preecipui Democritus, Anaxagoras, Epicurus, Stoici. Hienim, licet animarum substantiam, igneam nem- pe, aéream vel spirituosam preextitisse, plerique ab eterno crediderint, fuisse ta- men animas, antequam hec materies co- alesceret, non asserunt, ut nec etherez substantie particulas, antequam in luci- dum orbem cofluant, stellam componere. Nec usquam Aristoteles, quod sciam, huic sententize aperte favet (illud enim θύραθεν ἐπεισιέναι ambiguum est, et ad alios existendi modos referri potest), quin potius dum Πυθαγορικοὺς quos vocat μύ- dovs ridet, dum passim Platonicam ἀν»- άμνησιν ubique impugnat, omnemque in- tellectus notitiam a sensibus derivari con- tendit, dunrque animam corpofis “ organ- ici actum”’ definit, ab ea penitus alienus esse videtur. Ex philosophis igitur prin- cipes Pythagoras et Plato hoe commen- tum introduxerunt, quorum passim cele- brantur hujus μετεμψύχωσις, illius ἀγα- wuyie, Exque horum institutione e Christianis theologis Origenem et Syne- sium, atque ex hereticis tam Judeis quam Chrisuanis qui idem senserunt, hausisse credibile est. Et μετεμψύχωσις quidem, hoc est, Tertulliano definiente, ‘“‘ex animarum recidivatu revolubili al- terna mortuorum atque viventium suffec- tio,” ut Christiane fidei fundamenta, res- urrectionem presertim, ultimumque ju- dicium convellens, ab omnibus merito ex- ploditur, ut supervacaneum putem in ea refutanda oleum atque operam insumere. Simplex est προύπαρξες, quam impugnan- dam suscepimus, idque sequentibus po- tissimum ratiociniis. Primo, 8i anime preexistant, tum ita ut vel ante mundum conditum, vel una cum eo, vel aliquo post eum tempore create existere cceperint; nam a se esse, vel ab eterno factas, nemo, opinor, ANIMZ HUMAN CORPORIBUS Non ante mun- dum conditum, cum nulla ratio sit, cur aliud ipsis extra commune rebus uni- versis initium statuamus ; quod propter- ea simpliciter principil nomine insig- nitur; In princopio creavit Deus ca- Christianus afirmaverit. lum et terram. Quem locum respi- ciens Apostolus, τὸν Adyor* solum tum extitisse innuit, futurum omnium Opifi- cem. Id quod ex eo confirmatur, quon- iam ex antiquissimi sanctissimique scrip- toris mente nihil hane periodum anteces- sit, preeter chaos quoddam, hoc est, in- formem quandam, indigestam, tenebrico- sam molem, minime idoneum animabus habitaculum. Quis enim in illa confusi- one locus fuit animarum dignitati accom- modatus, quem incolerent? quid in tam spissa caligine cernerent ? quo mentis aci- em dirigerent? in que objecta activitates suas exercerent? Annon rectius sancti Patres hoc universum, tanquam animarum hospitium quoddam atque gymnasium, eo duntaxat fine constructum statuunt, ut es- set ubi anime commode degerent, quod ordinarent et regerent, in cujus mirabili ordine, harmonica compage, elegantissi- ma specie contemplandis, se oblectarent : contra animas idcirco productas, ut tam augustee fabrice pulchritudine atque pre- stantia animadversis, Conditoris optimi, maxim, sapientissimi majestatem suspi- cerent, ejusque admiratione perculsi in amorem raperentur: que si vera sunt, nec mundus anima posterior extitit, nee anima mundo, ipsa hujus pars maxima et prestantissima. Neque post mundum conditum simul omnes existere cceperunt, siquidem cur illz hoe potius, quam alio tempore fierent, nulla ratio assignari pos- it; preecique quum humanum genus ex prima propagine magis magisque indies cresceret, ideoque nove semper require- rentur anime,ex publico, quod hee hy- pothesis preestruit, animarum seminario depromendz: itaque omnes ab ineunte mundo Adami anime concreatas oportuit. Verum obstat quod in sacra τῆς κοσμοπος- εἴας historia, ubi rerum creatio luculente percensetur, animarum tum conditarum aut preexistentium nulla mentio habetur$ quam ignorare Moses qui potuit, cui uni- versa series divini opificii clare perspecta, accurate descriptaest ; aut cognitam dis- simulasse, quum primum rerum statum * Gen. i. 1; Joh.ti. 1. 7 ᾿ Ὶ — -— Ss ae | et precipue hominis sibi enarrandum pro- it, sincerus imprimis author, et quovis Pythagora vel Platone tantum sci- _ entia et fide, quantum evo anterior; pre- _ sertim quum alicujus momenti negotium vertitur, in quo sine tanti magistri ductu _ facile est labi, ad cujus notitiam flagrant- _ ibus desideriis anhelamus? Imo idem sacer Historicus tantum abest, ne omnes animas tum conditas asseveret, ut unam . tantum memoret, reliquarum in hunc mundi campum antesignanam, eamque nona grege animarum forinsecus assump- tam, sed a Deo immediate inspiratam, Gen. ii. 7. Formavit Dominus Deus hominem e limo terre, et inspiravii in faciem ejus spiraculum vite. Cui Sen- ece illud mirifice consonat, “* Si primam ejus originem aspexeris, non est ex ter- reno et gravi concreta corpore, ex illo ceelesti Spiritu descendit.”” Cujus sane Spiritus unicus Adamus primo particeps fuit, nisi aut Moses nescivit, aut legenti- bus imponere voluit, aut nobis saltem in- vidit origines nostras ; qui cum unius an- ime natales celebret, cur reliquas eque nobiles preteriret? imo cum animarum par conditio sit, quare Adami anima cor- pus preformatum subsequatur, relique materiam dispositam antecedant? illa ex divino afflatu procedat, he ex communi thesauro desumantur? illa nunquam ex- tra corpus fuit, vita simplici contenta ; hz seorsim agant, duplicemque statum exper- jantur? quid illa promeruit, ut ab ortu | statim in corporeum claustrum truderetur, cum he justa libertate fruerentur ? ut illa _ sensibus alligata, necessitatibus subjecta, laboribus mancipata fuerit, quorum he diu exortes feriantur ? Quin potius quo- niam Adami anima nunquam preextitit, nec a corpore separata diurnavit, neque extra sensuum consortium cogitandi fac- ultatem exeruit, non est quod reliquas dissimili conditione factas arbitremur. Cui accedit, quod Christi, secundi Adami, sanctissima anima non preeextitit, sed a Deo itidem spirante procreata est, Luc. i, 35. πνεῦμα ἅγιον ἐπελεύσεται ἐπ) ce, καὶ δύναμις 'ὙΨίστου ἐπισκιάσει σοι, διὸ καὶ τὸ γεννώμενον ἅγιον κληθήσεται υἱὸς Θεοῦ" in quo loco, ut Adamus, Lue. iii. ver. ultimo, Filius Dei vocatur, ob Spiritum a Deo communicatum ; ita Servator noster, quatenus homo est, eo nomine Filius Dei dicitur, quod animam Ὁ Consol. ad Helv. NON PREEXISTUNT. 367 suam a Deo Patre acceperit, que proinde non preexistit, ideoque nec nostra, que quoad existendi modum in hoc tantum ab illius anima differunt, quod hee a divino Spiritu immediate, nostre humano inter- ventu producuntur. Loci enim, quos al- legat optimus doctissimusque vir, Joh. xvu.d. (Δ. H.) καὶ viv δόξασόν pe od πάτερ παρὰ σεαυτῷ τῇ δόξῃ ἡ εἶχον πρὸ «οὗ τὸν κῦφμον εἶναι, παρά σοι, et Phil. 11. 6. ὃς ἐν μορθῇ Θεοῦ ὑπάρχον, et consimiles, divinitatem Christi claris- sime respiciunt, eoque communiter ab interpretibus referuntur. Secundo, Animarum preexistentie ad- versatur ipsarum propagatio, sive mavis, substitutio. Cujus modus (quoad depen- dentiam successivam intelligo) si aut ana- logiam nature sequi, aut experientiz ar- bitrium agnoscere volumus, sacre histor- iz calculo comprobatum, ab illo vix dis- crepat, quo brutorum animantium imo et | vegetabilium augentur numeri, species conservantur. Similis ubique vis prolifi- ca deprehenditur, gemella_procreandi methodus; ex parili benedictione 86 multiplicandi potestatem obtinuere; et prout ex unius equi stirpe equina diffund- itur progenies, que immensas regiones populando sit ; nec minus ab una glande quercuum ingentes sylve exurgunt, ita ut nulle his preparentur anime, nisi quas pro re nata emittunt: ita ab uno homine plurimarum gentium infinita ex- uberavit multitudo ; Act. xvii. 26. ἐποί- not τε ἐξ ἑνὸς αἵματος πᾶν ἔθνος ἀνθρώρων κατοικεῖν ἐπὶ πᾶν τὸ πρόςωπον τῆς γῆς. .Igitur inquit Ter- tullianus infra, unde merito Adamus pater, Eva viventium mater, appellantur: que nomina nisi parentes ad animarum ex- istentiam aliquid conferrent, frustra im- ponerentur. Nam corpora quod attinet, preterquam quod animarum quasi ap- pendices, instrumenta et vascula sint, il- lorum substantia a generan tibus inde- pendens jam olim extitit, iisque figuras et conformationes organicas, non parentes tribuunt, sed ips sibi anima, Deo opitu- lante, eflingunt ; ut praeteream corporis primordium, animeque vebiculum se- men, quantulumcunque est, quod in matricem recipitur, protinus sensu arbit- ro putrere, dispergi, evanescere, aut si aliquid superest, continuis incrementor- um affluxibus mutari, atque transponi; ut non absurde neget Aristoteles semen patris ullam partem materi@ corporis [αὶ conferre ; et nescio an fundamep*- 368 ANIMA HUMAN CORPORIBUS um corruat honoris et gratitudinis, quam ipsis ceu vite authoribus exhibere solem- 5. Ideoque si parentibus animarum existentia aliquatenus deputetur, nihil est plane quod impertiant, quibus tamen parentibus sacre litere non tantum ho- minis (cujus anima essentialem constitu- tionem in tantum ingreditur, ut homo dicatur anima vivens),’ sed et ipsarum animarum productionem disertis verbis assignant, haud ultra debitum, credo, liberales. Gen. xii. 5, Tulitque Sarai uxorem suam, et Lot filium fratris sui, universamgque subsiantiam quam possed- erant, et animas, quas fecerant in Ha- ram. Gen. xlvi. 18, Hi filii Zelphe, guam dedit Laban filie sue, et hos genutt Jacob, sedecim animas. FE.xod. i. 5, Fr- ant aulem omnes anime egressorum e semine Jacob septuaginta, ‘ Igitur” (inquit Tertullianus) “ex uno homine tota hc animarum redundantia agitur, observante, scilicet, natura Dei editum, Crescite et in multitudinem proficite ;”: quibus addi potest, quod parentes similes sibi liberos progenerare dicantur, Gen. v. 3, Et vixit Adam centum et triginta annos, et genuit ad imuginem et simili- tudinem swam ; et hoc quidem juxta phi- losophi pronunciatum, βυηνθνον» τῶν ἐν τοῖς ζῶσιν é ἔργον τὸ ποιῆσαι ἕτερον οἷον αὐτό. f Quomodo autem sibi similes gignunt, si aliquo modo animas non communicant, que ad hu- mane nature integritatem quam max- ime pertinent ? Tertio, Si anime preexistunt, unde est quod specie oris, habitu corporis, ani- mi moribus, prosapiam soboles referat ? quod liberi seepius parentibus pulchri formosis, robusti validis, ** fortes creantur fortibus et bonis,” ac vice versa? qua nascendi sorte in patris vitia succedit, virtute zmulatur proles, quocum anime extranee nulla cognatio, nullum preces- sit commercium? que sane ex corporee atorni dispositione haud proveniunt, que tantilla ex parentis substantia discerpitur, cujus fluxa temperies quolibet momento variatur, queque haud scio an virtutum vitiorumque capax sit, oumque precipui habitus anime insideant, et ipsa sibi or- gana extruat, native indoli conformia. Cui affine est, * Aristot.q. de Gen. An. c. 2, 20,21; οἱ 4 de Gen. An. 4 Gen. ii. 7. * De &n. 27. { De An. 2,c. 4. Quarto, Natorum anime paternorum — criminum peenas perszpe luunt, benefae- torum gratiam reportant, quod cum mul tis e sacra historia exemplis poterit con- ~ firmari, sufficiet primi hominis lapsum commemorare, ἐφ᾽ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον, Ex quo peccato mors intravit, et reliqui morbi, labores, cruciatus huamanum genus pervaserunt, quibuscum vita communis perpetuo conflictatur, ut liquebit verba illa perpendenti, Gen. il. 17, 18. Ade vero dixit, guia audisti vocem uxoris tue, et comedisti de ligno,ex quo preceperam tibz, ne comederes, maledicta terra in op- ere tuo: in laboribus comedes ex ea cuhe- iis diebus vite tue. Spinas et tribulos germinabit tibi,—In sudore vultus tui vesceris pane, donec revertaris in terram, de qua sumpitus es. Quod si posterorum anime Adami anime σύγχρονν fuerint, neque ab illa aliquatenus dependeant quo jure Adamici criminis participes evadunt, quod nulla generis proximitate attingunt ? Nam corpora quod atiinet hee ut prim- itiva labe inquinata concedamus, neque ulla commoda sentiunt, nec afliciuntur incommodis, neque mercede gaudent, nec supplicio anguntur. Ne dicam omnem materiam Adz independentem coé€atitis- se, ideoque ex eodem luto nos minime conflari: animasque proinde solas ab eo utcunque derivari, ideoque meri 0 com- munem cum eo fortunam subire. Quo utitur argumento S. Augustinus: ‘ Si” (inguit) ‘anima nostra‘nullam de illa peccatrice originem ducit, que causa est anime subeundi originale pecca- tum ?”s Quinto Quum in sacris literis quispiam aut egregie nequam, aut apprime bonus sanctusque celebratur, ultra natales et prima incunabula meritorum origo nus: quam extenditur. Nonnulli, aro βρέφους" ab ineunte etate virtutibus innutriti, a alii flagitiis assuefacti indigitantur. Psal. lvill. 4. Adienati sunt peccatores a vulva, erraverunt a utero, locutt sunt falsa. Contra Hieremias in utero sanctificatus dicitur; de 8. Johanne Baptista pradic- tum,«ai Πνεύματος ἁγίου πλησθήσεται ἔτι ἐκ κοιλίας μητρὸς αὐτοῦ. S. Paulus de se, ὁ Θεὸς ὁ ἀφορίσας pe ἐκ κοιλίας μητρός μου" non utique diviture coli tum puriore coetu delectas esse egregias 2 Pim. iii. 15. ε Epist. 157. a ' Jer. t. 8; Luc. i. 15; Gal. i. 15. — [ - , has animas, neque prestratas invasisse _ sanctitatem, sed ipsis Deo procurante _ congenitam fuisse. Nec sequiores illas ex _ altero secum pravitatem detulisse, sed ab _ ipsa infantia scelerum exemplis initiatos, _ peceandi perpetua consuetudine concep- _tam improbitatem [patravisse.] Item | cum humane vite calamitates graphice | depingunt, ac animarum miseram condi- | tionem flebilibus modis deplorant, non e | eeelesti habitatione detrusas, non in ma- | teriz custodiam demersas meerent, sed | a recentis vite lachrymis exordium pe- /tunt, ab uterinis infortuniis threnodias auspicantur. Job iii. 10. Quia non | conclusit ostia ventris, gui portavit me, | nec abstulit mala ab oculis meis ὁ Quare nonin vulva mortuus sum, egressus ex utero statim perti? quare exceptus _genibus? cur lactatus uberibus ? Porro, sexto, ut Socratica interrogandi licentia hance questionem vexemus. Cum justa Aristotelis effatum πᾶν τό ὄν ὑπο- λαμθάνεταν εἶναί που, ubi gentium ab orbe condito he presxistentes anime #tatem transigant? per liberas regiones vage spatiantur, an certis sedibus fixe conquiescunt ? prope ambitum telluris opportunos receptus expectant, an ex longinquo incorpora defiuunt? zthereas _arces obsident, an per nescio que _inter- -mundia volitent, an in terrestribus claus- tris detinentur? Platonici quidem a su- “pernis ipsas devocant, cceli olim indig- 6888, juxta quos Cicero in Somnio Scip- ionis, “* Hominibus animus datus est ex illis sempiternis ignibus quos sydera et ‘stellas vocamus ;” at reclamante Christo, Johan. iii. 13. Οὐδεὶς ἀναβέθηκεν εἷς τὸν οὐρανὸν, εἰ bya 5 ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ Katabas, ὃ vids τοῦ ἀνθρώπου, ὃ | dy ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ" ubi e celo descendisse ac cw- lestium conscium fuisse sibi soli assumit, aliis abjudicat. Quin hos cum Enea liebkemur. 7 | Anne aliquas ad celum hinc ire putandum Sublimes animas, iterumque ad tarda reverti Corpora, que lucis miseris tam dira cupido ? En. vi. Quid autem attinet animabus vitam sepa- jratam celestem attribuendo humanam naturam cum angelica confundere, quas irevera distingui apparet, ad Heb. ii. 16. Οὐ γὰρ δήπου ἀγγέλων ἐπιλαμδάνεται, ἀλλὰ σπέρμα- τὸς ᾿Αδραὰμ ἐπιλαμδάνεται. Nec opus est ut ani- marum gregibus redundantes plancte as ad nos colonias deducerent, quum _ Vor. Il. 49 NON PRAEXISTUNT. 369 a provido Numine peculiares animas des- linari, gue terrestrem hunc mundum conspicere et contemplari, eique interes- se ac presidere teneantur, ratio dictet, authoritas suffragetur: que tum demum in scenam prodire, partesque commissas capessere apte nate sunt, quum sibi corporum personas induere: interim donec nudz, habitusque corporei exper- tes sunt, quid rei moliuntur? dormiunt, an vigilant, desides otiantur, an destinen- tur negotlis? certe aliquid agunt, quum anime sint, quibus desidia mors est: quid autem? Non colores prospicere valent, ad quos oculis opus est, volatiles formas motusque palabundos colligenti- bus; non sonos dijudicare, quos auricu- larum sinuosi anfractus modulantur; nec saporum capere discrimina, ad que palati titillatio requiritur; neque mundi hujus visibilis harmoniam, pulchritudinem, de- licias percipere queant, quum ad hoc comparate videntur, ut ab anima orga- norum vario apparatu instructa dignos- cantur ; et nescio an ullum cum his rebus commercium inire possint, sensuum fami- liari auxilio destitutze: sin maxime pos- sint, quare apud ipsas gestorum—“Ad nos vix tenuis fame perlabitur aura,” eeque ac ab iis, qui 6 vivis excesserunt ἢ Deinde antequam corpora ingruunt, quam lotum somnolentam degustant, quo rore Letheo perluuntur, ut omnium que in precedenti statu egerint, senserint, perceperint, recordationem omnimodam amiserint ? Nullo, opinor, morbo laborant lethargice he anime tam acuto, nulla agitatione tam fera commoventur, que unico instanti memorize thesaurum peni- tus exhauriant, omnesque preevias species ex anime tabula eradant. Species, in- quam, istas, quas absque corporis ullo influxu aut ministerio acquisitas quomodo corpus auferendo sit, quum postea anime a corpore separatio etiam violenta, eorum que instatu conjuncto gessimus, idque ab eo dependenter, ideas minime excutiat, nec impedimento sit, quo minus multor- um memores persistamus? imo mirum est nullos adhuc a superiore vita impres- sos characteres legi, nec ex animarum ingeniis, proprietatibus, differentis ullum pristini status signum aut vestigium no- tabile elucescere. Non enim ex hac scaturigine subtilitatem Itali, Galli incon- stantiam, Germani hebetudinem, Scythe simplicitatem, Dalmate ferociam, Crete 370 vanitatem trahunt; ad regionum consti- tutionem, alimentorum temperiem, edu- cationis curam, temporum eventum, casu- umque licentiam, ad hujusce nature sta- tas leges, aut ad fortuitas circumstantias, dispositionum omnis varietas et habituum naturalium discrepantie exiguntur. Porro, Si uniuscujusque preexistet ani- ma, cum generandi actus requirit corpus ingressum, quomodo illa presto est, unde accitur, quo pacto in semen se insinuat? quem fingere possumus Mercurium ψυχα- γωγὸν quo adigente in corporeum carcer- em compingitur? invita intrat an sponte? vi compulsa, an impetu suo? conscia quid agat, an ignara’ delectu proprio, an alieno? Si sapit, cur levis et libera prius cum sit, ergastulo se includat, mole onerosa vestiat, morbis et meroribus cor- poreis se submittat ? Si nescit, quomodo callem per avia tenebrarum invenit, nec tritum et satis angustum ? quem premon- strare parentes nequeunt, ipsit animarum quod sint, ubi preestolantur, quot novam provinciam candidate ambiant, nescien- tes ? ad hee evolvenda Deus, ἀπὸ μηχα- νῆς, scilicet advocetur necesse_ est; quare autem supremi Numinis, pro cujus- vis pagani arbitrio in cogendis animabus quotidiana deposcitur opera? annon sufh- ciat nature legem certam et feedus in- violabile sanxisse, foecunditatem homini se implantasse, concursum ordinarium subministrasse, et verbum ad omnia ef- ficax protulisse, Crescit et multiplica- mini? ut taceam, videri siassidue Deus in corpora animas cogeret, opus non fuisse, ut quandoque ipsum facti hominis peniteret, aut diluvium inducendo huma- num genus pessundaret, quum nulla natu- re, quam instituerat, lege violata, hoc tantum compulsu intermisso, hc destruc- tio mnecessario consequi, scelerumque inde propagatio intercipi potuisset. Denique postquam anima directoris cu- juslibet auspiciis ad luteas edes ducentem semitam inivit, in semen quomodocunque intromissa, ex qua subito disciplina_plas- tici artificii mirabilem sibi peritiam com- paravit, hujusmodi architecture prius ig- nara, nec in effingendis corporibus exer- citata? unde tanta statim συμπάθεια emergit, et peregrini hospitisarctus cnm materia nexus? et cura vinculi parum connaturalis dissolutione tantopere abhor- ret? quae omnia cum animam corpori a congenitam satis indicant, tum inextri- cabilis preexistentize laqueos innectunt, Deinde, Hanc opinionem plerique Sane- ti Patres aperte damnarunt, hosque secuti ecclesiastici doctores. Augustini verba sunt, ‘‘ Credimas animas nec esse initio cum angelis, nec simul creatas, sicut Ori- genes finxit.””. Hieronymus ; ““ Nobis ni- hil placet, nisi quod ecclesiasticum est, et publice in ecclesia dicere non time- mus, ne juxta Pythagoram ac Platonem, ac discipulos eorum, qui sub nomine Christiano introducunt dogma genulium, dicamus animas lapsas de celo esse.” Idem alicubi hanc doctrinam peregrinam, alibi impiam et celeratam vocat, acriter quidem pro more suo. ‘Tertullianus postquam hereticis quibusdam hoc dog- ma tribuisset, subjungit, ‘ Doleo Plato- nem omnium hereticorum condimenta- rium factum.”* Epiphanius; “ Illud quoque quis Origenem dicentem patiatur, quod anime angeli fuerint in ceelis, et postquam peccaverint in supernis direc- tas esse in hunc mundum, et quasi in tu- mulos et sepulchra, sic in corpora ista relegatas, pcenas antiquorum luere pec- catorum, et corpora credentium non tem- pla Christi esse, sed carceres damnato- rum ?””! Ultimo, Fundamenta infirma sunt, qui- bus hance preexistentiam superstruunt ad- versaril. Nam, primo, Traditionem allegant, ex profundissima antiquitate desumptam. Philolaus Pythagoricus, Magtugéovtar δὲ καὶ οἱ παλαιοὶ θεύλογοὶ re καὶ μάντεις, ὡς διὰ τινὰς Ipse Socrates apud Platonem, Π]αλαιὸς μὲν οὖν ἐστί τις ὃ λόγος οὗτος οὗ μεμνήμεθα, ὥς εἰσιν ἐνθένδε ἀφικόμε- Cicero: “ς Ex quibus humane vite erroribus at- que serumnis fit, ut interdum veteres illi sive vates, sive in sacris initiisque traden- dis divinze mentis interpretes, qui nos ob aliqua scelera suscepta in vita superiore peenarum luendarum causa natos esse dixerunt, &c.’”° Quos hi antiquos vates, quos theologos intelligunt, preeexistentiz precones, non ANIMZZ HUMANE CORPORIBUS τιμωρίας ἡ ψυχὴ τῷ σώματι ovvécevkrar.™ ναι ἐκεῖ, καὶ πάλινγη δεῦρο ἀφικνοῦνται." ) Lib. de Sp. et An. cap. 40.—Ad Hedibiam, ad Demetr. k De An. cap. 23. ! Epist. ad Joan. Hieros. m Apud Eugub. ἡ In Pheed. ° Io Hortens. apud Aug. 1. 9, contr. Jul. admodum constat: inter Homeri et He- siodi figmenta nusquam comparet, unde nec Orpheum et Museum sic institutos improbabile fuerit, quos Greeca theologia patres atque antistites agnoscit; an igitur Pythagoram ipsum de quo Ovidius, primusque animalia mensis Arguit imponi, primus quoque talibus ora Docta quidem solvit, sed non et credita verbis, &c. 5 Metam. An vero potius AXgyptios sacerdotes ; a quibus τῆς μετενσωματώσεως doctrina im- butum Pythagoram author est Herodo- tus? Respondeat pro me Tertullianus : *“ Nullus sermo divinus, nisi Dei unius, quo prophetz, quo apostoli, quo ipse Christus intonuit: multo antiquior Moses etiam Saturno, nongentis circiter annis, nedum pronepotibus ejus; certe divinior multo, qui decursus generis humani ab exordio mundi quoque per singulas nati- Vitates nominatim temporatimque diges- sit.” Sane nobis nihil pensi est hujusmodi spurias, malefidas, multorumque porten- torum obstetrices historias rejicere ; qui- bus si legitimam originem assignare volu- mus, non aliunde fortassis repetenda erit quam ex institutione Mosaica perperam intellecta : que cum primi hominis ani- mam asupremo numine inflatam perhi- beat, quid mirum si celeste illi genus _ascripserint; inde ἃ ccelo delapsam autu- marint: vel potius, primum hominem in paradiso collocatum fuisse, ibi Dei im- morigerum extitisse, deinde ex amenis- simo horto ejectum exulasse ; hisque co- herentia cum audiverint, quid fabularum prestigias affectantibus facilius erat quam elysium terrestre in celeste palati- um evehere, quodque revera uni homini acciderat, ad omnes transferre ? Sed et priscorum Hebreorum suffragia advo- cant, querum complures hoc dogmate imbutos ex Josepho, Philone, Talmudis- tis certum, e sanctoribus literis probabile est: quod innuit Judzorum illa questio, Τίς ἥμαρτεν, οὗτος͵ ἤ οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ, ἵνα τυφλὸς yev- γνηθῆ ; illudque authoris Sapientia, “dor ée ἀγαθὸς ὧν ἦλθον εἰς σῦμα ἀμίαι τον 4 Josephus de Essenis, Kai γὰρ ἔῤῥωται παῤ αὐτοῖς fide ἡ δόξα φθαρτὰ μὲν εἶναι τὰ σώματα, καὶ τὴν ὕλην οὐ μόνιμον αὐτοῖς" τὰς δὲ Ψυχὰς ἀθανάτους ἀεὶ διαμένειν καὶ συμ- πλέκεσθαι μὲν ἐκ τοῦ λεπτοτάτου φοιτώσας αἰθέρος, P 28 de An. 4 Toan. ix. 2: viii. 20 NON PRAEXISTUNT. 371 ὥσπερ εἱρκταῖς τοῖς σώμασιν, ἴυγγυΐ reve φυσικῇ κατ- acrwpévas,* idem Phariseis tribuit, quod opinati fuerint, Ψυχὴν πᾶσαν μέν αφθαρτον, μεταβαίνειν δὲ Quid igi- tur? an propter horum suffragia Pytha- goricam animarum translationem amplec- temur? quam nescio an ab ethnicis phi- losophis, vel asacerdotibus Agyptiis mu- tuati fuerint ; certe nec a Mose, neque ex sanctorum prophetarum scholis edidi- cere. Enimvero quadrat, et fortassis hue ex scribentis proposito collineavit ad- monitio illa Paulina, Βλέπετε μή τις ὑμᾶς ἔσται ὃ συλαγωγῶν διὰ τῆς φιλοσοφίας καὶ κενῆς ἀπά- εἰς ἕτερον σῶμα τὴν τῶν ἀγαθῶν μόνην. της, κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώτων, κατὰ τὰ στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου, καὶ οὐ κατὰ Χριστόν." Nonnullos etiam S. Scripture locos ci- tat Origines, Peccavi antequam humilia- rer, hoc est, antequam in corpus descen- derem; subjecta est creatura vanitati, id est, corpori; et aliquot alios in commen- ti sul patrocinium allegorica expositione detortos; a quibus excutiendis, atque ab aliena interpretatione vindicandis, non est quod diutius immorer. Superflua res esset, et pene infinita, et quod sancti Pa- tres abunde prestiterunt. Secundo, Rationibus decernunt, qua- rum palmaria est, quod divine justitic hine optime consuli, hac sola clave provi- dentiz adyta reserari posse videantur. Nam si hanc vitam nihil anime preces- sit, ergo nec meriti. Cujus igitur justite fuit, misellas animas in corpora tot infir- mitatibus obnoxia constringere, ad statum tot molestiis involutum damnare? Cur ipsa nascendi, lege proclivitate in vitia tam obstinata feruntur, ad virtutes adeo averse ac contumaces? cui infelicitati taniarum gentium, totque seculorum pene fatalis barbaries imputanda est? unde naturam tam aspere novercatur, fortuna tam ferociter insultat mortalibus, nisi quod anteacte vite paenas damus, veter- esque nequitias ultricibus furiis divine Nemesis flagra persequuntur?* Respondeo, primo, Si hac doctrina jus- titi divine: illustrande tantopere inser- viret, cur prophetis Dei intimis non inno- tuit? quare in sacris oraculis sepius clariusque non inculcatur? precipue in evangelio, de quo Sanctus Paulus, Sexae- * Not. in quo statu Cain peceavit? et ii qui statim ab ortu, &c. τ De B. J. H.8, 11. * Col. ii. 8 372 οσύνη Θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ dnoxuhintetac:t quum maxime ‘intersit, ut de divina justitia recte sentiamus, cum illius elucidande multi- plex succurrat occasio, et in eo sacre scripture plurimum occupentur. Imo, Secundo, Horum accidentium aliz cause exprimuntur, in quibus parentum contumacia, inobedientia, neglectus, pre- cipue Adami: ex quo semine non alibi quam nostro in loco, ab ipso pene nas- centis mundi primordio, hec nobis malo- rum seges pullulavit. Tertio, Barbariem, inscitiam, et pec- candi proclivitatem quod attinet, has non omnino necessarias et prorsus inevitabiles esse docet demonstratque apostolus ad Rom. i. 19, 20, didte τὸ γνωστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ φανερόν ἐστιν ἐν αὐτοῖς" ὃ γὰρ Θεὸς αὐτοῖς ἐφανέρ- ωσεν. Ta γὰρ ἀόρατα αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου τοῖς ποιήμασι νοουμενα καθορᾶται, ἣτε ἀΐδιος αὐτοῦ δύναμις καὶ θειότης, εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἀναπολογήτους. Quid enim si homines naturali lumine et facultatibus divinitus concessis abutantur, quibus ad Dei notitiam, virtutisque am- plexum aspirare possint, ea propter di- vina providentia injurize est arcessenda ? an Deus homines e cunis perfecte sapi- entes, infallibiliter justos, et prorsus ἀγα- μαρτήτους, condere debuit? Quin po- tius si rationis judicium consulere nolunt, conscientiz dictamina respuunt, prime- ve lucis scintillas extinguunt, nature leges violant, exemplorum pessima imi- tantur, seque improbis moribus totos de- vovent, non tam antiquorum criminum rei sunt, quam recentibus implicantur, quorum aut adimere potestatem, aut ef- fectum impedire, nullo Deus jure tene- tur, nullo pacto obstringitur: imo non tam puniendorum, quam probandorum hominum gratia hec permittere po- tuit; et quidem permisit: Act. xiv. 16, Ὃς ἐν ταῖς παρῳχημέναις γενεαῖς εἴασε πάντα τὰ ἔθνη ποροὔεσθαι ταῖς δδοῖς αὑτῶν" et Act. xvii. 30, τοὺς μὲν οὖν χρόνους τῆς ἀγναίας ὑπεριδὼν ὁ Θεός. Quarto, Humane vite miserias atque erumnas, hoc est, naturales defectus, morbos, egestates, infortunia, querula petulantia providentie increpantes apos- tolicum fulmen retundit, Μὴ ἐρεῖ τὸ πλάσ- μα τῷ πλάσαντι, Τί μ᾽ ἐποίησας οὗτως ;" Etiam brutis animantibus communia sunt, quorum animas rationis unquam partici- pes, et peccandi consequenter compotes t Rom. i. 17. “ Rom. ix. 20, ANIMZ HUMAN CORPORIBUS fuisse, aut e supernis sedibus in corpora relegatas, quis tam absonus est ut dicat, tam audax, ut propterea divinam insimu- let justitiam ὁ Neque est quod he afflic- tiones tantas trageedias excitent, que tam ὦ immanes non sunt, ut facile tolerari ne- queant, ut propterea vitem respuant homi- nes, mortemque avertere non satagant, ut plerunque grandioribus commodis non compensentur. Denique hee mala ad bonos usus transferri, ad morum mede- lam facere, in virtutum occasiones con- verti, ad stultitiam arguendam, compes- cendam arrogantiam, intemperantiam, coércendam, ad conciliandam prudenti- am, acuendam fortitudinem, exercendam patientiam, animumque corroborandum conducere possunt : ut preeteream ex his plurima non esse Oséaeunta, sed ab hominum in se stolida pravitate accersi: quo pacto nodum dissolvit Homericus ille Jupiter. *Q πόποι, otov df νυ θεοὺς βροτοὶ αἰτιόωνται, "Eé ἡμέων γὰρ φασι κάκ᾽ ἔμμεναι" οἱ δὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ Σφῇσιν ἀτασθαλίησιν ὑπὲρ μόρον ἄλγε᾽ ἔχουσιν. Od. a’. 32. Quinto, Status ille animarum quicun- que preecessisse supponatur, etiam pec- catis, doloribus, defectibus subjacere de- buit, ut reatus contrahi, et supplicii obli- gatio emergere possit: an idcirco ut jus- titi ac providentiz idonea ratio reddatur, hoc alio priori comminiscei oportet, istoque itidem priorem alterum, et sic ἴῃ infini- tum ἢ Sezto, Christus divine dispensationis mysterium aliter interpretatur. Nam, cur quis cecus natus fuerat,sciscitantibus, Phariseis, respondet, non ob precedentia peccata contigisse, ἀλλ᾽ iva φανερωθῇ τὰἔργατοῦ Θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ." Reliquarum calamitatum non absimilis est ratio; instruendis hom- inibus, glorizque divine illustrande in- serviunt, nec tam ἃ preteritis malis fluunt, quam ad futura bona diriguntur. Septimo, Si corpus anime carcer sit, — non commodum diversorium, et vivere poena sit, non beneficium : quo grate ev- anescunt, quas authorivitee Deodebemus, quasque parentibus divine δημιουργίας, instrumentis. persolvimus? frustra ab apostolo celebratur, ὁ διδοὺς maou ζωὴν, καὶ πνοὴν, καὶ τὰ πάντα, Nec ab eodem minus incongrue dicitur Deus ἐμπιπλῶν ¥ Joan. ix. 3. _ultricis majestatem agnoscerent, | | | | perdurat? ubiilla benedictio ad Adam et | = = _ NON PRAEEXISTUNT. τροφῆς καὶ εὐφροσύνης τὰς καρδίας ἡμῶν (i. e. Viven- tium.)* Melius non exclamasset Job, Vitam et misericordiam tributsti miht.* Tacuisset David, Manus tue finzerwnt, et preparaverunt me. Immeritis laudi- bus tot hymni personant; in ludibrium abiit conformati hominis solennis historia, illudit nobis heec mundi concinna fabrica, magnificus apparatus ; custodia est, non theatrum libertatis. Neque denique ibi vita communicata tam Creatoris_ benefi- centiam suspicere est, quam Vindicis severitatem perhorrescere. Quibus, octavo, subjungo illa Epiphanii contra Origenem disputantis, ‘Si hoc verum est, ubi est fides nostra ὃ ubi pre- conium resurrectionis? ubi apostolica doctrina,que in ecclesiis Christi hucusque ad semen ejus, et ad Noe et ad filios ejus, Crescite et multiplicamini, et replete ter- ram? Jam enim non erit benedictio, sed maledictio, juxta Origenem, qui an- gelos vertit in animas, et de sublimi fas- tigio dignitatis facit ad inferiora descen- dere ; quasi Deus non possit animas per benedictionem dare, nisi angeli peccave- Tint, et tot in clo sint ruine, que in ter- ta nativitates.”’ Nono, Justitie convenit, ut delictorum, ob que sontes plectuntur, non aboleatur memoria; cum ut ad qualemcunque re- | Sipiscentiam ex reatus conscientia et pe- . Me sensu perducantur, tum ut justitie disce- 'Tentque ‘‘ justitiam moniti, et non tem- Mere divos :” quo spectat illud Tertullia- ni, ““ Evacuabitur ratio judicil, si merito- rum deerit sensus. Igitur cum olim pec- catum esse non agnoscimus, cur penam inde infligi censeamus ?” Ultimo, Ex admissa preexistentia non minus inextricabiles difficultatum labyrin- thi oriuntur. Cur enim Adami anima nunquam preextitit, Caini unum atque al- terum annum, Pharaonis per aliquot se- cula, Jude anima sero in corporeum pis- trinum conjecta est? et in universo ali- que ad penos subeundas priecoces, ali _tamdiu immature sunt? Cur spe, ut videtur, meliores animm temperiem cor- | poris languidam, dubiam, infirmam sor- tiuntur, longe pejores sanis, vegetis, ro- 17. 73. ον Act xvii. 25; xiv. | ,* Job x. 12; Ps. cxix. | Vide Just. in Tryph. 373 bustis corporibus donantur? Unde apud Indos, Mauros, /Zthiopes, reliquasque barbaras gentes, dociles animi, benign indoles, felicia ingenia, apud Christianos aliosque populos moraliores contraria dis- positione preedite anime nascuntur ἢ Qua- lia problemata ex preexistentize hy pothese difficulter, ex nature lege ordinaria, ejus- que pluriformibus circumstantiis multo facilius solvuntur. Tertio, Preexistentiam Platonici ex notionibus quibusdam deducunt, quas tan- quam rudera precedentis ruine, pristin- eeque scientiz reliquias, etiamnum super- stites volunt. Item ex humane mentis docilitate, que non tam prompte disci- plinas arriperet, nisi quas prius calluisset ; queecunque que interciderat memoria, ex mentis agitatione reviviscit: qui argu- endi modus Ciceroni vehementer arrisit, Tuscul. quest. I. “* Habet autem (anima) primum memoriam, et eam infinitam, re- rum innumerabilium, quam quidem Plato recordationem esse vult superioris vite : —nec fieri ullo modo posse, ut a pueris tot rerum atque tantarum insitas et quasi consignatas in animis notiones, quas ἐν- γοίας vocant, haberemus, nisi animus, an- tequam in corpus intravisset, in rerum cognitione viguisset.”” Libro de Senec- tute, c. 21. ‘*Magno est argumento homines scire pleraque antequam nati sint, quod jam pueri, quum artes difficiles discant, ita celeriter res innumerabiles arripiant, ut eas non tum primum accip- ere videantur, sed reminisci et recordari.”” Sed contra, nullas ejusmodi ἐν οίας ani- mo inherere yerisimile est, quas mentis opera, sensus adminiculo, a recentis vite exordio non acquisivit. Axiomata enim, et prima veritatis principia, que perspi- cullate sua communem assensum meren- tur, vel ex terminorum ge nuina signifi- catione, vi sibi indita, protinus apprehe ne dit, aut ex quotidiana observatione facile dignoscit ; reliquas autem ex his pendu- las conclusiones non temeré, et ex idea- rum fortuito occursu, sed native sagaci- tatis virtute elicit, per consequentiarum successivam seriem operoso progressu discurrendo: imo si precesisse aliquem anime: statum supponamus, has ipsas no- liones tum aut ei primitus impressas, aut ab intellectus naturali facultate excusas, vel a jugi experientia desumptas oportuit, ne oblivionum scilicet ac reminiscentia- rum perpetuas reciprocationes fingendo 374 in infinitum regrediamur. Cum igitur cognitio omnis aliquando nova esse de- buit, et animus presens scienti# omni, quam possidet, adipiscende par sit, ne- que aliter jam discit, quam in superiore statu didicisset ; quidni hic opportune ter- minum figamus, neque in seculorum, que dudum affluxere, obscuras profunditates frustra nos immergamus? Cum sane il- lius, si qua est, elapse vite tam exilis, aut potius nulla est recordatio, ut merito canat Platonice sententie fautor ac inter- pres poeta, ——anime, quibus altera fato Corpora debentur, Lethzi ad fluminis undam Securos latices, et longa oblivia potant. Ultimo, Alios existendi modos destruen- do, preexistentiam astruere conantur. Idcirco enim animasa Deo creatas infun- di negant, quia puram, insontem, immac- ulatam, qualis e divina manu procederet, in corpus immundum et vitiosa labe con- taminatum immitti, totque confestim mor- bis et miseriis ineluctabilibus nullo suo merito addici, nefas, atque divine justi- tiz contrarium ducunt: ut et Deum ad actum creationis sublimem, liberum, pe- culiarem, adulterorum quocunque arbitrio, incestorumque temeraria libidine deter- minari, fore incongruum. Nec minori- bus difficultatibus involutam animarum ex traduce propagationem arguunt; nam ex eo consequi aut animas a parentibus creari, aut si ab eorum substantia discer- pantur, divisibiles esse, quorum illud idio- ma Dei incommunicabile creature adjudi- cat; hoc animarum dignitati, simplicique nature derogat. Sed quoniam contra preexistentiam satis prolixe disputavi- mus, neque 6 reliquis aliquem existendi modum propugnandum suscepimus, et auditorum patieotiz consultum volumus, sufficiat utcunque probatum dedisse, quod anime humane corporibus non preex- istunt. DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. Mart. xvi. 19.— Et dabo tihi claves regni celorum Mopvs, quo Christus, ecclesiw Rex, hanc ordinat atque regit, illi perquam affinis est, | DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. quo Deus mundi Dominus ipsum moder- atur. Mundum Deus partim immediato providentiz sue nutu temperat, partim intercedente delegatorum suorum, et qua- si proregum visibilium (quos variis regni sui provinciis preefecit), opera curaque vicaria administrat. Horum (a Deo ae- cepta authoritate simul ac imposito offie- io) partes sunt, sub Rege summa, in suo quemque districtu, secundum ab ipso pre- stitutas equi bonique regulas, ipsius ita gubernare subditos, cum ut imprimis om- nibus qua licet modis Dei promoveatur honos, tum ut proxime salus hominum procuretur ; allaborantibus iis, ut et Deus ubique summa reverentia colatur, et hom- ines vita secura, tranquilla, commoda perfruantur: quinetiam horum preefecto- rum unusquisque commissi sibi gregis utilitati speciatim ita prospicere debet, ut simul omnes aliquatenus universi generis humani commoda respiciant, cum reliquis hominibus pacem, amicitiam, innocuum beneficumque commercium fovendo, ver- susque cunctos, quibuseum eos rem ha- bere contingit, humanitatis officia et @- quitatis leges observando: illis porro Dei vicariis que committitur authoritas, om- nimodam. complectitur ad illos conse- quendos fines necessariam, vel utcunque requisitam potestatem, leges equas et idoneas sanciendi, judicia exercendi, dis- pensandi premia, peenas infligendi, sic ut hisce subditi, juxta Dei voluntatem et ex divini juris vigore, sese morigeros preestare teneantur. Adsimili ratione, ecclesiz caput et absolutus rector Chris- tus (cui scilicet omnis in celo, supraque terram potestas est donata*) spirituale regnum suum dispensat, partim immedi- ate sui Spisitus directione et efficacia, partim legatorum et presidum suorum (τῶν ἡγουμένων, ‘‘judicum vice Christi,” quos vocat Cyp- rianus,? τῶν τοῦ σωτῆρος ἐπεχόντων πρόσωπον, αἱ ait Basilius*) ministerio, quos ipse variis ecclesiz suz provinciis preeposuit, authori- tate sic instructos, ut eo modo res ecclesia- ticas ordinare possint atque debeant, qui cum ad Christi provehendam gloriam, tum ad populi Christiani_ bonum procu- randum maximopere conducat ;f scilicet, τῶν προεστώτων, τῶν ἀγγέλων, * 'O γὰρ καθηγούμενος οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἐστὶν, ἢ ὃ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἐπέχων πρόσωπον. —Basil. Const. Monast. cap. 22. + Nec nos vim cuiquam facimus, aut legem » Matt. xxviii. 18 » Epist, 55, DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. ut imprimis Regi Christo debita reveren- tia, concilietur, ut ejus mandatis integrum deferaiur obsequium, ut ipsius regnum in imo statu conservetur atque floreat, quin et indies accrescat et prolatetur ; tum et ejus subditi (quibus in rebus ipsor- um yertitur salus, et bonum precipuum) ad officium suum peragendum instruc- tione requisita dirigantur, et monitis op- portunis excitentur ;° a peccatis munian- tur, et perficiantur in sanctitate ; quoque modo demum quam optime preparentur at eternam illam, ad quam (Dei benigni- tate gratiosa) destinantur ac invitantur, felicitatem occupandam. Hi vero Chris- tiani regni dispensatores, ita quisque pro- jam, quam nactus est, Spartam singil- latim obire debet ac ornare, totius ut in- terea corporis utilitati consulat atque stu- deat, cum reliquis fidelibus “ communi- eationem pacis,” ut cum Tertulliano lo- quar, et “appellationem fraternitatis,” et “ contesserationem hospitalitatis” ser- vando ;" hoc est, concordiam mutuam ob- nixe colendo, propensamque versus uni- yersos Christi cultores charitatem exer- cendo; quinetiam ipsis que a Christo de- mandatur authoritas, omnimodam contin- et ad ista complenda requisitam potesta- tem : penes ipsos est (in sua penes unum- quemque provincia) leges aut regulas salubres prescribere, causas emergen- tes decidere, premia distribuere, sed et peenas irrogare (officil nempe sui spiritu- alis nature consentaneas, et ejusmodi proposito accommodatas), ita demum, ut etiam hujusce regni populus,e Christi mini mente jussuque, legibus istis pa- rere, decisionibus acquiescere, censuris subjacere constringantur.° Hee vero potestas (magna saltem ex parte) multis ab inde seculis appellari consuescit polestas clavium, ex illis, que legi, verbis adsumpta nomenclatura ; qui- bus in verbis Sancto Petro pollicetur Do- minus, se regni ccelestis claves ei dona- turum: circa quod seu promissum (seu predictum) illud imprimis observandum venit, quod licet uni Petro (verborum ad am et sonum attendendo) factum vi- damus, quando habeat in ecclesiw# administra- tione voluntatis sue liberum arbitrium unus- quisque prepositus, rationem actus sui Domi- ho redditurus.—Cyp. Ep. 72. ® 2 Cor, xiii. 10. * De Prescript, c. 20. * Heb. xiii. 17 ; Matt. xxiii. 2. 375 deatur, revera tamen commune sit, et ad ecclesiam totam ejusque rectores pertine- at: nec enim occasio promittendi Petrum unice spectabat, neque causa propter quam promitteretur Petro suberat pecu- liaris ; nec alligabatur uni Petro promissi materia; nec in Petrum denique solum derivatus est ejus effectus. Occasionem quod attinet ; interrogavit omnes (quot- quot aderant) discipulos Christus, Vos autem quem. me dicitis esse? Petrus e more suo (utpote pre reliquis promptus et fervidus ; πρόθυμος et θερμὸς, ἘΞ ut ait Chrysostomus, vel ut inter illos etatis, vocationis, aut alia nescio qua ratione quodammodo preeminens; ut προέδρος, adeoque προήγορος) e vestigio preesultans responsum arripit (προπηδᾷ καὶ προλαμθά- vet, ait Chrysostomus), id omnium no- mine dictans, quod indubie cuncti sen- serunt, uti colligitur e capite 14. ubi succlamant omnes, ἀληθῶς Θεοῦ υἱὸς ei, quanquam bBellarminus (satis id audacter et temere) quid potissimum responderent ignorasse czteros, haud veritus est oggerere : sane quum, apud §, Johannem, simili (fortassis eadem) ex oc. casione confessionem hic apostolus pror- sus eandem ederet, expressum habetur , Ἡμεῖς, inquit, πεπιστεύκαμεν καὶ ἐγνώκαμεν, ὅτι σὺ εἶ ὃ Χριστὸς, ὃ υἱὸς rod Θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος" ita tune exerte, nunc autem implicite Petrus, velut Apostolorum os (quo illum normine cum hic, tum alibi Chrysostomus insignit), ‘‘pro omnibus loquens, et ecclesiz voce respondens” (uti loquitur B. Cyprian- us.)? Suppar est cause promissum hoc velut elicientis ratio: quod nempe Petrus Christum Dei Filium esse cognoverit, crediderit, et confessus sit: ** Mercedem” (inquit Hieronymus) ‘ accepit vera con- fessio :”” Petro revelatum id dicitur ; cun- ctis hoc fidelibus wque competit; nec enim quisquam nisi per Spiritum δὶ Jes- um appellare potest Dominum; Omnis- que spiritus, gui confitetur Jesum Chris- tum in carne venisse, ex Deo est :' firme credidit, et clare professus est illud Pe- trus; idem facere Christianis omnibus ex aequo convenit et incumbit: Quis enim * qui sibi fidit Dux regit exumen. + Matt. xiv. 33; De pontit. ; Rom. i, 12.— Quum pro omnibus responderet.— Tertull. in Marc. iv. 21. Joh. vi. 69 στόλων, καὶ στόμα τῶν μαθητῶν καὶ κορυφὴ τοῦ χο- ροῦ.---ΟἾΤΥ5. in Joh. xxi. 15; Cypr. Ep. 55, { 1Cor. xii. 3; 1 Joh. iv. 2; Gal. i, 12 Γ] al > ~ expires ἣν τῶν dro- 376 DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. est, qui mundum vincit, nisi gui credit) ὑμῶν ὃ καθηγητὴς Kprords, πάντες δὲ ὑμεῖς ae Jesum esse Filium Dei? Corde creditur| éote-' \iquido testatur id universus ad justitiam, et ore fit professio ad sal-| histori apostolic ; sed et aperte utem :* nihil igitur hac ex parte Petro ἔα! ficatS. Paulus, ubi de seipso predi proprium, nullum hic singularis privilegii nihil ipsi defecisse, quod sibimet apostol- fundamentum habetur. Neque si rem) orum precipui possent vindicare (οὐδὲν, ipsam expendimus, aliquid Petro delatum | ὑστέρησα τῶν ὑπηρ λίαν ἀποστόλων :)™ δὶ quoque constat, aut exhibitum, quod non et aliis | (quasi solicite caveret, et obviam iret zeque competit, ac alibi diserte tribuitur :| jllorum commento, qui non immediate affirmat Christus sese super Petrum, ceu | collatam, sed a Petro derivatam volunt in rupem firmam (super P etrum; etenim yeliquos apostolos hanc potestatem) se istum sensum, ut aliquatenus simplicio- | nec ab hominibus, neque per homines rem, ut Petri saliem prerogative, si qua | (οὐκ dx’ ἀνθρώπων, οὐδὲ δι. ἀνθρώπων), apostolum fuit, faventiorem, haud respuimus), eccle- | siam suam extructurum; hoc est ejus, imprimis opera efficace se multos in ce-| tum sibi fidelem ac obsequentem, divina | protectione conservandum, compacturum ; | se Petri preevalido testimonio, impigroque | studio ac labore, domum suam (quam in| Epistola sua vocat ipse Petrus) spiritua-_ lem erecturum:" hoc autem reliquis: apostolis (quin et omnibus ecclesie doc- toribus aliquatenus) congruere res ipsa clamat, et expresse docetur: nam in| Apocalypsi, duodecim fundamentis inni- tens describitur urbis cc@lestis murus, quibus totidem apostolorum inscribuntur nomina; et apostolorum atque prophet- arum fundamento inedificari ecclesiam | astruitS. Paulus; idemque vocat eandem | edificium Dei, cujus ipse velut sapiens, architectus fundamentum posuerat.’ Pollicitus est etiam Petro Dominus (id) quod phrasis proposite sensum explicat),, quicquid is super terram alligarit, id in| ceelis alligatum fore ; quicquid ille solve- | rit hic, id ibi fore solutum: idem hoc ex- plicite verbis prorsus iisdem ecclesiz spondetur (Matt. xviii.) quin et verbis| zequipollentibus alibi discipulis suis pro-| mittitur a Christo, (Joh. xx.*) Sed οἵ. illa nedum promissa, sed et ipsis exhibita, | ab ipsis exercita luculente constat. Nam sidenuo promissi respiciantur effectus, nil hujusmodi peculiare quippiam accep-| isse Petrus vel prestitisse deprehendetur, | quod non etalii pariter acceperint et usur- | parint. Nihil ille juris supra reliquos collegas adsumpsit sibi, vel exercuit: id innuit Christus, ubi scribarum ambition- | ¢ 1 Joh. v.5; Rom. x. 10. b | Pet. ii.5; Rom. xv. 20 i Apoc. xxi. 14. } Eph. u. 20; 1 Cor. iit. 9, 10. « Matt. xviii. 18; Joh. xx. 22, 23. | esse constitutum asserit, ast immediate Christo ipsi Deoque Patri suam acceptam referre potestatem apostolicam ; ubi sibi cunctarum ecclesiarum curam imcum- bere testatur ; ubi denique se Petro nom- inatim exerteque comparat, neque sibi minus potestatis aut officii concreditum innuit in sua provincia, quam Petro in sua." His expensis, haud immerito censetur hoc quicquid est potestatis (clavium no- mine designatum) non in Petrum person- aliter (hoc est restrictive, vel exclusive) consideratum, sed quodammodo repre- sentative (communis ex fidei, vel com- munis officii ratione), vel quatenus is ali- orum omnium simili conditione gauden- tium, similive munere fungentium quasi vices obiret, aut sustineret personas, con- ferri, vel conferendum promitti: in Pe- trum, tanquam strenuum fidei confesso- rem, eximium ecclesiz fundatorem, gna- /vumque pastorem ; fere juxta quod ita commentatur Origenes ; ““ Quod si nos loquimur idem quod Petrus loquutus est efficimur Petrus; et nobis dicetur, /u es Petrus; Petra enim est quisquis est dis- cipulus Christi.”° Vel si Petrum directe spectent hee verba, saltem ea interpre- tative vel consecutive non minus ad alios pertinere, quibus ex rationis paritate, vel officii similitudine conveniunt; preser- tim reliquis apostolis, qui (ut B. Cyprianus ait) “hoe erant quod fuit Petrus, pari consortio prediti, et honoris et potesta- tis:”’” in ecclesiam adeo totam finaliter (hoc est, in ejus gratiam et beneficium) “1 bdit: Εἴς ¢ ~°™* | collatum est, formaliter autem (hoc est, σ .ς Δὶς y . em sugillans, subdit; Εἰς ἐστιν (inquit) quoad ej us usum et exercitium) lis pra- 1 Matt. xxiii. 8. m 2 Cor. xii. 11. n Gal. i. 1; 2 Cor. xi. 28; Gal. ii. 7: ° In Matt. Tract. 1. P De Unit. Eccl. --- DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. sertim concessum intelligatur, quibus ec- clesie propagandz conservandeque cura demandatur, et officium incumbit. Ita certe rem accepere veteres; e multis, que protulerunt huc spectantia, paucula quedam allegabimus; Tertullianus : “Si adhuc clausum putas celum, me- mento claves ejus hic Dominum Petro, et per eum ecclesiz reliquisse, quas hic upusquisque interrogatus atque confes- sus feret secum.”’* Ita Pater ille preedoc- tus, € communi sententia, ut videtur ; quam tamen alibi, Montanismo penitius infixus, utejus ὑποθέσει serviret, retractavit ; nam libro de Pudicitia," ordinariam in eccle- sia peceata remittendi potestatem con- vellens, ac eapropter asserens apostolos non ex disciplina, sed ex potestate (mir- ifica scilicet aut prophetica) id fecisse, sic infit: ** De tua nunc sententia quero, unde hoc jus ecclesiz usurpes; si quia dixerat Petro Dominus, Super hanc Pe- tram—idcirco preesumis et ad te derivas- se solvendi et alligandi potestatem, id est, ad omnem ecclesiam Petri propinquam, qualis es, evertens atque commutans manifestam Domin: intentionem, person- aliter hoc Petro conferentem.” Ita tunc is, et in eam mentem plura pro fanaticis Montani deliriis adversus ecclesiam dis- putans. Cyprianus, Epist. 27. ‘* Dominus noster, cujus preecepta et monita observare debemus, episcopi honorem, et ecclesice . Suz rationem disponens in evangelio lo- quitur, et dicit Petro, Ego tibi dico—Inde per temporum et successionum vices epis- coporum ordinatio, et ecclesiz ratio de- currit, ut ecclesia super episcopos con- '—‘stituatur, et omnis actus ecclesize per eosdem prapositos gubernetur.”’ Firmil- ianus, Caesarezee Cappadocum episcopus, apud Cyprianum, Epist. 75. hune citans locum, subjicit: ‘* Potestas peccatorum remittendorum apostolis data est, eteccle- siis, quas illia Christo missi constituerunt, et episcopis, qui eis ordinatione vicaria successerunt.” B. Ambrosius, Epist. 83. * Claves ilfas regni coelorum in B. Petro euncti suscepimus sacerdotes.”? Augusti- nus in Johannem: Petro dicitur, 1 δὲ daho claves regni celorum, tanquam ligandi et solvendi solus acceperit potestatem, cum et illud pro omnibus dixerit, et hoe cum omnibus, tamquam personam gerens uni- 4 Scorp in Gnost. cap. 10. * De Pud.c. 21. Vou. III. 48 377 tatis, acceperit.””> Rursus: ** Quando ei dictum oat Tibi dabo claves—universam significavit ecclesiam ;’’> Et, “ Si in Pe- tro non esset ecclesie sacramentum, non ei diceret Dominus, Tisi dabo claves— si hoc ergo—in ecclesia fit, Petrus quan- do claves accepit, ecclesiam sanctam significavit.”* Basilius in Constit. Mo- nast.—Ildot δὲ rots ἐφεξῆσ ποιμέσι καὶ διδᾶσκάλοις παρέχει ἴσην ἐξουσίαν" καὶ τούτου σημεῖον τὸ δεσμεῖν Theophyl. Eé καὶ τρὸς [lérpov μόνον εἴρηται τὸ, δώσω σοι, ἀλλὰ καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ᾿Λποστόλοις δέδοται."---Εἰ quibus pre- stantium veteris ecclesiz magistrorum dic- tis de illus sensu constare videtur: ita- que jam ratum habeatur promissam hic, et aliquando proinde commissam fuisse potestatem hance Clavium nomine desig- natam ; id quod ex ejus natura, usu, sco- po verisimilius evadet ; quee modo nobis breviter instituimus exponenda, metho- dum hanc insistentibus; primo, Nomen ejus ; secundo, Objectum seu terminum : tertio, Phrases equipollentes, quibus ex- primitur, aut explicatur: quarto, Praxin ejus et exercitium in ecclesia primeeva : quinto, Ejus instituende originem, vel exemplar in ecclesia Mosaica; sexto, Ejus necessitatem, et utilitatem (hee, in- quam, vel horum partem aliquam nunc pro moduio temporis et nostro) perstrin- gemus. I. Clavium nomen (metaphoricum cum sit) significat eo denotatam rem nat- ura sua, vel quoad aliquam proprietatem suam, ipsi presertim intimam et nobis obviam, claves referre. Claves autem, velut organa certis usibus destinata, nul- lam obtinent naturam aut proprietatem aliam immediatam, quam ut aditum, sive transitum, qui est ab uno loco in alium, muniant, illum vel recludendo, vel occlu- dendo; illarum consequenter effectus proximi et primarii sunt vel introitum aut admissionem prebere; vel egressum prohibere, seu introrsum detinere ; vel aditum obstruere, et ab intrando arcere : horum igitur actuum omnes aut aliqui (vel iis analogum et agnatum quiddam) huic potestati, quo nomen hoc apte sibi adsciscat, congruere debent, respectu loci seu status, quem ipsa respicit: per eam adeo jus habetur vel in regoum ceelorum admittere, vel in eo detinere, vel ab eo ἅπαντας, καὶ λύειν ὥσπερ ἐκεῖνος. * Tract. 118, in Joh.; Tract. 124. ‘ Tract. 50. " Const. Mon. cap. 22. excludere, cum nihil aliud firme suppe- tat, propter quod hoc nominis indipisci potuerit. Enimvero cernimus, cum si- miles ad casus illustrandos adhibetur heec metaphora, horum effectuum nonnullos interpretandi causa adjectos : ita cum in Apocalypsi de sancto illo et verace (de Servatore nempe nostro) dicitur ipsum habere clavem Davidis, subjicitur, Ape- rit et nemo claudit: claudit et nemo aperit:¥ cumet Dominus Judzorum le- gisperitis improperat, eos clavem abstu- lisse scientig, dicti sui mentem elucidat, subdens:* Ipsinon intrastis, et eos qui intrabant prohibuistis ; itidem de scri- bis ait: Clauditis regnum celorum (\o- cum scilicet haud alium ab. eo de quo nune agimus) ante homines ; quid hoc? exponit: Vos enim, addit, non intratis, nec introeuntes siniiis intrare.* Unde colligi potest, hance potestatem in eo pre- cipue sitam esse, ut in locum, quem res- picit, adducat, vel ab eo secludat quomo- docunque ; de quo loco proxime dispici- endum est; etenim talis sit potestas hec oportet, qualem rei, que regnum celo- rum appellatur, natura capit aut exigit. Il. Regnum ceelorum, e Novi Feederis usu, duos precipue sensus accipit: impri- mis crebro designat religionis sub evange- lio statum, prout is a rerum conditione distinguitur, que sub antiqua lege vigebat. Sub legis Mosaice tempora Dei regnum quodammodo terrestre fuit: acta est Judea sanctificatio ejus, Israel potestas ejus ; factus est in Salem locus ejus, et habitatio ejus in Sion.* In Hierosolymis magni Regis civitate que dicitur) velut in arce regia, imperiique sui metropoli, residebat Deus; Ei quod illic extabat templum quasi palatii loco fuit, pro solio (presentiz specialis loco)” tectum fuit, arc sacre Cherubinis interjectum :* in- de subditos gubernare videbatur,. edictis extra ordinem subinde promulgatis, hoc est, oraculis, per temporum occasiones, in sacerdotum atque prophetarum ipsum consultantium ora infusis. Leges im- posuit, ex magna parte carnales (ἐντολὰς σαρκικὰς, ut est apud Apostolum ad. He- brzos) et terrenas :* visibilia potissimum tributa (cultum crassum et corporeum) τ Apoc. iii. 7; Is. xxii. 22, ~ Luc. xi. 52. x Matt. xxiii. 13. Υ Psal. cxiv. 2; exlvii. 19; Ixxvi. 2. * Psal. xci. 1, &c. * Heb. vii. 16. DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. exegit atque retulit a subditis ; privilegia, beneficiaque terrena concessit et elargitus est illis; ad legum suarum observantiam. terrestrium premiorum pollicitatione ex- citavit et allexit; ut et ab inobedientia preesentia damna pcenasque temporales interminando deterruit; verbo, nihil fere non sub illa dispensatione (saltem im- mediate, quoad primam speciem) ter- restre videbatur ac temporale, presen- tem hanc in terris vitam respiciens. Ve- rum sub evangelica constitutione prout regnum Dei capacius et illimitate proten- sum evasit, ita nullum Deus adsumpsit sibi peculiarem in terris residendi locum, nec aliter jam preesidet, aut colitur, quam ut in celo (nativa quasi majestatis suz glo- rizque sede) residens, et lucem habitans inaccessam ;* per legem mortalibus im- peritat perpetuam et immutabilem, inde delatam ; hostias jam et adorationes expos- cit Maxima ex parte spirituales, eo dirig- endas; privilegiis et beneficiis spirituali- bus’subditos-ornat obstringitque ; eos pre- miis ad obsequium invitat in ccelo con- ferendis, ab impietate pcenis subducit post hance vitam inferendis;* breviter, nihil fere jam inculcatur non ceeleste vel eter- num : hic itague rerum status apte reg- num celorum, regnum Dei, regnum Chris- ti (regnum veniens et appropinquans, 4 ἐρχομένη, ἡ ἐγγίζουσα βασιλεια, tunc utique cum in terris ipse Christus Rex noster humil- iter versaretur ;" at vero jam regnum preesens, postquam Christus ad ccelestem thronum evectus, ibique juxta Patris om- nipotentis dextram residens, inde super omnia longe lateque dominatur;)* in quod regnum transferri, ad cclestem Hierusalem accessisse, concives et cohe- redes evasisse sanctorum in luce degen- tium, in ccelo πολετεύεσθαι, coelestis vo- cationis participes fieri, cum Christo ce- lestibus in locis considere dicuntur, qui- cunque sincera mentis persuasione Christi doctrinam amplexantur, animique firmo proposito se Christi Jegibus subjiciunt τ΄ eo scilicet ipso ceelestis hujus regni civi- bus ac subditis ascripti, munia suscipien- Ὁ Joh. iv. 24; Rom. xiv. 17. 4 | Pet. 11.5; Eph. 1.3; Joh. xviii. 36. 4 Matt. iii. 2; iv. 17; vi. 10; x. 7. ‘ ¢ Luc, ix.27; xix. 11; xxi. 31, 32; Matt. xii. 28. Γ Colos. ii. 9; 1Cor. xv. 27; Colos, i. 12, 13; Heb. xii. 22; iii. 1; Eph. ii. 6; Phil. i. 20; Heb. xii. 28; Matt. v. 20. _ tes ei statui debita, nec non privilegiis in eum collatis dotati: hujusmodi vero sta- tus vel relatio in sacris literis ita passim et obvie celorum regnum vocatur, nihil ut sit opus instantias allegare, vel ei con- firmande tempus impendere: subnotan- dum est tantummodo, Christi regnum hoc (sicuti quoad alia regna fit) ibi vigere, ubi vere nomen ejus colitur, et auctoritas agnoscitur; ubi veritati, quam docuit, fides adhibetur, et legibus quas tulit ob- sequiunr prestatur ;* ubi vicarilsejus rite constitutis honos et observantia deferun- tur; ubi denique charitas et concordia, disciplina, et ordo conservantur (medioc- riter saltem, si non exquisite ;) unde ce- - tus hominum, ita Christo fidentium et obsequentium, in tali statu constitutus et - compactus, etiam subinde calorum reg- - Bum dicitur : ut, verbi gratia, ubi coelorum regnum agro assimilatur, cui bonus Sator triticum insevit, malus autem intersper- sit zizania; ubi fermento confertur in massam ingentem saporis sui quiddam diffundenti; ubi sagenam referre dicitur, 4085 mari injecta piscium (bonorum simul ac malorum) promiscuam copiam appre- hendit et complectitur ;" hee autem ac- ceptio (juxta quam regnum celorum ec- clesiam designat) eodem recidit quo pri- or, nec in re proposita quicquam immu- tat; perinde fuerit an statum abstracte, vel concrete homines in hoc statu consti- tutos intelligamus: ita enim in usu ser- -monis vulgari fit, ut regnum quodpiam Μοὶ pro ipso statu, vel pro personis ei sub- _ Jectis accipiatur. Sed et preterea sepe phrasis eadem statum alterum designat, qui priorem illum extreme perticit;' illam αἰώνιον βασιλείαν, wternum illud Christi Serva- toris nostri regnum (de quo S. Petrus), _ hoc est, supremum illum beatitudinis ac gloria statum ; qui preparatur iis, et in aon denuo recipientur omnes fideles hristiani, qui per hanc transitoriam yi- tam in jugi versus Regem calestem ob- Sequio perseverarunt;' quem non qui- cunque dixerit Dominus, Dominus (qui tantum ore, vel externa specie tenus se | | & Lue. xviii. 16; ix. 62. | -® Matt. xiii. 24, 33, 47. ‘| 42 Pet. i. 11; Matt. viii, 11,46, 28; xviii. —»- 23, 25,.34; xxvi. 29; Luc. xxii. 29; Aet. xiv. 22; 10Cor. vi. 9, 15, 50; 2 Tim.iv: 18; 1 Thess. ii. 12; 2 Thess. iii. 14. ) Matt. vii. 21, DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. Christi subditum profitetur), at qui Det in celis existentis voluntatem peragit, ingredietur. Jam vero cum hi duo sta- tus (unus gratie seu favoris apparentis hic in terris, ἧ χάρις αὕτη ἕν 7 ἐστήκαμεν, αἱ S. Paulus loquitur ;* alter gloria gau- diique perennis in ccelis) natura sua, et ex intentione primaria cohereant indi- vulse ; quippe cum huic iste tanquam gradus subordinetur, vel in banc ut via pretendatur) ;* quum hic illius completio quedam et consummatio sit; is ordine precedat, hic fine proponatur; idcirco quod unum. ipsorum immediate spectat, id ad alterum ex consequentia refertur ; videlicet in casu, qui pre manibus, po- testas aperiendi vel claudendi statum gra- tie (in hunc admittendi, vel ab hoc se- cludendi) merito potestas quoque censeri possit ad gloria statum, pari (respective) modo relata ; quoniam vero persone, qul- bus induitur vel inhzeret hec potestas, hic versantur, et hic eam exercent ; cum et ejus immediati effectus hic appareant (ete- nim Petrus in terris ligat, atque solvit) ideo par esse videtur, ut directius et im- mediatius ad presentem hunc gratie sta- tum referatur hee phrasis ; regnumque celorum intelligatur hoc, in quod Christi nomen professi recipiuntur; status hie, inquam, intelligatur; aut si malitis, ccetus ipse, cui potestas heec committitur ; quan- quam remotius et ex consequente glorio- sum insuper Dei regnum, eoque gaudens societas in ceelo triumphalis connotetur. Succedit itaque jam ut despiciatur quo- modo status hi (preesertim ille gratia, qui immediatius respieitur), hujusmodi clavi- bus subjecere possint ; qua ratione penes hominem quempiam concipiatur grate statum aperire vel claudere; ejus res- pectu ingressum vel egressum preebere quomodocunque, vel auferre. — Cum variis hoc modis effici possit, illorum plerique saltem ad hac pauca capita re- digantur. 1. Per efficacis adjumenti, quo quis admoveatur huic statu, vel in eo. permaneat, subministrationem : aut Θ contra, per interpositionem obicis aut im- pedimenti, quo quis ab eo amoveatur. 2. Per intercessionem, qua culplam In- trandi permanendive voluntas et facultas * Idem erat specie status peregrinantium in eremo, et residentium in terra promissionis ; at gradu differebant. ¥ Rom. v. 2; Act. xx. 24. 380 DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. impetrantur. 3. Per discretionis facul- tatem, qua dotatus quis cum dignos ab indignis, aptos ab ineptis internoscere queat, tum juxta qualitates ipsorum ex- ploratas respective (pro suo arbitratu) jus habeat vel iilos recipiendi, vel hos rejiciendi. 4. Per formalem actum ju- dicii, cujus virtute post causam cognitam decisamque quidam participes fiant juri- um et privilegiorum ad hunc statum per- tinentium, alii reddantur illorum inca- paces, et exortes. 1. Primo, inquam, hujusmodi status re- eludi potest, verum quodpfam adminicu- lum suppeditando; qua ratione, qui do- cendo viam commonstrant, qui consiliis, argumentis, hortatibus, admonitionibus et reprehensionibus tempestivis adducunt ; qui media vel occasiones suppeditant ; qui leges prescribunt eo conducentes, vel adjuvantes, utcunque recludere dicantur. Ita Deus Gentilibus ostium fidei dicitur aperuisse precones idoneos ad illos sum- mittendo.' Sic et sibi magnum et ev- idens (vel efficax) ostium Ephesi apertum, et alterum apud Troadem dicit 8. Pau- lus ;" idemque Colossenses hortatur De- um exorare, ut sibi λόγου θύραν aperiat, Christi mysterium preedicandi ; ubi janu- am aperire nil denotat aliud quam oppor- tunitates et adjumenta rei peragende ne- cessaria dispensare. Ita vero status, istius de quo loquimur, ad naturam attendendo, quandoquidem e debito versus Dei glori- am ac hominum salutem respectu ob- stringuntur omnes (suo quisque modo ac ordine) conniti, ut homines quotquot ubi- que sunt, in ccelorum regnum adducantur, aut in eo persistant ; hoc autem ecclesiz presidum (pro officio quod obeunt pro facultate qua pollent) potissimum intersit ; ideo rei naturam spectando, jure censea- tur hic modus proposite potestatis unam partem constituere, vel eam ingredi (nec enim subesse ratio videtur, cur ab hu- jusce phrasis significatu quicquam rejict- amus, quod illo satis apte vereque com- prehendit:) quo admisso, possint exhine multe claves, aliquatenus distincte, nu- merari: nempe, clavis doctrine, clavis exhortationis, clavis admonitionis, clavis correptionis (παράκλησις), denique clavis γομοθεσίας, et his, si que sunt, affines aliz. 1 Acts xiv. 27. ™ ἐνεργῆ θύραν, 1 Cor, xvi. 9; 2 Cor. ii. 12. Quin et ab altera parte, qui viz noti- tiam auferunt aut impediunt, qui dehor- tantur ab ingressu, vel deterrent; qui media vel occasiones subdueunt; qui _ difficultates, pericula, damna, vel obsta- cula quepiam objiciunt; qui leges con- dunt prepedientes viam, aut arcentes ab ingressu, ejusmodi statum claudere di- cantur, vel ab eo excludere:” ita scribe regnum ccelorum claudebant, hoc est, im- pediebant, ne Christi doctrinam amplee- terentur homines, aut ejus se legi subji- cerent; eos ab attentione fideque dictis ejus et factis preestanda, per calumniosas suggestiones, avertendo; ut et ab agni- tiune perspecte veritatis per minas, con- tumelias, et poenas acerbas abigendo. Talis autem clavis, ut cuiquam eonceda- tur, rei natura vix fert ; conscientia siqui- dem et charitas vetant eo modo gratie statum obstruere ; Scribisque vitio verti- tur, quod homines ita ceeleste regnum in- gredi non siverint. Est tamen nonnihil, ab hujusmodi legitima potestate non ab- horrens, quod et hue referri possit: cum scilicet iis, qui veritatem malitiose res- puunt (ἀπωθοῦσι τὸν λόγον, et se vita @- terna indignos judicant, ἀγτετάττονται καὶ βλασφημοῦσι, ut habetur in Aetis),° qui salubria monita preefracte repellunt et as- pernant, qui noxiis erroribus aut vitiis per- tinaciter adherent, qui turpi vita religion- em dehonestant, qui pacem et ordinem conturbant,” ad tempus, et sub conditione (quousque scilicet impietati vel contuma- ciz suze involuti persistunt), illa submo- ventur adminicula, quibus ordinarie patefit aditus in hunc statum; iis doctrina sub- trahitur; ab eos monendo desistitur; iis cceetuum actuumque sacrorum participa- tione interdicitur; ab eorum consortio abstinetur, quo nempe cum aliis prosit exemplum, terror incutiatur; subducatur contagio, depeliatur infamia; tum ΜΝ ejusmodi peena corrigendis inserviat ; forte de suo statu admoniti, pudore suf fusi, metu perclusi, dolore compuncti re- sipiscant. Hine aliud clavium genus ; [rejection- is, declinationis, excommunicationis cla- ves ; que] tamen ad alia capita commo- dius referantur. » Lue, xi. 52. * Act. xiii. 46, 51; xviii. 6; Matt. x. 13. P Tit. iii. 10. °1Tim i. 20; 1 Joh. v. 16; 2 Joh. iv. 10; Matt. xviii. 17; vii. 6; 2 Thess. iii. 6, 14; Rom. xvi. 17; 1 Cor. v. 7, 1, 13. - DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. 2. Alius aperiendi modus est interces- sio, quascilicet ab eo, qui solus eos pre- stare potest, tales effectus impetrantur ; to celum plusquam triennio clau- sum reseravit Elias; qualis etiam celum occludendi potestas testibus Apocalypticis Hic vero modus pro- positi status naturee admodum quadrat ; tenus oratione ad Deum fusa (que plurimum valet) cum voluntas prompta, tum apia dispositio comparantur lis nec- essariz, qui statum hune capessunt :" hoc modo Christianis omnibus aliquatenus competit cceleste regnum aperire ; pas- toribus autem id apprime convenit, ex Officio peculiari; quorum utpote functio preces concipere, et ore fungi ccetus uni- versi: nam ὃ. Paulus ideo mandat pro eunctis hominibus supplicationes fieri, quoniam Deus omnes vult salvari, et ad veritatis agnitionem pervenire τ hoc est, cupit omnes hunc ceelestis regni statum ingredi; illum proinde vult communium Etiam 8. Johan- nes, cum hoc modo precipit: δὲ quis vri- deat fratrem suum peccatum admitientem, quod non ad mortem, αἰιήσει καὶ δώσει αὐτῷ ζωὴν, precetur et illi vitam donet ;' eximiam scilicet insinuat ad hoc ipsum quoque Nostri promissum habetur, huic ipsi non obscure agnatum et annexum, quo post exhibitam ligandi solvendique potestatem, continuo spondetur, Si duo ex vobis con- senserint super terram de omni re quam- cungue petierint, fiet illis a Patre meo, qui in celis est τ" hinc emergit altera ‘clavis, hanc potestatem ex parte consti- tuens, nempe clavis orationis vel inter- quo pac concessa traditur.4 precum clave reserari. orationis efficaciam. Domini ‘cessionis. - 2 ΜΝ ΝΜ, ΜἝΎΎΎΜππτττἕτεέΕΠΛ]ΠΙἍὌΕἀένσ μραπΔΠὼπ|πὺῸᾶ|ὖτὔὔὖ ιοοοὖτςᾧοτἰ οὐ τοοὧὖὔτ'ὕὺττὌθτοτοτττοὡοΘΠὀἘἬὅσΠσοοτ,ἝἊοτἦἧὀἧΉςττὖοὔὖὸῷὸὔὥὖὥὐῇὍτὖἷ΄ὸῦὖ,ὖ οϑτὖ͵ὖἍὐἍ. ϑ0ὍὌΔ2ΣΣΣεὲἊὀ, Ὁ. ὍτὌὍΔδ'΄'ὄ.΄τὐϑὐϑϑϑδἱ0Ὃὃὺἅπνἅ Ὁ ' ϑὔδδδ} ιυ δϑδιννυνδνοονν, νδϑὅὦνὕτττἱὉὉὉ..........Ψ * Ἑϊσί τινες τεταγμένοι πρὸς τὸ φιλοπευστεῖν τοὺς βίους, καὶ τὰς ἀγωγὰς τῶν προσιόντων, &c.—Orig. in Cels. III. p. 142. 4 Luc, iv. 25; Jam. v. 17; Apoc. xi. 6. * Jam. v. 16. * 1 Tim. ii. 1, 4. | ' 1 Joh. v. 16. “ Matt. xviii. 19. 3. Alter, tertio, succurrit hujusmodi Statum aperiendi modus per facultatem discretionis, qua quis instructus persona- Tum aptitudinem perspiciat, et ex illius perspectee ratione quosdam admittere (quos aptos nempe dignosque consuerit) alios autem repellere vel eliminare sibi concreditam habeat potestatem :* veluti δὶ quis servo, vel amico cuipiam suo do- Mum committat, cum mandato vel licen- 381 tia quosdam (sibi puta amicos, vel agna- tos, vel aloquin bene comparatos) exci- piendi hospitio ; et neutiquam tales alios excludendi; cui non absimilem potesta- tem obtinet cconomus, quem (ut in evan- gelio habetur) constituit Dominus supra familiam suam, ut det illis in tempore de- mensuM suum ;" qualem et eleemosyna- rius usurpat in dispensanda Domini sui liberalitate : qualem denuo legatus habet a rege suo perduellibus ad fidem redu- cendis deputatus, cui integrum sit cuicun- que, pro personz qualitate delictive mo- do, veniam condovare vel subtrahere: hujusmodi discretione (modo quodam mi- rifico, mensuraque plusquam ordinaria) dotatos fuisseconstat ecclesie primeve pastores: nam inter Spiritus charismata recensetur mvetya διακρίσεως, et τῆς προ- φητείας actibus adnumeratur, cordis arca- na patefacere; cujus doni specimen edi- dit Petrus Ananiz nequitiam detegens; sed et δοκιμάζειν πνεύματα pastoribus ali- is ordinarie (50 modo ac modulo) com- petit ;* nedum quatenus (ut alii) humana prudentia utuntur, ast insuper ex inflexu et assistentia speciali Dei; nam et hoc proculdubio charismatis illius divini par- tem constituit, quod presbyterii χειροθεσίᾳ collatum innuit S. Paulus ad ‘Timotheum scribens ; cujus et ipse Petrus aliud spec- imen exhibuit, cum de Simone Mago pro- ferret illud: Cor tuum non est rectum coram Deo: In felle enim amaritudinis, et obligatione iniquitalis video te esse ; cujusmodi sententias, rebus inspectis, et assistente Deo, proferre valent ordinarii pastores.* Porro satis liquet hoe modo ccelestis regni statum reserari vel obser- ari posse; cum quicunque charitatis et prudentiz judicio digni, recteque dispositi sunt (qui sunt εὔθετοι εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ,» qui nempe Christi doctrinam intellectu capiunt, assensuque compro- bant, qui de vita priore male acta resip- iscunt, et ad Christi mandatis dehine ob- temperandum se composuerunt), ecclesia protinus inseri debeant ; ut et illos exhinc secludi par sit, quos secus animatos esse constat : cum et nonnulli sacrorum mys- teriorum e rei dignitate, Cumque suo fructu participes esse queant, adeoque a Lue. xii. 42. ~ | Cor, xii. 10; iv. I. * 1 Tim. iv. 14; Act. viii. 21, 23. γ Lue. ix. 62. xiv. 25; Act. v.; 1 Joh. debeant; alii vero non sine ecclesie de- decore, suoque detrimento res ejusmodi sacras attingant ;* cum quibusdam recte moratis consolationem impertiri, aliis prave affectis iram denunciari expediat ; cum alii sint oves vere, quibus caula pa- tere debeat, et pascui copia fieri; alii ve- ro sint canes mordaculi (quibus contem- erandum dari vetuit Christus, quod sanc- tum est) aut immundi porci, quibus pro- jict non debent conculcande margarite ; vel lupi rapaces (non parcentes gregi), quos ideo fas et equum est procul ar- cere.“ Cum et hos secernere pastoribus ecclesiz concessum sit, ac ut ea facul- tate utantur nedum in honorem illis, sed in ecclesie commodum cedat; quidni concredatur illis talis authoritas? quidni (rem ipsam spectando) ad illam de qua agimus potestatem pertinere censeatur clavis discretionis, in sacramentorum dis- pensatione ab illis adhibenda, qui sunt οἰκονόμοι μυστηρίων Θεοῦ." Sane spec- iatim baptismus, quem competentibus et idoneis, juxta suum arbiratum, dispensan- di jus obtinent ecclesiz pastores, a Na- zianzeno diserte vocatur sels τῆς βασιλ- élas τῶν οὐρανῶν, et οἴχημα πρὸς Θεόν": ab Augustino ecclesia janua, porta gratiez, primus introitus sanctorum ad eternam Dei et ecclesie consuetudinem.* “In Christi haptismo reseratur aditus ccelestis regni, quo solvuntur alligata retro delic- ta,’ ait Teriullianus.©. Eademque plane ratio est reliquorum actuum, quos pasto- rum prudentiz commisit et commendavit Dominus. 4. Demum quarto hujusmodi status aperiri claudique concipiatur per actus judiciales, et quasi pretorios, juxta sen- tentiam, secundum prestitutas leges aut regulas, deliberatione preemissa causaque mature discussa prolatam; eo fere mo- do, quo cernimus indies nonnullos civi- um (his vel illis privilegiis ac immunita- tibus gaudentium) in statum ascribi re- cipique ; sed et alios ab eo distineri vel expungi, per suffragia decretaque forma- liter ab iis enunciata, quorum auctoritati, juxta reipublicz constitutionem, assigna- * Aug. de Pecc. Mer. et Remis. Per lava- crum unde regeneratricis janua panditur ce- lestis regni.—Bed. 1 Cor. xi. 29. Ἀ Joh. x.; vil. 6; Act. xx. 29, Λύκοι βαρεῖς > 1 Cor. iv. 1. ὁ Naz. Or. 40. DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. tum est id muneris aut officii: cuj di potestate quum donatus esset atque fungeretur ille (apud Esaiam proph Servatoris nostri typus Eliacim, de ¢€ propterea dicitur, Dabo clavem d David super humerum hujus ; et ap | et non erit qui claudat; et claudet, et non erit quit aperiet :* hunc vero : dum in nostro casu adhiberi natura re nedum pati, sed prorsus exigere vide Cum enim (ut prenotatum est) huic stat ui vel inseri vel inhzrere debeant {ΠῚ tantummodo, qui cum a mentis fide, tum a morum habitu digni sunt (quorum ree- ta fides et honesta conversatic Deo simul ac ecclesie honorem concilient, et illo- rum quibuscum versantur edificationi de- serviant) nec non ab eo vel omnino vel ex parte (pro hominum causarumque merito) secludi par sit illos, qui seu noxi- is erroribus afflati, seu pravis moribus imbuti divinam gloriam obfuscare, eccle- sie dedecus impingere, socios corrum- pere, pacem interturbare, scandala qua vis progignere, compariti sunt; cum etl am super hujusmodi dispositionibus et factis eas indicantibus necesse sit (6 con- ditione rerum humanarum) interdum sub- oriri controversias; cum et harum ali- que graviores sint, quam ut zquum sit, aut intersit reipublice, illas perfunctorie vel arbitrarize decisioni subjici (ne scili- cet hominum conscientie fameque nimis absolute dominari videantur pastores, in- deque causas etiam arripiant insolescen- di) expedire videtur omnino, ejusmodi dubiis eventilandis atque dirimendis leges quasdam particulares formulasque statas institui, quarum ex preescripto pastores ecclesie tales causas cognoscere debeant ac definire; cujus processus effectus sunt; hinc, reos condemnare, pcenisque subjicere ; inde, illos absolvere, et in i- tegro collecare. ~ Unde elavis habetur jurisdictionis; et in hac comprehense claves magis speciales cxcommunicatio- nis, suspensionis, restitutionis,. absolutio- nis ; hisque suppares ac affines. Talis et totuplex existimetur hee po- testas objecti naturam attendendo. III. Verum ut lucis amplius nonnihil affundatur huic negotio, phrases istas eX- cutiamus paulo, quibus in paralellis evan- geliorum locis exprimi vel explicari vide- tur heee potestas ; imprimis quid sibi vo- ἀ Tert. de Pud. 21. ¢ Es. xxii, 22. ΝΣ _ lunt antitheta ista ligare et solvere ;* tum quid designant 7emissio peccatorum et - Quod ligationem attinet et solutionem, satis apparet hoc ipso in loco potestatem a Petro Petrique similibus usurpandam consequentes effectus hisce verbis signi- fieari, Et quodcungue ligaveris super ter- ram, erit ligalum et in celis; quodcun- que solveris super terram, erit solulum etiam in celis. Jam vero ligatio quamlibet determina- tionem, aut detentionem, apposite deno- tare potest rebus aut personis imposilam; solutio quicquid illis contrarium est, puta rem in inedio liberam relinquere, person- am nexu quopiam, eximere. Qui justa tate dotatus utensque quicquam man- dat aut vetat, illud rei ligat (moralem ejus qualitatem determinando, faciendo ut bo- na sit vel mala, justa vel injusta) personas etiam ligat, eas ad observandum aut ab- stinendum obstringendo. Idem ille legem abrogans aut relaxans (dispensando vel excipiendo) solvit; rem quidem, facien- do, ut illa jam adiaphora sit; personam, ut is jam liber evaserit : hujusmodi liga- tionem, et illi oppositam solutionem at- lingit apostolus ubi de muliere nupta pro- nunciat, Γυνὴ dederae νόμῳ mulier aliga- _ DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. es mh Ch) Ce | quod preestare (sicuti Cameron, Seldenus et Gtotius observant) a scriptoribus He- breis nominari solet ligare et solvere: quod et Tertullianus confirmare videtur; 'dicens, “* Quam vero clavem habebant | legis doctores, nisi interpretationem le- gis 2% Hee autem potestas ecclesiz _pastoribus eximie compeltit, et ad doc- tring clavem liquido pertinet; precipua quippe docendi pars in divinarum legum expositione (ἐν τῷ διανοίγειν τὸν νοῦν τοῦ συνιέναι ᾿ τὰς γραφὰς) consistit: etiam apud omnes _gentes diviniam mentem interpretari pe- culiare sacerdotum censebatur officium :* _horum quisque talis semper habitus est, qualis apud Horatium, Orpheus——-sacer interpresque deorum. Preeterea jurisdictionis cujuspiam, aut arbitrii jurisdictionem #mulantis exerciti- um, quatenus causas determinat, eoque personas (ad resarciendum damnum, ad ‘offense parti satisfaciendum, ad peenam subeundam) astringit, vel ab iis eximit, ,est ligatio quedam aut solutio; quales actus aperte spectat huic agnatus ille lo- cus (Matt. xviii. 18), ubi Dominus vali- dum fore pronunciat arbitrium inter duos disceptantes ab amico peractum uno vel -altero ; vel (si minus dirimende liti suf- ta est legi, quanto tempore vir ejus vivit ; fecerit illud) ecclesiz finale judicium, de quod si dormierit, vir ejus, liberata est : | quibus sic asseverat : Amen, dico vobis, cui vult nubat :* hinc de Judaice legis | @uecunque vos (hoc est, 6 discipulis meis doctoribus illis affirmatur, “εσμείουσι φορτία βαρία καὶ δυσβάστακτα, καὶ ἐπιτιθέασιν ἐπὶ τοὺς Guous τῶν ἀνθρώπων (quanquam hoc etiam ad legum interpretationem referri po- test:)‘ hoc modo leges omnes sunt vin- cula (omnes θεσμοὶ sunt totidem δεσμοὶ), et obligare dicuntur eos, qui legitime subsunt ; illarumque vim infringere (vel in solidum alprogando, vel ex parte dis- —) consequenter est solvere, vel tas nihil est aliud, quam illa, quam ra perstrinximus, clavis γομοθειικὴ, leges (hoc est regulas actuum nostrorum _ directrices) figendi refigendique potestas. uic suppar est potestas leges a Deo vel ab ecclesia institutas (cum authoritate, vel exofficio) interpretandi, hoc est, defi- quid prohibetur, aut liberum relinquitur : % ΟΦ Solvunt autem eos apostoli sermone Dei, et testimoniis scripturarum, et exhortatione vir- tutam.— Hier. in Is. 14. * 1 Cor. vii. 39. ‘ Matt. xxiii. 4. are; talis itaque ligandi solvendique | pew and. vel ipsorum quicungue cctus le- gitimus, hoc modo litem quamcunque /per arbitrium aut judicium definiendo) alligaveritis super terram, erunt ligata et in celo; hoc est, omnes vestre decis- iones et sententie (rite secundum equi bonique leges peracte prolateque) apud Deum invalescent, rateque fient, sicut iis repugnantes Deum sensuri sint ipsa- rum assertorem et vindicem ; juxta quod S. Chrysostomus ait, ἅπερ ἂν ἐργάσωνται κάτω οἱ ἱερεῖς, ταῦτα ὃ Θεός ἄνω κυροῖ, καὶ τὴν τῶν δούλων γνώμην 6 δεσπότης βεβαιοῖ cujus acceptionis ad normam intellecta potestas hee jurisdic- tionis illam (quam mox antehac attigimus) clavem comprehendit. Porro, qui contractum ineunt, vinculo quodam obligantur, ab iis injecto, quibus- niendi declarandique quidnam precipitur, |C¥M pactum contrahitur; quomodo pas- tores etiam illos ligant, qui Christianis- t Religionum interpretes, Οἷς. de Leg. Cas. 1, 6, ἄτα. ε Tert. adv. Marc. IV. cap. 27. * Chrys. de Sacerd. 3. (p. 16.) 384 DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. mum primo suscipientes, aut eum denuo | vel hic) actus a Deo comprobabitur, ef. redintegrantes, foedus ineunt cum Deo, fidem suam et obsequium Christo devo- ventes. Item detentio quecunque sub alterius potentia vel imperio vocatur digatio ; qua qui emancipatur proinde solutus dicitur : Annon (inquit Dominus), hane jiliam Abrahe, quam alligavit Sathanas ecce decem et octo annis non oportuit solvi a vinculo isto die Sabbathi δ) ubi quod dicitur a Sathana ligari, alibi exprimitur καταδυναστεύεσθαι ὑπὸ τοῦ Διαβόλου" Ut et in statu quovis preesenti detineri, vel ab eo libera- ri, ligari illud, hoc solvi est: “Ζέδεσαι γυναικί ; (inquit apostolus) μὴ ζήτει λύσιν, de statu perpete conjugii, “Ooor ὑπὸ φυγὸν δοῦλοι, de statu servitutis. Θεὸς τοὺς πάντας εἰς ἀπείθειαν, de statu hominum ante patefactum evangelium ;' ita si cul sub reatus ireve statu Jacenti, vindicteeque idcirco vel paene obnoxio, non concedi- tur aut abnuitur venia; vel si venice pro- curandz necessaria aut idonea media subtrahuntur, is ea ratione /igatus cen- seatur; ut et so/utus, qui ab ejusmodi statu per exhibitionem veniz, per medi- orum eam procurantium applicationem, per obstantium causarum amotionem ex- tricatur: cul sensui quadantenus altera phrasis, illi quee pree manibus ἰσοδύναμος, coincidit, que habeturapud 8. Johannem, ubi Servator discipulis sic affatur: Ac- cipite Spiritum Sanctum ; quorum remis- eritis peccata, remittuntur eis, et quorum retinuer itis, retenta sunt ;* hoc est, quem- cunque merito dignum reputabitis, qui absolvatur a reatu, et in gratiam recipia- tur, adeoque cui veniam annunciabitis et exhibebitis, illi revera Deus conciliabitur et ignoscet; quemcunque vero (propter animi pravas affectiones nondum exutas) minime dignum aptumve judicabitibis, cui divinus favor indulgeatur, reatus abolea- tur, celestis regni privilegia concedan- tur; et cui proinde, justis ex causis, Dei nomine veniam impertire recusabitis, ille talis in eo statu misero revera detinebitur et persistet, exors remissionis, et a divina gratia semotus :* vester eo spectans (ille Συυνέκλεισε ὃ * Tunc vera est sententia presidentis, quan- do eterni sequitur sententiam judicis.—Ambr. i Lue. xiii. 16. J Act. x. 38; 1Cor. vii. 21,27; 1-Tim. vi. 1; Rom. xi. 32; Gal, ui. 22. k Joh. xx. 23. fectumque proinde certissimum obtinebit. Verum ut hee paulo curatius expo. nantur, advertamus variis modis intelligi posse, quod ecclesiz pastores peccata dimittunt ; idque prenotandum est, quod cum principaliter et absolute peccata re- mittere Deo soli* (Regi Judicique su- premo), competat (nec enim abs ratione scitabantur isti Scribe, Quis preter unum Deum peccata valet remittere?) id ta men ut homines (Dei nomine et volun- tate, tanquam ejus ὑπηρέται, διάκονοι, ol- κονόμοι, συνεργοὶ, πρεσβευταὶ, quibus illos nominibus et officiis insigniunt sacre lit- ere), instrumentaliter, et snbordinate fa- ciunt, a Deo concessum et constitutum esse :' prout et iis homines convertere, regenerare, salvare, similiaque _ talia (qualia primario solus efficit Deus),+ ut cunque tribuuntur; ita quidem, αἰ quot et qualibus ipse Deus, tot fere talibusque modis pastores ordine suo peccata dimit- tunt; id autem hisce potissimum modis exequntur : Primo, Dispositives ; dum homines ad remissionem obtinendam parant, illas an- mi dispositiones (fidem scilicet et poeni- tentiam) ingenerando, que ad remissio- nem necessario previz sunt, et quas hee certo consectatur, ex vi feederis et pro- missi divini: dum eos ad hunc statum invitant, aliciunt, adducunt, in quo re- missio peccatorum offertur, et exhibetur : dum τοὺς ἔξω suorum criminum et erro- rum arguunt reosque peragunt; de statu suo perquam periculoso commonefaciunt, certosque reddunt; compunctionem ac terrorem iis incutiunt;{ resipiscentl- am acriter inculcant;" hine a Domi- no nostro tale describitur apostolo Pau- lo demandatum munus: Constituam te ministrum et testem—te deligens ex populo et gentihus, in quas nunc milto te; aperire oculos eorum, ut convertan- tur a tenebris ad lucem, et de potestate * Semper Dei est illa gratia, et Dei sacra- mentum, hominis autem solum ministerium, &cr.—Aug. Ep. 166. t Ministerium dedit servis, potestatem sibi retinuit.—Aug. in Joh. Tract. 5. t Quo de modo Firmilianus “non quasi a nobis remissionem peccatorum consequantur, sed ut per nos ad intelligentiam delictorum su- orum convertantur.’—P. 198. τά ii. 7: 1 Cor. v. 4; iv. 1; Act. xxvi. Tit. i. 7; 2 Cor. vi. 4; ‘ Pet. iv. 10. τι 1 Cor. v. 12; Act. ii, 37; xvi. 29. 16; DE POTESTATE CLAVIUM. | Sathane ad Deum, ut accipiant peccato- rum remissionem, et sortem inter sanctos, | per fidem que est tn me—quod et ipse mox | preestitisse narratur—drayyé\Xwv μετανοεῖν, καὶ ἐπι- στρέφειν ἐπὶ Θεόν" quo munere S. Petrum defunc- ᾿ tum cernimus, ita concionando: Meravojeare,{cai | ἐπιστρέψατε εἰς τὸ ἐξαλειφθῆναι ὑμῶν ras ἁμαρτίας." Idem versus τοὺς ἔσω similiter prestant, | quum illos in errores vitiaque prolabentes aut prolapsos admonent officii, severe re- darguunt, corripiunt, increpant, quin et | aliquando coércent, et castigant ; necnon _enixe modis omnibus eos ad sanam men- tem reducere student; qualia peragen- tes dum peccatorum convertunt ab errore vie sue (sicuti B. Jacobus docet), sal- ‘vant animam a morte, et multitudinem | peccatorum operiunt.° _ Secundo, Idem exequuntur declara- ‘tive, dum per illum quem ebuccinant ᾿λόγον καταλλαγῆς,» peccatorum sensu | perculsis, et ad Deum animi serio firmo- que proposito revertentibus, indubie par- ‘atam apud Deum veniam, gratiamque -mox presentem attestantur et annunci- ant;* velut legati, seu precones, ad homines sub his conditionibus Deo recon- ciliandos deputati: ita munus apostoli- cum et pastorium depingit S. Paulus, ὑπὲρ Χοιστοῦ zge0betouevX—Pro Christo legatione fungimur, tanquam Deo exhor- ‘tante per nos ; obsecramusque pro Chris- ) to, reconciliamini Deo. I Tertio, Peccata remittunt impetrative, _precum energia divinam gratiam concili- antes peccatori. Ita monet 5. Jacobus infirmos, ut ecclesiz presbyteros advo- cent proipsis oraturos; κἀν ἁμαρτίας καὶ πεποιη- κῶς, ἀφεθήσεται αὐτῷ. Et si languens peccatt quip- piam commiserit, id (intercedente presby- terorum oratione), δὲ dimitietur : ita sa- cerdotes peccata dimittere Chrysostomus -arbitratur : Οὐ γὰρ ὅταν ἡμᾶς ἀναγεννῶσι μόνον, | aa καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα συγχωρεῖν ἔχουσιν ἐξουσίαν ἁμαρτήματα" ἀσθενεῖ γάρ ris*—inquit 1116, dictum §. Jacobi locum adponens. Quarto, Propius hoc et immediatius ‘exequuntur dispensative ; peccatorum * Lomb. Dist. 18.—Dominus tribuit sacer- ‘dotibus potestatem ligandi et solvendi, id est, ostendendi hominibus ligatos vel solutos. Β΄ Act. xxvi. 18, 2U. * 1 Thess. v.14; 2 Thess. iii. 15; Act. xx. ΠΤ Tit.i.13; 1 Tim. v. 1,22; 2 Cor. ii. 6; xii. 20; xiii. 10; 1 Cor. iv. 21; Jac. v. 20, ® 2 Cor.v. 19. 42 Cor. v. 20. * Jam. v. 15. * De Sacerd. 3, pag. 17. Vor. ΠῚ. 49 nempe remissionem exerte dispensando ; quin et eam revera concessam et exhibit- am symbolis solennibus obsignando: nempe, 1. Dum baptismum conferunt—* felix illud” (ut Tertullianus loquitur) ‘ sacra- mentum aque nostre, qua abluti delictis in vitam eternam liberamur ;” in quo commorientes et consepulti Christo justi- ficamur a peccato; de quo Petrus— βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῷ δνόματι ᾿Ιησοῦ Χρισ- τοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν, et Ananias S. Paulum alloquens—dvacris βάπτισαι καὶ ἀπόλουσαι τὰς ἀμ- αρτίας'---ηαοά cum sacerdotum judicio simul ac opera administretur, eapropter illi peccata remittere dicantur ; et huc Domini promissum aliquoties refert B. Cyprianus, et e Patribus alii. 2. Dum in gravia_ scandala prolapsis, et idcireo peccatorum reatu innodatis, post resipiscentiam probabilibus indiciis compertam, absolutos pronunciant, in statum gratiz redintegrant (verbum est Paulinum, vos spirituales, καταρτίζδτε τὸν τοιοῦτο») in ecclesize sinum et sacro- rum officiorum consortium restituunt, id beneficii solenni χειροθεσίας ritu confirm- antes; id quod S. Paulus χαρίζεσθαι, gratiam indulgere, vocat: ᾧ δέ τι yagl- ζεσθαι, καὶ ἐγώ: huc et illud spectare videtur ejusdem apostoli monitum, Ti- motheo dictum: Xetpas ταχέως μηδενὶ ἐπιτίθει, μηδὲ κοινώνει ἁμαρτίαις ἀλλοτρίαις ἃ Cave ne cui- quam, ante peenitentiam luculente com- probatam, absolutionem impertias, ne in causa sis, ut peccator remissionis pre- matura spe delinitus nihil amplius curet, adeoque cum remissionis exors fiat, tum in peccatis obduretur : huc etiam Christi promissum refertur a Patribus. Ambro- sius contra Novatianos disserens: ‘* Cur baptizatis, si per hominem peccata remitti non licet? In baptismo enim utique re- missio peccatorum omnium est; neque interest, utrum per pcenitentiam, an per lavacrum hoc jus sibi datum sacerdotes sibi vindicent ; idem in utroque mysterio est.”* Hisce modis ecclesia pastores peccata remittunt, sed et ἀντεστοίχως ea- dem retinent, cum media submovent, quibus homines ad peccatorum remissi- onem consequendam disponantur; dum t Tert. de Bapt. c. 1; Rom. vi.; Act. ii. 38; xxii. 16; iii. 19. “ Gal. vi. 1; 2 Cor. ii. 7,10; 1 Tim. γ᾿ 22, * De Peenit. c. 7. 386 CONCIO AD CLERUM. iram Dei denunciant ; dum (quod subinde fieri posse 8. Johannes innuit) a precibus pro illorum salute fundendis abstinent ; dum baptismum indignis denegant; dum ab ecclesia depellunt aut distinent ; ad- eoque tanquam ethnicos et publicanos ha- bent:” vel dum a Deo quasi divulsos Sathane tradunt exagitandos. Ex his omnibus, que de potestatis hu- jus nomine, de ejus objecto, de phrasibus e- quipollentibus ac exegeticis premissa sunt, tametsi satis verisimiliter ipsius natura deduci possit et determinari; quid tamen sit, et quousque se extendat, haud aliunde clarius eliciatur elucideturque, quam ex eo quod proxime decreveram attingere. IV. E praxi scilicet et exercitio potes- tatis istius, quee cum primitus apostolis ut ecclesiz magistris et rectoribus deman- data sit, existimare nefas est illos eam secus quam par erat usurpasse, vel ultra citrave justos limites extendisse: quic- quid igitur ab 115 (officii ratione, vel per modum auctoritatis ordinariz) factum cernimus, applicabile vel consentaneum horum verborum sensui.rationabiliter ex- posito, quidni merito potestatis hujus, ipsis a Domino tam expresse communi- cate, virtute factum arbitremur? Idem de ecclesiis ad illorum tempora proxime accedentibus jure supponamus licet ; quicquid ille nempe (regiminis et dis- cipline modo) passim factitarunt, id eas non temere, vel ab auctoritate sibimet arbitrarie desumpta vel arrogata, sed ex jure potius ab ipsius Christi institutione derivato (quod singulas ecclesias in ordine statuque recto stabilientes apostoli declararint, constituerint, et ad singulares casus accommodarint) usurpasse vel ex- ercuisse ; juxta ‘Tertulliani priscum illud effatum : ‘ Constat id esse ab apostolis traditum, quod apud ecclesias apostolo- rum fuerit sacrosanctum.”’* Verum has et cxteras, que supersunt instituti discursus partes (etiam potis- simas) vel ut nunc obmittam, vel ut im- maniter patienti vestree molestus sim oportet: illud prius faciam potius; et Tetulliani luculentis verbis (in Apolo- getico) clavium usum primitivum repre- sentantibus sermonem claudam: ‘ Cer- te fidem,” inquit, “ sanctis vocibus pascimus, spem erigimus, fiduciam figi- ~ 1Joh. v.16; 2 Joh. 10. χ Cont. Marc. iv. 5. mus, disciplinam preceptorum nihilomi- — nus inculcationibus densamus: ibidem etiam exhortationes, castigationes et censura divina: nam et judicatur mag- no cum pondere, ut apud certos de Dei conspectu; summumque futuri judicii prejudicium est, si quis ita deliquerit, ut a communicatione orationis, et con- ventus, et omnis sancti commercil re- legetur.”*¥ | Gratia Domini nostri Jesu Christi, et charitas Det, et communicatio Sancti Spiritus sit cum omnibus vobis. Amen. CONCIO AD CLERUM. JoELIS il. 12.—Convertimini ad me toto corde vestro, et in jejunio, et fletu, et planctu. Quo tempore vixerit hic propheta, et circa que singularia eventa versetur ejus prophetia, cum nec ‘ipse diserte indicet, nec uspiam in sacra historia tradatur, nee ex rerum quas enarrat circumstantiis, satis liquido appareat, merito ambigitur ab interpretibus, et in varias sententias fit discessio; nec e re nostra fuerit, in tam difficili lite componenda admodum solicitos esse. Illud constat, valde lugu- brem fuisse et calamitosum illorum tem- porum statum, qualem habemus in primo capite luculenta descriptione expressum. Liquet etiam Judzeis ex hostili invasione graviores zrumnas impendisse, quas pro- pediem consequuturas capite hoc com- minatur Deus, denunciat propheta, ejus horribiles circumstantias tragicosque @- ventus ad terrorem composita oratione accurate depingens. Ne autem tam im- manis periculi magnitudine simul ac pro- pinquitate perculsi et consternati, ex des- peratione, animos abjicerent, quo pacto Dei iram placare et instantem vindictam propulsare possent, docet illos propheta verbis modo lectis. In quibus pertrac- * Tstum locum episcopi et presbyteri non i= telligentes aliquid sibi de Phariseeorum 8551: munt supercilio, ut vel damnent innocentes, vel solvere se noxios arbitrentur; cum ΒΡ Deum non sententia sacerdotum, sed reorum vita queeratur.— Hier. ta loc. Υ Apol. cap. 39. —— ΝΜ CONCIO AD CLERUM. tandis non alia utar methodo, quam tex- tus seriem persequens, ut ipsa qualiter- cunque explicare satagam, deinde que continent utilia documenta ut expromam. Convertimini ad me, id est, ad Deum. Converti vero, vel reverti ad Deum, ἔπισ- τρέφειν ἑπὶ Θεὸν, juxta stylum sacrum et propheticum dicuntur, Primo, Qui postquam ad idololatriam desciverant, errore deprehenso ad veri Dei cultum redeunt: aut saltem qui ab ineunte ztate quum alienis superstitioni- bus addicti et innutriti essent, denuo me- lius edocti veram religionem ex animo agnoscunt et amplexantur: quod et nunc vulgo obtinet ut dicatur Converti. Ete- nim Deum recta fide confitentes et debi- to honore reverentes mentis obtutu Deum respiciunt, affectu accedunt, corde am- plectuntur, et proinde in sacris. literis, Deo adherere, Grecis vertentibus, κολ- λᾶσθαι τῷ Θεῷ, hoc est, Deo agglutinari, item Deo appropinquare, Deo appropria- ri, ad Dei peculium pertinere, a Deo adoptari, institui, regi dicuntur; et con- sequenter Deum deserere, fugere, abne- gare, repudiare, Deo adversari, in Deum rebellare et fornicari, a Deo ἀποστατεῖν deficere, tergiversari, abalienari, divelli, faciem avertere, quia vera religione ad superstitiosos ritus deflectunt; proinde optimo jure ad veram fidem et sanctum cultum receptus ad Deum conversio nun- cupatur. Quomodo, Jer. iii. 6, Dixit au- tem Jehova— Vidistine que fecit rebellis Israel? abit ipsa super onnem montem exclesum, et in omnem arborem viridem, et fornicatur ibi, et dixi postquam feci omnia ἰδία, Ad me revericre : et ita pas- | sim in Veteri Testamento; quinetiam in Novo, Act. xiv. 15, Εὐαγγελίζομαι ὑμᾶς ἀπὸ rod- τῶν τῶν ματαίων ἐπιστρέφειν ἐπὶ τὸν Θεὸν τὸν ζῶντα" ἀπὸ τῶν ματαίων᾽ ἀπὸ τῶν εἰδώλων. Nam idolum Hebreis appellatur an, id est, μάταιον, Sicuti cum aliis locis patet, tum ex illo Je- remir, Vill. 19, Διότι παρώργισάν με ἐν rots γλυπ- τοῖς αὐτῶν, καὶ ἐν ματαίοις ἀλλοτρίοις. Νεοιηῖο, Converti ad Deum dicuntur, qui ab impietate ad pietatem, ab iniquitate ad justitiam,a contumacia ad obedienti- am, a pravis et impuris moribus ad probum sanctumque vivendi institutum se recipi- unt. Nam et qui Dei mandatis obtemper- ant, et mores suosad divine legis normam omponunt, Deo attendunt, Deo auscul- tant, Dei nutum observant, ideoque cum Deo ambulare, in Dei semitis incedere, Deum sequi, Deum amicum et familiarem sortiri, cum Deo consuetudinem habere, Deo uniri, imo et Deo inesse perhibentur, et ejusmodi passim magnificis titulis atque elogiis ornantur ; contra, qui divinis pra- ceptis minus obsequentes sunt, desertores, transfuge, perduelles, hostes, a Deo ali- eni, separati, aversiappellantur: itaque vitam emendantes, et ad bonam frugem reducti, ad Deum vultum reflectere, re- gredi, converti dicuntur; nec aliud est hoc modo acceptum converti, quam “et«- voeiv, resipiscere, mores corrigere, vitam reformare. Quo spectant sacre scrip- ture loca, Deut. xxx. 2, Et conversus Jueris ad Jehovam Deum tuum, obedieris- gue voci ejus per omnia. Is. lv. 7. De- relinguet impius viam suam, el vir ini- quus cogitationes suas, revertaturque ad Jehovam. Hos. xii. 6, Tu ergo ad De- um tuum revertere, misericordiam et justitiam custodi, et fide Deo tuo semper. Ps. li. 13. Docebo prevaricatores vias ‘uas, el peccatores ad te convertentur. Tertio, Converti ad Deum dicuntur illi, qui se vite male institute pigere, peccata admissa agnoscere, et serio dolo- re prosequi, debita illis supplicia depre- cari, et misericordiam divyinam implorare, externis indiciis testatum faciunt: quod et simili metaphora facitem Dei querere, et nonnunquam resipiscere dicitur ; qua- tenus alterius conversionis, hoc est, animi peenitentis, mutati propositi, et vite ad obsequium redeuntis argumentum, initium aique instrumentum est. Ita de Nine- vitis, qui solenne jejunium observarant, cilicium induerant, et in pulvere sederant, dicitur, Jone ili. 10, Vidit autem Deus opera eorum, quod conversi erant a via sua mala. De Tyriis et Sidoniis pronun- ciat Christus, Matt. xi. 21. πάλαε ἂν ἐν σάκκῳ καὶ σποὺξ μετενοήσαν" de se Dan- iel testatur, cap. ix. 3, Posui faciem meam ad Dominum, ut quererem ora- tionem et deprecalionem jejunio, sacco et cinere. Nee dubium est, quin hoc loco propheta sicuti ad priores conversiones duas, sin- cere religionis studium, et vite emenda- tionem, potissimum collineet, ita ultimam hance magis directo obtutu respiciat ; adeo quidem ut in intentione primarim illm, hee in executione prima esse, ille suc- cedere, hee preludere, ille perfici, hac subministrare, debuerit. E sacra enim 388 historia et scriptis propheticis apparet, Judzos ‘tunc temporis magna ex parte a pura religione, quam lex Mosaica pre- scripserit, ad Gentilium conterminorum impias superstitiones defecisse ; istorum- que pravos mores, sacrificia szeva et san- guinaria, ritus stolidos, obsccenos et de- testabiles ex vesana quadam κακοζηλίᾳ zemulatos esse ; legem vero divinam neg- lectui penitus habitam, et quasi oblivion traditam jacuisse. Quinimo apud ipsos crassissimam inscitiam, pestilentissimam superbiam, delicatissimam mollitiem, pro- fusissimam luxuriam, insatiabilem ava- ritiam, eque his natas immanissimam crudelitatem, gravissimam oppressionem, execrabilem perfidiam, omne genus Vitil, sceleris et injurie viguisse, quibus merito divinam iram irritaverant, poenasque in se varias et severa judicia accessiverant quibusque avertendis, ut se ad vere re- ligionis studium reciperent, mores impro- bos corrigerent, et ita faciendi propositum extraordinariis quibusdam officiis osten- tarent, propheta cohortatur. Subdit autem, cwm toto corde vestro. Cor in sacra dialecto non est tantum principale viscus illud, vite omnis, motus et caloris nativi fons; sed et facultatum omnium et operationum animalium pa- riter ac vitalium principium, origo, sedes intellectus, phantasiz, memorie, affec- tuum; scaturigo, ex qua cogitationes, discursus, imaginationes, passiones et motus, qui in homine sunt omnes, fluunt ac emanant; thesaurus insuper virtutum, vitiorum sentina, et habituum quorumcun- que repositorium ; unde 25 Grecis trans- ductoribus varie redditur, nempe, καρδία, Est itaque cum toto corde, cum sincero assensu mentis, cum serio voluntatis proposito, cum affectuum vehemente impetu, cum valido virium conatu 23 ὉΠ ut alibi ha- betur, in mentis integritate, vel perfec- tione, non 29) 223 cum corde duplicato, vel potius dimidiato. Vult nimirum va- tes, ut conversio penitus cordata sit, hoc est, vera et sincera, non ficta, fucata, ‘hyp- ocritica: seria et solida, non ludicra, lace perfunctoria ; diligens et efficax, non imbecilla, remissa, ignava; integra deni- que et plena, non concisa, mutila et im- perfecta. Sequitur cum jejunio, fletu et planctu ; quorum explicationi non est quod diu im- ψυχὴ, φρὴν, νοῦς, διάνοια, ἐπιθυμία. CONCIO AD CLERUM. - moremur; per jejuniwm enim nihil aliud — intelligitur, quam ab alimentis et oblecta- mentis corporalibus ad certum tempus omnimoda abstinentia, ad religiosos fines ordinata et exercita: per fletum vero et planctum externa signa denotantur, qui- bus internum animus dolorem, status sui displicentiam et miseriz incumbentis sensum, vel nature instinctu, vel con- suetudinis recepte arbitrio, exprimere solet.:. Cor enim cum gravis meestitia occupat, lachrymas naturalis necessitas exprimit, et spiritus ictu doloris impulsus, quemadmodum totum corpus quatit, ita oculos, quibus adjacentem humorem per- premit et expellet. Planctus vero, κοπετὸς, quum pectus manibus contundunt, caput allidunt, crines vellicant, et consimiles sibi injurias inferunt, ex instituto dolorem indicare videtur; ex se enim hi gestus furoris potius quam meeroris indicia sunt, et mentem emotam magis, quam affectu commotam representant. ΕἾ quibus 516 explicatis, et ad contextum collatis atque expensis, hec tria elicimus documenta. Primo, Ad divinam iram leniendam, et poenas, que ex illa consequuntur, aver- tendas, necessario requiritur ac summo- pere conducit seria recipiscentia, seu vi- te reformatio et morum emendatio, Cujus effati veritas cum aliis plurimis tes- timoniis et exemplis e sacra pagina, tum validissimis e rei natura deductis argu- mentis, demonstrari potest. ‘Testimonia atque exempla pretereo, cum brevitatis studio, tum quia huic fundamento univer- sa fere prophetarum preconia innitantur, ad hoc evincendum tot valida elencho- rum tela vibrantur, ad hoc persuadendum illorum atroces mine, graves querele, pathetici hortatus diriguntur. Argumen- ta vero perstringemus. Et, 1. Patet hoe ex natura et ingenio homi- num, quibus peed infliguntur. Hi enim dum vitiosis habitibus imbuuntur, pravis affectibus distorquentur, et impuris mori- bus indulgent, non possunt non Deo dis- plicere, nequeunt suis nefariis flagitiis non divinam in se indignationem provo- care. Non sunt ccelestis misericordi® idonea objecta, non capaces ullius felici- tatis. Ita comparati sunt, ut non prosit illis, imo obsit magnopere et noceat di- vina indulgentia. Ex divinis beneficiis ut nullum commodum, ita gravissimum * Sen. Ep. 99. — detrimentum percepturi sunt; nec ab ip- sis deteriores tantum fient, sed et miserio- res, ut sibi et aliis molestias creent, inde ansam arrepturi. Ex impunitate cres- cit improbitas, et corroboratur prava dis- positio. Inde peenitentiz omnis cura abjici- itur, sensus peccati extinguitur, cor ob- duratur, conscientiz callus obducitur, animus ad divine legis monita mi- nasque obsurdescit. Inde stolidi ma- is, prefracti, obstinati, intractabiles unt, giganteam quandam animi feroci- am concipiunt, horribili superbia inflan- tur, profundo stupore demersi obbrutes- cunt: sui immemores evadunt et Dei, quem quia scelerum vindicem non senti- unt, vereri desinunt, aspernantur et neg- ligunt, tandemque existere non credunt, aut rebus humanis non prospicere. _Ita- que priusquam vitlis renunciaverint, vir- tutemque amplexati fuerint, non jure de- betur, non ex decoro convenit, imo non expedit illis, ut a pcenis liberentur, aut Deum sibi propitium experiri videantur. Cum vero ita dispositi fuerint, tum divi- nz misericordiz capaces esse incipiunt, tum faventis cceli beneficia grato animo accipere, et ex rebus prosperis qualem- cunque fructum percipere queunt. 2. Patet idem ex natura, fine et usu narum. Naturam habent remedil. Bx primaria intentione sua ad correctio- nem ordinantur. Ad hoc utiles sunt, ut melior et felicior evadat, qui perpetitur : ἡ κόλασις ἐπ᾽ ἀγαθῷ καὶ ἐπ᾽ ὠφελείᾳ τοῦ κολαζομένου" non ex pura vindicta procedunt, non ex odio mero; sed ab ira quadam propenso amore temperata, quali subinde parentes in liberos incandescunt. Non sui gratia inferuntur, nec in patientis dolorem, mi- seriam, perniciem tendunt, imo in ejus- dem gaudium, solatium, salutem colli- Mant et destinantur: παιδείας rationem habent, quem castigant, monentis et in- Struentis ; medicine amar, sed salubris ; cathartici fastidium parientis, ast vitiosos humores evacuantis: caustici putridas excrescentias adurentis, sanas carnes re- parantis. Instar ferri corruptas partes recidunt, sinceras conservant. Falcis ‘ritu, inutiles ramos amputant, ut felicio- res inserantur. ‘Tanquam ventus, aream averrunt, difflant, paleas, frumentum emundant. Ut ignis, sordes absumunt, scoream segregant, bonam massam puri- orem, nilidiorem, splendidiorem reddunt. » Cl. Alex. Pred. CONCIO AD CLERUM. Verum anime purgatorium sunt, ei in- coctam labem excernens, affectus spur- cos purificans, mentem celo przparans. Nec ob alios fines, quam ut animi stoli- das opiniones avellant, stupidam incuri- am excitent, centumacem ferociam cou- tundant, fastuosos tumores reprimant, in- domitas cupiditates compescant, peccati vividum sensum ingenerent, conscientie veternum excutiant, sui moneant, Dei memores timentesque eficiant, divine providentiz fidem faciant, vitiorum deni- que ut radices extirpent, virtutum semina insinuent, vitam reforment, moresque cor- rigant, pcene mortalibus infliguntur. Quos fines antequam assequutz sunt, ex- pedit ut perdurent, illasque subducere crudelitati verius quam clementie esset deputandum. Sin scopum suum attige- rint, castigatumque ad sanam mentem pertraxerint, earum omnis ratio evanes- cit, tum peracto suo negotio protinus ces- sare debent, nec habent quod ultra ope- rentur: tum prorsus inutiles sunt, et ve- lut sano medicina, frustra adhibentur. 3. Patet hoc ipsum ex natura Dei pe- nas infligentis: que quidem ex quadam nature proprietate impura omnia et per- versa odit ac detestatur ; citiusque adver- si poli coéant, prius ccelo infernus colli- datur, facilius inter se amice conspirent infensissime antipathie, desinat esse prius contrarius ignibus humor, quam cum homine Deus, pessimo Optimus in gratiam redeat. Non potest ille non ad omnem impuritatem expurgandam, ad omnem iniquitatem coercendam, ad om- nem nequitiam expugnandam, non seip- sum nature sanctissime indesinenti im- petu effundere. Nec ex alio manat hee qualitas, quam ab illo bonitatis immense dulcissimo fonte. Bene enim Clem. Al- eX. ἔπεται τῷ ἀγαθῷ, ἦ φύσει ἀγαθός ἐστιν, ἡ μισοπο- quippe vitia quantum creature sue damni, molestiz, miseriw, afferunt, nequit ignorare, nec cum sciat non miser- eri et succurere laboranti ; nec ideo non enixam operam dare, ut a gravissimis istis malis liberetur, via nature suc conveni- enti, 1d est, monitis, hortatibus, minis, cor- reptionibus et paenis ; quas proinde infert, non sponte, nec ex suopte ingenio, sed invitus, et quasi coactus. ‘l'alem nobis depingit Jeremias Threnorum iii. 33, Qué non affligit ex animo suo, mestitiaque cit mortales. 'Talem se preebuit, cum phraimum castigaret, propheta attestan- VIO 390 te, sonuerunt viscera mea super eum, qua- si condolesceret ac compateretur patien- ti.. Spe se opera sua universa diligere testatur, mortem impii nolle, omnes ad salutem perductos velle. Nos vero Pa- rentis optimi in nos indignationem con- citamus, nos clementissimi Domini ultri- cem manum armamus, ——neque per nostrum patimur scelus Iracunda Deum ponere fulmina. Optime in hance rem Salvianus: ‘* Nos vim Deo facimus iniquitatibus nostris, nos nolentem ulcisci cogimus, nos parcere vo- Jentem non permittimus.”. Nec male Deo convenit quod Augusto tribuit Naso, Est piger ad peenas princeps, ad premia velox ; Quique dolet quoties cogitur esse ferox. Qui cum triste aliquod statuit, fit tristis et ipse; Cuique fere penam sumere pena sua est. Victa tamen vitio est hujus clementia nostro, Venit et ad vires ira coacta suas. Clemens est Dei ira, mitis justitia, sal- utaris severitas. Itaque antequam pecca- tor resipiscat, potest Deus a pena irro- ganda uabsistere, non magis quam bonus et justus esse desinere ; nec magis quam fidelis medicus a curando abstinere, prius quam morbum expulerit, egrumque ad justam sanitatem perduxerit. Tum vero, cum propositum suum obtinuerit, cum perversum rectificarit, aberrantem redux- erit, male affectum ad sanam mentem restituerit, ultro ei deferbescit ira, intime reconciliatur animus, serenatur vultus, seponitur flagellum, manu excidit ful- men ; tum favoris amplo cumulo preteri- ta supplicia compensat, et ad bonam fru- gem revocatum prodigum tenerrimo af- fectu complectitur; nec absurde dixit Seneca, “ Deum habet faventem et pro- pitium, quisquis 5101 se propitiavit.”’ Est enim Deus ex indole eterna, necessaria et immutabili benignus, misericors, placa- bilis, χρηστὸς, φιλάνθρωπος, μακρόθυμος, πολυέλεος" quo propterea argumento noster vates Judzos ad conversionem invitat, versu proxime sequenti, Convertimint, (inquit) ad Jehovam Deum vestrum, quia miseri- cors et miserator est, longanimis, et mul- ta misericordia, et panitens super ma- lum. 'Talemque nobis Deum sacre lite- re, nature vox, gentium consensus, suf- fragia sapientum, et quotidiana experien- tia exhibent ac representant. Ex quibus © Jer. xxxi. 20. 4 De Proyid. CONCIO AD CLERUM. liquido apparet, quo Dei iram et i oriundas calamitates evitemus, nobis cessario incumbere, ut convertamur Deum cum toto corde; id est, primo vitam reformare et mores emendare stu. - deamus. f Secundo, Ex his colligimus, ad De iram avertendam necessario exigi et plu- rimum conferre de peccatis admissis se. rium dolorem, seu validam animi displi- centiam. Cujus etiam pronunciati veri. tatem cum multa sancte scripture | confirmant, tum rei ratio perspicue evin- cit. Quisquis enim vite male acte sibi conscius, quot bonis exciderit, quantis se miseriis implicuerit, quam impie, inique, ingrate, optimum Patrem ac Dominum tractaverit quantam a se. bonitatam alien- averit, qualemque adversus se potentiam irritaverit, serio perpendit, non potest non summopere contristari, et gravissima cum animi anxietate sortem suam deplo- rare, nec ideo non peccata sua valde de- testari, tot malorum causas, tam acerbi doloris origines. Ad que in posterum devitanda (cum alioqui divine indulgen- 1185 spes affulgeat), ut vite melius institu- end consilium ineat, eique pertinaciter insistat, preegustate amaritudinis memoria acerrime stimulatur: ita quod S. Paulus asserit, ἡ κατὰ Θεὸν λύπη μετάνοιαν ἀμεταμέλητον κατεργάζεται. Etenim ut Aristoteles ait, λύπη καθ᾽ αὑτὸ φευκτὸν, nec in illa quis ultro se inge- rit, a quibus vehementer doluisse se re- cordatur. ‘Timetnaufragus mare, ignem fugit, quisquis eum vel semel attrectayit; corpori cavet miles utcunque saucium se expertus ; solitarios calles declinat a pra- donibus aliquando spoliatus ; qui egrum se commeminit, sanitati noxia aversatur; que fastidium olim pepererunt palatum semper respuit; quidni seque a vitiis ab- horreat, qui vitiorum acerbos morsus pra- sensit? Severe’ nec Deum vereri, nec peccatum odisse, nec seipsum nosse, nee periculi sui conscium esse, nec emendan- de vite propositum fovere, nec proinde divine misericordie capacem aut venie opportunum esse commonstrat, qui mor- borum spiritualium maxime sontico labo- rat, τῆ ἀναλγησίᾳ. Itaque ubique Deus sibi demissam animi dispositionem im- pense placere, se moestos consolari, af flictos et animo pauperes recreare, hu- miles erigere, laborantes sublevare, corde * 2Cor. vii, 10; 10 Eth, ad Nicom. . . 9 εὐ ὁ of see Δ σι δὲ ὧΨ » CONCIO AD CLERUM. 391 contritos sanare, miserize suze sensu de- jectis veniam, subsidium, effugium indul- paratum ostendit ; contra his oppo- fe pe animi habitus, superbiam, arrogan- tiam, confidentiam, ferociam aversari et abominari profitetur. Itaque ad Deum mitigandum, et peenas depellendas, ex- pet, ut de admissis peccatis serio dolea- mus. Tertio, Deducimus ad eosdem effectus (nempe ad favorem recuperandum, et in- stantes calamitates averruncandas), ex- fernis animi meesti contritique signis qualemcunque efficaciam competere, ead- emque a Deo injungi, probari, benigne accipi. Docemur’ hoc cum aliis, tum Achabi et Ninevitarum illustribus exem- plis, etillo Ezre viii. 23, Jejuxavimus itaque, et petivimus a Deo nostro propter hoc, et pacatus est nobis. Nec de nihilo est quod, ut premonitum, hee conver- sionis et resipiscentiz titulis commendata nobis veniunt. Nimirum Deo valde ar- rident doloris nostri spontanea ostentatio, humilitatis verecunda expressio, mutati propositi solennis attestatio; divinam glo- riam illustrant, nostrum statum decent, ad mutuam zedificdtionem faciunt, quam profitentur pcenitentiam valde promovent, augent, confirmant, viteeque ad emenda- tionem properantis ‘eximia pignora, aus- picia, adminicula sunt: imprimis jejuni- um, de quo, quia res meretur, et praesens ‘ccasio flagitat, paulo fusius disseremus. De jejunio nihil uspiam habetur in lege Mosaica expresse prescriptum, aut defi- nitum ; nulla regula ‘traditur ejus obser- vationem dirigens, nullum tempus ei dic- fum aut injunctum legimus. Nec alibi fere sub alieni nominis larva innuitur, ni- Siubi de expiationis festo agitur, in quo Judeis precipitur, ut animas suas vex- ent; quam vexationeim sicuti de aliis ab- stinentiis voluptatum, ita presertim de jejunio interpretantur Hebrei, haud ab- surde, ut mox videbimus. Nihilominus constat ipsos postea sibi omne genus je- junia instituisse, tam ordinaria, et ex sta- tis temporum intervallis recurrentia, quam extra ordinem, et hee cum publica, tum privata. Statorum jejuniorum celebris est mentio apud Zachariam vatem, cap. viii. Jejunium quarti, et jeyunium quin- ti, et jejunium septimi, et jejunium lecimi, mensis erunt domui Juda in gaudium, et letitiam, et solennita- tes preclaras; que quidem jejunia quatuor ex occasione variarum afflic- tionum et e#rumnarum, que genti Ju- daice obtigerant, jam olim indicta, ad hunc usque diem observantur. De jeju- niis extraordinariis ob preesentem aliquam vel imminentem calamitatem indictis se- pe legimus, quale Israelitarum, quum a Benjamitis cesi et profligati sunt; Josa- phati regis, quum ipsi Moabite et Am- monite bellum inferrent; Esdre, cum ex captivitate Babylonica ad templum in- staurandum se accingeret. Privatorum etiam jejuniorum non infrequens est men- tio, que pti homines suopte arbitrio ad bonos fines sibi obeunda susceperunt; nec opus est ut Davidis, Nehemiz, Dan- lelis, et aliorum exempla_proferam, quando Salvator noster illis legem dix- erit, et methodum descripserit; et con- stet 6 Judeis, quicunque pre ceteris devoti et pil erant, per totus anni curriculum singulis diebus Lune et Jo- vis jejunii agendi consuetudinem usur- passe, in quibus ille in evangelio Phar- iseus gloriosus nomen profitetur su- um. ἘΣ quo ritu fluxisse videtur mos iste Christanorum antiquissimus, et nescio an ab ipsis apostolis ad nostra usque tem- pora deductus, bis hebdomatim jejunan- di, utpote quia Clemente Alexandrino, et’ Tertulliano, vetustissimis Patribus, communi suorum temporum usu compro- batus memoretur. Imo in hac omni materia, quam Judi licentiam sumpse- rant, sibi eandem Christiani vindicarunt, quod ne facerent, nulla ratio prohibuit. Nam \ex eo, quod licet in lege Mosaica de jejuniis omnibus (unico forsitan excep- to) altum sit silentium, nedum ut de 115 lex ulla figatur, vel certa aliqua et con- stans regula prestituatur, utcunque He- breei non dubitarint complura ipsi obser- vare, et aliis observanda preecipere, clare sequitur, Hebreeos non ita se Mosaics legi adstrictos censuisse, ut extra ipsius explicitum prascriptum in οὐ divino nihil attingere deberent; quin potius qure ad pietatem in lege commendatam vel promovendam vel exprimendam condu- cere videbantur, ultro excogitabant, insti- tuebant et observabant, prophetis Dei non improbantibus, imo laudantibus, et astipulantibus ; qualia fuerunt festa evya- ριστεκὰ, atque jeyunia Purim, Mardochai magnatis authoritate stabilita, et Encenia a Machabeeis instituta ; atque ille, de qui- bus modo dictum, jejuniorum state so- 392 CONCIO AD CLERUM. lennitates. Quod si id Jndzis non illici- tum fuit, quibus Deus, quoad ritus religi- osos et modum cultus sul, curiosius pro- spexerat, et strictiores officiorum can- cellos prefiniverat, multo minus Christ- lane ecclesie adempta est, quam et sem- per sibi asseurit, que ad λογικὴν λατρείαν honesta, decora, utilia videbuntur, statu- endi et preecipiendi potestas, cui scilicet Deus ampliorem indulsit libertatem, cui in modo, ordine, mensura et circumstan- tiis cultus sui nihil fere expressum, deter- minatum, vel singulare precepit, ut con- sulto ipsius judicio et prudentie reliquisse videatur, quod in his rebus sibi ex usu esset, liberum deligendi aribtratum. Quod nisi partium immodicum studium, et al- tercandi prurigo pestifera multos trans- versos ageret, ef omnia ex certis incerta faceret, nullam arbitror hac in parte, ut per multa secula non fuit, ita nunc dierum exituram controversiam. Et sane qui Judzos in extraordinariis festis atque Je- juniis celebrandis sequi se et imitari non difftentur, cur in statis et ordinariis obe- undis eorundem exemplum tam perti- naciter detrectant, nisi quantum in ani- mos hominum prejudicia valeant, nen ignoranti mirum cuivis videri possit. Non enim hoc facere magis liberum illis fuit, quam nobis; imo tanto magis nobis, quanto Deus nobis parcius in his rebus providit, nosque minus arctis. limitibus circumscripsit, quanto nos illis altius sa- pere voluit, quantoque licentia concessa nos melius uti possumus, aut posse debe- mus. Nec major tis ratio fuit, aut gravi- ores illi cause, cur hee solennia jejunia procuderent, quam prisci religionis Chris- tianee antistites habuerunt, ut nobis nostra commendarent. Siquidem enim Judei tabulas legis lapideas confractas, Hiero- solyma obsidione cincta, templum concre- matum, Gedaliam interemptum (que sci- licet ex Judzeorum unanimi consensu cau- se fuerunt precipue quatuor, quorum Zacharias meminit soleanium jejuniorum instituendorum) anniversarioin perpetuum luctu recolenda autumarint; si istarum rerum recurrens memoria, ut proavorum antiqua delicta deflerent, et memorem Dei vindictam deprecarentur, satis illis cause subministrarint, quanto dignior est passio Domini et Redemptoris nostri, qui pro nobis acerbam et ignominiosam mor- tem subiit, que solenni recordatione quo- tannis (quid si dixerim quotidie?) in sem- piterna secula sit concelebranda ὃ quai potiori jure occasionem hanc arripere bemus peccata nostra gravissima fatendi ac deplorandi, qua Filium Dei sanctissi- mum et innocentissimum, deque nobis — optime meritum, in crucem adegerunt? quo preterea luculentiori symbolo tam impensi amoris sensum exhibeamus? quo illustriori indicio pro tam eximio ben- eficio gratitudinem nostram exprimamus ὃ quo denique certiori documento tante erga nos bonitatis benevolentiz et chari- tatis susceptum estimare nos, suscipere, et magni pendere demonstremus ? Non ideo gravior illis causa fuit, sed nec sane- tior finis propositus nec usus commodior oblatus fult, nec major necessitas incubu- it, nec uberiorem inde fructum isti perci- pere potuerunt, quam nos possumus ; quod patebit jejunii fines et usus expen- denti, quos nobis sacre liters, ratio et experientia ferme tales indigitant. Primo, Primarius jejunii finis in sacra pagina perhibetur, ut ob perpetrata pec- cata conceptum dolorem augeat et inten- dat ; unde passim afilictio, vexatio, hu- miliatio, vel depressio anime nuncupa- tur ; Greecis traductoribus nune κάκωσις, nune ταπείνωσις τῆς ψυχῆς. Ps. xxxv, 13, Affligebam in jejunio animam meam; ἐταπείνουν ἐν νηστείᾳ τὴν ψυχήν μου, Esre vil. 21, Tune indixi ibi jejunium jucta fluvium Ahava, ut affligeremus nos coram Deo nostro. Esaiz lviii. 3, Ut quid jejunavimus, εἰ non aspexisti, afflixi- mus animas nostras, et nescivistt? Ju- dithe, iv. 9, ἐταπεινοῦσαν τὰς ψυχὰς αὐτῶν ἐν ἐκ- τενείᾳ μεγάλῃ, quod de jejunio intelligi ex con- textu liquet. Et proinde patet in expi- ationis festo, quum imperatur ut affligant animas suas, de jejunio recte accipia Judwis: quod et sub gravis poene peri- culo injungitur, Lev. xxiii. 29, Omnis enim anima, que non fuerit afflicta eo ipso die, excidetur a populis suis. \dem- que proculdubio respicitur, Num. xxx. 14, Omne votum, et omne juramentum obligationis, ut afflagat animam suam, “Ὅρκος δεσμοῦ κακῶσαι ψυχὴν, ubi mate- ria fit voti vel juramenti Deo sancte pra- standi, etiam a feminis. Nec obscurum est, pio dolori amplificando jejunium quantopere inserviat; cum operative naturam lacessendo, sensum imitando, spiritus acuendo, appetitum stimulando, quam privative dolorem prohibens gaudi- um submovendo, voluptatem extinguen- δ ἰ —— tS s— CONCIO AD CLERUM. 393 do,etlascivientis animi impetus coercendo. Recte philosophus, Nicomacheorum ulti- MO, γινομένης μὲν ἀναπληρώσεως ἥδοιτο ἄν τις, καὶ τεμνόμενος λυποῖτο, Semper inedize meer- or sequela est, sic ut lztitia accessio sa- i Nec sane nisi subductis letitize alimentis, cibo et potu, possibile est, ut quispiam valde contristetur. His natura velit, nolit, reficitur, oblectatur, exultat. Ex horum usu per inevitabilem resultan- tiam bene turgent, spiritus exhilarantur, roboratur, sensus t'tillatur, letificis halitibus cerebrum ~repletur, imaginatio obtunditur, et cum mentis acumine tris- titi acrimonia hebetatur. ltaque fero- cienti. jumento pabuluim subtrahendum, servus contumax fame edomandus, pru- rienti nature blandimenta precidenda sunt, siquidem peccati vivido sensu cru- ciari, et vehementis molestize aculeis ani- mum pungi oporteat. , Nec solummodo dolorem alit jejunium, sed et spiritualem parit laeti- tiam, animumque ad percipiendam e ce- lestibus voluptatem summopere disponit ; mec hoc tantum indirecte et ex conse- quenti, quatenus defuncte officio con- Scientie necessario gaudium adnascitur, sed directe et effective, juxta Augustini dictum, ‘‘Cessando a lztitia carnis ac- quiritur lztitia mentis. Crassis enim corporee voluptatis fumis soluta mens ameenioribus radiis scintillat.” A ven- triculo que exhalant, nubibus discussis, in amabile sudum serenatur; sensualis complacentiz sordibus detersis, nitidiori facie resplendet. Compedibus exemptis liberior, onere sublato levior, amotis im- pedimentis expeditior, molestiis abdicatis alacrior, sensu carnali destituta ad spirit- males gustus acrior, occupationibus cor- is defuncta ad intellectus munia ha- bilior, inimica carne debilitata, spiritu fortior, vegetior, animosior, ex his omni- bus letior, placidior, vivacior evadit. Quo spectat Basilii monitum, εἰ ϑούλου ἐεχυρὸν ποιήσαι τὸν νοῦν, dépacoy τὴν σάρκα διὰ νησ- τείας. ᾿ Tertio, jejunium ad precum aptitudi- nem et efficaciam adinodum conducit. Unde hee duo, oratio et jejunium, in Sacris literis indivulsa copula sociantur ; juxta Chrysostomi eflatum, νηστείας ἀδελ. φὴ καὶ ὁμόζυγος εὐχή. Uno partu gemel- lam hance sobolem religio enixa est: inde Pperpetue consuetudinis fraterno vinculo colligantur; idem sacra biga officiorum Vor. ΠῚ. 50 jugum trahit; indissociabili nexu comi- tantur se invicem, et amice conspirant, maximosque semper ad pietatis effectus collatas operas prestant. Σύντε δῦ ég- χομένω nihil non valent efficere, ccelum flectunt, infernum expugnant, mala abi- gunt, judicia avertunt, beneficia accer- sunt. Ex hisce partibus conflata est sancte mulieris Anne devotio, Luc. il. 37, ΝΝηστείαις καὶ δεήσεσι λατρεύουσα νῦκτα καὶ ἡμέ- θᾶν" quo his vacarent, monet apostolus conjuges, ut maritali toro interdum ab- stinerent, 1 Cor. vii. 5,"Iva σχολάζητε τῇ νηστείᾳ, καὶ τῇ προσευχῇ. Harum junctas vires libidinum dzemoniis eliminandis unice sufficere do- cet Christus, Matt. xvil. 21, Τοῦτο τὸ γένος οὐκ Gemi- na hac oblatione apostoli Deo sacrorum administros consecrabant, et ecclesia gu- bernaculis presbyteros admovebant. Act. Xiv.. 23, Xeiperoviicavres δὲ αὐτοῖς πρεσβυτέρους ἐκπορεύεται, εἰ μὴ ἐν προσευχῇ καὶ νηστείᾳ. κατ᾽ ἐκκλησίαν, προσευξάμενοι μετὰ νηστειῶν παρέθεν- ro αὐτοὺς τῷ Κυρίῳ quorum vestigiis etiamnum insistit ecclesia, et semper inhesit; ut non dubitet Basilius M. affirmare, nefas esse sine jejunio quenquam sacrum hoc officium attrectare: ot yap δυνατὸν (inguit) ἄνευ γηστείας ἱερουγίας κατατολμᾶν. Imo nec olim nisj per orationis atque jejunii bipatentes val- vas, quisquam in edem Dei, ecclesiam dico, admissus est.‘ Author est S. Jus- tinus, Apol. II. pro Christianis : σοι ἂν πεισθῶσι, καὶ πιστεύωσιν ἀληθῆ ταῦτα, τὰ ὑφ' ἡμῶν διδασκόμενα καὶ λεγόμενα εἶναι, καὶ βιοῦν οὕτως δύνασ- θαι ὑπισχνῶνται, εὔχεσθαι τε καὶ αἰτεῖν νηστεύοντες παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῶν προημαρτημένων ἄφεσιν διδάσκον ται, ἡμῶν συνευχομένων, καὶ συννηστευόντων αὐτοῖς, ὅ Nec fere (ut paululum digrediamur) ut sine precibus, sic absque jejunio preclari quicquam gestum aut administratum legi- mus. Sub jejunii conditione humani generis salus primeva stetit; nec ni- si violata legum vetustissima, Ne com- edas, simul et semel pessundati om- nes, et ab amplissime felicitatis fas- tigio in hunc infime miseri@ sta- tum delapsi sumus; nec jejunio nobis jam opus esset, si Eva olim jejunasset.* Jejunii quoque impatiens Esau, “ fa- cilius ventri quam Deo cessit,”t pabulo potius quam preecepto annuit, salutem * El ἐνήστευσεν ἀπὸ τοῦ ξύλον ἢ Εἶδα, οὔκ ἂν ταὖῦ- τῆς νῦν ἡμεῖς ἐῤεόμεθα τῆς ynercias.— Bas. » ΤᾺ * Ada Vide Cyp. Ep. vii. p. 20. g- * [Apol. |. 61.] " gula vendidit; et ἀντὶ βρώσεως μιᾶς ἀπέ- ὅοτο τὰ͵ πρωτοτόκια αὐτοῦ, ut est apud authorem ad Hebreeos. Quadragesimale quoddam jejunium quum observaret Mo- ses, vidit oculis Dei gloriam, et audivit auribus Dei vocem, et corde conjecit Dei legem." que diuturne inediz patiens, legis vindex, et vatum antesiga- nus Elias, cum in speluncam divertisset, familiari Dei congressu et quodam Nu- minis quasi contubernio exceptus est. Nec in minus temporis spatium protracti jejunii armatura instructus, legis veteris- que instaurator, et nove author, Christus Diaboli insultus sustinuit, repulit, supera- Vit, ἡμᾶς παιδεύων νηστείαις ἀλείφειν, καὶ παιδοτρι. δεῖν ἑαυτοὺς πρὸς τοῦς ἐν τοῖς πειρασμοῖς ἀγῶνας, αἵ optime inquit Basilius. Paris intervalli abstinentia Ninevite enormibus flagitiis Suis accensam Dei iram restinguere, ex- cidii latam in se sententiam rescindere, ipsumque Deum quasi ad palinodiam adigere potuerunt: quod exemplum in- tuens Patrum non nemo satis audacter dixit, “*Sodoma quoque et Gomorrha evasissent, si jejunassent.”” Semiquadra- gesimali temperantia (vir desideriorum) Daniel ad visiones eximias claro intuitu conspiciendas, atque ad revelationes istas mirabiles puro animo percipiendas sese comparavit. Triduano jejunio Regina Esthera Amani perniciosas molitiones elusit ac infregit. Jejunio freti Esdras et Nehemias ad urbem sanctam extru- endam, et domum* Dei instaurandam, auspicato se contulerunt. Ejusdem pre- sidio communiti Samuel Philistzos, Josa- phatus Ammonitas, et, ni fallor, Hezekias Assyrios exultantes repressit et profliga- vit; Achabus vero quas peccando ac- celeraverat peenas, jejunando distulit, et ase penitus elongavit. Que ex sacra scriptura lubens commemoro, ceu non temere effusa, sed in usum et exemplum nostrum πρὸς διδασκαλίαν, πρὸς ἔλεγχον, πρὸς ἐπα- γόρθωσιν, πρὸς παιδείαν τὴν ἐν δικαιοσύνη, tradita et consignata. Quid porro penitentie pre- conem referam et evangelice lucis phos- phorum, Johannem, cujus vita, angelice emula μία νηστεία ἦν, ut 6 Patribus aliquis dixit, continuum fuit jejunium? quid ethnici orbis magistrum apostolum, qui, se- ipso teste, frequentibus jejuniis corpus suum subegitet maceravit? cum nemo, opinor, usquam fuerit sanctorum, qui non h Heb. xii. 16; Tert. * 2 Tim, iii. 16. CONCIO AD CLERUM. | tice se exercitarit, qui non divina hac ΩΣ ad ccelestem militiam sacra hac devotionem suam accenderit, cujusque non hac ala subvecte preces ad ceelos evolarint. Nam ut Basilius, νηστεία προσευχὴν εἰς οὐρανὸν ἀναπέμπει, οἱονεὶ πτερὸν αὐτῇ γινομένη πρὸς τὴν ἄνω πορείαν. Hoc autem prestat (ut tandem ex diverticulo in viam redeamus}, preces, inquam, adjuvat jejunium, 1. Indigentie nostre sensum impri- mendo, et excitando anime desiderium ad res necessarias appetendas. Nobis enim usu yenit, ex unius rei, qua car- emus, conscientia, ut ad alia, quibus pariter egemus, consideranda et expe- tenda erigamur ; et semel excitatus af- fectus ad quelibet sua objecta se promp- tius diffundit, haud secus quam fluens aqua in quosvis sibi obyios canales facile derivatur. Terreno pabulo destitutus, ccelestis cibi memor et eupidus efficitur: corporez voluptatis exors ad spirituales delicias anhelat. 2. Deinde comprimendo cupiditateslas- civas,impuras, supervacuas, quibus sancta anime desideria, ceu pure aquis super- fusis flamme, suffocantur; quibus affee- tuum meliorum fervor retunditur, cordis puritas inficitur, Spiritus Sanctus abigitur. 3. Item animam ad meditationem faci- lius, suavius et tranquillius obeundam comparando; dum multiplice sarcina preegravatum allevat, corporeos tumultus sedat, fluctuantem phantasiam componit, et phantasinata vaga, stolida, tumida, spurca fugat, crassos halitus discutit, menti nebulam offundentes, cogitandi quoque instrumenta, spiritus animales defzcatiores reddit, puriores, subtiliores, agiliores. “4. Denique anime dispositiones istas gignendo, alendo, confortando, quibus Deus potissimum delectatur, et ad auscul- tandas preces disponitur. Nam, Quarto, Jejunium ex se est exercitium multarum yirtutum, quas procreare aptum natum est, productasque fovere et conser vare. Omnimode temperantie direete et immediate inservit, ejusque fidissima disciplina, utilissima paleestra, tutissima est custodia. Docet enim appetitus im- modicos refreenare, voluptatum illecebris obsistere, corpus subigere et δουλαγωγεῖν, Affectus carnales cohibet, voluntatem pro- priam subjugat, et ad ἑαυταπαρνγησίαν as- suefacit. Humilitatem ac modestiam yi quadam sua peculiari parit et nutrit. De ὡς CONCIO AD CLERUM. 395 peenitentia quid dicam, ad cujus incremen- tum ex primaria intentione designatur,’ nec idcirco inepte a quodam vocatur, ἀρχὴ μετανοίας.) et ab eodem dicitur, με- τάνοια χωρὶς νηστείας ἀργή ἢ Paucis, ad vitiorum ferme omnium radices avellen- das, nervos succidendos, alimenta sub- ducenda, fomites restinguendos, non ex- ilem sortitur efficaciam. Nec, si fre- quens ejus usus sit, si bono animo sus- cipiatur, et prudenti consilio administretur ullum fere habet religio omnis nobilius, potentius, accommodatius instrumentum. Quinte, Utile est jejunium publicum presertim ad hoc, ut dolorem nostrum significet, alienum eliciat, humilitatem privatam prodat, publicam provocet, et consequenter ut glorie Dei consulat, et ecclesice eedificationem promoveat. Nos enim peccata nostra sentire, fateri, de- testari, deplorare, deprecari, divinam Majestatem vereri,potentiam expavescere, justitiam agnoscere, misericordiam im- plorare testatur: quam de Deo mag- nifice, de nobis demisse sentiamus; ut peenis merito obnoxios, premiis indignos, beneficiis impares, nec necessaria vite, nedum oblectamenta attingere promeritos nos arbitramur; quamque pre Dei cultu, favore, et obsequio reliqua omnia, utcun- que suavia, vel necessaria contemnimus et posthabemus, eo palam docemus et profitemur. Omitto minores ejus usus et commoditates percensere, veluti quod satisfactionis cujusdam speciem habet, dum delicta nostra voluntariis quasi poenis expiamus ; nos ipsi judicamus, ne judi- cemur a Deo; Deoque illate injurie spontanea ultione divinam nemesin ante- vertimus, cum Augustino nimirum dicen- te, “ Excrucio me (plane) ut ille parcat ; do de me paenas, ut ille subveniat :”” quod ex eo temporis usuram lucramur, negotiis secularibus renunciantes, ut divinis vace- mus; ut celesti pabulo reficiamur, ter- reno temperantes ; nec digerendum_sto- macho cibum ministrantes, ut pia medi- tatione defixi divina ruminemus. Quod corporis sanitatem conservat, et infirmi- tati medewur, unde μήτηρ ὑγιείης, εὐεξίης φυλακ- τήριον, σώματι σύνοικος ἀσφαλὴς (ἰϊοὶ meruit.* Quod denique charitati et eleemosynis ‘suppetias fert, nostree gule abstrahens, quod pauperum fami saturande eroge- mus ; quod in vero jejunio requirit Esaias, : J Bas. M. « Bas. cap. 58, Nonne hoc est jejunium quod ego elegi—Ut frangas esurienti panem tuum, et pauperes vagos introducas in domum,! &c. Accedunt ad laudem jejunii consum- mandam, Christi et apostolorum exempla, monita, consilia ; piorum omni #vo con- sentiens praxis; sanctorum Patrum mag- nifica encomia, et argumentorum invic- tissimum, experientia utentium. Cum igitur tam graves causas, tam laudabiles -scopos, tam insignes usus, tam eXimios fructus, tam sanctam authoritatem habeat jejunium, que causa est, ut ecclesiz adeo salutare institutum commendanti refrag- emur? Quid si lamentabili cum ejulatu vociferari, lachrymis coactis sinum per- fundere, vestimenta discindere, pectus tundere, cilicio corpus involvere, capitl cineres inspergere, humi nos prosternere, et pulvere demersos volutare (qualia peenitentie indicia, non inter Judeos mo- do, sed et veteres apud Christianos inval- uisse, preter indubitate suffragium _his- tori vel hujusce diei titulus abunde fidem fecerit),a nobis ecclesia postularet ? Ita pauca, tam mitia, adeo facilia jubentt qui tam prefracte adversantur, quo cla- more tam austeram disciplinam excipe- rent, quas querelas evomerent, quales tragcedias excitarent? At quibus longe graviora illi pertulerunt, cur nobis intole- randa videntur ? que fructuosa illi expertt sunt, unde nobis perniciosa evaserunt ὃ quamobrem nos ceu superstitiosa argul- mus, que sancta illi reputarunt? Que prisci doctores illi, quibus religionem nos- tram acceptam, servatam, propagatam, nobisque in manus traditam debemus ; illam qui voce professi sunt, ingen acumine viribus propugnarunt, vite ΘΧ- emplo_ illustrarunt, et sanguine 800 obsignarunt ; qua, inquam, illi probarunt, laudarunt, usurparunt, quare nos dam- namus, rejicimus, detrectamus, ὨΙΒῚ quod nos illis immane quantum magis delicati, morosi, refractarii sumus? Cerle non- dum officii nostri ratio cessavit, nec di- vini precepti vigor defecit, nec ecclesie quasi senio confecta potestas expiravit, nec rei ipsius virtus effoeta, vel abolita est efficacia. Adhuc jejunium utile, et salubre, et sanctum, et pene necessarium est; quod nemo ausit negare. Displicet vero quod tempus δὶ preestitutum, quod ' Es. lviil. 7. erebrius usurpatur, quod precipitur et imperatur; placiturum nempe si vage indeterminate, et arbitrarie observantize permittatur ; imo vero ita placiturum ut penitus negligatur, contemnatur, in desu- etudinem abeat, nisi certa illi lex figatur, et statum tempus deputeter. Quidni etiam lisdem objectiunculis freti ab oratione ecrebra, a Deo solenniter laudando et celebrando, a concionibus frequentandis, et ab omnibus sacris officiis pariter ab- horreant? quibus etiam sua tempora as- signavit, quorum frequentem usum exi- git, queeque pari authoritate sanxit ec- clesia? cur non et hec libero cujusque arbitrio relinguuntur, ubi, quando, quo- modo collubitum fuerit, suscipienda, vel omittenda? Annon confessio peccatorum nostrorum zque ac divinorum beneficio- rum agnitio; dolor pro Deo offenso, ac letitia in Deo propitio ; contritio cordis, ac emendatio vite, humiliatio, sui abnegatio, abstinentia voluptatum eque ac aliz que- libet virtutes a nobissemper exiguntur ? Quidni igitur harum instrumenta, admi- nicula, exercitia, pariter ac illarum, in perpetuo, constante, ordinario, przfinito sint usu? Et si hee sepius adhibita vi- te sanctimoniam juvare queant, edifica- tioni communi inserviant, nec exiguas nobis utilitates afferant, que ingratitudo, que iniquitas, que perversitas, imo que insipientia est optime matris curam as- pernari, consilia respuere, mandatis ob- murmurare? Verum hisce dituius incul- candis ut abstineam, tempus admonet, ne prolixitate nimia patientiam vestram vio- lem, vobisque quam immodice laudo, im- portune inducam pcenitentiam. Ad hoc igitur tantum veniz. vestre indulgentiam aliquantisper peto, liceat ut mihi duntaxat paucis ad nos prophet verba adaptare, Convertimini ad me cum toto corde ves- tro in jejunio, et fletu, et planctu. Con- vertamur, inquam, nos ad Deum ; nos vi- tam reformare, peccata deflere, supplicis peenitentiz signis conspicuis fructibusque idoneis iratum Numen mitigare, summa ope enitamur. Nos, quibus alios conver- tendi officium incumbit, quique ad Deum redeuntibus preire exemplo, et iter pre- monstrare debemus. Nos, qui in Deum pre aliis gravissime deliquimus, contra mentis lumen clarius,et veritatem intimius perspectam, et acriores conscientix sti- mulos, et ampliora Dei beneficia, et cw- lestis gratia uberiores influxus. Nos, CONCIO AD CLERUM. inquam, in quos Deus se haud ira exarsisse, non obscuris indiciis ἶ fecit; quos severioribus judiciis exercuit, | quosque ultimo pene exitio devovisse vis- — us est; quosque proinde liberaliore mis- | ericordia devinxit, tot erumnis exemptos, — tantis perplexitatibus extricatos, et ab im- pendentis ruine faucibus ereptos. + Enimvero, fratres, ex gravissimis malis emersimus ; immania rerum discrimina — effugimus ; ex desperato languore in san- itatem pene integram convaluimus, “ nam partem penarum, 4085 divina j tia inflixerat, supra modum, pjeeter spem, ultra meritum nostrum clemens, divina bonitas relaxavit. At nisi pravos humo- res maligne intemperiei reliquias evacu- amus, nisi mores nostros nondum satis defecatos repurgamus, ut recradescat morbus, nosque in pejorem statum rela- bamur, ut consopita nemesis evigilet, et lesa Dei patientia in furorem recandes- cat, ingens subest periculum, imo certa necessitas. Quamobrem luctuosa expe- rientia ad sapientiam eruditi, preceden- tium malorum causas solicito studio vite- mus ; quibusque impegimus scopulos,cau- to remigio pretervehamur. Corrup- icem morum luxuriam sobrio victu cas- tigemus. Ambitionem, ordinis nostri summum dedecus, exuamus; ejusdem precipua ornamenta, humilitatem et mo- destiam induamus. Inanium titulorum ventosos strepitus, mundane pompe ludi- crum splendorem, popularis aure insul- sos plausus, et secularis potentiz fallaces typhos contemnentes, ad inculpate vite solidam laudem, et vere virtutis intami- natum honorem aspiremus. Infamis ava- ritie pestem, qua nulla clero infensius odium conciliare, aut graviorum conflare solet invidiam, cane pejus et angue, δΧ- ecremur. Non alienis rebus inhiemus; nec viis illicitis vel inhonestis ad opimas possessiones contendamus, nec preesentis seculi de sordidis exuviis rixas, et turbas, et controversias moveamus: virtutis po- tius, sapientie, et pietatis ceelestibus the- sauris reponend!s operam impendentes. Socordiz quoque excutientes veternum, officio quisque suo gnaviter, constanter fideliter defungamur. Precipue vero charitatis, in qua religionis nostra sum- ma consistit, in qua Christiana vite pert fectio elucet, cui salus nostra, pax, et felicitas tam eterna, quam temporarig innituntur; charitatis, inquam, sanct®, divinum, qui refrixit, ar- dorem exsuscitemus. Nos invicem om- nes sipcero et fervido affectu diligamus. iscordiarum, simultatum, et inimicitiarum veterum memoriam delea- m causas, occasiones, pretex- Alter alterius onera porte- μετα ‘jnfirmitates toleremus offensas con- donemus. Infensa prejudicia deponamus, iniquis suspicionibus ne indulgeamus ; cre- dulitati maligne et temerarie censure mus; ne calumnias cuiquam stru- amus, nec detrahamus, nec obtrectemus ; nec maledica mus, nec insultemus, nec facta in sequiorem partem detorqueamus, | Ὁ dicta duriori interpretatione perverta- | itis quempiam incessamus ; in neminpem tecum ferocia detonemus ; nec e sacro hoc suggestu ebullientis cerebelli spumas aut #stuantis stomachi bilem, aut exulcerati splenis virus eructemus ; nec religionis fu- pem invidiam, vel veritatis obtentu airo- ,concordiam, benevolentiam cole- Te; humanitatis, pietatis, et charitatis offi- ‘ia commutare parati simus. Aquos nos i ue, ingenuos, beneficos, man- ‘troversias, factiones, dissidia ne fovea- ‘Mus, nec de rebus minimi momenti tanta um acerbitate litigemus ; judiciis nostris 86 nimium tribuamus, nec privatis opin- fonibus alii alios vexemus, torqueamus, inquietemus. Dissentientes placide fera- ‘mus, non Turcas dico, vel paganos, aut hereticorum nequissimos, quaquam hu- Manitatis id esset, sed fratres nostros, ‘eandem fidem profitentes, eadem spe ejusdem in precipuis animi; repantes, humanz forsitan fragilitatis: vitio deceptos, aut sophismatum laqueis | eee, aut speciosis ratiociniis illectos, diverse discipline: prajudiciis abrep- | 3 hos, inquam, tales ne tetrica vi, nec’ zelo amaro, nec furiali iracundia, nec hostili odio, nec effreni maledicentia in- : CONCIO AD CLERUM. ; nec probis immeritis, imo nec me- | famemus, conviliis proscindamus. petulantia invehamur,nec insolen- | 60 inveteratum odium, aut zeli pallio tur-| tam conservari yolumus, comes, aflabiles preebeamus. Con- | minutulas tantum questiunculas, et | ulos subtilitatum apiculos sententia | sectemur, ast aberrantes qua licet, fideli consilio, blanda admonitione, amica sua- dela in viam reducamus. Nemo aspere preesit, morose, superbe, ceu impotentem dominatum afiectans, sed benevoli animi signis, comitate, gravitate, prudentia sub- ditos in obsequium trahat, tanquam illo- rum qui bono studeatget commodo invig- ilet. Nos vero, qui subsumus, demissos nes prestemus, morigeros, tractabiles, antistitum justis mandatis alacriter olytem- perantes, prudentibus consiliis prompte auscultantes, personis debiiam reveren- tiam officiose deferentes ; nec in illos im- modesti, pervicaces, queruli, vel impor- tuni simus, nedum ut eos vituperemus, in- Invi- diam denigque omnem, malitiam, contu- maciam, reliquosque pravos aflectus se- ponamus. lta quidem, contra quam ple- rique nunc facimus, vitam instituamus oportet, si aut ecclesiz honori consulium cupimus, aut patriz quietem sartam tec- aut favorem | propitii Numinis diuturnum retinere pre- em malitiam occultemus. Cum omnibus | optamus. Nec ut vite tantum future seriem juxta legis evangelice normam emendate transigamus; sed preterite errata ut serio dolore prosequamur, fate- amur, detestemur, iisque debitam divinam ultionem cum jejunio, ploratu, et planctu deprecemur. Nec idcirco instantem hance, quam ecclesiz veteris consuetudo, presentis consilium, legis insuper politi- czprescriptum, et reipublice authoritas nobis commendarunt, opportupitatem om- | nino negligamus. Que bono cum fructu et felice successu ut efficere valeamus, nos gratie sve ceelestis prepotente in- fluxu juvet, Fons ille bonitatis, et Pater misericordiarum #@ternus, cui cum bene- dicto Filio et Sancto suo Spiritu, sit om- nis honos, laus et gloria in secula seculo- rum. Amen. | Pax Dei, que superat omnem intellec- tum, conservet corda vestra, et mentes vestras, in cognitione εἰ amore Dei, et Filit ejus Jesu Christi Domini nostri; et favor omnipotentis Dei, Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti, robis acsit, robisque semper maneat.—Amen. EPITOME FIDE] ET RELIGIONIS TURCICA, v% ΣῚ A MUHAMETO KUREISCHITA, ARABUM PROPHETA, PRIUS IN ARABIA DESERTA, POSTEA A SUCCESSORIBUS PER TOTUM PENE ORIENTEM DIFFUSZ. MvuHAMMED, cum quadragesimum eetatis suze annum attigisset, sibi revelationes fi- eri, legemque a Deo constitutam comma: tim per angelum Gabrielem adferri XXIII annorum spatio apud Arabes, precipue Meccanos et Medinenses, predicabat. E quibus, scilicet, ccelitus demissis comma- tibus conflatus est liber ille, qui Alcoran (id est, Legenda) appellatur. Hic liber apud Turcas tanta cum veneratione con- trectatur, ut quispiam illoto corpore et manibus non aperire aut legere solum, sed ne tangere quidem audeat, nisi forte necessitate coactus ; tunc temporis pan- no aut sudariolo aliquo obvolutum suble- vare licet: huic libro, aut suo lectori, terga vertere nefandum est. Hitet, id est, scriptores, qui hunc librum_ pulcher- rime describunt, magnis przmiis deco- rantur; aliqui mille coronatorum pretio mercantur. Huffar,id est, eos qui hunc librum memoriter censervant, ceu numi- na quedam venerantur, et quibus facul- tates adsunt, ad «edes convocatos thymia- mate honorant, et liscum convivalia ob- Jectamenta peragunt; omnes libros, pa- ginas et schedulas, tam propriis quam ex- oticis literis exaratos, diligenter recon- dunt, ne pedibus conculcentur, aut pa- rum pie tractentur; veriti quod versus aliquis Alcorani, aut salilem ipsum no- men Dei in ipsis notatum inveniatur: un- de Christianos hostili odio et maledictio- abstergant: versiculos exinde descriptos amuleti loco ex collo aut brachiis suspen- dunt, et ita se ab omnibus corporis ac an- ime periculis salvos esse firmissime cre- dunt: pro victorie aut aliarum divinarum gratiarum impetratione aliqua particula- ria Surath (id est, capita) ex expresso imperatoris edicto perlegunt: procella- rum tempore ad antennas, pugnarum ad vexilla appendunt: omnes fere legunt, et quidem tam superstitiose, ut literas, ac- centus et periodos connumerent, ast per- rari intelligunt, a concionatoribus tamen explicationem audiunt, qui nisi approba- tissimi sint, concionari non permittuntur, In hoc igitur libro seculares et spirituales leges continenti preecipitur, I. Primo, Ut quilibet credat unum esse Deum, non trinum; absque ullo consorte aut consimili ; Creatorem, Lar- gitorem, Preservatorem, Permutatorem omnium creaturarum, exemptum ab epi- theto Patris et Filii, ut quippe qui nee natus est nec genuit; nullibi manet, et ubique existit; nullam effigiem, qualita tem, colorem, membrum possidet: est sine principio, et sine fine erit: essentia ejus ex seipso est, et non ab alio: natura ipsius semper in eodem statu est ; nec ullos unquam animiaffectus patitur. Si vult, om- nia creata in nihilum vertet, et iterum refi- ciet: nemine indiget, et omnes eo egent ; si omnes infideles fidem ingrediantur, et nibus prosequuntur, quod (salvis auribus) { omnes impii pietatem colant,!nihil ei hine charta tam scripta quam inscripta podices | commodi ; et si omnes pagani fuerint, EPITOME FIDEI ET RELIGIONIS TURCICZ. nec eum adoraverint, nihil damni_ provo- nire potest: vivit; scit omnia tam occul- ta quam manifesta; numerum foliorum et granorum, arenarum, et capillorum novit; specialia, universalia, preterita et futura, mentes et corda, presentia et ab- sentia ille solus, non quispiam alius, cog- nita habet: non obliviscitur, non errat, nec quicquam negligit: audit omnes vo- ces tam submissas guam erectas, tacitis- simos quosque susurros: videt nocte ob- seura quoque; nigre formice gressum super nigrum lapidem cernit; et auditus et visus ejus auditui ac visui humano dis- similis est: omnia ex sua voluntate de- pendente, cum mala, tum bona: fideli- um fidem et piorum pietatem, pagano- rum infidelitatem et sceleratorum scelera vult; et si nollet, nullus esset infidelis, nec ullus protervus: musce alas commo- vere nequeunt absque sua voluntate: ejus mysteria inenunciabilia sunt, nec acerrimis quibusque ingeniis investigari possunt ; neque ea scrutari debemus, sed sufficit simpliciter credere talem esse qualem diximus. Il. Secundo, Credatur esse angelos, servos Dei obedientes ; qui nec peccant, nec comedunt, nec bibunt, nec masculini, nec fceminini sexus sunt. Inter eos sunt Deo propinquati, et prophete etiam : qui- libet suo muneri et officio preest ; aliqui in terris, aliqui in ccelis, aliqui stantes, aliqui inclinati, aliqui prostrati: alii lau- des canunt; alii hominibus prefecti, quo bona et mala opera recenseant; alii pro — custodia : aliqui maximi corpo- ‘Tis sunt, et eximio robore pollent; una hora 6 celis in terras descendunt; et una ale penna montes elevare et dissi- pare possunt: eorum maximus est Ga- briel et potentissimus: Esrail morienti- um animas recipit, et angelus mortis vo- catur. Israfil extremi judicii indicatri- cem tubam canere debet, quam semper ori appositam tenet, et jussum Dei pras- tolatur ; jussus inflabit tubam ; ejus clan- on perculsi viventes omnes, sive sint mez sive corpora, emorientur, ipsemet tibicen interibit, et totum universum XL annos vacuum permanebit; post dictos annos rursus Israfil a Deo resuscitabitur, iterumque sonare jubebitur, quo sonitu es anime et angeli excitabuntur et reviviscent, ac ad tremendum judicium parebunt. Lucifer, qui Iblis voca- , olim fuit angelus lucis, sed quia Dei OOO EEEOeeeeereeeeere 399 mandato (scilicet, ut ante Adamum novi- ter creatum simul cum aliis angelis 5656 prosterneret), inobsequens fuit, et se ex lumine creatum prestantiorem esse eo, qui ex limo productus erat, superbe pre- dicavit, e caelis ejectus est, et usque ad diem extremum spem gratie expectat: hic plurimos peperit filios, cum quibus fi- his hominum adversatur; hi sunt angeli mali et tentatores; in quodlibet mem- brum hominis ingredi possunt, seducunt et decipiunt : suggerunt tamen ad infide- litatem, sed cogere nequeunt; quilibet sibi ab ipso caveat, eumque esse inimi- cum humane nature pro certo sciat. Ill. Tertio, Credatur quatuor potissi- mum libros, viz. Biblium Moysi, evange- lium Jesu Christo, Psalmos Davidi, Alco- ranum Mahumeto ccelitus demissos: om- nes esse veros; tres autem anteriores, utpote a plerisque false descriptos, inter- pretatos, falsificatos, corruptos et ebolitos per Alcoranum novissime demissum ab- rogari: in eo enim omnia ea, que vere in preedictis libris continebantur, reperi- untur ; et hic sufficiet usque ad diem res- urrectionis ; non augescet, nec diminuti- onem aut corruptelam patietur. ΙΝ. Quarto, Credatur prophetas et evangelistas a Deo esse missos, ut predi- cent veritatem. Adamum, prophetarum patrem, ex sicco cceno conflatum esse, ut sue proli Factorem sui indicaret; hic primus propheta, uti Muhammed omni- um ultimo missus in mundum: hujus an- ima, tam hominum quam dzemonum gra- tia, ab eterno creata in ardenti lampade conservabatur usque ad diem sue nativi- tatis. Lex, que ei data est, in eternum perseverabit: ejus assecle omnium pre- stantissimi habentur apud Deum: hujus miracula erunt et post mortem, uti fue- runt in vita; ex digitis fontes manarunt ; Lunam digiti signo unico in duas_ partes divisit, quae proprio orbe in sanctum venerabunde descenderunt, ac per sinum ingresse, et per municarum aperturas egress, iterum ad suum locum ascende- runt; saxa, arbores, animalia ipsum allo- quebantur, verumque Prophetam Dei esse confitebantur. V. Quinto, Credatur fore diem judi- cii, et que Muhametus de signis, que ante hunc apperere debent, nunciavit om- nia esse verissima; nempe, adventum Deggiali, hoc est, antichristi; descensum Jesu Christi e ccelis, ut eum interficiat ; 400 nativitatem Muhdi, hoc est, directoris, e stirpe Muhameti, quicum Jesu Christo conveniet, et ei suam fillam nuptum da- bit; tunc temporis XL annos una fides manebit per totum orbem, et hee Mahu- metica a Jesu Christo attestata; exitum Gog et Magog, viz. extremi orientis Scy- tharum, qui formicis minores erant; et aliorum reptilium, que totius mundi aquas ebibent, quapropter homines siti necabuntur: horum Gog Magog 50,000 unum humanum calceum inhabitare de- bebant, et admirari quod antiquitus tam magne aulee fundarentur; ortum solis ab occasu, et occasum ad orientem; mor- tem omnium animantium; montium per aérem volatum ; liquefactionem celorum, et post aliquod tempus eorundem instau- rationem ; nudorum hominum a mortuis resurrectionem ; prophetis, sanctis, doc- toribus, togarum ceelestium (que Hulet appellantur) et jumentorum coruscantium (que Burak vocantur) e Paradiso demis- sionem, quibus 11 vestiti et conscensi sub obumbrantem Dei thronum migrabunt, ibique considebunt: gentes autem resi- duze nudi, famelici, sitibundi, in pedibus consistentes, ac pre timore mingentes remanebunt; post aliquod tempus versus solem conducentur cul unum miliare ap- propinquati fervido sudore madebunt ; aliqui usque ad talos, aliqui usque ad ge- nua, aliqui usque ad renes, aliqui usque ad collum, aliqui usque ad os, aliqui us- que ad verticem subdori immergentur; 50,000 annorum spatio in hoc statu per- severabunt, et pro operibus eorum mer- cedem intenti postulabunt; posthac bi- lanx accommodabitur ; bona et mala op- era uniuscujusque ponderabuntur; qui- bus bona opera preeponderabunt, paradi- sum, quibus mala, infernum adibunt; ni- si forte Deus optimus ignoscat, aut pro- phetarum, sanctorum, doctorum et pro- borum iniercessione liberentur: qui ta- men extra fidem morietur, intercessione fraudabitur, nee unquam a peenis inferni absolvetur; sed si in fide morietur et peccata praponderabunt, et si condona- tio et deprecatio non sequetur, pro quantitate et qualitate delictorum gehen- na urentur; tandem ccelo gaudebunt. Deus quoque absque mediatore aliquo in quemlibet inquiret; a tyrannis oppresso- rum justa exiget ; si quid bonorum operum habebunt, auferet, et injuriam passis dona- bit : si nihil habuerint, peccatis injuria af- EPITOME FIDEI ET RELIGIONIS TURCICA. fectorum oppressores onerabit. Pons Si- rath, qui pilo tenuior et ense acutior erit, super infernum distendetur; omnes tes hunc transire cogentur, aliqui ut ful- men, aliqui uti ventus, aliqui uti velox, aliqui uti succussator equus, et aliqui fa- tigatim peccatis super humeros gravati transibunt, condemnati non permeabunt, sed in infernum decident; peccatis non gravati transcurrent, et ad ccelos perve- nient : quisque propheta suam_habebit piscinam, ex qua, antequam coelum adi- verint, cum suis populis bibant: piscina Mahumeti major erit quam aliorum; ex uno capite in alterum unius mensis inter patebit ; in viridissimis et opacis ripis ap- positi erunt urceoli, stellarum multitudi- nem excedentes; hine semel bibens, non amplius sitiet; aqua piscine lacte candidior et melle suavior erit: ccelestes semel ccelum ingressi, in eo manebunt in eternum, nunquam egressuri; ibi nul la. mors, nulla senectus, aut decrepita getas; vestes non senescent, nulla excre- menta aut foria, sed omnia per sudorem evacuabuntur ; nullus somnus, nullus la- bor, nulla passio: ibidem celestes virgi- nes, quee Hur vocantur, et aliz mulieres nulla menstrua aut puerperia patientur; non pravi mores, nullum odium, nulla in- vidia, sed eternus ac purus et incorrup- tus amor: qualemcunque cibum aut po- tum desiderabunt, epulis apportabuntur; heec tamen non coquentur, sed semper parata inveniuntur: terra ex musco, 88- per quam palatia mixtim exaureis et ar- genteis lateribus fabricata, auro et gem- mis intextis peristromatibus strata, Phry- gio opere laboratis cervicalibus instructa, sedes ex pretiosissimis lapidibus fabre- facte ; vini jucundissimi saporis a pocil- latoribus pulcherrimis propinabuntur; coitus cum virgunculis et puerulis, per iscelibus, torquibus, armillis, et inauribus ornatis ; emissio spermatis quousque pla- cebit. In inferno autem infideles et dia- beli eterne manebunt, 1i quoque immor- tales; his collo camelorum crassitudine similes serpentes, et mulorum magnitudl- ne horrendi scorpiones tormenta injul- gent: {ΠῚ ferventibus pice aquis aduri debent ; combusta corpora et in carbones versa iterum novas carnes et cutes indu- ent, paenasque infinitas, et crudeles, ac inexplicabiles Juent. VI. Sexto, Credatur omnia bona et ma- la fieri ex decreto et providentia divina; - it aut futurum est, preedes- tinatum est; et in leuk et mahfuz (id est, tabula adservata) rerum fata ab eterno seripta sunt; ei scripture nihil contra- rium accidere potest; fidelium fides et devotorum devotio, aliaque bona fiunt ex scitu, voluntate, predestinatione, consen- su, complacito Dei, et dict tabule crea- tz inscriptione; sic quoque infidelium infidelitas, et prevaricatorum prevarica- tio, ac mala omnia fiunt quidem ex scitu, providentia, pradestinatione, et dicte ta- bule inscriptione, sed non ex consensu et complacito Dei; hec autem cur pre- destinaverit, voluerit, noluerit, nemini in- daganda sunt, prout occulta Dei myste- ria, quorum ratio apud illum solum con- stat; imo in Deum gravissime peccabi- tur, si impenetrabilia et scitu impossibilia secreta Dei perscrutabuntur. Et hi sunt VI articuli fidei Turcice, que corde credere et lingua profiteri ob- ligantur, dicentes, Credo Deum, et ange- los, et libros, et prophetas, et diem judi- cii, et predestinationem boni et malia Deo celsissimo. Fidem quoque exterio- ribus actionibus sustentant, nimirum, tes- tatione, precibus, eleemosyna, jejunio mensis Ramadan, et peregrinatione ad Mecham, si viaticum suffecerit. Attestatio est formula, per quam patet transitus ad sectam Mahumetanam; nempe, Non est mumen preter Deum, et Muhamed est propheta Dei. ‘Turcarum ergo filii pu- ‘beres ad hanc repetendam stimulantur ; ille vero, qui ab alia fide Mahumetanam ingreditur, in conspectu imperatoris, aut ‘alterius cujusvis prepositi pileum e capi- \te abjicit, atque dicit se velle fieri Musul- \mannum, hoc est, per fidem Mahumeta- nam salvum; tum presens ille magnas jubet adferri syndonem, qua caput novitii Jobyolvendo redimitur, ac unam sagittam, |que in ejusdem dextram _porrigitur; ‘hance ille erecto digito indice recipit, et |prescriptam formam ab antistite dicta- }tam repetit; tandem secedit et ab alio eonclavi prioribus vestibus exuitur, aliis- }que pro usu Turcico induitur, ac cum as- |sumpta sagitta ad ditiores ‘Turcas condu- citur, qui commune gaudium ostentantes neviter sectam ingresso gratificantur ; al- liqui vestes, aliqui nummos donant ; postea itur ad balneum, in quo raditur et atur, tandem ad circumcisionem: mo- ‘autem circumcidendi hie est; ex is sericis et tapetibus cortina prepa- Vor. ΠΙ. 51 EPITOME FIDEI ET RELIGIONIS TURCICZ. 401 ratur, quam preputiatus cum circumcis- ore et curatore ingreditur; extra corti- nam tibicines tibias inflant, tympaniste tympana ac crembala quatiunt, adstans populus, magna voce, Deus, Deus, con- clamant quousque circumcisor officium suum peregerit, qui dum novacula pre- putium abscindit, procurator a tergo digi- tum melle oblinitum ori novitii, ne forte veritus vociferetur, imponit; hoc perac- to, circumcisor pulveribus constringenti- bus (veluti arundinum cineribus, aut ca- prinarum pellium rasuris) inspersis san- guinem sistit, deinde spectatoribus pre- putium ostendit; circumcisus lecto im- ponitur, circumcirca mense extruuntur, per diem epulantur, noctem ludis ducunt, mane abeunt, circumcisus solus cum suo curatore remanet, quosque ex vulnere sanus consurgat; tum iterum in balneo abluitur. Opulentorum vero Turcarum filli, antequam dictam cortinam ineant, pretiosis vestibus ornati, instratis equis per plateas exspatiantur, quibus pauperi- ores filios vel servos suos circumcidendos aggregant, ut sine ullo sumptu ditioris gratia circumcidantur, quos ille libenter ex opere charilatis recipit, ac filio suo pro labantis animi confortatione socios adsciscit: seepius quoque hanc attestatio- nem in ore habent Turce, et preesertim dum suas lotiones peragunt: hoc autem fit pro fidet renovatione ; leves enim ob causas fidem labefactari, infirmari, et ab ea facillime avelli posse suspicantur: al- iqui ipsorum religiosi vocati Zakir (id est, Memorator, quod hanc formam semper memorat) diu et noctu sine intermissione cantitant, sed sine adjunctione, Muham- med est propheta Dei, tantummodo reite- rant, agonizantibus clara voce in aurem inculeant, superliminaribus, vexillis, et aliis in locis spectabilibus majusculis lite- ris exarant. Oratio quotidie quinquies perorari de- bet, ante ortum solis, meridie, pomeridia- no tempore, post occasum solis, et prima noctis vigilia, (id est, una hora et media noctis) tum ipso temporis momento, quod quidem melius fit, tum eorum intercape- dine ; ut si aliquis summo mane precibus non adfuerti, usque ad meridiem habet tempus satisfaciendi; at si meridionales preces ipsa meridie non peregerit, inter- capedine, que inter meridiem et pomeri- dianum tempus est, persolvere poterit, et sic de ceteris: tempora autem a preco- RAS) ὦ “4.0. 402 nibus ex turri aut locis editis alta voce populo his verbis indicantur : Deus Maximus, quod quatuor repetit. Fateor non esse numen preter Deum! hoc bis repetit. ateor Mahumetem esse prophetam Dei, hoe quogue bis. Adeste ad orationem, hoc quoque bis. Adeste ad salutem, hoc quoque bis. Jam incipit oratio, hoc quoque bis. Deus Maximus, Deus Maximus, non est Numen preter Deum. Oraturi debent esse a spermate, men- struis, sanguine et aliis sordibus (inter quas vinum et porcina caro vel pinguedo immundissime habentur), impolluti, 6 quibus in balneis abluuntur, que lotio Gast vocatur: ante precationem autem fit lotio sacra, que est manuum, faciei, brachiorum, jpedumque lotio; et humi- de dextre manus per verticem capitis, et per posteriores partes colli utriusque manus ductio ; hzc omnia instituto quo- dam ordine, et interjectis aliquibus pre- catiunculis perficiuntur. Si autem aqua defuerit, loco lotionis aqualis faciunt Teijmum, id est, lotionem pulveralem ; accepto enim terre pulvere, et quidem puriore, manus faciemque defricant, et sic sacram supplent lotionem: precatio- num aligue sunt Farza, id est, institute a Deo in Alcorano, aliquee Sunna, insti- tute a propheta Mahumeto: que a Deo sancite sunt, nunquam possunt omitti; et si intermittuntur, alio tempore omnino re- coli debent; que vero a propheta, ali- quando a parum devotis pretermittuntur, precipue Sunna pomeridiani temporis et prime noctis vigiliz ; Sunne omnes sum- missa voce et sine antistite singulatim peraguntur; Farzarum alique clara, uti matutina, serotina, et nocturna; alique tacita, uti meridionalis et pomeridiana ; eedemque vel singillatim, vel cum mul- titudine et antistite : cum ergo precationi se accingunt, sint in templo aut quovis alio in loco, versum eam partem orientis, in qua templum Meccanum est, sese dirigunt ; ea autem pars vocatur Kyber ; et ad Sunnam quidem soli per se sine ordine, ad Farzam vero si sunt duo vel tres precaturi, et serie prout acies milita- ris se disponunt, et unus eorum qui doc- tior est fit antistes, alter vero preco, qui prescriptam indicationem iterum in delu- bro replicat, ad cujus finem omnes ma- nus erigunt, ac pollicibus aurium molliores partes attingunt, et ita se corde velle EPITOME FIDEI ET RELIGIONIS TURCICA. orare intendunt: ad cujuslibet autem temporis orationem sunt precipue inten- tionis formule, postea junctis manibus ante pectus, hanc orationem tacite prolo- quuntur: Gloria sit tibi, O Deus noster, et laus; et benedicatur nomen tuum, et evaltetur dignitas tua, et magnificentur encomia tua, quia non est numen aliud preter te: postea dicit, Confugio ad Dominum Deum a Diabolo maledicto, in nomine Dei miseratoris et misericordis ; ac tum primam Alcorani suratam, que potissima ipsorum est oratio, recitat; illa autem vocatur Fatihe, initium: Laus Deo sabaoth, misericordi et miseratori, Regi extremi judicii: te adoramus, a te auxilium postulamus ; dirige nos in vi- am rectam, viam eorum quibus benefecis- tt, non €orum guibus tralus es, nec eorum qui deviant. Amen. Post hance oratio- nem tres aut quatuor versus, quicunque placuerint, ex Alcorano pronunciant, et hee omnia memoriter; nam inter pre- candum legere non licet: hoe quoque perlecto dicitur Deus mazimus, et miris ceremoniis sese ad medium corpus in- clinant, ac ter vel quinquies, vel alio im- pari numero usque ad novem dicunt, Gloria Deo meo maximo: post dicunt, Deus maximus, et iterum se erigunt ; tum iterum, Deus maximus dicentes se inclin- ant; ac tandem in faciem procumbunt, et preedicto numero dicunt, Laus Deo meo altissimo; et sic finitur una inclinatio: pro altera iterum se erigunt, et a pre- scripta Fatihe, usque ad procubitum ea- dem ratione progrediuntur: post secun- dam quoque inclinationem fit Kaade, Sessio; in qua oratio peroratur; Bene- dictiones sint Deo, et orationes, ac bone actiones: pax tibi, O propheta, et mise- ricordia divina, ac benedictio ejusdem, et pax sit super nos, et super servos Dei probos : fateor quod non est numen pra@- ter Deum: et fateor quod Mahumet est servus Dei, et propheta: hac oratione peracta, si preces sunt duarum solummo- do inclinationum, hune precum epilogum adjicit; Deus meus, esto propitius Ma- humeto et populo Mahumetano, uti propt- tius fuit Abrahamo et populo ejus, quia tu es laudatus et glorificatus : hoc dicto, facie ad dexiram, post ad sinistram in- versa, angelos custodes, quos ipsi hume- ris suis insidere credunt, salutant, dicen- tes ad utrumque humerum, Paw sit vobis et misericordia divina: ac sic manibus Ἶ EPITOME FIDE! ET RELIGIONIS TURCICZ. faciem detergentes dicunt; Audivimus, et obtemperabimus tibi: parce nobis, O Deus noster, et ad te concurrimus. Sic _finiuntur preces, que si quatuor sint in- _clinationum, post priorem sessionem res- _ervato epilogo, iterum se erigunt, et duas _posteriores inclinationes, uti prius fece- rant, persolvunt; (nisi quod hec semper tacite recitantur;) tum iterum considen- tes sessionis orationem cum epilogo reci- tant et concludunt. Matutina ante Far- zam habet Sunnam duarum inclinatio- num, et unius sessionis ; post hance sequi- tur Farza,eadem quoque duarum incli- _nationum et unius sessionis. Meridiona- lis ante Farzain habet Sunnam quatuor inclinationum et duarum sessionum ; hanc sequitur Farza totidem inclinationum et sessionum ; post Farzam fiunt due Sunne, po quatuor inclinationum, et duarum _sessionum ; altera duarum inclinationum, et unius sessionis; pomeridiana ante -Farzam habet Sunnam quatuor inclina- tionum et duarum sessionum: postea se- quitur Farza similiter duarum inclina- tionum et sessionum ; hanc subsequitur Sunna duarum inclinationum et unius ses- ‘sionis. Serotina incipit a Farza, que est 3 incl. et 2 sess. ; prior sessio fit post _duas inclinationes, secunda post tertiam : -hane sequitur Sunna 2 inclin. 1 sess. /Nocturna ante Farzam habet Sunnam /quatuor inclinationum et duarum sessio- -num ; post sequitur Farza totidem inclina- ‘tionum et sessionum: post Farzam habet /Sunnam quatuor inclinationum et duarum | sessionum ; sed post secundam sessionem non recitant epilogum, uti in aliis, imo se erigit, et pollicibus aures apprehendit, ac »intendit se velle orare Vitw, id est, ora- ‘tionem imparem, quam incipit a Fatihe, eaque finita, recitat Doai kun ut, id est, /orationem stationis, que sic se habet; Deus noster, utique ate opem implora- mus, et a te indu/gentiam petimus, a le dirigi cupimus ; in te credimus, ad te convertimur, {ἰδὲ confidimus ; {ἰδὲ bona | omnia impulamus, tibi gratiam agimus, et non sumus in te ingrati ; repudiamus ac relinguimus eos qui in te contumaces Ι sunt ; Deus noster, te adorumus, tili pre- ces fundimus, ct in faciem prosternimur, ad te recurrimus et properamus: spera- | mus tuam misericordiam, et penam tuam timemus, quia pena tua ad infideles per- \ tingit: hac oratione absoluta se inclinat, | prosternit ac considet, et sessionis oratio- | nem epilogumque recitat, angelos salutat, et finit: post cujusvis autem temporis ora- tiones fit Litania, vocata T'esbih, que sic incipit; Deus unus est, non est aliud nu- men preter eum; vivus uh @terno, non corripit eum dormitatio nec somnus ; quic- guid in celis et in terra est, ab ipso creata sunt: quis ille, qui intercedere potest apud eum nist cum ipsius permis- sione ἢ scit quid ante et post ipsos est, nec illius sapientia quicquam comprehen- dere possunt, nisi quod ipse vult; nec est Deo gravis celi et terre conservatio ; et hic est altissimus et maximus. Gloria Deo, et hoc trigesies repetitur, et corolla precaria numeratur: trigesima vice dici- tur, Gloria Deo altissimo, maximo, et semper laus Deo; sic trigesies, Laus Deo: trigesima vice dicit, Laus Deo, Domino exercituum : tunc, Deus magnus ; hoc quoque trigesies : trigesima vice, Deus maximus, sapientissimus, magnificentissi- mus, potentissimus ; non est Deus preter eum solum, non habet consortem, ipsius est regnum et laus, hic etiam est omnipoten- tissimus : tunc elatis manibus versus cee- lum omnes precantes Turce dissonis vo- cibus ac magno motu tractis suspiriis in- gemunt Amen septies; post septimum Amen dicunt, O prestator rerum expeti- tarum, exaudi, O exauditor precum : ite- rum septies Amen; et, Sit laus Deo Sa- baoth: tandem consurgunt et ex syna- goga egrediuntur. Eleemosyna precipua, aut contributio ex lege divina datur et consecratur; ea enim sanctificantur, augenturque opes relique: ad hance nemo constringitur, nisi Nisah hauli possideat ; hee autem est portio quarumvis opum ultra supel- lectilerm necessariam uno anno absolute possessarum, que possessorem fidelem eleemosyne dicte obligat. Supellex neccessaria vocatur Haget astire, qua quotidie fruimur, uti vestes, domus, servi, libri, boves operarii, jumenta oneraria aut pabularia; absoluta possessione lib- eri potiuntur; unde servus talionatus, id est, cui summa aliqua pecunialis pro sui ipsius redemptione prescripta est, non obstringitur hac eleemosyna, quia etsi opum suarum sit possessor, non tamen ipse semet possidet: debitor quoque de tot opibus, quot pro debito persolvendo sufficiunt, nihil contribuit ; nec quidquam tribuitur a bonis in fine anni perditis, aut iis que naufragio interierunt, aut vi Se ee ee. 404 EPITOME FIDE] ET RELIGIONIS TURCICA. ereptis: nec ereptor testimoniis convinci potest ; nec in deserto sepultis taliter ut locus ubi sepulte sint ignoretur; nec de eo credito, quem debitor toto anno ne- gaverat, postea in presentia aliquorum se debere fassus est; nec ab aliquo prin- Cipe usurpatis et post aliquot annos res- titutis ; sed de iis opibus quibus anno in- tegro potitus est, et quas debitor non ne- gat, et siquidem persolvere nequeat ; et de iis quas negat, sed testimoniis aut ju- dicis notitia approbantur, eleemosyne da- ri debet: nec de aliis opibus extra aurum argentum, camelos, boves, oves, equos, asinos eleemosyna impertitur, nisi forte Sit possessoris intentio opibus 115 merca- turam exercere: v. g. si quis servum emerit pro suo famulatu, de eo nihil per- solvet, sed sieum vendere intendit, lar- gitur: portio igitur dicta Nizab ex came- lis est possessio V camelorum, ex bobus XXX boum, ex ovibus XL ovium, ex auro tam nativo quam cuso XX Miskal (Miskal autem est pondus 11-7 drachm.) ex argento C drachme, ex rebus merca- toriis quoque que C drachmarum argenti pretio constant: pro quotvis ergo V camelis, sint Persici aut Arabici, una ovis datur, usquequo augeatur possessio XXV camelorum, pro his tribuitur Ibn, vel Binetu Mechazin, scilicet, annum se- cundum agens camelus, vel camela, us- que ad augmentum possessionis XXXVI, pro quibus Ibn, vel Binetu Lebun, hoc est, annum tertium agens camelus aut camela gratificatur, usque ad XLVI, pro quibus hik, vel hikkah, id est, quartum annum agens camelus, aut camela, us- que ad LXXVI: pro his dantur bineta le- bun, id est, duo cameli aut camele ter- tium annum agentes, usque ad XCI, post CXX, a quovis quinto una ovis et hikka- tan usque ad CXLV, abhinc Ibn vel Binetu mechaz, et hikkatan usque ad CL; ab CL dantur hikak, id est, tres quartum annum agentes camel ; postea iterum a capite, scil. a quovis quinto una ovis, et hikak usque ad XXXVI, ubi fiet summa camelorum CLXXXVI: pro his Ibn vel Binetu lebun, et hikak, usque ad XLVI, ubi erit numerus CXCVI camelo- rum, pro quibus dantur IV hikak usque ad CC: et sic augente numero camelo- rum augetur eleemosyna, inchoando a capite, uti post CL usque ad CC acturm est; et sic semper a quovis L una _hik, vel hikka, producitur, usque ad infinitum: de bobus ovibusque sunt certe a certi numeris institute eleemosynarum pro- portiones, quee in libris legum Muhame.- danarum sub capite Zekiat designate re- periuntur, liberumque erit loco ‘ictoaal animalium equiparabilem pecuniam im. pendere. Ex auro autem, argento, ac) mercibus decimarum, quarta pars tribui- tur, sic ut a 40 unum proveniat: he - eleemosyne distribuuntur inter pauperes, - inopes, servos, talionatos, debitores, qui nullam ex predictis portionibus possident, | militibus, peregrinis in itinere remansis, — et 115 qui a suis opibus longe absunt: non — possunt dari parentibus, conjugibus, man- | cipiis, parvulis, divitibus, nec tributariis: | laudabile est donare tantum per vicem, | quantum pro uno die pauperi_a cibo men- | dicando exempto sufficere potest: et | quilibet in sua urbe aut mansione habi- _ tantibus, non in alia loca transferendo | partitur, nisi forte ejus loci habitatores sint suis vicinis pauperiores. Alia ele- | emosyne species est Fitu, id est, jejunil solutio: hane enim dare debent in fine Paschatis Muhammedici, succedenti jeju- nio mensis Ramadanisummo mane; et — nummi qui donantur sint impari numero, | nec cui datur intente respiciendum est. Eleemosyne exequiales pro posse cujus- libet fiunt; Oryza cum melle et croco | cocta, ac eadem cum butyro spissa; car- nes elixas, dulciaria coquunt, ac quadra- gesimo septimo die post mortem, imo et in anni exitu distribuunt. Charitates omnes laudant et exercent: si aliquos ex agnatis aut cognitis in statu afflicto somniant, panes emunt, confring- unt, ac per vicos vagis canibus projiciunt: canes preesertim catellos bidentes sum- mopere curant; lis enim tuguriola con- ficiunt, scruta substernunt, ac per aliquod tempus nutriunt. ‘Solis sine ullo hospite cibum capere grave est; quapropter ceenaculorum portas patentes sinunt, et publice aliqui ante portas edulia sumunt et transgredientes invitant : die Paschatis victimarum et aliis temporibus, si aliquod boni successerit, aut ex aliqua tribulatione elabuntur, oves immolant et carnes pale — peribus dispertiuntur: aquas pro com- | muni usu a longinguis partibus magno sumptu conducunt: aliqui se solum huie ς servitio devovent, ut aquasalonge hu- | meris aut jumentis portatas populo in | 4 templis, aut militibus in castris preebe Jejunium principale ab apparitione : EPITOME FIDEI ET RELIGIONIS TURCICA. dicte Ramadan usque ad finem ejus- dem ex decreto divino celebrant: a cibo, etcoitu per totum diema diluculo e ad crepusculum abstinent; post sum lampades supra turres et in synagogis quam plurime accenduntur ; ‘tum temporis fit jejunii solutio, que fit dactylis aut aliis levioribus cibis ac potu ‘aque; postea serotinas preces peragunt ; tandem mense accumbunt, usque ad pri- mam roctis vigiliam, qua assurgunt et in templo congregantur; ubi ordinariis ‘ejus temporis orationibus absolutis, ex- ‘traordinarias et huic lune peculiares ora- tiones (que conquiescentia nuncupantur) faciunt: hc autem oratio est XX_ incli- ‘nationum ; post quaslibet quatuor con- quiescunt, et antiphonas variis tonis ca- nunt ; post domum redeunt, ac tota noc- te edunt, bibunt, melicos audiunt, confa- bulantur, petum et kahuvam pro evitando somno sumunt, interdiu dormrunt: infirmi et itinerantes a jejunio absolvuntur, alio tempore compensant ; alias si aliquis data Opera jejunium ruperit edendo, bibendo ‘aut coéundo, piaculum, quo tale crimen expiatur, pensare debet ; viz. pro unico die soluti jejunii servum aut servam liber- ‘tate donare, et, si potis non fuerit, sexa- nta dies jejunare, et si hoc quoque non joterit, pro LX pauperibus prandium con- ere debebit; si autem casu, scil. si ‘aliquis os eluendo parum aque absorpse- Tit, aut vicoactus ad edendum, bibendum, vel actum libidinis fuerit, aut ore pleno vomuerit, aut putans adhuc noctem esse ‘Mane comederit, aut jam vesperam esse ‘Opinatus die claro jejunium solverit, diem Pro die jejunabit. Si quis interdiu dor- ‘Wiens polluitur, aut oblitus comederit, biberit, aut se unxerit, vel collyrio ovifios illeverit, aut osculatus fuerit, aut alicui ‘obtrectaverit, aut parumper evomuerit, aut parum aque in aures illapsum fuerit, ‘aut pulvis, fumus, vel musca in guttur inci- derit, absolvitur. Si frustulum, quantum ‘unum cicer, inter dentes remansze carnis inglutierit, diem pro die reficiet, sin Cicere minus fuerit, absolvitur, nisi forte Semel ore exemptum iterum ingerat et @eglutiat. Et si aliquis unum granum ‘sesami sine masticatione comederit, je- junium solvit, si vero masticat, non: et Ore pleno vomitus iterum fortuito, vel €onsulte deglutitus, rumpit jejunium, sed _— vomitus nequaquam. Imam Mu- met autem dicit, si parum vomitus ite- ἬΝ = a δή ras = «= a ee oe ὖν 405 rum deglutitusjejunium solvit; sin multum, non. Si decrepitus aliquis jejunium sus- tinere non potuerit, solvat jejunium, et pro quovis die unum pauperem saturet, aut alio tempore diem pro die jejunet : preeg- nans, aut nutrix, si sibi aut puerulis timent, ne ex jejunio infirmentur, edunt sine pensatione. Si aliquis a per aliquot dies hujus lune mente defecerit, postea sanatus, totidem dies jejunabit. Si ali- quis toto mense Ramadan deliraverit, absolvitur; sed si aliquot dies tantum, pensabit. Sunt et alia quamplurima scrupula, quibus tale jejunium corrumpi- tur, sed quia auribus non competunt, re- ticeo : alia quoque jejunia ex voto et ju- ramento observant; aliqui integro anno, sed multi tres lunas Regeb, Schaban et Ramadan, quovis anno jejunant, preeser- tim provecta etate mulieres. Sunt et qui se in templis per aliquot dies et noctes continent jejunantes, nec nisi alvi inaniendi gratia prodeunt; nectu cibos capiunt, et pugnis pectora percutientes cum vehementi suspiratione Huve! Huve! (id est, Deus! Deus!) ingenti voce proclamant: aliqui et junctis mani- bus inter se choros circulares ducunt, ac assidue preedictum Huve, vel lau illah tllala modulantur; hoc tale jejunium vocatur continentia. Peregrinationem in Meccam a Deo san- citam quilibet fidelis liber, puber, sanus, videns, viaticum abundans et jumentum habens, ac familiam usque ad reditum penu bene instructam relinquens, semel in vita explere debet, si iter tutum est: mulieres quoque cum maritis aut pro- pinquis parentibus simul, si eorum man- siones plusquam trium dierum itinere a Mecca distant, peregrinaridebent. ‘lem- pus in qua hee peregrinatio peragitur, esta luna Schawal, in cujus principio fit pascha solvendi jejunii, usque ad deci- mum diem lune Dulhaiat, qui dies, voeatur dies jugulationis, vel pascha immolationis, quee in memoriam sacrificii_patris: Abra- ham colitur. Hujus peregrinationis Par- ze sunt tres: prima Naziratus, nempe vilioris vestis amictus, abstinentia a ve- natione terrestri, venere, odoribus ; con- tinentia a verbis obscanis, jurgiis, rixis, venationis demonstratione tam actu quam dictu, tonsura barbe, abrasione capitis et pilorum corporis, unguium sectione ; ab indutu caligarum, vestium, cidaris, ocrearum, pannorum odorifero eolore 406 imbutorum, nisi forte odor evanuerit. Secunda Farza est, statio in monte Arefat, ut infra dicetur. ‘Tertia, processus circa templum Meccanum visitationis gratia. Loca dicta Mevakit, in quibus variarum nationum peregrini congregantur, sunt quinque: 1. Hulyfa; hic locus septem milliaribus distat a Mecca ; Medinensibus est destinatus. 2. Zatark ; Babyloniensi- bus, Basrensibus, et Cufensibus. 3. Hu- gefa; Damascenis. 4. Karn; Negden- sibus. 5. Yelemlem; Jemaniensibus. Antequam autem heec loca ineant, squa- lentes pulvere vestes deponunt, puris et insutis, quarum altera succinctorium, al- tera pallium, corpora tegunt, vultumque et caput aperiunt: duarum inclinationum oratione peracta singuli hanc precatiun- culam recitant, Deus, Deus, profecto ego cupio peregrinationem, proinde mihi se- cunda eam, et suscipe eam a me: tum intendit se velle perficere peregrina- tionem, et dicit, Ecce adsum, et obedio tibi, O Deus meus ; non est tibi consors ; paratus consisto ad gerendum tibi mo- rem, quia laus et beneficentia tua est, et regnum, nec est tibt socius: heec verba multoties reiterantur, preesertim post quas- vis orationes in ascensu montium et de- scensu vallium. Meccam ingressi impri- mis ad templum Meccanum procedunt, quo conspecto exclamant, Deus mazimus, et non est numen aliud preter Deum: recta lapidi nigro obviam eunt; hic est ille lapis niger, quem summa veneratione colunt Mahumetani, ob vestigia planta- rum patris Abrahe, que quod continue inde jumentum inequitaverat, et iterum super eum descenderat, impressa ap- parent: huic igitur lapidi appropinquan- tes manus imponunt, ac exosculantur, si in densa hominum turba sine molestia alicujus fieri potest; sin minus, aliqua alia re contingunt, atque eum osculantur : postea circum templum_ processionem boni adventus peragunt: hc processio exieris nationibus Sunna est; inchoatur a dextra parte porte pone septum quod- dam imperfectum ; ponentes pallium sub axillam dexteram, et projicientes partem ejus super humerum sinistrum septies obeunt; tres obitus anteriores cito qui- dem, sed parvis passibus, ac humeros agitantes circumcurrunt, et quavis vice petram illam nigram, ut dictum est, con- tingunt, ibique finiunt processionem : postea duas inclinationes in loco Abra- EPITOME FIDEI ET RELIGIONIS TURCICZA. hami, aut in quacunque parte templi pla- | cuerit, perficiunt; tum egrediuntur, et ascendunt montem Safa; ubi se templo— obvertunt dicentes, Deus maximus, et non est numen aliud preter Deum ; et eriguat manus, impetrantque quod cupiunt: postea vadunt versus montem Mervah currentes, ejusque fastigium petunt, et idem faciunt, quod in Monte Safa; et sic ab uno monte ad alterum septies con- tendunt; rursus revertuntur ad Meccam et pro libitu processiones peragunt. Septi- mo die lune antistes perorat, et peregrinos docet quomodo se gerere debent in Mecca; ac ceremonias, legem et ritum sacrifi- candi demonstrat. Octavo die redeunt in vallem Munam, et ibi commorantur usque ad diluculum none diei: nona die vadunt in montem Arefat; ibi antistes iterum preedicat, et instruit populum us- que ad decimum diem. Decimo die de- nuo adeunt vallem Munam ; ibi ritum sa- crum dictum Gemerat incipiunt; viz. summo mane, orato matutino, dicunt, Deus maximus ; et lapillorum vel silicum duobus digitis prensorum jactu Satanam quasi impetentes execrantur, atque aver- runcant; et tum reticent illam orationem Lebbeike, ac immolant oves, camelos, boves,si volunt, capillos tondent, et radunt potius ; a dicta abstinentia Nazireati, pre- terquam a coitu, absolvuntur: post solis ortum processionem visitationis peragunt, et tum coire cum mulieribus licet. . Un- decimo, duodecimo, et decimo tertio die in ea valle demorantur, ac dictos lapides projiciunt, prius ter, postea septies, hoc autem fit quotidie. Ultimo, Meccam rev- ertuntur; ac exteri in signum valedic- tionis templum circumeunt: Meccani autem habitatores ad edes_ tendunt; limitem templi osculantur; pectus et faciem super Multezem, locum inter por- tam et lapidem nigrum ponunt, tegumen- tum templi arripiunt ac per unam_ horam tenentes supplicibus verbis orant, plan- gunt, gemunt, retrorsumque incedentes ex templo egrediuntur: qui autem non substiterit toto die in monte Arefat, mer- itum peregrinationis non acquirit: prop- terea processione peracta exuit Ihram, ac anno venturo peregrinationem rendo- vat. Animas, uti et corpora, sepulchro re- condi credunt Mahumetani usque ad diem extremi judicii; sepultis statim grandem et gravem clavam gerentem angelum _— HABITUS HUMANI ACQUISITI NON SUNT Munker vocatum, una cum Nekir, alio angelo advenire, et defunctos de quatuor rebus interrogare: 1. Quis est tuus Deus? 2. Quis tuus propheta? 8. Que tua fides? 4. Que est tua directio ? Ad has questiones ii, qui constanter fidem Mahumeti professi sunt, imperterri- ti respondent, Deus meus est ille, qui te -ereavitet me; propheta Muhamed; fides mea Islam, id est, Mahumetana (quasi Salvatio ;) directio, Caba, id est, templum Meccanum. Ceteri, qui extra hanc fidem sunt, ob eximiam magnitudinem -angelorum summo terrore perculsi, per- contatorem angelum pro Deo agnoscent ; 'qua de causa clava percutientur, ac ‘sepulchri compressione cruciabuntur ; | fideles autem placide requiescent, ac per | apertam sibi in ceelis fenestellam omnia, . ᾿ que ibi aguntur, respicient, et sic extre- mum diem prestolabuntur. Mahumeti quoque anima sepulchro continetur ; nam celum sibi oblatum refutavit, nolens eo sine suis fidelibus potiri; hanc animam omnes alie Mahumetanorum anime uti ductricem ad ceelestem gloriam insequen- tur. QUASTIONES ACT. MODERAT. APRIL. 1651. Habitus humani acquisiti non sunt revera | diversi a memoria hominis. ᾿ Visionem fieri posse absque specie, aut | imagine sensibili, probabile est. De priori. 1. Hasirvum naturam rite et distincte explicari multum interest philosophie. Hac etenim rite et distincte intellecta, cum res plurime varii et pulcherrimi /usus propius est ut cognoscantur, tum etiam confido fore, ut satis foecunda inu- jtiliam questionum seges hinc continuo amputetur; plurimi nodi et difficultates cum suis fundamentis et vestigiis penitus evanescant; et ipse animus noster tot entium a se invicem, non reipsa solum, verum et specie etiam diversorum, hos- pitio et sarcina liberetur. 2. Ut rem ipsam aggrediar, innuo im- eon me non de habitibus infusis, sed acquisitis tantum questionem instituere, 407 ne scilicet confidentius quam tutius extra philosophiz pomeeria evagatus, theologo- rum, quorum sunt partes de habitibus infusis agere, in meum caput objectiones accerserem. 3. Moneo iterum me minime paratum fore in quzstiones alias de modo me- mori, verum etiam sensationis efficiendz meipsum induere. Neque enim istud aut mei officii esse, aut ad presentem causam pertinere existimo. Seu me- moria nihil aliud sit, quam imaginum ‘quarundam intentionalium capaci cerebri cere impressarum retentio, seu per crassiores quasdam et corporales picturas fiat, sive per membranulas illas Lucre- tianas—summo de corpore rerum diremp- tas, et in capite asservatas ; seu potius memoria sit tantum motus illius, per quem sensatio facta est, vestigium in cerebro; seu alio quovis modo, aut medio existat ; satis est, modo hoc con- stet et concedatur, actuum ex quibus habitus ponuntur generari, in apothecis cerebri manere reliquias ; quas phantasi- am respicere, et ab ea intellectum sume- re, mallem ceu experientia cognitum supponere, quam operose ut dubium demonstrare. 4. Nihil etiam morabitur me ista Pla- tonicorum sententia asserentium quosdam habitus, virtutes pracipue et scientias, actibus novis non acquiri, neque in re- cente saltem memoria consistere, quippe quas non tam de novo discimus, quam veterem de iis scientiam repetimus, pul- verem et rubiginem menti obductam de- tergentes. 5. Neque de illa questione valde solicitus sum, utrum quidam habitus non tam acquirantur, quam ab ipso initio connascantur. 6. Neque ad rem nostram aliquid mo- menti habet, an simplex tantum, an vero (ut quidam volunt, reclamante Aristotele) duplex sit memoria, in sensitiva parte una, in intellectu altera. It si qua sunt similia dubia τῆς ἄλλης σκέψεως, lis nos Minime immiscemus. Quocunque illa modo sumantur, et constat memoriam dari, et in ea ego, vel in aliquo ipsi va. λόγῳ habituum, essentiam constituo. 7. His praemonitis, ea que ad propo- sitee theseos explicationem ulterius desi- derantur, et paucula sunt et. breviter expediantur. Supponitur enim dari hab- itus: id quod cum experientia satis lucu- 408 lenter ostendat, tum etiam obiter postea ratione ‘probabitur. Ipsius autem habitus hoc in leco definitionem exhibere incon- gruum esset, quippe dum sub judice lis sit de ejus essentia. Satis vero mentem theseos intelligit, qui habitum mente con- ceperit esse eam rem, qualiscunque sit, quze hominem ad aliquas actiones obeun- das promptiorem reddit, ad quas alioqui non adeo facilis et idoneus erat. Penitus autem omittendum censui, si quid in vi vocabuli hujus, aut etiam Greeci (ἕξεως), homony mize et diverse acceptionis occur- rat; quare enim opus esset hoc facere, quum quisque probe cognoscat qualis ea acceptio verbi sit, de qua agitur? 8. Quoniam vero potentiis operatrici- bus habitus omnes adjungunt, utile erit quedam de tis annotare, precipue ut di- visiones habituum, et subjecta ipsorum, secundum aliquorum sententiam, admo- dum calleamus. Aristoteles in secundo Nicom. cap. 5. ea que in anima sunt omnia in tria genera dispescit, ἕξεις, δυ- γάμεις, πάθη. Τὰς δυνάμεις (quibus ac- cedunt reliqua duo) idem et in Ethicis, et in Physicis libris sepius ψυχῆς μόρια vocat, qua appellatione et veteres omnes gaudent. ‘* Dividitur enim in partes an- ima, nunc in duas a Platone, nunc in tresa Zenone,nunc in quinque, et in sex a Pane- tio, in septem a Sorano,etiam in octo penes Chrysippum, etiam in novem penes Apol- lophanem ; sed et in decem apud quosdam Stoicorum ; et in duas ampiius apud Po- sidonium, qui a duobus exorsus titulis, a principali, quod aiunt ἡγεμονικὸν, et a rationali, in duodecim exinde prosecuit.” Ita et Seneca animam in membra disper- tit, et partes ministras; Galenus et alii communiter “407, μοιρία, μοίρας, aliquan- do εἴδη nuncupant. Elegantissime om- nium Tertullianus noster in libro de An- ima ingenia nominat; ““ Non membra,”’ inquit, ‘* sunt substantiz animalis, sed in- genia; neque tam partes anime habe- buntur, quam vires et efficacie et opera, sicut de quibusdam et Aristoteles judica- vit.” Sic ille exprimit ea, que ipse Aristoteles et sui interpretes δυνάμεις, ἰδεό- τητας, ἐνεργείας efferunt. Sane Aristoteli neque Anima διμερὴς est, ut Platoni, ne- que τριμερὴς, ut Galeno, neque ὀκταμερὴς, uti Chrysippo et Stoicis, verum ἀμερὴς po- tius, uti in tertio de anima disputatur. Que reliqui partium loco habent, τὸ ἡγε- μονιχὸν, et τὸ ὑπήκοον, vel τὸ θυμικὸν, τὸ ὙΨ Ψτυωνσὶ HABITUS HUMANI ACQUISITI NON SUNT ἐπιθυμητικὸν, et τὸ λογιστικὸν, vel ut alii di vidunt, τὸ ζωτικὸν, τὸ αἰσθητικὸν, τὸ κι κὸν, τὸ γοητικὸν, τὸ ὀρεκτικὸν τῆς ψυχῆς hee, inguam, eisi aliis sint, et Aristote nomine tenus, tamen non sunt anir revera partes philosopho. Non sunt illa certis corporis partibus et officiis distril tee et disclusze, sed ita singulz in toto dif- fusze, ut sunt proprietates in rebus natura~ libus, que ἴῃ his localiter dissepte non sunt, verum qualitate tantum distincte, uti 6. g. in igne siccum, calidum ac leve, que non loco distincta sunt, sed proprie- tate. Has igitur Aristoteles δυνάμεις, po- tentias, facultates appellavit, nomine aptis- simo, quod etiamnum merito schole reti- nent. Harum etenim distinctiones, que revera prope infinitee esse possint, pul- chre ostendunt quot modis anima apta sit nata vel agere, vel pati; et vel se ex- ercere, vel aliquid ab extrinseco recipere. Ei proculdubio he a natura insunt, vel ipsius potius natura et substantia sunt; et hisce instructa anima idonea ceasetur sua sponte, ad actiones 5101 a natura conces- sas et debitas, modo adsint cetera re- quisita, in lucem proferendas. ἢ Videntur nihilominus he facultates ad queedam objecta, etiam contraria, e sua indole indifferenter se habere; ad quos- dam actus ἐσοῤῥόπως tendere: ad neue trum duorum se determinare, verum ex captu et ingenio suo ad utramque partem inclinare. Hine ad ipsarum hane ἀδεαφο- ρίαν eximendam, alio quopiam opus 68- se experimur, quo quasi natura altera restrictiori agens ad unas partes alacrius, ad alias difficilius pertrahi cola Hoc quicquid sit isto modo facultati jectum, ad ipsam in limites et ordinem cogendum, habitus titulo apud omnes dignoscitur. 1 9. Hine facultatum multiplicem, imo infinitam divisionem esse posse perspic uum est; illa vero que nostre rei pre cipue conducere videtur, hee est, qua altera anime facultas cognoscens, altera appetens dicitur. Secundum enim hasee partes (ut distinctius agatur) utile erit et habitus dissecare. Quarum utramvis 8 habitus disponet secundum natures 8088. debitam perfectionem, et ad consentane> am ejus operationem, virtus vocetur, Sit aliter, vitium. ‘ 10. Illud vero ex ordine presupp dum de habitu loquor, illud tantum intelligere, quod in animo situm est. REVERA DIVERSI A MEMORIA HOMINIS. scholastici de habitibus disputant; in fa- cultatibus animi eequalitates quasdam ex crebris actibus nasci statuunt, quas habi- tuum nomine indigitant. ita et ego vel- im. Siquid ad corpus, aut organa que- vis, vel instrumenta, vel requisita perti- neat, non ingreditur habitus vel naturam, velnomen. Sed infra pauca de hac re ex altera occasione. 11. De memoria illud tantum efflagito, ut concedatur, eos nempe actus, quos in _aliquo genere virtutis vel vitii, seu in mente seu in appetitu residentis, agens _exerceat, alicubi iia retineri et reservari, ut eos iterum mens quasi perpetua que- dam simulachra respicere, et secundum 0s agere queat. Hoc facere memorie esse patet ; et tales actus esse quasi par- ticulares quasdam reminiscentias seu re- tentiones potius ; in his ego habitum col- locare profiteor. qualitatem quandam vel simplicem, vel ex pluribus conflatam, potenti τῇ éveg- γητεκῆ vel παθητικῆ inherentem, et acti- bus frequentatis productam constituunt. 12. Quod ad Aristotelem attinet, ante- quam ad probationem ulterius procedam, -|meum esse contendo, et ex eo memorize \terminum elucidandi occasionem desu- mo. Quum liceat piewhas, hisce tantum ἰοοῖβ illud probo. Sunt in libro J/egi ἐγήμης καὶ ἀναμνήσεως, Habitum ete- nim et memoriam ille isthic vel plane συνωνύμως vel aliam per alium effert. Semel sic loquitur, αἰσθητικοῦ μορίου ἐξ ¢ ἡ: μνήμη, capite primo; in alio capite hee sunt ejus verba; ὅταν γίνεται ἢ ἕξις ἢ πὸ πάθος, μνήμη ἐστι, Videte, confun- lit hee nomina. Actum vero etiam nti ex habitu profiuentem alibi me- ie tribuit ; Otro μέμνηται τὰς τοῦ τριγώνου ἣν ὀρθαῖς εἰσί. Ex hisce οἵ similibus Aris- lotelis verbis animadvertere mihi videor inl ice esse quasi memoriam. 1. Illa 2st, que sepissine sub memorime nomine ἢ scholis venit; scil. potentia anime, qua illa capax est a natura speciem rei jatellectee aut sensate apud se retinere, 1 in ejus iterum cognitionem regredi jueat. 2. Ipsa retentio, et quasi habitio ge Speciei in anima, quod, ὅσο. Hane Aristoteles memoriam, i. e. μνήμην sem- yer VOcat: etiam dicit modo 1460; modo > ΠΌΠΟΙ ΠῚ anime δύναμιν, Verba quarto Parag. primi capitis, de M. emin. ἐστὶ μὲν οὖν ἡ μνήμη οὔτε αἴσθησις, οὔτε ἐς, ἀλλὰ τοῦ μὲν τινὸς, ἢ ἕξις, ἢ πάθος, ὅταν Vou. Il. ᾽ , ᾿ ἢ Quem Teliqui plerique γίνεται ψρόνος" et in initio, Twi ψυχῆς μορίῳ συμ- Quid sit μορίον ψυχῆς, visum est prius; facultasnimirum. Aristoteles igitur per memoriam minime designat fae- ultatem ; sed ei συμδαίνον tm, accidens ejus; habitum nempe aut passionem. Liberum mihi puto ita usurpare hoc ver- bum, ut ipse philosophiz nostre magister, ὁ πάνυ, uti voluit. Hujusmodi igitur et ego memoriam intelligo in thesi, et exs presse hoc commoneo ne aliquod de ter- minis litigium suboriatur. 3. lpse actus memorize seu recordatio, τοῖς ἔξωθεν, ut ita dicam, seepe memoria dicta, at rarius ita in scholis. Nominari poterit forte haud inconcinne triplex hee memoria, potentialis, habitualis et actualis, e quibus mihi cum secunda solum res esto, (qua- rum unaqueque priorem perficit, et ha- bet se ad eam tanquam actus ad poten- tiam.) 13. Ne nimium curiosus videar, brevi- ter hee theseos mez mens, hic sensus est; agens ex habitu operari, nihil aliud est (quod solam mentem, seu partem im- perativam et primariam spectat ; organi- cam et instrumentalem prius amovi) ni- hil inquam aliud, quam in aliqua specie actionis reminisci illorum actuum, quos prius et szepius in ea specie ediderit ; qua mera ἀναμνήσει sine aliqua alia quali- tate promptius et paratius redditur ad eum actum iterum iterumque exerendum. Hee theseos mew est explicatio; quam, si non urgentissima brevitas me oppres- sisset, subtilius forte elaboratam, et va- riis conjecturis uberius stabilitam habuis- setis; nunc satis, imo necesse fuerit di- lutius et popularius, addo, parcius et de- sideratius currentibus quibusdam argu- mentis confimare. Et, 14. Primo, Primi vice se in conspec- tum sistunt ipsa experientia et inductio ; per quam precipua habituum genera dil- igenier excutiendo, constabit nihil eos aliud esse revera, quam quasdam memo- rig partes vel species. Pertinent habi- tus omnes, ut videtur, ad facultates, vel τὴν γρωστικὴν, vel τὴν ὀρεχτικήν, Eas ordine inspiciemus. Intellective partis quinque esse habitus a philosopho tradi- tos nemo ignorat; quibus et sua vitia an- aloga opponere facile fuerit. Enume rem hos, et videam. Quid igitur aliud est ars, quam exemplarium vel idearum quarundam opus aliquod seu ποίημα respicientium comprehensio in mente, Gaiver τὸ πάθος. 410 que exemplaria opifex semel vel «sepius plene ac dilucide exploravit, et in memo- riam reposuit, vel suo ipse ingenio prius excogitavit, deinde perfecit, et in alta mente etiamnum ipsorum notitiam reser- vat? Eum qui sic fecit, etsi quidvis aliud absit, communibus omnes suffragiis in artificis censu collocamus. Quid hic ἃ memoria nostra diversum aut alienum ? Pari modo scientia habitus est mentem apposite instruens ad unam aliquam con- clusionem, vel totam conclusionum mo- lem ac compagem faciliter cognoscen- dam. Recte; nunc et hic habitus est tantum reminiscentia istorum principio- rum, in quorum virtute hee conclusio necessario delitescit, et e quibus eam vir Sciens aliquoties elicuit, et ita se fecisse meminit ; ideoque eodem iterum ordine elicere valet; que principia, qui actus, 51 6 memoria dilaberentur, nonne actum esset de habitu isthoc, et de scientia ὃ Sic et ille intelligens est et γοερὸς, cujus animus principiorum et theorematum lo- cuplete pene, instruitur; qui illa in nu- micrato bade principia ; que si aut mini- me adessen |,aut aliquando effugerent, es- set forte—¢yudtwr ποταμὸς, vow οὐδὲ στα- λαγμός. Idem insapientia; at in pruden- tia adhue clarius, nihil eam esse, preter memoriam quandam ob plurimorum anno- rum usum omnigenis exemplis, factis, re- sponsis, monitis, legibusque luculenter re- fertam. Hine precipue senibus ob evi spatium tribuitur, ut illi in secundo Odys- see, “Os δὴγήραϊ κυφὸς ἔην καὶ μύρια ἤδη. methodusque illa est, qua se acquirere sa- piendi habitum profitetur Telemachus, ἐγὼ δ᾽ ἔτι νήπιος ja, Nov δ᾽ ὅτι δὴ μέγας εἶμι, καὶ ἄλλων μῦθον ἀκούων Πυνθάνομαι, καὶ δή μοι ἀέξεται ἔνδοθι θυμός. Discebat, rogabat, inspiciebat, retinebat; hec methodus est animum preclaris_ha- bitibus imbuendi. Merito igitur Cicero memoriam enumerat inter prudentiz par- tes; latius scilicet inventivam et conjec- tivam partes in prudentia coimplectens. Jure Mnemosyne mater Musarum a poé- tis constituta. Non indigne Apollonius hymnum memorize cecinit. Hee scilic- et via est scientias comparandi; distincte intelligere, et fideliter retinere ; id dum facimus, ecce, (ut Prudentius.) Tardis semper processibus aucta _ Crescit vita hominis, et longo proficit usu. HABITUS HUMANI ACQUISITI NON SUNT Eodem modo in vitiis opositis, ἄφρονες, ἄνοι, ἄτεχνοι, ἀνεπιστήμονες, iden bardi, per inopiam scilicet et incuriam memorize evadimus. Ad morales jam habitus recensendo devenimus. Virtutes et vitia quomodo a memoria non ablu- dant, exemplo uno aut altero discamus. Proponitur in medium vice reliquorum— temperantia. Nonne eum omnes tem- perantem nominamus, qui quum legis il- | lius, qua huic vitio interdicitur, probe meminerit, simul etiam oblata juxurie opportunitate ab ea aliquoties temperarit? _ que abstinentia reflectentis in se animi oculo perspecta, cum grata animum ob- | lectatione perfundit ob honestam victo- riam, tum etiam docet, quomodo dein- | ceps abstineri poterit; hine fit continuo ut hoc actu seepius repetito, et hac me- | moria firmata facilius ab illius voluptatis illecebris avertitur, et virtus illa radices in animo altiores agit. Vice versa vitiorum instantia fit ebrie- tas. Ille tandem ex habitu ebriosus eva- dit, quem quum allectrix crapula semel et iterum ad istud τὸ ζωρότερον πίνειν im- pulerit, occupetque adeo sequutura occa- — sionis vice phantasiam residens in me-— moria pregustata illa vini duicedo, subit — animum, quam benignis usus est sociis, quam grate et blande hilaris esse soleat, Cum bibitur concha, cum jam vertigine tectum Ambulat. Hee memoria, sensim per renovatos ac- tus magis magisque invalescens, ita de- mum totam mentem obruit, ut nihil aliud, quam faecundos calices concipere et cog- itare possit, blande tyrannidis vinculis irretitus. Adeo difficile est, quod subin- de jactitabat lepidus ille rhetor, quorun- dam oblivisci. Liceret in alliis omnibus Vitiis instare, quomodo hee τελευτῶσα φύ- gts, et—Quam multos laqueo tenet ambi- tiosi consuetudo mali. Verum supersede- bo hoc argumento, postquam uni objecti- uncule ex experientia desumpte respoM- — deatur, que suadere velit aliud quid preter — memoriam ad habitus, puta ad artes, Te | quiri. Supponatur enim quicunque cujus- | cunque artis regulas et ideas apprime cal lens, musicz forte, vel scriptori; neu- — tiquam foret ut hic homo, si desit praxis, et exercitatio, tam peritus musice evadet, ac ille, qui aliquos cithare pulsande an- nos impenderit ; neque erit scriptor | ter Ausoniano illi ταχυγράφῳ artis REVERA DIVERSI A MEMORIA HOMINIS. 411 tate et promptitudine conferendus, de quo dicitur, Currant verba licet, manus est velocior illis, Nondum lingue suum, dextra peregit opus, habeat ille prius dictus quantamvis memo- riam, et tantam quantam habere possit. Sic etiam fieri potest, ut ebriosus ille (de quo antea dictum) diuturno tempore Bac- cho sacer, etsi omnem pene memoriam immersit poculis, pergat tamen fortius genio et vitio suo indulgere, habitu ebrie- tatis vel ipsum corpus obsidente ; ut nul- la legum virtutis quanquam exactissima cognitione ad bonam frugem retrahi pos- sit. Respondeo, 1. Quod spectat mu- sicum et scriptorem, eos qui ideis artium harum mentem plene instructam ha- bent, et meminere quomodo omni mo- do organa artis tractare et applica- re debeant, que esse, quod spectat substantiam habitus, artifices, ac quos- vis alios quantalibet praxi aut usu exi- mios. Sin vero ita ipsam artem exercere nequeant; est quedam accidentalis, ex- trinseca, et minus ad rem pertinens ratio ; qualis est vegetior vis imaginative, cor- poraiium membrorum habilitas, organo- rum dispositio aptior ; manus scilicet, et partium habitui inservientium torpor, fir- mitas, mollities, flexibilitas, robur, quibus organa artis et habitus imperatis obse- quentiora redduntur. Hc autem ex ac- cidenti se ad habitum habere, qui in ani- ‘Mo situs est, jam antea premonitum est ; ad mentem enim dirigentem et imperan- tem, non ad manum habitus pertinet, cu- jus facultates perficit, facilitat et determi- nat ; corpus vero et reliqua agentia mere naturalia, que sub arbitrio et nutu alte- rius sunt, quod sua natura ad unum pro- pendeant, et passive solum indifferentia sunt, habitus incapacia sunt, imo potius ipsa sibi habitus sunt; facile id apta nata re, ad quod a natura diriguntur; et quod contra est tentare, inepta et inido- nea. He dispositiones corporales, habi- tus quidem exequutioni extrinsece mul- tum inservientes, non tamen magis per- tinent ad ipsam naturam habitus proprie et precise dicti, quam modulatio et inte- cithare arti citharcedi conducat. briosum quod attinet, si ex vitiosorum actuum frequentia corpus suum |wsum, et imminutum, et immuatatum est, induitur ille nova potius substantia quam novo habitu, syncrasia corporis alteratur ; quicquid vero in eo proffuit ex habitu, ἃ. idem etiam ex suavi memoria ebrioso- rum actuum. Actuum memoria, non regularis virtutis preestat homini habitum virtutis. Sed ecce secundum argumen- tum. 15. Secundo, Actuum habitum procre- antium dari memoriam conceditur ; hane autem sufficere ad omnia habitus munia commode obeunda patefiet. Sihoc suf- ficit, notum est naturam in superfluis non redundare ; et ulterius quicquam requi- rere, quam id quod necessarium est, cu- riosi esse ac satagentis animi. Non est ideo absque ratione temere nova qualitas confingenda, si hec satis fuerit. Suf- ficere memoriam inde probo ; quia quum hec habitus sola sint officia, facultatem disponere et determinare ad hoc potius quam illud, promptam reddere operationi- bus producendis, agentis vires augere et corroborare, activitatemque ejus suo in- fluxu promovere, et similia, hac omnia memoria perficit, etiam sensu teste. Qui enim recordatur quomodo, quo or- dine, quibus mediis et instrumentis aliquis actus edatur, modo non desint extrinseca requisita, quid illi deest quin possit quam paralissime et facillime operari? Sal- tem prope est, ut facile operetur; et ac- crescente et validius radicata illa memo- ria poterit adhuc facillius agere. Ego certe nihil video, nisi si hoc privilegii fic- titia illa qualitas sibi proprium usurpet, ut agentis cujuslibet actioni pro sua au- thoritate intercedat. Sane preterea quic- quam expetere videtur merus éSovuztauds, inutiliter accurata subtilitas. Satis est ar- tis pictorie perito, sisimulachro semel ef- fecio, prototypi penes se speciem et figuram retineat; ad quam se denuo convertens, simile efformare potest. Nec opus est ei veteriori qualitate. Idem est et hic ; agens sepius actus produxit; eorum reservatur in animo similitudo ha- bitualis ; ad ejus effigiem quidni agens viribus preeditum alium actum procudere possit ? 16. Tertio igitur probatur (idque ex ortu et interitu habituum, simul et me- moriz ex accremento et decremento, ex dependentia invicem necessaria), idem esse horum utrumque, agere ex habitu etex memoria. Nam quis eadem esse illa non agnoscat, que eodem modo, iisdem vicibus, eodem semper tempore oriuntur, et occidunt, vigent, increbres- cunt, minuuntur, abolentur? Nam ex 412 quibus signis evidentioribus aut magis authenticis rerum vel unitatem, vel identi- tatem concludere erit? Si hoc tam illi par et omnibus adjunctis simile, ac ὠὸν ὠῷ, ac Sosias Mercurio, quid erit in causa ut duoesse arbitremur? Videamus utriusque semina, dein funera. Aristo- telis effatum est secundo Nicom. cap. 1. ἐκ τῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν καὶ γίνεται πᾶσα ἀρετὴ, καὶ φθείρεται. ex actuum, 561]. frequenti multiplicatione generantur habitus,"A δεῖ μαθόν- Tas ποιεῖν, ταῦτα ποιοῦντες μανθάνομεν. Similiter ex actuum cessatione denascuntur iterum ; - HABITUS HUMANI ACQUISITI NON SUNT - actuum suorum quasi penu quodda preesens atque mirus thesaurus. se et hic ad instar potenti cujusda dormientis et ociantis, δοκεῖ yap ἐνδέχεσθαι kai καθεύδειν ἔχοντα τὴν ἀρετὴν, ἢ ἀπρακτεῖν διὰ βίου, | in octavo ethicorum. Et Eusttathius ad — sextum Eth. ἡ ἕξις πρὸς τὴν ἁπλῶς δύναμιν ἐντελέ- Ὁ xeta λέγεται, πρὸς δὲ τὴν ἐνέργειαν καὶ προαίρεσιν, Ϊ ὡς ἐν τῷ κοιμωμένῳ γεωμέτρῃ γεομετρὶη. ἢ Ε 1 Ut quamvis tacet Hermogenes, cantor tamen, eque Optimus est modulator, et Alfenus vafer, omni Abjecto instrumento artis, clausaque taberna, . | Sutor erat : Hor. lib. .I Sat.3 Ut pugnam se habere ad inducias — Gellius ait; “ Non pax est inducie, bel — lum enim manet, pugna cessat;” ita ace tus habet se ad habitum ; itaet memoria — eos usus procreat, otium interimit ; con- Suetudine comparantur, desuetudine la- befactantur. Inchoantur primo, perficiun- tur paullatim, postea confirmati suam ἀκμὴν et culmen obtinent, a quo eodem ordine precipites decendunt, deficiunt. expirant. Exige ad has leges ipsam pariter memoriam. Ecce easdem obser- vat, lisdem progreditur vestigiis, pari modo etatem suam acquirit et retinet ; indiget omnino consimili pabulo, exer- citatione augetur—Et increbrescit eundo, alitur familiaritate agendi, intermissione deletur, enecatur, extinguitur. De me- moria dicit Fabius,* ‘ Omnis disciplina memoria constat; frustraque docemur, Si quicquid audimus, preterfluat ;” Dis- ciplina, idest, habitus qui discuntur. Quin eadem passim utrique horum tri- buuntur. Miratur Cicero, qua ratione memoria insuis thesauris tam multa tamque diversa recipiat, neque ea tamen confundat, sed discretim sincera conser- vat; qualia sint illi spatia, in quibus illa continet, ita suis sedibus disposita, atque etiam ordinata, ut et unumquedque sepa- ratim, et cuncta confertim, et singula ordi- natim promat, statuat, digerat. Quomo- do cuncta in se recipiat et recondat, ad ea recolenda, et cum opus est retractan- da, gravis memorize recessus, commune hoc promptuarium et repositorium, dis- ciplinarum custos et index, ut ex Platone Tertullianus noster, “Ἢ sensuum omnium et intellectuum salus.”” Hee mira me- moria non se habet per modum actualis rei; ibi species in tenebris et silentio quodam latitant, quasi in vagina sua, aut arcula, vel in somno tranquille feriantes. Educere inde in actum, in usum, in lu- cem, si opus est, licet. Sane hee ipsa est habitus effigies; est hic specialium * [Id est Fabius Quinctilianus, /nsti/. xi. 2.] ad actum suum; est ille habitus quidam (ut Aristotelem vocare visum est) diver δὲ évegyeiuy, uterus est ex quo plerique actus nascuntur. Jam etase invicem etiam dependent, et sibi mutuo respon- dent; Integra enim mente, memorie vel ex usu, vel ex temperamento cerebri, hab- itus manent et vigent ; hac languente et la- befactata marcescunt et decedunt. Vigent ergo in viris et habitus simul et memoria; in senibus disparent. Quum enim memo- iram humiditatis modice alumnam, 516- citatis inimicam, trudunt ἰαλεῶν παῖδες, et senibus vena omnis exaruit, et super fluus humor excoctus est, memoriam in illis debilem esse, aut nullam consequi- tur; pari passu et ab iis evanescere scientias et habitus compertum est, ut iterum quasi pueri videatur, tabula memo- rie derasa. Exemplo sit Hermogenes ille acutissimus juvenum, senum ex oblivi- one ignarissimus. Item insignis ille memo- riz rhéetor, qui in libris controversiarum se dud nominum mittia ordine prolata re- citare potuisse tradit, cui tamen in senecta simul ars et memoria valedixere. Jam Themistolcem ita valuisse memoria, Ut intra annum Persice quidem prompte loqueretur, historiis constat; detraxisset quis illi memorize munus, non habitum loquele reliquisset. Idem de Cyro, qui militum suorum nomina tenuit ; de Mi- thridate cui duas et viginti linguas, quot imperabat nationibus, traditur notas fuis- se; de 'Theodecte, qui semel auditos quamlibet multos versus dicitur reddidis- se ; de Crasso divitis etiam memori@ Vie ro dicendum: quippe si quis rationem horum habituum reddere e vestigio [85 beretur, quid aliud responderet, 4 excellenti illos viros memoria valui et reliqui ill Sane si qualitas ab ea diversa est φυὴς, et cognata; arctissimam habent ie, credo amborum certo (feedere) | Bonsentire dies, et ab uno sidere duci. Non est igitur equum illa iis separare naturis, que suis omnibus attributis tam | coherent et quasi coalescunt; que se invicem mutuo dependent. Sa- rque hic versatum est. 17. Ultimo, A ratione brevissime de- mgar. Hujusmodi ea est, habitus non est qualitas aliqua, aut forma actibus erebris genita, et facultatibus operatrici- bus inherens; ut communiter ponitur. Ergo non differta memoria. Aliud ergo medium non novi. Brevissime et festi- atissime hoc ostenditur. 1. Habitus ex actibus generari asseritur, Facultatem autem ipsam agendo in seipsa aliquid Jucere, est valde obscurum, et nescio bsonum. Facultaiis est actum elice- re, et in aliud plerumque quippiam age- Quomodo igitur seipsum agendo yonit, quo pacto actus e facultate im- datiens egressus in ipsam revertitur? Jrgeri hoc possit. Sed, 2. Monstri sim- ile narratur, quod una simplex qualitas tot actibus variis et centies conduplicatis retur. Excedit hoc ipsum prodigi- 2 Bacchi διμήτορος, ut centum eadem res celebret natales, ut ex mille oriatur jinibus indivise res nature. Unus- 4 hisque enime tot actibus genitoribus i paterest; imo idem pater qui et fili- us. Quienim ex habitu agit, idem habi- Ἢ agendo ulterius producit, stabilit, re- borat, complet. 3. Quoniam non ex uno actu producitur habitus, sed e pluri- bus; An primus actus aliquid producit, vel nihil? Si aliquid, num habitum? Hoc est contra hypothesin plurium actu- um. Num aliquid preterea? Quid, queso, est? Nemo, inquis, novit.. At cunque est secundus, idem producet rtius et deinceps; et sic qualis erit Jem lepidus ille habitus, ex tot entibus io quibus coagmentatus? Si dicitur primum actum nihil producere, recte, idem secundus producet; ratio enim ae. Ὁ «-. _ {REVERA DIVERSI A MEMORIA HOMINIS. 413 non obstat; et ita olim emerget nobis bo- nus hic habitus ex mille nihilis conflatus. Dicis hic idem evenire quod in guttis, in- - que lapide contuso evenire docent Aris- toteles, Scaliger, alii. Multa, scilicet, ca- dentes gutte nihi] auferunt de lapide, sed una tantum, puta centesima in alia- rum virtute partem tollit, gue tum tota simul aufertur, non autem particulatim ; sic est de lapidis fractione per mal- leum, que fit tertio aut quarto ictu minus valido, aut ab uno valido satis. Secundum hoc ne tantillum quidem ha- bitus ἃ prioribus aciibus producitur; verum adest tandem fortis aliquis actus, qui et suis, et reliquorum aciuum vicariis operis et viribus instructus totam rem con- ficit; et educit in lucem habitum toties aniea irrito conatu tentatum. Hoe cum intellectu. perobscurum sit, ego tamen nolo in eo evertendo laborare ; Sumat id sibi pensi Suarezius; qui hoc efficit in Disp. Met. prolixe quidem, sed efficaci- ter. 4. Datur habituum intensio, extensio, imminutio, contractio, remissio, cessatio ; omnia hec per gradus quosdam et scalas. Horum singula fieri non posse, prolix nec hujus est opere demonstrare ; etsi fieri posse non dubitaverim. Interim quis cre- dat tot facies diversarum cenditionum tot personas, lot status, tot mutationes, puram aliquam et simplicem qualitatem sustinere ac subire? Mira de horum singula in- stantia in pulvere scholastico occurrunt litigia, que sane nemo nisi bene patientis stomachi tulerit sine tedio pervolvere. 5. Dantur etiam in brutis non obscure habitus quidam. Quid enim aliud illa canis, elephanti et ceterorum animalium docilitas est? At nemo aliquid in iis idoneum habitum preter memoriam con- cipere potest. 6. Taceo dubium valde esse, an hujusmodi entia a rebus diversa, qu tamen sine aliis esse nequeant, omnino dentur; et annon he sint ipso sono contrandictoria. Reliqua qua erant plurima necessario dicenda (etsi et que dicta sunt, remitius sunt dicla) omittere libet; Tu utm proprie festinationi, tam ut auditorum patientia, tum ul oppo- nentium diligentia consulatur), concludo igitur, Habitum non esse a memoria diversum, Wc. a a 414 IN COMITIS 1652. CARTESIANA HYPOTHESIS DE MATERIA ET MOTU HAUD SATISFACIT PRAECIPUIS NATURE PHENOMENIS. E vETERIBUS Grecis, qui se primi omnium naturalis philosophiz studio addixerunt, quum vellent quam libentissime omnium effectorum apparentium in natura promp- tam inire rationem, dedit unusquisque operam sive ingenio proprio, sive obser- vationibus fretus, prinicipia queedam gen- eralia et verisimilia investigare, quorum ope universam naturam et singula ejus phenomena plene et perspicue explicare posset. Ex quo instituto prolate sunt in medium quamplurime et quam diversis- simz rei naturalis hypotheses ; aliz allis elegantiores, atque concinniores, prout quisque vel judicio magis polleret et in- genii acumine, vel feliciore experientia uteretur. Hine Anaximander materiam infinite extensam, Anaxagoras Homoio- mereias suas ; Atomos Leucippus, Demo- critus et Epicurus; Empedocles Litem et Concordiam; Pythagoras Numeros et Symmetrias; Plato Deum, Ideam, et Materiam ; demum Aristoteles Formam, Maseniacny: Privationem ; alii alia rerum principia excogitarunt; ita tamen ut sua quisque commenta pro veris ac genuinis nature principiis, a quibus deduci om- nium apparentiarum ratio et possei et deberet, venditare atque asserere non dubitarent. Atque ita se rem habuisse constat, intra ducentos plus minus annos ab ipsis nascentis in Grecia hujusce philosophie initiis. Post Aristotelem autem sive jam detrita antiqua simplicitate, sive effceta in hominibus inveniendi curi- ositate, et fatiscente industria, seu potius quoniam preestantissima queeque ingenia partim studia moralis philosophiz, partim rhetoric, politiceeque cure ambitiose preeoccuparent, naturalis philosophia vel penitus neglecta jacuit, vel satis habebant ejusce studiosi in Platonis, Aristotelis, Epicuri, aut cujuspiain e vetustioribus placitis et principiis harere ac acquies- cere, de ulteriori inquisitione securi : unde decursu temporis effectum est, ut CARTESIANA HYPOTHESIS HAUD SATISFACIT apud quam plurimos vero solius Aristotelis principia et dictata obtinerent ; reliquorum omnium non tantum authoritas, sed et scripta in- apud pauculos Platonis, terirent. Equidem hoc fluxus tenore per continua aliquot secula procedebant res. philosophicz, donec pene ad nostra usque tempora perventum est: quando quasi e somno quodam profundo aut veterno ex- citatis hominum animis, cum medicina, mathematicis, ceterisque artibus honestis, cceperit quoque naturalis philosophia reviviscere, et inse excolenda et restaur- anda multos ingeniosissimos Viros ΘΧ- ercere. Ccoeptumque est statim deliber- ari de principiis, nimirum quia recepta Aristotelis non solum a rudi preeceden- tium seculorum sophistica corrupta vid- erentur, verum etiam in sua licet since- ritate atque integritate accepta, non usque adeo omnibus satisfacerent. Quare con- tinuo aggressi sunt complures viri ingenio ac eruditione precellentes ali veterum quorundam philosophorum principia, qua licuit resuscitare et recolere: alii nova et inaudita suo Marte comminisci. At que isti quidem, ut nostis, Epicuream Gassendi, Magneni Democriticam, novam peripateticam Digbeanam, Aristarchi Samii, et Philolaicam philosophiam nobis pepererunt; hi vero, ne Telesium et Campanellam memorem, magneticam Gilberti, Fluddi thermometricam, deni- que multas easque varias chymicorum philosophias in lucem_prodiderunt. At qui presertim in hoe choro philosophan- tium prelucere reliquis non immerito Vir sus est, adeoque profusissimum plausum universi orbis literarii_ promeruit, tandem Renatus Cartesius extitit; vir proculdubio optimus atque ingeniosissimus, ac serio philosophus, et qui videtur ad philosophie hujus contemplationem ea attulisse aux ilia, qualia fortassis nemo unquam alius; intelligo eximiam in mathematicis pe- ritilam; animum natura atque assue- factione meditationis patientissimum ; judicium eee omnibus, et popu larium errorum laqueis exutum extrica- tumque ; quinetiam plurimis lisque non nisi certissimis et selectissimis exper- imentis instructum; abundans otium, ab inutilium librorum lectione, et avocae mentis seculi electione propria immune; ne memorem incomparabile ingenii ac umen, et facultates quibus praestabat eximiis tam clare et distincte cogitandi, τ --ὠὐῷἅ οτος PRAECIPUIS NATUR PHAZNOMENIS. quam mentem suam paucis verbis admo- ac dilucide explicandi. Ab eo itague viro recepimus philosophic systema, quod nollem alias commendare quam dicendo tale ipsum esse, quale possemus jure a tam consummato philos- opho expectare ; eaque principia nature, ad que si quis serio appellat animum at- tente paulo examinanda et perpendenda, nisi vel nimium abundet affectu, aut in- tellectu deficiat, non dubito quin ipsa om- nium que audiverit clarissima, simplicis- sima, imo et verisimillima sit pronuncia- turus; tanta statim in ipsis facilitas, since- ritas, atque elegantia elucebunt. Nihilo- minus ne aut nimia viri admiratio obse- disse animum nostrum, debitzeque exami- nationi aditum preclusisse ; et ne videamur existimare, unius cujuscunque hominis sufficere ingenium divine sapientie po- testatisque vestigiis in natura persequen- dis ac indagandis ; denique ut de ipsius rei veritate rectius conjecturam faciamus, nobis id negotii assumpsimus, eas ex- ponere difficultates, quibus principia hec nova obnoxia esse videntur; per que precipue obstat, ne hypothesim hanc, tanquam Ariadneeum filum, quod in na- ture totius intimos et labyrinthi recessus ducat nos reducatque, admittamus: id quod conabimur hac methodo prosequi quam possumus succincte et perspicue : nempe ut primo hypothesim ipsam pro- ponamus, ne quis forte Cartesiana prin- cipia haud inspexerit. Secundo ut rati- ones quasdam generales contra illam afferamus, precipue ex singularum sec- tarum diversa sentientium pharetris de- promptas. ‘Tertio, quaedam_ principalia phenomena enumeranda veniunt, quibus Cartesiana hypothesis haud faciat satis, rationes insuper cur ita suspicemur, ad- jungendo. Primo itaque hypothesim ipsam quod attinet, ita se habet. Adverti potest in- numera objecta externa, que corpora di- cimus, sensus nostros variis modis affice- re; atque ideo mentem nostram ipsa tan- quam variis qualitatibus preedita percipe- re, quibus nomina imponit duri, ponde- rosi, colorati, aut similium. Preterea considerari debet, ea accidentia, quee sen- tiuntur in materia corporea, vel singula- tim omnibus corporibus non competere, vel potius omnia immutari posse, et ab ea penitus tolli; ita tamen ut ipsa non sit naturam corporis amissura, sed in sua es- ἃ 415 sentia adhuc integra permaneat: at in extensione aliter se rem habere; quia nullum omnino corpus imaginari possu- mus, quod non extendatur in longum, la- tum et profundum. Unde dicitur natu- ram corporum a nullis reliquarum quali- tatum, scilicet fluxarum et corruptibilum, sed a sola extensione dependere ; et cum non detur alia notio corporis diversa ab hac, et hec sit ab idea corporee materi omnino inseparabilis, dubitari non debet, quin natura corporis in sola extensione consistat. Ex quo supposito cum non- nulla alia facile deducuntur, scilicet quid sit spatium ; non dari vacuum, vel spati- um inane ; neque corpora prorsus indivi- sibilia, et hujusmodi alia; tum precipue illud, unum esse mundum sibi ubique co- heerentem, et spatia omnia imaginabilia occupantem ; cujus universa materia una et eadem existat, utpote que omnis per hoc unum tantum agnoscatur, quod sit extensa ; atque talis est natura Cartesia- ne materi ; ex qua sic exposita, liquet ipsam in multas portiones diverse mag- nitudinis ac figure partibilem esse. Cir- ca quas observandum est denuo, eas in duplici modo existentiz consistere posse, scilicet in motu, vel quiete. Motus au- tem nihil revera est aliud, quam transla- tio unius partis materigz, sive unius cor- poris ex vicinia eorum corporum, que il- lud immediate contingunt et quiescentia spectantur, in viciniam aliam. Hujus- que absentia est quies, quum corpus re- spectu aliorum omnium adjacentium eun- dem locum situmque retinet. Neque circa naturam motus et quietis preter hee quidpiam subtilius notandum videtur. Tantum adhuc causas motus et quietis in corporibus considerare oportet primarias et secundarias. Deus motus et quietis primaria causa censendus est; qui mate- riam simul cum motu et quiete creavit in principio: ad cujus perfectionem divi- nam cum spectem, quod sit immutabilis, et quod modo quam maxime constanti et immutabili operetur, rationi est consen- taneum putare, quod diversimode move- rit partes materi#, quum primum illas creavit; jamque totam istam materiam conservet eodem plane modo, eademque ratione qua prius creavit; eum etiam tantundem motus in ipsa semper conser- vare; ideoque etiam regulas quasdam legesque figi ac constitui posse, juxta quas cause secundarie et particulares 416 CARTESIANA HYPOTHESIS HAUD SATISFACIT motus istos efficiunt, qui in singulis cor- poribus reperiuntur. Leges iste genera- ies tres sunt. Prima, unamquamque rem, quatenus est simplex et indivisa, mManere quantum in se est in eodem sem- per statu, nec unquam mutari, nisi a cau- sis externis. Ut si pars aliqua materize sit quadrata, manebit perpetuo quadrata ; nisi quid aliunde adveniat, quod ejus fig- uram immutet. Si quiescat, neutiquam incipiet moveril, nisi ab aliqua causa ad id impellatur. Et si moveri supponatur, non unguam sua sponte eta nullo alio impedita motum illum suum intermittet. Secunda lex hujusmodi est, unamquam- que partem materiz seorsim spectatam non tendere unquam ut secundum ullas lineas obliquas pergat moveri, sed solum- modo secundum rectas. ‘Tertia lex est ; Ubi corpus quod movetur alteri occurrit, Si minorem habeat vim ad pergendum secundum rectam lineam, quam hoc al- terum ad ei resistendum, tune deflectitur in aliam partem, et motum suum retinen- do, solam motus determinationem amittit ; si vero habeat majorem, tune alterum corpus secum movet, ac quantum cui dat, de suo tantum pendit. Et se ita Cartesiana hypothesis habet: nam ex hisce solum suppositis, materiam, sive ex- tensionem dari, et in partes dividi ; eas- que partes moveri vel quiscere juxta le- ges nominatas; his inquam solum sup- positis et concessis, quecunque in rerum natura mutationes, generationes, alterati- ones, et quecunque universim nature phzenomena observantur, satis explicari posse censet Cartesius, ita ut demum pronunciet nulla alia physice principia vel admittenda esse vel optanda. Quod non ita se habere, illud demum est quod mihi incumbit propositis rationibus osten- dere. Itaque cum precipua nature pheenom- ena dico, necesse est ut excipiam ea que corporibus ceelestibus, cometis, planetis, reliquisque conveniunt; quoniam in lis nihil fere preeter motus, colores et figuras deprehendere possumus ; qu non solum Cartesius sed reliqui omnes hac aut si- mili via necesse habent explicare : et pa- ri jure ea excludo, que in propinquo ob- servantur directe et ad sensum, vel motus locales, vel colores, vel figuras respicien- tia; qualia sunt mechanica artificia; ex- perimenta de motibus projectorum; imo et fluxus ille ac refluxus maris; quem agnosco hac via admodum elegant clarari; et similia, colorem, lucem, p mata, spectanua, &c.—nam neque in I aliquid peculiare erat, et in harum rentiarum rationibus reddendis ὁ philosophi simili methodo insistunt, est, mathematicee potius quam physi Sed per preecipua nature phenomena telligo ea, quee nature penetralia propius attingunt, scilicet generationes, proprietas tes et operationes specificas animaliu plantarum, mineralium, lapidum, et reli« quorum naturalium corporum, precipue eorum que mixta vocantur. Rursus per illud, Aaud satisfacere, non intelligo, qua- Si quisplam caput suum torquendo, et δουλεύων τῇ ὑποθέσει quod dicitur, non possit complurium effectuum ex hisee principis qualemcunque reddere concins nam rationem; quoniam et in hac re, et in aliis, innumere hypotheses. confi cudique possint, haud facile falsitatis, sal tem non contradictionis alicujus arguen- deze: de quibus nihilominus promptum fo- ret dignoscere, et judicare rem juxta illas se non habere; prout etsi per Ptolemai- cum systema, saltem aliquatenus emen- datam, non dubium est quin ratio cceles- tlum apparentiarum reddi possit satis 805 curata ad caleulos motuum, eclipsium, et reliquorum eventuum construendos; et lamen vix jam sanus quispiam hane, quod rem ipsam spectat, tanquam veram admittet, que tam intricata, et minime elegans sit. Itaque hoc volo per illud, non satisfacit ; quod hypothesis hee multarum apparentiarum causam satis idoneam reddere non possit, cui vir phi- losophus acquiescat, atque existimet summe esse probabile rem juxta ipsam se habere. Non est igitur expectandum, ut contra Cartesium agam alias, quam rationes quasdam generales et probabiles sive conjecturas proponendo, que infe- rant naturam non juxta viam istam me- chanicam omnino procedere ; atque adeo ipsius bypothesim nature non usquequas que satisfacere. [4 quod tentabo efliees re, committendo imprimis reliquos phir losophos cum Cartesio, ea tantum ex C= rum ratiociniis seligendo, que videbun= tur nonnihil ponderis atque momenti has bere. Committo autem cum eo Plator nem, Aristotelem, Democritum, vel Epir- curum, chymicos, et magos naturales quos vocant, sive eos qui de sympathiis: et antipathiis naturalibus scire profitem= tur; at imprimis ac pre omnibus tan- quam πρόμαχον hujusce prelii, Verula- mium nostrum, virum magni proculdubio judieii et nominis, qui philosophiam hance nondum natam damnavit. [5 enim ali- quoties in suo Organo contra hujusmodi omnes universim hypotheses admodum prudenter cavit, et praemonuit non esse magnopere ab iis principiis metucndum, que violenti argumentationum conatus ex singulorum hominum cerebello par- tnrirent: nam prout super phenomena etheris varia cceli themata construi, ita et super pheenomena universi multo magis complura dogmata fundari et constitui posse; que tamen non nisi commenta sint; et quot hujusmodi philosophize ex- tant, aut extiiure sunt, ex nuda _ specula- tione oriunde, tot ille reputat effectos es- 56 mundus fictitios et scenicos. Nam licet Cartesius plerisque aliis, imo haud injurie dixero, omnibus scenem suam ele- gantius instruxerit, concinniusque compo- suerit ; et forte fabulam narraverit, quam nemo prima specie non concesserit ab historie veritate haud multum abludere ; non tamen videtur penitus eorum nume- 9 eximendus, qui in censure istius aci- em incurrerunt. Namexproprio ore con- stat, eum philosophandi ordinem, qui et tilissimus videtur et solidissimus, plane invertisse, dum non a rebus discere, sed ebus leges suas imponere ei visum est. [τὰ enim processit, ut primum quas pro- posito suo idoneas censuit metaphysicas yeritates colligeret et stabiliret, nempe ex ionibus natura menti sue insitis; dein- »ab iis ad generalia principia nature scendit ; et inde gradatim progressus ad particularia queque explicanda, *X principiis scilicet que ipse nec incon- julia natura struxerat : nempe hoc modo tius private mentis ideis, quam thea- ri publici constitutioni attendendo ; non Xsingularibus exemplis, atque experi- entis diligenter trutinatis axiomata ligendo ; sed ipsa ex proprio discursu fingendo, iisque quod Aristoteli pre- tim vitio datum est, nature effecta pro ibitu suo accommodando: que ratio ilosophandi a viro magno improbatur Ὁ rationes minime contemnendas. Ni- irum quia hoc destinare est nimium viribus nativis rationis nostra pre- umere, mentemque nostram longe su- ra justum suum modulum mirari et ex- re; subtilitas nature ἃ subtilitate Vou. IIl. 53 PRACIPUIS NATURZ PHNOMENIS. rr ΘΒ ΄΄ἷὺἧὺῖἷἷῆ΄ῆῇἷῇπ:ἠπτἐτἐτ΄΄ῆ΄σπτ|;|ὈτΤ------. τὈὈτΘτκἝῬ- Τγσ“------τ-- -τ το ττ-- 417 mentis equari, ejusque operationes per syllogismos comprehend existimantur. Quinimo preterea per inanem hujusmodi conatum sperare videmur, posse nos mo- dum quo omnia que ubique in modo accidunt, pernoscere; id est, eque ac ipse rerum Conditor; qui nobis minime consciis illa omnia mira sapientia odina- vit (nec mira tamen, si nos ipsam nostra assequi possumus): et sic idola mentis nostre cum ideis divini intellectus con- ferre, quee suas rebus signaturas impres- sere. Denique quia experientia comper- tum est, hujusmodi dogmata a metaphy- sicis cogitatis, caute licet et curiose con- quisitis, ortum ducentia, quia experienti- am semper fere negligunt, revera in me- dullas nature non intrare, ejus scopos non attingere, atque adeo phznomenis minime satisfacere ; ideoque neque Car- tesiana, ulpote que plane hoc modo in- venta atque exculta fuerint: et hee est prima ratio generalis contra hanc hy- pothesim. Secundo contra Cartesium confertim e specu emittam Platonem et Aristotelem, et qui cum iis in hisce rebus paria senti- unt; qui cum hypothesim hance perspex- erint, inque ea nihil prorsus de anima, nihil de seminibus aut rationibus semina- riis, nihil vel de formis vel finibus rerum, aut appetitu, vel instinctu naturali conti- neri notaverint, atque adeo de causarum suarum quaternario fere plusquam duas excludi, credo haud facile querelas sto- machumque tenebunt. Scilicet res om- nes a deo conditas virtutis innate exper- tes ; effectus quoscunque cum vi et luctu peragi; interna agendi principia, hacte- nus a philosophis magno consensu admis- sa, una cum intentione finium rejici; et ijoco horum principia mortua ac temera- ria, φύσιν ἄψυχον, naturam absque anima, id est, corticem absque nucleo proponi exclamabunt subirati. Sane aliter anti- quissimus ille philosophantium ‘Thales dicitur tradidisse; cujus illud, Πάντα θεῶν εἶναι πλήρη. Longe aliter ipse A- ristoteles ; qui omnia fateri videtur ani- mabus esse plena, iis verbis, capite 2. libri IT]. de Gener. Anim. ‘Ev γῇ ὑπάρχειν ὑγ- ρὸν, ἐν δὲ ὕδατι πνεῦμα, ἐν, δὲ πνεύματι θερμότητα Ψυ- χικήν" ὡς τρόπον τινα, πάντα Ψυχῆς εἶναι πλήρη. Insuper Platonici et Stoici, videntes mun- dum tam pulchra partium harmonia, et quasi organizatione constare, omnia tam sapienti dispositione, quam mirabili con- 418 sensu et'indefessa constantia in mutuum subsidium beneficiumque conspirare, et hujusmodi pleraque animadvertentes, non verebantur asserere, prout ipsorum men- tem Manilius representat, Vivere mundum, Et rationis agi motu, cum Spiritus unus Per cunctas habitat partes, atque irriget orbem Omnia pervolitans, corpusque animale figuret. Itaque tam longe aberant illi primitivi an- tistites philosophiz ab hoc, ut mundum in- animem et nullo vel principio vel intenti- one agendi preditum supponerent, ut con- tra vel animabus referta esse omnia, vel Spiritum gquendam vitalem catholicum, qui per universum diffusus omnia conser- varet aique foveret ; qui Custos τῆς εὐταξ - fac, et contrariorum δεσμὸς συναγωγὸς exis- teret, et qui multis stupendis atque laten- tibus phenonemis sufficeret, comminisci et perhibere non dubitarent. Utcunque sit de communi haceanima, non per bru- tos et fortuitos motus confici omnia, sed speciebus singulis corporum naturalium suas inesse animas vel formas, hoc est, in- terna specific essentiz principia, faculta- tibus agendi juxta fines a natura destinatos instructa, et appetitui proprio obsequentia, id est, quod non absque ratione et neces- sitate quadam affirmare videntur hi phi- losophi. Nam imprimis, videtur de su- premo rerum Conditore indigne sentire, quisquis autumat, eum solummodo unam materiam homogeneam, eamque hebetem et inanimem, per tot jugera immanis spatil exlensam creasse, ac cum unico preterea motus instrumento ludos hosce solennes, omnemque mundanam co- meediam dispensare ; quasi fabrum, aut artificem χειρώγακτα, technam hanc suam singularem neurospasticam ad nauseam usque repetentem et ostentantem: at multo augustius de eo cogitare videtur qui credit ipsum immensa sua bonitate ac beneficentia impulsum, innumeris spec- iebus suam singularem essentiam commu- nicasse ; singulis peculiares appetitus, propriasque facultates agendi imperti- visse, et universas apta serie ob mutuum auxilium in suos gradus classesque dis- tribuisse, aliisque alias κατὰ μοῖραν sub- ordinasse ; nimirum videntur heec sancti- us honestiusque ab hominibus de Authore suo cogitari; sed neque minus utile et necessarium est ita sentire, phwenomenis nature urgentibus, Nam si totius nature theatrum uno ictu oculi perlustremus ; CARTESIANA HYPOTHESIS HAUD SATISFACIT in 60 quasi innumeras personas animad- vertamus, specie, qualitate, opera valde — discrepantes: singulas sibi unas et con- tinuas, quasi se unius spiritus vinculo . et regimine continentes ; quin et quomo- do se unumquodque tueatur et foveat, et crescendo multiplicet ; non erit valde du- bium quod asseritur. Nam ut ordiamur a perfectioribus, id est, ab animalibus, etiam dempto homine ; annon facilis ex perientia commonstrat inesse illis spirit um .quendam naturalem, non solum cog- noscentem et sentientem, sed se sponte moventem et promoventem ? qui nempe tanquam tutelaris genius corporis, cordi vel cerebro affixus, a nemine impulsus aut concitatus,eterni perpetuique motus prox- imam effigiem representat; qui pro- vinciam totam nutu suo moderatur, et disponit organa ad agendum; qui in primzvo nexu, perseverante consensu ét justa temperie partes continet et tuetur; imo quiper multos annos integram cor- pusculi fabricam, fluxa’ materiz suze con- ditione, externorumque agentium im- pressionibus ac violentiis non obstan- tibus, ab omni periculosa et lethi- fera vicissitudine, ab omni putrefactione usque ad terminos a Creatore designatos defendit et protegit; absque quo foret corpus bidui intervallo fceteret pessime, inque dissolutionem spontaneam ex sul corruptione festinaret. Annon hec Car- tesius preclare explicuit, dicendo corpus meram molem esse homogenez nature, in partes varia figura preditas divisam, quibus diversi motus insint sane ceca lege fluentes, nullo spiritu preside, nulla sapientia operis directrice, nulla intenti- one finis, aut quovis alio efficiente preter concursum Dei ordinarium interveniente ? Illud vero omnium est maxime admira- bile, quod cogmitionem ipsam atque ap- petitus animales ad motus locales retule- rit; quos esse omnino alterius altiorisque generis, nemo certe non imaginari po- test. Si quis autem instet non constare utrum ad heee effecta Cartesius hypothe- sin suam extenderit; neque enim viro acutissimo et perspicacissimo hec tam inania et veri haud similia satisfacere po- tuisse ; respondeo, quod Cartesius hypo- thesin suam generaliter proponat, quasi universis phienomenis nature explicandis sufficeret ; istis que animalium sunt non exceptis : deinde manifestum est quid il- le intelligat, ex verbis Regii, sequacis ᾿ ΨΥ ΤΟ - PRACIPUIS NATUR PHZNOMENIS. give discipuli sui; qui decimo capite ~ suorum Fundamentorum ita expresse lo- quitur ; “ motus animalium sensitivus et locomotivus fit in animalibus eodem mo- do, ut automata agiantur, et moventur sine ulla cognitione vel vero appetitu.” Hee Regius, que hausisse ipsum ex tractatu Cartesii de animalibus hactenus inedito, ipse Cartesius author est, in pre- fatione sua ad secundam editionem Principiorum suorum: dein necesse est ut ita statuat, scilicet, bruta animantia nul- la cognitione,imo nullo appetitu esse pre- dita ; aliter enim de motus sui lege max- ime generali erit conclamatum; que pronunciat tantundem motus continuari perpetuo in rebus, quantum initio fuerit ; quia quantum corpus de suo motu dat, tantum perdit, et vicissim. At omnis αὐτοχινησία Novos motus, eosque satis vehementes pro suo arbitrio introducit ; et sane motus tot animantium multum conferet ad statum rerum, motuumque proportiones immutandas, atque adeo ad hanc hypothesin susque deque perver- tendam ; et nihilominus haud bene video quomodo ipsum hominem a fatali lege ignorantie et violentize hujus excipere possit, ne eadem sequantur: quo tamen nihil fingi possit vel incredibilius vel in- dignius. Hactenus de operationibus an- imalium jam in lucem editorum, organ- isque idoneis instructorum: at se ille Spiritus, materia inerte altior ac animos- ior, adhuc si fieri potest clarius in gener- atione animalium prodit ac manifestat ; dum sibi magnificum domicilium struit, pulcherrimamque corporis machinam ef- format. Etenim non est perdifficile ag- noscere, automaton postquain egregio artificio factum est, sua sponte mira ac stupenda rei ignaris officia obire ; at ne- mo ideo sanus concesserit, istiusmodi machinam ullam absque ingeniosi artifi- cis cura, aut opera manuuin diligenti et prudenti, suopte arbitrio in lucem un- quam emersisse : nimirum tam mirifico operi erigendo adesse debet internus ali- quis architectus, vel sua intentione, vel directione divina admoduin sapiens, qui tot diversas partes e rudi semine eflingat, temperie exquisita donet, situ conveni- enti disponat, figura decenti expoliat, lin- eamentis bene congruis et gratis colori- bus exornet, denique qui in his omnibus et reliquis optimum scopum et petat sem- per, et feliciter assequatur. EKoque ma- 419 gis hoc venit annotandum; quia hoc opus naturalium sit naturalissimum, ut aiunt; nec quod scire possumus ipsi, ali- quis cognitionis explicitee actus interce- dat; quod ostendit etiam iis operibus nature, qu apparent brutissima et scientiz expertia, consilium et appetitum non abesse. Utcunque autem de cogni- tione, locomotiva facultate, et genera- tione animalium se Cartesius excusaret, tamen in plantis videtur pene eadem dif- ficultas versari, que jugulum hujus con- troversize pari impetu petat. Nam ines- se etiam iis quod Hippocrates appellat τὸ ἔμθιον τῆς φύσεως, hoc est, spiritum quendam et rectorem intrinsecum, ener- giarum vitalium presidem, generationis fabrum, qualitatum simul et effectorum mirabilium fontem et originem, permulta ostendunt: et si quis eas plantas intuea- tur, que absque omni cura aut cultura, ἄσπαρτοι καὶ ἀνήροτοι, sua sponte prove- niunt, si figuras ipsarum varie decentes, colores aspectul gratos, potestatesque op- portunas contempletur, an apud se facile reputabit, effecta heec sane stupenda ex sola divisione materiz, et motu particu- larum nonnisi per generales admodum regulas determinato procedere; et non potius semina queedam, sive fermenta fuisse initio singulis soli locis ab Authore nature implantata; que celesti fotu evocante parata essent su speciei cor- pus prodere ? juxta Virgiliana ista, Continuo has leges, eternaque federa certis imposuit natura locis : et— Quippe solo natura subest.— Adhuc eas plantas, que ex certis semin- ibus oriuntur, quod spectat, admodum verisimile est lis etiam seminibus inesse animam quandam seu spiritum vitalem, qui sit, non dico conscientia aliqua ac- tionum suarum, sed utcunque imagina- tione certa licet subobscura, appetitu pertinace, et potestate idonea donatus, ea qua imaginatio et appetitus juxta Dei at- que nature prescriptum jubent exequen- di, plane prout in animalibus facultates phantasiew et passionibus obediunt; etsi non eodem gradu neque adeo manifeste. Amat enim natura a supremo apice re- rum usque ad scale infimum pedem apto ordine et quasi harmonicis interval- lis descendere. Ex angustiis pusilli semi- nis quam robuste ac procerw arbores se explicant ? quam solerte prudentia, qua apparatus curiositate necesse est ut in- 420 fervente ista officina omnia procurentur ? Imprimis moles corporea terre matris visceribus per radices suas innascitur, tum ut se in sinu ejus sustineret, tum etiam ut ex parentis ‘tenerz uberibus pendens succum sibialimentarium exu- geret: dein tellure egressa pro corporis sui firmamento truncum satis crassum ac nervosum obtinet, externo cortice bene loricatam fibris spisse interius con- textam ; deinceps medulla centrali per- vadente, quasi quodam thesauro, ex quo in membra reliqua per exiles venularum ductus necessarium alimentum deprom- itaret, distribuitur: proxime ex se satis numerosam ramorum ac surculorum propaginem emittit; quarum extremi- tates nunc floribus_ picte cernuntur speciosis ac fragrantibus; vel folia ip- sis naturales arborum come, vel ves- timenta, aut saltem fructus appendent, gustui gratissimi et aspectui, singuli in suis penetralibus spem nove arboris ge- rentes, vivifica virtute inspiratam ; et cz- tera que commemorari possent, omnia alia potius quam inscium-et temerarium motum materia, nihil autem magis quain distinctam phantasiam et fortem appeti- tum indicantia. Nam observari potest leges motus Cartesiani adeo generales, laxas et indeterminatas esse, et tamen mi- nime ad unum hoc vel illad producendum limitatas, ut quecunque juxta illos eveni- ant, jure optimo non nisi per casum quen dam et fortuito evenire putare debeamus ; nam inesse illis nihil amplius quicquam consilii agnoscitur, quam quod leges iste generales initio sancite sint; quod non magis fortunam aufert, quam Epi- curi hypothesis, docentis mundum ex ato- mis certa lege fluentibus fuisse consti- tutum, et adhuc perseverare ; qui tamen eum plane contingenter et fortuito fuisse factum, et modo _perdurare, esset proculdubio concessurus. Haud injuria itaque contra hanc hypothesim, heec quotidianze sapientiz et consilii sin- gulis rebus invigilantis indicia objicio. Nam de plantis, ‘verbi gratia, si ex motu ὡς ἔτυχε, proveniunt, interrogo, 1. Quare tam decentes figuras, qualitates omnibus sensibus gratas, virtutes salutiferas nac- te sunt? 2. Si hoc ex motu materiz juxia leges suas contingere possit ; quare non fere omnes uniformiter se habent, cum leges pauce et determinate sunt ? 3. Aut si valde mult# species sua sponte CARTESIANA HYPOTHESIS HAUD SATISFACIT hoc modo emergere possint, quare non singulis annis nove plantarum species” exoriuntur, ob variatas materiz partes, — atque ob easdem rationes, que faciunt ut i jam tam multe existant? et quare fixus | et determinatus est plantarum numerus | in mundo, quasi motus eo usque valeret, © ad id quod reliquum est esset effcetus? 4. Quare non contingit plantas sepe im- perfectas et mutilas apparere, causis suis titubantibus ? 5. Quare sepe sub iisdem figuris, coloribus et complexionibus plan- tarum diverse et contrarie virtutes la- tent? annon forte hoe a spiritu interiori, materiz sue ministerio alias atque alias utenti ? Porro metallorum et mineralium eadem ratio est, etsi juxta regularem descensum nature id minus manifeste appareat. Videtur enim generatio horum et con- stitutio nativa etiam per spiritam suum in semine, aut aliquo semiie analogo resi- dentem peragi; per quem scilicet ad suos colores specificos, proprietates ac virtutes valde uniformiter disponuntur atque determinantur: unde non sine causa dixit Severinus, non esse majus artificium in formis atque figuris ani- mantium quam in proprietatibus et quali- tatibus metallorum ac gemmarum; et geque mirandum esse colorem sapphiri, duritiem adamantis, perspicuitatem cry- stalli, pulchritudinem auri, ac organa ves- pertilionis: quo referri possunt figure adamantis octoédra, hexaédra crystalli, que et salis communis, notante Gassen- do advitam Epicuri. Quinetiam tradunt metallici mineralia non solum crescere et renasci, verum et nutriri, maturari, sese purgare, atque indies in melius dis- ponere, quod spiritus intus hospitantis preebet indicium; prout et illud, quod adamantis corpus durissimum, solidiaai« mum, purissimumque in terre superficie spatio biennii, imo ipsum aurum in West- phalia quadriennii intervallo nascatur et perficiatur ; que absque interni agentis excubils perpetrari nimium esset: itaque heec, et que conformiter hisce in natura eveniunt, ita forme necessitatem et pra- cellentiam ostendunt, ut pre ea dixerit magnus Verulamius efficientem ac ma- teriam res perfunctorias esse ac super ficiarias, et nihil fere conferre ad scienti- am veram et activam: circa quas tamen solas hec hypothesis versatur. Proxime notatur hec hypothesis ἃ PRACIPUIS NATURZZ PH/ENOMENIS. predictis philosophis, quod nullos fines naturalium agentium, nullos appetitus, nullos instinctus rebus ab originesinsitos t; sed cunctos amores, inimiciti- as, contrarietates, sympathias omnes et antipathias prorsus exulare precipiat ; quum tamen liceat plurima ejusmodi appetituum, instinctuum, similiumque affectuum vestigia in rerum natura de- prehendere ; ex observatione, scilicet, et relatu virorum gravis simorum ; inter quos Verulamius noster, ex variis motus generibus, quos existere in natura dili- nter consideravit, fere omnes a varia intentione finis determinandos judicavit : alios enim motus libertatis, alios nexus, alios continuitatis, alios ad.lucrum, alios fauge, alios unionis, alios congregationis adsuum corpus dici voluit ; atque ita ideo, quia viderentur naturalia corpora ex in- stinctu innato ad hosce status propendere, motusque suos ex intentione finis suscipe- re. Verbi gratia, ita ille instat in motu ad lucrum ; inquiens, “ Electrica operatio (de qua Gilbertus et alii post eum tantas excitarunt fabulas) non alia est quam corporis per fricationem !evem excitati appetitus, qui aérem non bene tolerat, sed aliud tangibile mavult, si reperiatur in propinquo.” Et liceret ex naturalis his- toriz scriptoribus permulta sympathiar- um ac antipathiarum exempla depromere, que proculdubio difficile esset ex me- chanicis rationibus declarare, nisisi forte juxta istas explicandi methodos liceat quidlibet ex quolibet deducere. Qualia numerantur animalium atque plantaram ingenite amicitie, inimicitieque; de- Jectus, sive dijudicatio ciborum quam animantium feetus juniores faciunt; pro- prietates rerum que magice, queque magnetice appellantur; philtra unguenti hopliatrici, sympathetici pulveris, et si- milia; de quibus quum non vacet lucu- lente despicere, omittam aliquid dicere ; et licet consulere que sparsim de iis tradunt nature interpretes ; et quae con- fertim affert Helmontius in tractatu ele- = de magnetica vulnerum curatione. ic loci etiam commemorari possent quae de venenis, et que de alexipharmacis, et de medicinis purgantibus medici ab ex- rientia edocti nos docent ; venena enim Bbininima quantitate non quidpiam leve detrimentum aut tenuem sensum affe- runt, sed plane execant; quid illud est Magne rei quod phalangii ictus, vel in- 421 fixus scorpionis aculeus demittit in corpus, ut corpus adeo ingenti atque inusitata mutatione afficeretur? cum /liano nar- rante, libro de Animalibus, morsus vesti- gia, que aspis imprimit, tam obscura et parva sipt, ut indicia vix acri oculorum acie deprehendantur: et exigua rabidi canis spuma diu in corpore latet, tandem quasi expergefacta vim diram et fortis- simam exerit: jam si quis putet tantum non exilem atomum unicam, que posset facile per pori alicujus cutanei patens os- tium evadere, vel inherentem alicui membro, vel corpus rapidissime pervo- lantem ac pervadentem, tantas strages edere, omnem motum machine perver- tere, ipsamque compagem dissolvere, is paria Epicuro et Asclepiadi facere vi- debitur, qui Galeno advertenti ejusmodi effectus et reliqua omnia ex primis quali- tatibus elementorum exponere tentabant, ita ut tandem cogerentur vel rationes afferre plane ineptas et ridiculas, vel ea negare, qu certissima experientia con- firmata essent; itaque inesse venenis spiritum vitalem adinodum potentem nos- tro spiritui vitali inimicum ; ubi alexi- pharmacis et cardiacis amicum atque be- nignum satius sit ingenue confiteri, quam sapere velle per impudentiam ; et mani- feste improbabilitati σοφὸν φάρμακον ad- hibere. Sed hactenus philosophis istis satis superque indultum est; proxime post eam nititur descendere in arenam alterum agmen sapientum, Democritus, Epicurus, Heron Pneumaticus, et similes; scilicet, ut contra nova hee principia causam suam agant, propterea quod e rerum natura omne vacuum penitus ex- cluserint; quod tamen videtur multis natures phenomenis egregie satisfacere. Nam si rebus interspersum inane con- cedatur, ponderis in eadem figura majoris minorisve facillime ratio redditur; et quomodo corpusculis subtilibus per me- atulos inanes transitus prebeatur; et quo pacto rarefactio et condensatio fiant ; et fere necessarium est ad intelligendum quomodo motus omnino dari possit, hoc supponere: ut Lucretius eleganter, Quod si non esset (vacuum secilicet) nulla ratione moveri Res possint; namque oflicium quod corporis extat Ollicere, atque obsture, id in omni tempore adesset Omnibus, haud igitur quicquam procedere possit, Principium quoniam cedendi nulla daret res. Nempe si universus mundus confertissima esset moles, continua materie stipata, nul- 422 lis spatjolis vacuis interceptis, si quod- piam corpus ex iis que intra hanc molem disposita sunt moveri e suo loco incipiat, locumque alterius invadere, necesse est ut id alterum corpus expellat; quod cor- pus quo concedet ? expellet nempe aliud, atque illud itidem aliud, et continuabitur expulsio ad infinitum non solum spatii sed et temporis; quum aut nullum prin- cipium hujusce motus esse possit, aut saltem nullus finis. Rursus finge moveri corpus per aérem, id ut contiguum aérem pellat, debet sane pilum quod aiunt sua superficie ver- sus ipsum procedere ; at tantulum spa- tium, quantula pili crassitudo est, occupa- tum est, quare se in eo sistere non potest, nisi prius aérem ex ipso depulerit. Quo- nam autem ipsum depellet? an per Jaiera ad jocum retrorsum? at nondum est ullus retrorsus locus, quando ipsum nonduim antrorsus processit. Igitur cum tantillum spatii, quantilla est pili crassitu- do, procedere non valeat, quia locus non est, quo aérem illum occupantem prc- trudere possit, neque habebit consequen- ter unde aérem ulteriorem propellat, sed necessitate revinctum in eodem loco sem- per herebit: que absurditates per ar- gumenta non ἀποδεικτικὰ inducte facile omnes a vacui positione elevantur. Quin hoc idem ostendunt experimenta trivialia eolipyle bombarde pneumatice, aliaque innumera, que apud Heronem in Spirit- alibus, Gassendo ad Epicurum, et pre- cipue apud Helmontium in Discursu de Vacuo Nature, occurrunt sane ex iis non- nulla pulcherrima atque vividissima. Nec tam philosophi hoc eximii inane suum extrudi, quam id fieri argumento inani, seu potius metaphysica quadam subtilitate, indignantur : nempe hac ; vacuum imagi- namur esse extensum, at hec materi proprietas est; nec vacuo, hoc est nihilo, competere potest: ergo vacuum dari re- pugnat. At similiter tenebree non dan- tur, quia ipsas tanquam nigredinem quan- dam concipimus; que color est corpori conveniens. Et cecitas non datur, quia necesse est ut ejus ideam ab aliquo positivo desumamus, et multa geminatis. Dein juxta hoc argumentum res sue existentiz veritatem a nostra phantasia petere de- bent, et que nos perperam cogitamus, ea vel non sunt, vel non aliter quam nos concipimus. Quinetiam quid si dixerim, Deum ubique esse absque vera quantitate? CARTESIANA HYPOTHESIS HAUD SATISFACIT = et animam toti corpori coéxistere absque proprie dicta extensione? quidni igitur et vacuus esse possit absque, extensi raeli? denique divina potestas valet uni- versam materilam preter eam que est hujus templi annihilare : id exempli cau- sa fieri supponatur ; retinebit certe tem- plum in hoc casu fines quos jam habet: at non possemus non imaginari ultra ter- minos hujusce templi exporrectum ali- quod spatil; igitur juxta hune argumen- tandi modum revera dabitur spatium, hoc est, quantitas corporea sive materia, quee tamen omnis jamjam annihilari dicta est: imo pariter concipimus ante condi- tum mundum ingens expansum exXtitisse; neque aliter cogitare possumus, utcunque aciem intellectus nostri intendamus. An inde sequitur revera tunc temporis im- mensam quandam materiam fuisse? quod nemo absque manifesta cum impie- tate, tum absurditate dicturus est. Nunc ad triarios deventum est, et nos- trum agmen claudant hermetici philoso- phi; qui sive interpretes sive tortores nature audire debeant, saltem semet ipsi a secretioribus consiliis, et myste- riorum omnium intime conscios esse jactitant. Ab eorum singularibus ex- perimentis, que huic hypothesi mani- feste refragantur, recitandis consulto me temperabo ; etsi liceret fortassis ex unico authore plusquam sexcenta hujus generis depromere, cum ut meipsum ex infinitis preestantissima seligendi tedio subley- arem, tum precipue ut patientie audi- toram consuleretur; proponam itaque non nisi generalia quedam observata, que cum hisce principiis antithesim habere videntur. Primo, \taque observant hi philosophi omne corpus naturale mixtum, qualia sunt animantia, vegetabilia, mineralia, lapides et similia, ex duabus partibus omnino diversis atque distinctis constare } non secusac hominem ex anima et cor- pore : nimirum ex spiritu subtili, puro, po- tentissimo, et corpore opaco, faeculento, impuro atque imbelli : atque hac duo ig nis beneficio separari, et seipsa seorsim ostentare. Secundo, Spiritum istum ita rectifiea- ri, depurari ac perfici posse, ut nihil sordium habeat in se reliqui, neque ideo ignem sibi immerito importunum per ferre amplius, sed in superna avolare ; quod siquis eum apicem perfectionis _— PRAECIPUIS NATURZ PHENOMENIS. 423 suze adeptum, fecibus suis, vel corpori derelicto restituere et remiscere moliatur, quasi priscum suum contubernalem im- purum aspernatus, atque abominatus refugit; et vix difficili arte acmulta in- dustria cogitur post multas prolatationes et circulationes descendere, et corpus il- lad suum purificare. Tertio, Observant hosce spiritus in prima specie reddunt suspectam ? annon diserte significant inesse rerum nature quidpiam arcanius, divinius, ac excelsius, quam quod rudi hac methodo mechani- ces queat attingi? Saltem materiam di- versi generis extare; corpora mixta ex suis specie discrepantibus principiis con- sistere, hoc est ex aqua, et spiritu aquam impregnante et coagulante; spiritus in itate valde exigua, omni totorum) corporibus singulis esse valde homogen- suorum virtute esse predita, admodum| eos; ideoque ignem non corpus perse- tibus validos esse, atque ingentia| cando, atomosque spirituales ex materia opera patrare. corporis sua acie fabricando, spiritus sep- Quarto, In corporibus per artem re-| arare; at solummodo aperiendo ostia, seratis, forte singulis, si res innotesceret,| per que spiritus evadant, prout gladii at certe multis, specificas et proprias cei acies exitum anime prebet se in auras tutes, per quas consensum suum sub re-| expiranti: dein ea corpora quibuscum bus quibusdam aut dissensum extremum | nostri oculi versantur non nisi rerum cor- testentur, reperiri; unde et quedam me-| tices et operimenta esse ; et nihil ad vir- dicamenti loco propinata egregiemembris tutes ipsarum conferre, imo istas potius vel visceribus quibusdam prodesse, que- | impedire, diminuere, retundere et retar- dam vero pessime officere deprehendan-| dare. Et reliqua aliquam multa ex his tur. | consequuntur, que huic Hypothesi partim - Quinto, Compertum habent, spiritus directe repugnare, partim ipsam transcen- predictos in mole angusta alterius mate-| dere videntur, et quiddam altius pre se riz longe uberiori copiz immissos, ipsam | ferre ; que tamen particularius persequi totam in sue speciei tincturam et quali-| et demonstrare non vacat: ex quibus in- tatem convertere, et sibi ex ea quasi no-| ferri potest quod tutius atque consultius yum corpus efformare : ita ut seminum| sit, potius experimentis fructiferis ac nat- Yatio, virtus, natura hisce spiritibus con-| ural: histori diligenter incumbere, ex gruere videatur,dum speciem suam pro-| quibus multa effecta sat clare perspicere, | pagant et multiplicent; et sane hec ba-| et juxta eorum normam similia sperare _ sis esse videtur philosophice fidei, et huic | atque dirigere licet (quod abunde ex usu -fandamento mysterium lapidis inniti. | humani generis erit), quam ex remotis Serio, Notant res omnes vi suz artis | presumptionibus cum inani opere dis- inaquam ultimo reduci claram et insipi-| pendio, causas rerum fortassis inaccessas dam, ipsum durissimum adamantem, ar-) et sciri vetitas anxie perscrutari ; atque enam, vitrum, terramque originalem non interim pie credere ea sapientia divinam excipiendo; seminibus nempe omnibus, Majestatem hc omnia condidisse, ut ex quibus sapores, colores et similia pro- | magis ea mirari, quam percipere possi- flaunt, que prius inerant, per arcanum) mus, ut inservirent usibus nostris, dum quendam carnificem confectis ac inte-| contemplandi vires superarent; ideoque remptis. / demum ad causarum naturalium in puteo _ Septimo, Penes se reperiri menstrua) divine sapientie latentium comprehensio- am, que vocant, potestate corpora) nem nullum humani intellectus nisum as- lvendi, atque intimius penetrandi, pirare posse, nisi si quam ipse, ex bene- quam ignis noster longe potiori instruc- | placito suo, dignatus fuerit demisso ceeli- ta; quorum ope rerum nudas essentias tus radio illustrare. facile inspicere licet; per que rerum) Restat jam ultimo, philosophorum sen- ipse vite ac spiritus intaminati nullo tentiis atque argumentis adductis, ea hegotio eruantur : et qu preterea noxia_ phenomena districte indicare, quibus per corrigendi, et pessime venenata reddendi Hypothesim haud fiat satis: quod cum innocua, imo salutaria, mirifica vi pol-| ex magna parte in precedentibus obiter lent. Annon hec omnia, et multo pla-| sit factum; nec liceat absque prolixitate Ta, et impensius miranda, que philosophi aliqua hac parte pro rei dignitate defun- isti se vidisse atque expertos esse per-| gi, non par est, ut patientiw vestre huma- Sancte affirmant, Hypothesim Cartesii | nissimi auditores, ulterius aliquod moles- ————————————— el 424 tie crearem. Quapropter concludo, Hy- pothesim Cartesianam de materia et motu haud satisfacere precipuis nature pheno- menis. ORATIO MODERATORIA IN AUSPICIIS TERMINI, APRIL. 30, 1651. In vestris aspectibus omni gratia floren- tissimis ; in vestro vultu, vivam literarum virtutisque effigiem referenti; in vesira indole ad optima quzeque atque amplissi- ma comparata, dum presentis seculi gau- dia, et triumphos, spes, atque omina pos- terorum lzussima studivse contemplor, erumpit e gestienti pectore, non dico in- vita, sed tamen preceps, et quodam qua- si impetu extorta, hodierna gratulatio. Scilicet, cum ubique alias terraruin lite- ras oppressas, virtutem dejectam, wium- phantem barbariem, luxum atque igna- via diffuentes, omnia tenebris, sirepitu, sordibusque oppleta, attonila diu mente tacitaque perlustrassem; quamprimum ex isto squalore oculi in suum hoc ves- tre presentie elysium emergentes tam grati spectaculi avido se pastu reficerent, sensi et linguam stuporis sui vinculis vix- dum liberatam, cujusdamque lascivice im- patientia correptam, prepropero conatu in plurimam salutem vobis dicendam prosilientem. Salvere igitur vos jubeo, academici, etiam atque eliam omnes. Que salutatio prout e pectoris mei fundo et penetralibus, ex intimis precordiis, e promptissimo affectu nata, atque effusa est; ita utinam nulla eam doloris mistura cum ob vestras omnium vices, tum ob meas suscepti aliqua ex parte corrum- peret, ipsamque adeo e sui authoris ar- dentissimis votis pariter cum ispo e ves- tro conspectu retractaret; neque enim aut mihi ingratior necessitas, aut vobis immanius infortunium § obtigisse potue- runt, quam quod iniquus nobis omnibus infestusque Apollo me vobis hodie con- scivit moderatorem, vos mihi auditores ; ego sane (ut mei ineptitudinem ingenii, ut peritize inopiam, ut c#teros meos defec- tus conticescam) ego, inquam, unicus ves- tris tot discrepantibus sententiis, tam dis- pari genio, tam diverse expectationi sat- en ORATIO MODERATORIA isfacere eadem opera possem, qua simul et semel Jovis et Momi, Ulyssis et Ther- site, Democriti et Heracliti, partes age- re; aut in eadem scena Catonis et Ros- cii personas sustinere. Facilis est, 6 Hercules, bivii tui ingressus. In promp- to tuze literze anxios calles dignoscere, ὃ Pythagora ; enigmatis tui perplexitates, sphinx versutissime, solvendo sum; at quibus ego technis, quo artificio effectum darem, ut per eundem spiritum, in ea- dem loquela, gravis pariter essem et lepi- dus, serius et facetus, dicaculus modes- tusque, hoc est nimirum ut vestram om- nium laudem et benevolentiam promere- rer? Heec estea difficultas que me cru- clat,haec qua me vestree omnium indigna- tioni, dicteriis censurisque torquendum propinabit. Si quid enim ego, quandocun- que sermones meos nostri officii et hujus- ce institui rationes exegerint, honesti et sobrii, bona scilicet mente, protulero ; ec- ce tot illi famelici jocorum chameleontes, hujusce loci, hujusce aéris parasiti, sua spe, sua preeda, suo venatu multati, indig- nanti stomacho, latrantibusque pulmoni- bus! quasunt pedum, cerebrique levitate, hinc se continuo proripiunt, obtusissimi moderatoris capiti quot imprecantes diras, quot furiarum atrocissimas vindicias ill meditantes. Revertentes autem si quos recta iter ad nos conficientes nacti fue- rint, quantee confestim bardos illos argu- unt insaniz qui proficiscantur audituri (utor eorum verbis)asinum rhetoricantem, truncum loquentem, aut ipsum potius stu- pidissimum moderatorem prolixe somni- antem. Sin ex altera parte aliquid de severioris styli rigida gravitate relax- ando, operam quis dederit oratiuncu- lam suam ameenioribus facetiarum condi- mentis temperare ; ilico, que nostra est fortuna,—ex ipso fonte leporum surgit amari aliquid—mirum ni in ridiculi ho- minis caput mille imputationum ‘calami collimentur; ni tergum illud puerile in- clementius vapulet; et ineptissimi hu- meri tot nugarum, cavillorum, stolidita- tum, et universa illa levium quisquiliarum farragine degraventur. Ita me misere ambiguum conspicitis, academici, iter serium et ridiculum, inter iram et jocum, inter sacrum et saxum solicita distrac- tionc hesitantem. Ex hujusce anxietatis equilibrio ut me expedirem, quum ad vestri judicii aram confugio, ad vestra provoco consilia, quam belle mihi consul ἝΝ IN AUSPICIIS TERMINI, APRIL. 30, 1651. atur, queso vos obnixe, ut animum ad- vertatis. Nil aliud e vobis plurimi quam sales, facetias, festivitates; id est, si mentem rei scrutemini penitius, nugas, scurrilitates, ineptias; perpauci rationes honestas, serias, solidas, austeras nimi- yum, sordidas torpidasque, sibi et huic loco deberi vociferantur. Alius me su- percilium strenue contrahere jubet, alter _explicare ; hic tetrice fronti erumnosam nubem induere; ille exporrecte sere- pum. Est qui me malit esse hilarem, est etiam qui tristem; hic ad lasciviam hor- tatur, ille ad severitatem: ut videam cla- _rissime, vestris modo moribus et volunta- _tibus obsequi velim, necesse esse, vel me | puerum preestare, vel senem referre, vel plane ludere, vel disertissime insanire. Ita quum intelligam vos omnes erga me _hedie esse animatos, quid m.tius restat, quam ut in vos indignabundus aciem | stringerem, et in hec ingentia opprobria libere orationi habenas -effunderem ἢ Eone tandem evaserint res nostre, audi- tores lepidissimi, ut vestris etiam suffra- giis hic ludus literarius in scenicam, he schole in theatrum, hzc subsellia in tot tabernas vertantur; vos autem ipsi ex academicis in spectatores, nos omnes in mimos atque histriones transeamus ? quin C protinus togz huic renuncio, comi- eum induor pallium; cucullo me exuo, _Tecipio soccos. Huic ipsi pileo larvarum prestigias sufficio; pudet enim hujusce -vultus, hujusce habitus, si me in hunce lo- cum importuna adegerit necessitas, non ad virtutem evehendam et propagandam ; ‘non ad veritatem inquirendam et propug- _nandam ; non ad vestras egregias laudes ‘meritissimis encomiis celebrandas, verum ad agenda coram vobis ludicrorum pro- | pudia, ad theatralem plausum mercena- rio ineptiarum dedecore emendicandum. Illud si verum sit, quod fama loquitur, | stomachos vestros solidi omnis cibi per- _ tesos, et dapium rhetoricarum nau seam et salubrioris philosophiz gravedinem usque adeo invasiss , ut preter futilia _— bellaria et putidissima nugarum fercula palato vestro nihil sapiat; ne ipsa sapientia, nisi insipida, neque ver- ilas, nisi jocis condita, neque ratio, nisi ridiculo tincta ; mala profecto sorte ego \vobis coquus sum datus, ad illum inan um deliciarum apparatum neque ingenio fac- tus, neque studio institutus. Si vel ipse nissine Muse non alio quam de- Vor. Il. 54 425 formes cachinnos attollentium ritu pul- chree vobis δὲ decore videantur; non ipse gratissime Gratiz preterquam ri- dentes arrideant, quo suo amplius merito sic locus Musarum antrum, regnum Apol- linis, domus literarum, templum virtutis, veritatis asylum, aut vos horum numinum longe amplissimorum ministri, myste, sacerdotes audiatis? quin potius novo numini Joco; numini inter tot Atas, Peenas, Parcas, Vejovesque jam tandem annumerando, augustissimum hoc delu- brum cum appositis sibi aris, hostiis, sta- tuis, sacrificulisque consecrentur. Aris, dixi, hostiis, statuis, sacrificulis? Ecce quam sine ullo negotio heec omnia (an vobis, sophistee, architectantibus?) pre- sentia atque parata sunt! vestree omnium aures sanctissima sunt joci altaria ; pro mole salsz sacrificio plerique astantium sui medullas -cerebelli, et fumigantis phantasie nidores certatim obtulere. Uniuscujusque vestrum huic in mente Deo mille idola et simulachra eriguntur. Sin requirantur sacerdotes, ecce pro sua in jocum devotione procedunt in medium haud pauciores sexcentis tam sacrosancti muneris candidati ; in quibus tamen ego nomen non profiteormeum. Quin potius videor mihi non immerito indignari, si in hoc suo quondam imperio tam stramineo numini fasces submittat regina scientia- rum, mater artium, ceelestis philosophia ; coelestis, inquam, philosophia, nostri lux ingenii, mentis ambrosia, dux et magistra vite, medicina morum, animi paradisus, donum deorum longe optimum ; si ut huic ficto deo locus et successio prebean- tur, ex hisce scholis quasi quodam ejecta ostracismo exulabit divina veritas; ve- ritatem, dico, celi fillam, rerum legem, deorum autographum, supremum testem, proximum mentis aflinem, imo ipsius in- tellectus parentem, sobolem, conjugem, essentiam. Hoc nisi esset manifestum, si non ipsa res aperte pronunciaret, vix ipse mihi etiam preefracte aflirmanti fidem acquirendo fuissem, apud homines eous- que ingenuos aut hee tam preclara po- tuisse rejici, aut illa tam indigna, tam absurda obtinere. Que, queso, omnia quid aliud sunt, quam tot spurii mentis inceste abortus, wstuanlis ingenii spume, purgantis sese intellectus excrementa, vagabunde errores phantasiw, pinguioris Minervee sudores, insulsi sales, invenuste veneres, rustice urbanitates, horride, 426 barbareeque elegantie ? In quibus nihil sancti, nihil sani, nihil solidi, nihil rari; nihil, denique, in quo aut vis ingenii, aut vigor phantasiz, aut subtilitas acuminis, aut fides memorize, aut laus industrie eluceant, reperitur ; imo ne ipsius quidem aliquid inventionis; nisi hoc sit egregie invenire, sedulo nempe obsoleta jocorum scrinia excutere, sophisticorum actuum archiva recolere, sepultas excitare face- tias, antiquatas interpolare, alio donatas vultu edere; saltem novas quasdam et inauditas e tot communibus locis, e tam plene instructo promptuario colligere, e tam varia materia procudere, e tam dif- fusis campis excerpere ; 6 tot, demum, catenarum nodis, lancium capulis, bacu- lorum manubriis, ipsisque ollarum auri- culis, aliquas arripere jocandi ansas. Sin in hisce rebus quisquam plurimum levitatis et ineptize, stultitize et vecordiz, flagitii, obsccenitatis, injurie, et ipsius (proh dolor) impietatis desideraverit, nimium (heu nimium) harum fecium deprehendet ; etiam et expertus mirabi- tur fuisse usquam aliquos, in hoc olim gravissimo castissimoque Musarum hos- pitio, nugarum institores, talem audentes et gestu et lingua profiteri immodestiam, qualem vix, aut ne vix publicorum mo- rionum projecta licentia, neque scurra- rum de trivio effreenis protervia, neque ipsa Cynicorum perfricta impudentia pre se tulissent ; qualemque non dico severior aliquis Aristarchus, sed vel ipse Momus, horum licet non longissime absimilis, suo confixisset obelisco. Certe quis hisce ferat audire in locis tantam verborum turpitudinem, quantum stupendum fuerit aut castam mentem concipere, aut pudens os proferre, aut honestas aures aliquo gratulationis testimonio excipere potuis- se? Quis non commotior sustinuerit as- picere eos viros, quos- absque sollenni quadam reverentia cogitarl non debere ipsa virtus judicaverit, vobis non quidem frementibus, verum ridentibus etiam, ac applaudentibus, totis conviciorum plaus- tris oneratos, immanisque petulantize spiculis impetitos ὃ Etiam nos quam hie virtutem non temeratam, quam in- nocentiam illasam, quem pudorem non explosum, quam sacrarum rerum majes- tatem illibatam quorundam facinore, om- nium favore, vidimus et audivimus? Cogitate, juvenes, serio, et despicite, quam graves ex errore isto vos maneant contu- be a δ, a ORATIO MODERATORIA melie ; quam dura et infesta de vobis jue dicia apud omnes excitetis? Videamini vobis audire, id quod res est, plerosque ita de vobis statuentes, macilenta oppor tere esse ea ingenla, que tam inanibus vescantur alimentis; conspurcatissimam indolem, que sordes istas scurrilitatum tam avide et oblectanter deglutiat; pu- dendam esse illorum animorum scabiem, quos adeo infimee stimuli voluptatis pun- gant titillentque ; lubricum esse et incon- stantem mentis habitum, quem leves adeo venti moveant et concutiant; hebetes, Janguidosque sensus, ad quos tam aperte insulsitates sub ingenii sapore et colori- bus veniant abeantque. Illos, demum, homines, vos, inquam, non optime esse moratos, quos ita perspicuum est a gra- vissimis hisce morum pestibus et certissi- mis pudoris corruptelis non abhorrere. Innocentes jocos, tempestivos sales, lib- erales facetias (ita me Muse omnes et gratiz ament) nemo est usquam qui me sincerius diligat; nemo qui tetricam il- lam et inanem plerumque austeritatem vehementius detestetur. Erat festivita- tum qualecunque genus, quod neque in- fra suam majestatem reges gloriosissimi, neque citra suam dignitatem consules eminentissimi, neque contra suam gravi- tatem sapientes cordatissimi sunt arbitra- ti: exempla Philippi, regis fortissimi simul et lepidissimi; Cesaris illius Oe- tavii, augustissimi non minus jocatoris quam bellatoris; elegantiam Scipionum decantatissimam ; et consularis scurre M. Tullii tres facetiarum libros. Tot deinde Socrates, Diogenes, Zenones, Democritosque sua seria his ludis verten- tes quid attinet commemorare ? Res ipsa loquatur. Ecqua sit a strictioris disci- pling, cui nos potissimum incumbimus, molestiis suavior respiratio? ecqua ab hujusce pulveris intensissimis sudoribus relaxatio utilior? ecquid a. literario la- bore otium honestius? an aliud quippiam condimenti austerius pabulum philosophi- cum juctndius temperet, quam moderata festivitatum tinctura, quam honesta lepo- rum ameenitas? Heec nempe languen- tes spiritus reparat et recolligit, hee tris- tes solvit affectus, hac ab immodica ani- mum attentione avertit ; de satietate refi- cit, de fatigatione renovat; adimit lan- guores, vires redintegrat: exitum, deni- que, heec optatum superfluis phantasie fu- mis subministrat, quibus si non hbera _ - — a ee. CU - - IN AUSPICHS TERMINI, APRIL. 30, 1651. concedatur expiratio, redeunt in sese, et in spissum obstipati coagulum sua ani- mum densissima ubertate obstruunt suffo- ut dum induere gravitatem n et Me@stitiam juvenes videamur, biliosa extemplo quadam insania impru- dentes implicemur. Istos vapores fes- tivitas discutit, recludit meatus, exhila- rat spiritus, animum laxat et distendit, ut jam mobilior alacriorque, sibique non impar suis ipse officiis defungatur. Enimvero tumidum illud supercilium, compositos ad erumnas vultus, Clean- theam faciem morti concolorem, verba affectatam quandam gravitatem et fastuo- sam prudentiam ostentantia, tragicos ges- tus Erynnias potius quam Musas, Eu- Menides quam Gratias, Rhadamanthum aliquem quam Apollinem addecentes, et nostra etas et hujusce loci genius repudi- ant. Vivimus nos non in stoa, sed in aca- demia ; non in Areopago, sed in Lyceo; invita nobis ora nulla adhuc senectus cor- Tugavit, ut urbicos potius patruos quam nes academicos sapiamus. Utamim Tr, Si cui vestrum allubescat, per me is castis quidem illis, modestis ac in- nocentibus, reliqui modo injurii, obscceni, Sacrilegi, quo digni sunt, eant ad corvos. Estis tamen monendi, ut cetera facetiis vestris loco, tempori, personis congrua adessent, modum quoque esse adhiben- dum: quem sane hactenus defuisse, tes- tetur illa, que mentes vestras occupavit immodica nescio que voluptatis titillatio. Intra nullos sese terminos continebat hy- @ropicus ridendi appetitus. Ad hune lo- tum frequentes confiuxistis, an discendi. ain audiendi, an proficiendi, imo vero sola hinc ridendi, illinc jocandi gratia? Qua- ᾿ ginon alibi quam hic suam celebraret aulam ipsa stultitia, suas hic ageret nun- dinas, et universale nugarum emporium ; sScommata, convitia, barbarismos bibula aure sorbetis, mox evomitis rursus omnia in auriculis concocta,et sua plau- sus bene aucta Echo, quasi era Dodonwa Tesonatis. Nihil est ab omni adeo levi- fate abludens aut sejunctum, quod vos Statim, qu vestra est alchymia, in risus δῖ jocos non commutetis. Risit Zeuxis ig a se pictam ; risit Chrysippus asi- ficis vescentem ; uterque ridendo Obiere. Vos etiam quotidie, omnium ho- Tarum homines, inspicere licet, anilia deliramenta et ficu non digna edentes, tantum non ridendo emor- tuos. Illa ex orationibus demantur, nihil placet: nor dignitas, non concinnitas, non gravitas, non elegantia, nec pondus, nec ornamentum; neque nervi, neque aculei, neque robur deinde, neque pul- chritudo. Non delicatos nares vel frag- rantissimi rhetorice flosculi; non pala- tum mellitissime verborum illecebre; nec oculos lumina ulla, nec pigmenta, neque lenocinia oblectarunt; ipse figure deformes erant; ipsa argumenta argue- bantur, ipse rationes obbrutuerunt, om- nia preter unicum jocum rejecta, preter unicum illum petulantem Cupidinem, qui vestra omnium corda animosque tyranni- co aliquo telo fixisse, vulnerasse, domuis- se videbatur. Ab indecora hac effuse ineptiendi libidine illud saltem vos coér- ceat, quod minime sint in illo ridendi lo- co res nostre constitute. Et nostris sus- picionibus, et plerisque aliorum calculis exitio addicti, isto modo academiz fu- nera curemus, ne minime alii nostram misericordia calamitatem prosequantur, dum nostris ipsi instantibus fatis Sardonio hoe risu quasi gratulari videamur. Et jam vestra mihi vicissim, auditores humanissimi, opus est indulgentia, ne forte minus arrideat vobis hec mea pro- lixa declamatio potius, quam oratio. Quin redeamus pariter in gratiam, inque illa, que ad nostrum omnium decus pro- movendum, ad illustrandam academize gloriam, ad eluendas presentis infamie maculas, ad rei literarie (heu jam afflictis- sim) solatium faciant, unanimi industria contendamus. Solenni vos obtestor de- siderio, academici, virtutem imprimis et modestiam, integritatem vite, morum comitatem, animi lingugeque temperan- tiam et castitatem amplecti, prosequi, venerari.. Erigite vestros de hodierno torpore vivaces animos; turpissimum illum desidie somnum et veternum ex- cutite. Peculiarem horum temporum ignaviam corruptricem morum, decoctri- cem ingenii, nutricem et lacunam vitio- rum, magni cujusque et egregii solam pe- ne et certissimam hostem, procul in suas regiones facessere jubeatis. Quin omni- bus diligenti# nervis, forti animo, fer- vido conatu, invictis studiis, sudoribus et Vigiliis obite literas nobiles, eximias, im- mortales, mentis vestre viteque castis- simas delicias, suavissimas epulas, ditis- simum thesauram, tutissimum presidi- um, pulcherrimum ornamentum. Ament 428 sua deliria, indulgeant suis somniis fanat- ica secula; suam ipsi lucem manibus pedibusque eant extinctum: de yita et statu innocentium literarum, acclamante et hic justitiam popello, extrema sententia statuant; absit ut vos ea contaminati in- sania virgineo renuncietis choro, eas deseratis literas, per quas steterunt hac- tenus, et in £ternum stabunt sua inviolata numini reverentia, sua _ virtuti laus, suus veritati locus: per quas hucusque peren- narunt limpidissimi hi Castalidum fontes, per quas effloruit hoc Musarum Elysium ; per quas vestra academiz preestet virtus, ut ex hoc inglorio atque infami seculo eluctetur. Hurum utcunque auxilio lite- rarum supra importune plebecule per- petuo jam vobis obstrepentis despectissi- mam sortem vos attollite ; harum ope de popularis cstimil ingratissimo contemptu, de publici obloquii flagellis, de injuriis temporum vos vindicate ; ne forte exist- ant haud pauci faleras vestras non im- merito detractas, nuperimaque ista tri- butorum onera vere asinis imposita as- serentes. Harum, denique, presidio fre- ti grassantem inscitiam ejicere ; suc- cumbeniem veritatem excitare; renas- centium errorum et novitatum indignis- sima monstra profiigare; nostramque adeo academiam in sui honoris pristinum fastigium revehere connitamini: nullo non genere literarum feracissima vestra ingenia excolite ; nullis - cireumscripta finibus, nullis inclusa angustiis, nullis emensa spatlis, nusquam aut ripas aut obices agnoscens in immensum evagetur vestra cognitio: in ardua nature ascen- dite ; in abyssos veritatis vos immergite ; in adyta scientiarum penetrate: sup- pudeat vos ulla esse omnino in scientiis arcana vestre diligentiz inaccessa, ullos calles vestris non impressos vestigiis, ullas tenebras vestri intellectus fulgore non illustratas, ullam aut linguam tam absonam, aut dialectum tam difficilem, ut vestri aciem captus effugiat. Nempe dum vos assidue legitis, subtiliter dis- seritis, facunde peroratis, quis pudor est utilissimam simul et pulcherrimam ma- thesin sua obscurilate quasi obsignatam intra prodigiosos characterum cortices delitescere ; divinam geometriam paucos ultra superficiem attingere ; in solidum, in profundum, in ipsa scientiz intima, ubi lateant usus magis quam ostentatio, neminem descendere ; quod cecos illos ORATIO MODERATORIA et implicatos acuminis industrii Ariadneo filo extricare satagant vel duo vel nemo: in geographia terras incognitas, et nihil ultra relinqui; illustrem astrorum scientiam, miramque opticen irrefracto constantis animi radio perpaucos intueri ; patentes et foecundis- | simos Arabismi agros ignorari; sancte linguz mysteria czeca devotione coli potius,quam cognosci; Graecos a Barbaris, in mediis hisce Athenis, plurimorum — judicio non dissonare; relique omnia quamlibet optima, quanquam _preclara, modo inesse aliquid difficultatis summa species ostentet, sicco pede preteriri? Ecce, dum hee loquor, tacito obrepens incessu, in suos fontes labitur, in suum caput pervenit nostra parznesis; ad sacrosanctam philosophiam scientiarum parentem dixero, an deam quandam, de- gentem in ccelis, metientem infinita, scrutantem profundissima, contemplan- tem singula, complectentem universa ; cujus ego nunquam fuerim confertis- simas divitias, eximiam utilitatem, miros effectus, digna encomia_ celebrando; quo pacto nempe animum formet et fabricet, vitam disponat, actiones regat, pellat vitia, expugnet passiones, errores discutiat, liberet ab e2rumnis, solicitudines detrahat; per ancipita fluctuantium dirigat cursum, agenda et omittenda de- monstret; in Dei, in nature, in veritatis sinum perducat, det animo latius regnare, omnia possidere, et in suam originem redire; admoveat tamen ea ambigua vile, et secreta rerum diseernantur, eaque efhciat pleraque, que stupor potius, quam loguela, religio, quam laudes silentium quam preconium, mens luculentius, guam lingua docebunt, et explicabunt; de quibus loqui est te- meritas, et loguendo detralhere sacrile- gium. Ad talis tanteeque discipline stu- dium acriter capessendum me vos ἴῃς citare dedecus fuerit; equius erit spe- rare vestram indolem vice esse stimu- lorum; apud vos rei pulchritudinem pro centum precibus, necessitatem vero pro mille fore argumentis. Ducem nobis, et perpetuum in philosophia dictatorem multi tractus, et prescriptio temporis, continue veneratio antiquitatis tradidit nobis Aristotelem, dignum mehercle hoe principatu ; acerrimi ingenii, omnigen® doctrine, indefessee industria virum$ quem non immerito et ego dubitem cum numerorum labyrinthes | ! \ Ι i i ᾿ εἶ “᾿ —— ss =a ts νυν ΨΥ τχΤ —_— - Υγ i IN AUSPICIIS TERMINI, APRIL. 30, 1651. clarissimo rhetore an scientia rerum, an m copia, an eloquendi suavitate, an inventionum acumine, an varietate clariorem putem. Stet illi (per me) sua integra et inconcussa in his locis authoritas ; maneat suum imperium, fru- atur suis fasoibus ; revocetis vos modo in animum neutiquam constare, an illum unum genuerit philosophia, in quo omnes -guas vires experiretur; neminem unum tot arduis, ambiguis, secretis; imo ne manifestis quidem pervidendis suffecisse ; naiuram in unici pectoris angustiis infin- itos suos thesauros, diffusissimasque opes nunquam conclusisse ; libero demum vos ortos esse judicio, intellectu sui juris, mente nulli imperio obnoxia ; aptos natos os esse tam imperare, quam subjici, tam preire, quam sequi, tam probare quam eredere, tam invenire quam doceri. So- lius ingenium vestrum veritatis jugo et arbitrio permiltite. Exerceat illa quan- dam in vos, si velit, tyrannidem ; ejus -numen colite, ejus erin litate ; in hunc vestros oculos scopum dirigite; in hance iter cynosuram intendite. Sit hc vestre palma victoriz#, vestre brabium certaminis, vestri tropheum prelii ; elici- at nobis ceelestem hanc flammam vester | disputandi conflictus; emergat heec har- -monia e vyestris tot dissonantibus sen- tentiis; in hune vos portum con- trariis hisce ventis, stabiliente cursum sinceritatis et modestie Saburra, tenente }elavum peritia, sedulitatis remis promo- | ventibus velificamini. Obstet veritati apud vos nullum sect studium, nulla sententie pervicacia, nullus amor novitatis, nullum ,Vetustatis preejudicium. Quanquam nol- | lem vos (nisi sacrilegi esse velitis) anti- quitatem plane aut respuere, aut asper- ‘nari: debetur sua illi religio, sua reveren- tia ; heec nobis preivit ; hic faces pretu- lit, [hac artes et prudentiam invenit], hac ealles scientie indicavit; id autem, ad quod ct hee et cetera referantur, veritas est; hee ditat, hee perficit, hae nobil- ταὶ animam ; hac nihil prius, nihil anti- psig nihil sanctius esse debet ; vetusta- )tem igitur oportet jure suo diligere, ver- ‘itatem venerari ; banc «stimare, illam ra huic studere, illam sectari. vissime pudeat vos novitatis studio, vel quodam potius consuetie veritatis fas- tidio prisca et vera contemnere, hesterna et falsa aucupari ; putide hoe est levita- tis, nefariee injurie, pudende ingratitu- | 429 dinis ; levitatis, inquam, veritatem agni- tam, injuriz dudum_ obtinentem, ingrati- tudinis aliorum opera inventam et tradi- tam rejicere et abdicare. Quam etiam turpe fuerit vos, morbo quodam et fana- tica ambitione agitatos, tumulata obitu feliciter errorum porteutae suis nobis cineribus resuscitare ; Epicuri intermun- dia, Democritum inane, Deos in otio et desidia feriantes, animam Galeni aut Dicearchi quandam 6 nescio quibus elementorum Suzygiis contemperatam, et.consimilia his falsa, explosa, absurda et impia dogmata novo apparatu, recente pompa in has scholas postliminio redu- cere. Sin quis signatum presente nota nummum nobis velit procudere, licet hoc per me, semperque licebit, modo non fictum, non fucatum, non adulterinum. Veritati enim nove, et hactenus inaudite primum apposuisse calculum, veritatem tot secula latentem e tenebris eruisse, laudande est inventionis, invidende lib- ertatis, sempiterne glorie. Illud autem serio vos commoneo, ne veritati sit fraud, neutiquam eam in ornatu semper eleganti, nec perpetuo aut pexam cincinnis, aut calamistris comptam, nec unguentis de- libutam, nec exoticis luminibus decora- tam; nullis fucis, nullis vocum lautitiis inquinatam, non in ameenis continuo viretis, nec tam in Platonis alicujus aut Theophrasti mellitissimis sermonibus, quam in scholasticis spinis et salebris, in quadam vocabulorum barbarie horridam, incultam, invenustam versari et residere : non sunt illie vestris manibus squalidi scholastic! omnino deponendi; habent illi suum si non cultum, at fructum ; utilitatem, si non concinnitatem ; habent suum in pectore, si non in lingua Mer- curium. Quid etiam si illi ingemio plus quam arte valuerint; si suas ipsi umbras aliquando fortiter debellarint, et larvas confoderint acuto nimium pugione ; si nulli experientia# multas scientias, exili fundamento operosas_ structuraS ineedifi- caverint; si denique e nature visceribus paucas telas, e suis ipsorum plurimas et subtilissimas confecerint ? ut raro verita- tem sint assequuti, fungentur saltem vobis vice cotis ; proderunt si minus ma- teria, at modo utcunque disputand!; ver- itatem in suo et simplice habitu dignos- cere, presse stricteque disserere, sagaci- ter inquirere, circumspecte explorare, ambiguitates tollere, difficultates enodare, 430 ORATIO HABITA QUINTO NOVEMB. ANNO 1651. scrupulos diluere, involuta evolvere, flex- animis syllogismis et infirmare falsa et vera confirmare, vos instruent atque edo- cebunt. Ulterius vos ego institutos, plu- ribusque admonitos voluissem; at ecce jam incipio vereri, academici, ne immod- icus vestre lascivie vindex nimio pro- lixitatis tormento patientiam vestram ex- ercuerim; ne auditorum jam tandem plerosque probe obtusos, ipsoque adeo illepido suo moderatore reddiderim stu- pidiores. Retraho idcirco meipsum in salutem tam dissitis jam orationis inter- vallis disjunctam iteram mihi iterumque repetendum, Salvete. Valete. Dixi. Vos autem, doctissimi, respondens. pa- riter et opponentes, efficite, ut dum ex- terno huic actui inesse aliquid, imo plu- rimum bonitatis aperte demonstretis, tu propriam ipse thesin defendendo evertas, vos arguendo id probetis, quod argu- mentis evincere non possitis. Vide etiam tu veritatem rerum divino con- formem esse intellectui valide et per- spicue astruendo, ut tua etiam sententia ipsi veritati conformis esse videatur. Ita fiet ut tue virtuti et diligentize cum ver- itas ipsa, tum et nos omnes plurimum debeamus ; illa, quam in divinam a deo originem retulisti; nos etiam, quos ad tam excelsam et celestem rem ardentis- simo conatu amplectandam animabis. Unicum est, academici, quod me fugit perorantem ; cujus vos etiamnum partic- ipes facere, nescio an gratum fuerit. Habituri estis propediem ex voto vestro et sententia animi moderatores duos. Unum nuperrimum tripodem vestrum, ipsas, ut probe meministis, jocorum de- licias. Alterum autem, non tripodem quidem illum, veram omnium tamen (quos ego quidem cognovi unquam). bi- pedum lepidissinum. Quod cum ita se habeat, noluissem ego utcunque exiguis meis, si que adfuissent, facetiarum fer- culis tantas lautitias minima ex parte antevertendo stomachum vestrum fre- gisse. Valete, et strenue expectate. Vos autem agite. Dixi. : my ORATIO he) , HABITA QUINTO NOV. ANNO 1651, IN AULA 5. TRIN. COLLEGIL. | Reverendissime Presul, Nobilissime Ju- venis, Gravissemi ~ Viri, Juventus Academica. | Uxtimus jam tandem leti.nuncii preco | fores vestras-pulsat, et si non intus per- — strepens gaudium omnem vobis foris | oberrantium ademit conscientiam, be-— nevolarum sibi aurium introitum recludi — precatur. Jamdiu est ex quo diurne solennitatis moram perpessa nox hee » longe augustissima suo tandem ordine succedere gestit, suasque adesse jam — vices jubila vestra excipiendi 5101 pariter — ac vobis abunde gratulatur. Enimvero dignior haud immerito sibi visa, que exultationis vestre potissimas partes sibi — vindicaret, utpote quam non eousque ac | hodiernam lucem tam immanis trageedie — designatio inquinavit; queque infandi facinoris (horribile dictu!) peracti modo ac perpetrati funestissimis — effectibus suum primo tenebrarum velum obduxis- set. Fuerit certe hujusce rei fidelem memoriam in tot annorum vertentium vestigiis altius impressam, luculenta to- ties, hodierna presertim, facundissimor- um virorum commemoratione renovatam, vegetiores [ΕΠ vestre appetitus ex- saturasse; minime tamen fastidiosa res est gaudium; dum pascit animum, irritat acrius ad recentes continuo succos e pa- bulo suo exugendos, et hujusce hydra, quam excisam hodie et profligatam cele- bramus, illud ingenium est, ut quantum- vis innumeris sui capitibus detectis et amputatis, novi tamen semper aliquid monstri subnascatur; in quod vos gaudil et gratitudinis triumphos ageretis. De- clinavit jam dies, ne sinite ut vester etiam leetandi impetus consenescat. Quod restat, celebris curriculi festis tripudiis alacrius absolvite. Descendens sol ves ter major appareat, et fortior gaudii flam- ma in tenebras modo abitura. Sed quid ego frustra curiosi molior, dum illos in pectoribus vestris igniculos acrius inflam- mo, qui ut langueant unquam aut defiei- ant, non est verendum, dum id solum fide in animo recolatis, quantum hoc sit beneficii quod accepistis, qualis illa ca- lamitas fuerit quam evitastis ? Beneficium inguam non simplex aut unicum, verum tot feetum et pragnans beneficiis, quot poterant nobis prestare continuata pax, conservata respublica, stabilita religio, optimi principis, sobolis regi serenis- sim, consultissimorum procerum, uni- versi adeo regni salus imminentis exitii faucibus erepta; quin et per ipsum, ut olim, restituta vis legibus, judiciis author- itas, rediens cultus agris, sacris honos, hominibus securitas, suo cuique rerum suarum possessio; tanta vero depulsa calamitas, quanta fuisset, tam ingentibus beneficiis semel nec opinantes excidisse. O inauspicatam miseriam, que tot nos tantisque bonis spoliare potuit! potuit ? imo tentavit. O infaustum scelus, cujus tanta miseria effectus extitisset! scelus ! imo omnium scelerum caput et fastigi- um, cujus respectu reliqua omnia juste et sancta admissa, et quocum collata di- rissima parricidia excusanda, imo lau- danda viderentur. Evolvamus monu- menta temporum, fidem histori appel- lemus, archiva gentium, acta curiarum, barbarorum instituta scrutemur ; prodat nobis intima veritatis conscientia, quod- cunque flagitii aut foras lux protulit, aut opacee tenebre obruerunt; quin et in conspectu nobis statuamus exquisiti ali- quam facinoris effigiem, quod nec sus- picio majorum somniare, nec posterorum queat credulitas admittere; quod qui presenti seculo intersint, non nisi stu- pidi et exanimes videant, videant tamen : jcompingatur in unum quicquid excocte jet conquisite seevitie Thracia stabula, Taurice are, Thyestee epule, Siculi eruciatus ; quicquid Marianz, Sullane, Antoniane: proscriptiones, denique quod- ungue immanitatis exemplum aut vere toria, aut ficte tragcedia representat. ‘Ecce hujusce diei ingeniosam carnifici- , in qua hee omnia cum amplo faen- 5 convenerint et conspiraverint. Ecce slus, quod nullus unquam successus honestasset ; quod illi ipsi, quorum eptum est gratia, pre se ferunt odis- ! En proditionem, quam vel neuter ilippus ainasset, nec Macedo, nec His- anus ; cujus artifices primarii Loiolite, um czteros mortales pangendis technis, lisque consuendis vincere dicantur, in > seipsos multis parasangis videntur | ORATIO HABITA QUINTO NOVEMB. ANNO 1651. 431 superasse. Ecce vero quo me impor- tune et intemperantis loquelz preepostero ordine rapuil sceleris nondum perspecti aut explorati detestatio! Cautius vos maturiusque consiliis usi eousque vehe- mentiores affectus pr®trahite et inhibete, donec extractis e suo cinere hodierni qua mali, qua emolumenti originibus, vestra haud injuria sanctissimumque gaudium gravissimaque indignatio suos impetus accipiant. [1185 igitur ut et rescire quea- tis accuratius, et dignius zstimare, indul- gete, queso pacem vestram el patientiam, humanissimi auditores, oratori vestro, si usitati moris pomeeria presentisque officii quasi oleas transgressus, vobis ob oculos illorum temporum (quorum hec pestis summam felicitatem oppugnatum ibat et eversum) imaginem quandam proposue- rit, equidem rudem illam et imperfectam, sed que pulchrior longe atque augustior videretur, si nacta esset oratorem, eam non dico exornando, sed enarrando ido- neum. Agebant halcyonis dies insule he for- tunate, 115 omnibus bonis, copiisque flo- rentes, que aut liberali indulgentia nu- minis, aut optimorum principum solertia et cura in aliquam unquam gentem exun- daverint. Que bona plurima sane atque amplissima, alte et diuturne pacis bene- ficio firma et quasi perpetua reddeban- tur. Cives omnibus amici, sibi mutuo fratres cum exteris feedera, inter se con- cordiam coluerant; nec tam illa concor- dia fuit quam charitas, non in cessatione armorum publica, sed in intima animo- rum conjunctione sita. Augusti in hoc orbe altero tempora revocata aspeximus, quum sole Jani edes occluse, reliquo- rum numinum fores starent aperte. De- scenderat pridem e c@lo Astra, suasque in curiis sedes fixas posuerat, certa du- dum apud se nisi invita non redeundi. Hine vis pulsa, propugnatum fas, securi- tate innocentia, arimis imbecillitas donata est. Judicii sellas occupabant viri gra- ves, sciectia, dignitate, integritate prees- tantes ; per quos stetit ne plus ipsa po- tentia posset quam jus, et ne fortune po- tius quam merito premia cederent. Nee delinquere impune, nec immuniter me- reri fuit. Etiam infime sortis viris per virtutis scalas gradum ad honores facere tuto licuit, et qui culmen dignitatis obti- nuerant, ab invidiw telis securi emine- bant. Nec egenis ab injuria, nee locu- 432 pletibus a rapina periculum imminuit. Nec in foro strepitus uspiam, nec extra forum querele audite sunt. Isto pacto coeuntes inter se pax et justitia miram omnium ordinum opulentiam procreave- rant. Per hance faoile, per illam tutum erat ditescere ; quum in acquisitas opes nec grassare aperta vis nec occulta latro- cinia auderent. Crimen videri potuit tunc temporis pauper esse, et tremende cujusdam ignaviee tam facili clivo opimi- orem statum non ascendere. Tutum et pervium mare mercatoribus (qued facile industria principis effecerat, nec minus exterorum propensus favor, tam _beatz genti pre pudore non adversantium) in- digenas nobis Indie ac Arabie gazas comparaverat. In sinum agricole sur- sum terra uberes proventus, aureosgue desuper imbres placidum ccelum funde- bat. Opifici deesse citius manus, quam merces poterant, ceeterique passim ordi- nes hominum suis quisque opibus afflue- bat. lta fixas pace, fultasque res squi- tate Britanaiz prosperes divite etiam splendidas prestiterant, ac multo sanctio- rem ornatum, honestiusque preesidium li- tere late triumphantes contulerunt. Me- minerant tunc homines Musas Jovis filias esse, suoque illas honore fraudari sacri- Jegii esse ducebant. Etiam qui eas am- bire non possent, devote tamen colere didicerunt, inque aliis suscipiebant non inviti quas in se cum meerore desidera- rent. Nimirum artes tune dierum certa spes aluit et impinguavit, lautisque Mi- nervalibus cultores suos remunerando erat ipsa eruditio. Tum sapientie stu- dere non erat desipere; nec ad fastigi- um doctringe aspirare, projicere se fuit in abyssum paupertatis. In hisce templis sapientie, quam venerabilis mystarum, quam candidatorum spectabilis frequen- tia versabatur? In singulis hisce orbi- bus literariis quam conspicuus siderum globus fulgebat? Quoties seipsam regia majestas ad aras Musarum venerabun- dam demisit? Quoties nostram hance rempublicam Platonis rex philosophus invisebat, et quasi gavisa est aula se de- gere in academia? οἱ sacris pedibus palestra hee terebatur? Quam tunc nituit toga, et nostrum insigniter laure- tum effloruit? Felicitatis nostre infi- mos gradus, et prima quasi rudimenta accepislis; qui restat apex et cumulus redundantis gloria excelsiori nos invidie ΠΝ ORATIO HABITA QUINTO NOVEMB. ANNO 1651. subjecit, qui nostram coronando erat, imo consecrando felicitatem. Religio nem nostram dico, sanctam illam et intamina- tam; puram fide, pulchram ordine, vene- randis ritibus decoram, qua nulla unquam gens vel usurpare potuit vel exoptare aut veriorem aut pulchriorem. In qua vix aliquid fuit quod superbia contemnere, vix quod calumnia accusare, nihil fere quod desiderare equa et moderata inge- nia possent. Nec veteres illa corrupte- las, nec hesternas ineptias admittebat. Summe simplex fuit; nec nuda tamen lis Ornamentis, quibus antiqua pietas et consulta prudentia ecclesiam honestave- rant. Quicquid rebus sacris spisse cali- ginis preeuntium seculorum infelix igno- rantia infuderat ; quicquid lutulentarum sordium turpis avaritia affricuerat; si quas fraudes artesque malesanas ineffre- nis quorundam hominum ambitio, aut si quid luxus perditique moris fomies gula et crapula invexerat ; illa jam olim omnia rejecerat. Sacri ministerii cervicibus jugum externe tyrannidis depulsum, pub- licisque officiis inutiles pomp elimina. te; faciem ubique erat primevi tempo- ris agnoscere candidam et immaculatam 5 eosque qui a pietate olim profecti eo ites rum redirent, matremque suam auctio- rem redderent et foecundiorem. Publica ecclesiz administratio non in tali fastu aut fastigio constituta est, ut gravis ali- quando principi, reipublice periculosa evaderet; nec tamen ita projecta repebat humi, ut impure illam inepti ac importu- ni homines contemnere aut proculcare possent. Dignus scilicet habitus est sa- cer ordo, qui dignitate aliqua prefulge- ret, ad res suas tuendas simul et amplifi- candas. Rerum gubernacula tractabant quamplurimi presules, Viri prudentia conspicui, doctrina eximii, pietate pra- cellentes, etate venerabiles, qui tam il- lustri officio ipsi erant ornamento, quan- tumque acceperant lucis, tantum vicis- sim splendoris refundebant, quos vel as- pexisse erat pudorem didicisse et tantum non induisse virtutem. Hee eos precla- rissimze dotes, quum suis charos et co- lendos facerent, etiam alienis non ingra- tos, nec ipsis quidem hostibus inyisos, servare debuit, quem exhiberent omni bus, modestissimus candor et pene divir na animi moderatio. Aliis illi facilius quam sibi ipsis errantibus ignoscerent, nec statim quoscunque a se sententia dis - SSS | pendia accepta referamus: quod elegan- — ter etcommode habitamus ; quod tutis ab — hostili incursione vallis protegimur ; per infidos fluctus secura commerci ebramus; quod agrorum pacifice fines , ORATIO PRAFATORIA IN, ἄς. dispescimus ; quod momenta ponderum lance expendimus, justaque suum cuique mensura dispensamus; quod vas- tas susque deque, quo volumus, levi digi- to moles versamus, immanemque rerum silla vi resistentiam profligamus: speciosis spectaculis et concinnis ocellos simulachris oblectamus ; quodque -harmonicis auriculas concentibus delini- ‘mus. Quod terreni faciem orbis delin- ‘eamus accurate, remque mundi publicam ‘nostro universam conspectui subjicimus. Quod temporis fluxam seriem apte diger- jmus, et rerum vices agendarum debitis jntervallis distinguimus. Quod celes- tium radiorum in usus nostros subtilem efficaciam derivamus; quod mente de- ‘mum superos accedimus; imo superos admovemus nobis ; nostraque neutiquam ἃ tellure disjuncti per ethereas libere re- | spatiamur; leges ipsis preescribi- ‘mus inviolabiles ccelis, et vagos syderum sircuitus certos intra cancellos coercemus. Ut preteream in palestra rationem nos- ram geometrica cum ad valide intor- enda argumentorum tela, tum ad caute clinandos sophismatum ictus, cum ad srvose disserendum, tum ad solide diju- dicandum, ad prompte inveniendum, ad recte disponendum, ad dilucide explican- jum, utilissime exerceri: nec non ad at- tents meditationis perferendum tedium, d alacrem cum objectis difficultatibus conflictum, ad pertinacem in studiis so- rtiam, usu componi mentem, et robore confirmari: instabilem hac et inzqua- lem phantasiam quasi saburra librari ; _jhae fluctuantem anchora figi ; hac desul- toriam orbita contineri. Luxurians hac genium ceu falce castigari ; obtusum cote exacui; prefervidum hoc freno reprimi, torpidum hoc stimulo excitari ; nulla clarius lampade per cecas nature mbages, nullo certius filo per tortuosos ilosophici labyrinthi anfractus vestigia σὶ incedentis: nec alia demum bolide itatis fundum facilius explorari. Ne a, hine quam varia rerum cognitione litetur, quam multiplice perpoliatur or- quam salubri pabulo nutriatur an- et quam sincera voluptate perfun- ur. Nam illias que calos, que ter- que maria permetitur scientiz, nulla 6 limites describat, nulla plene com- qg | mu . . . : : ᾿ exhauriat oratio. Et alioquin in materia perspecta, improbe stolidus sim, si aut meam frustra abutar operam, aut ves- tram ulterius violem patientiam. quam haud mediocrem jure meo possim in geometriz auditoribus patientiam exi- gere ; facilemque debeam utcunque a vobis veniam impetrare, si (quod felici cedat augurio) optimum me hodie pre- ἢ stiterim geometram, hoc est, pessimum oratorem. SCHOLA PUBLICA MATHEMATICA, Ut conquieverit paulo solennium negotio- rum estus, et restituta tantisper rebus vestris tranquillitas dandis accipiendisque novis animos apparaverit vobis, avres pa- tefecerit ; attendite sultis (academici) in- solite rei quiddam, et prodigii non absi- mile denarrare gestienti. quidnam ὃ inquietis: an dirus cometes funestorum casuum prenuncius,cujusmo- di plusculos indies (vel invito ceelo) fana- dlectatur utilitates, nulla penitus laudes ntata ab omnibus, et vobis intimius 471 Quan- Dixi. ORATIO PRASFATORIA IN Mart. 14, 1664. Affulsit nuper : ticorum capitum distorta contuetur acies ? imo novum, et beneficum sydus, vero pariter ac fausto jubare scintillans, quale nullum constat a multis annis supra hor- izontem academicum emersisse ; cujus ego nunc ut dimetiar magnitudinem, mo- tus explicem, presagiam eventus, non vanus utique hue prodeoastrologus. Vul- tis edisseram clarius? Quam iniquum sit in literas, erga literatos invidum in- gratumque audiat hoe seculum, ignorare nemo potest, qui vel ad illarum calamito- sam sortem obverterit oculos, aut ad crebras horum querelas non prorsus ob- surduerit. Quo demiremini magis, qui tristes hac tempestate Camecenas respi- ceret; istam infami seculo labem abster- geret; elanguentibus studiis vigorem in- spiraret; obductam longa desuetudine, nullisque jamdudum vestigiis signatam benefaciendi semitam reteyveret, eximium tandem comparuisse Mecanatem; ne- dum titulo tenus, ut fit, sed ipsissima re Meceenatem; non qui nudam ostentarit gratiam, at solidam operam impenderit literis, non ipsas benevolo tantum affectu, sed munifica quoque manu sit prosecu- tus: cujus ego viri ut laudes efleram, ut 472 virtutes depredicem, utinam mihi con- grua tantis meritis verba, par tali mate- riz eloquium obtigis set; neque de adeo prelustri argumento tam mihi arduum esset digne fari, quam nefas est omnino tacere. Utcunque cum publice gratitu- dinis intersit, meique presertim id exigat officii privati ratio, etsi facultatem pre- stare non possum, voluntatem tamen os- tendam, aliquo saltem (imperfecto licet et inconcinno) elogio preclari benefacto- ris memoriam cohonestandi. Fuit is (assurgite quotquot estis audito- res, tantoque debitam nomini reverentiam exhibete) Henricus Lucas; Lucas, in- quam, martiam simul virtutem efful- minans, et Palladiam sapientiam blandius expirans nomen; belli togeeque laudibus utramque paginam historie repleturum, futurumque apud posteros an heroice fortitudinis nescio, vel divinee munificen- tie exemplis celebratius. Henricus Lu- cas; vir a prosapie dignitate prolixe commendandus (utpote qui preenobiles familias proxima sanguinis agnatione contigerit) nisi quod amplitudini generis potior animi magnificentia detraxerit, et virtutum excellentia natalium splendorem obumbrarit. Modicas illi facultates nas- cendi sors attribuit, quasque etiam pu- pillo litigiosi fori subtraxit importunitas, jurisque injuria surripuit; prospera fati iniquitate, ne scilicet inconsulte fortune potius, quam laudabili solertiz sua vel honeste vivendi copia, vel gloriose bene- faciendi facultas posset imputari. Ete- nim a parentibus transmissas possidere divitias, pure felicitatis est; acquirere sibi, perfect laudis: que aliunde quis acceperit, aliis impertire juste restitu- tionis speciem habet ; suo autem labore parta comiter elargiri, titulum merito pre se ferat liberalis beneficii. Max- imam inde partem gloriz casus decerpat, integrum hine 51:01] virtus adjudicat. Talis noster, sortis auctor propriz, suze virtutis heres, private soboles industrie, ex angusta re ad amplas opes enisus, ab humili statu in spectabilem gradum evectus est. Quo pacto, sciscitemini, quibusve fretus adminiculis ? an repinis grassando, fovendo lites, merces commu- tando, illiberales questus exercendo ? nulla harum, sed innocentissima ratione, probatissimis srtibus, quibusque natura homines ad propulsanda vite: incommoda sanctissimis armis instruxit, elegantia ORATIO PR/FATORIA IN ingenii, linguee sonnel’ morum probi Amplissimo nempe Collegio Sancti Joh τ nis, (quod cum innumeros addixerit ec clesiz, permultos reipublicee commodar. insignes viros, nullum, reor, sacademiz enutrivit utiliorem alumnum;) huic inquam, feraci seminario implantatus adeo feliciter adolevit, ita bonis artibu ingenium exculuit, probis animum imk moribus, ut cum nulli non aptus mune quavis promotione dignus videretur, ic saltum assecutus est, ut in illustrissim: comitis Hollandiz (viri preecipua apuc serenissimum regem gratia florentis, e cancellarii vestri (summis etiam proce. ribus invidendo) tunc honore preefulgentis_ i familiam ascitus, secretioribus ejus con’ siliis et literis (qui potissimus est et per: quam honorificus apud optimates clientela locus) admoveretur ; quam adeo singular dexteritate, sinceritate,diligentia Sperill exornavit, ut neutiquam miranJum sit,dum patroni res procuraret optime, suis ip- sum non pessime prospexisse, bonzeque frugis aliquid 6 tam copiosa messe pro- prium in horreum reportasse. Sic am- plificato per honestam solertiam censu pari prudentia decrevit uti, nec egregii laboris fructum 5101 passus est elabi t piter, infeliciter abortire. Non in splen- didos illum luxus erogavit, nec in foedas profudit voluptates ; non (sicut plerisque nunc usu venit opulentis) otiosorum ve nularum stipavit se frequenti satellitio, nec magnificos conviviorum apparatus. adornavit: non popularem impendiose captavit auram, nec politicis semetipsum facionibus immersit; at vite genus fru- gale, modestum, tranquillum amplexate sapienti ac pietati vacans unice, modi¢i temporis erga se parsimoniam coluit, ut sempiternam versus alios liberalitatem exerceret. De prole suscipienda, vel’ stirpe sua propaganda parum solicitus, patrem se egenis preestitit, suis Musas’ penatibus ascripsit, universos sibi pou | ros velut adoptavit; neutiquam id si pensi datum arbitratus, ut unum aliquem | efficeret signiter locupletem, sed ut plu-— rimorum necessitati subveniret, omnium industriam compensaret, nec ut privatam: domum adimpleret copia, sed ut totum genus humanum scientia collustraret. Quanquam haud videri debet vel fami- lie sue neglexisse decus, aut fame sui | nominis ullatenus offecisse, quibus adeo | durabilia constituit monumenta, quarum- | ὁ ἡ ὁ iam immortalibus Musis com- Nam accurata modo lance πο ϑύνω, non alia quacunque generose. propaginis gloria seipsam latius, aut radices suas altius πο είϊεν; quam literarum 5101] rem demerendo ; quibus ipsum scili- tt tempus suarum rerum custodiam as- e, conscientiam solet accredere ; uumque semper indefesso_ spiritu ra fume buccina inflatur. Intereant rtet literee, lumen extinguatur omnis emorie, diffusissima barbarie rerum ies obruatur, quam Lucasianum’ ces- t inctarescere nomen, inque hoc per- a illustri glorize theatro solenni cum 2 personare. Sed neque justitiz ninus in hoc proposito quam _ prudentiz S| ecimen elucescit : us est lucis, plus in illam splendoris dit; tenue patrimonium a majoribus cepit, larga cognatis munera redonavit ; amicorum benevolentiz foenus amplum ι πεν: neminem de se bene meritum | vicissim bene faciendo superavit. si literarum preesertim auspiciis prema cum fortune suz presidia, tum nimi ornamenta consecutus sit; si ademiz, parenti vite melioris initium ; _— virtutis, qua emicuit, disci- am cultumque, quo excelluit, ingenil ; rici demum, eximium dignitatis suse rit incrementum ; quamobrem non κι jure parer illis rependeret , mutuis hance officiis devinciret r Bid enim, Academiz nomine semel que iterum ad suprema regni comitia inari; senatoria purpura ‘decoratum literati populi causa agere, tutelam ipere, personam sustinere ; vestrum est, ipsissimum sapientie) corpus entare ; vestro gravissimo judicio ri, deligi, claris competitoribus an- i, DUM parvi pendendum decus est ? 9 quolibet pretio pluris estimandum, non fastuosis titulis praferendum. que, utinam, Academici, sic perpetuo rebus vestris comparatum esset, 405 educatio sua in sublimiorem extulit mM, quosque consimili benevolent nio afficitis, ut ii pariter evadant Vos qnimati; ut sepius judicia ves- ‘tam auspicato colliment, beneficia tam recte collocentur: non ita les scienti# pabuli inopes, honoris es marcescerent ; nec dignis modo iis, at necessariis etiam subsidiis VoL. 111. 60 τῷ rere " . | { q SCHOLA PUBLICA MATHEMATICA. aliquid a prosapia ; ἡμμόϑμώ studia languerent. Enimvero solus ille jam a plurimis annis ab ipjuria literas protexit, a contemptu asseruit, ab inopia liberavit; opera sua adjuvit, opibus adauxit scientias. Iniquis siquidem illis et infaustis temporibus, cum _proventibus Academicis avida barbaries inhiaret, onera cum imponeret omnibus, et gravis- sima undicunque tributa corrogaret, causam ille vestram tutatus est acriter, immunitates vestras strenue propugnavit, annisus est vehementer, et multum ef- fecit, qua consilio, qua eloquio suo, ne toga sago fieret vectigalis, ne Martis furor Minerve fundum depasceret; ne honestis artibus fovendis dicate opes ad sustentandam nefariam tyrannidem, ad improbos ausus promovendos perverteren- tur. Ita clypeum se vestrum tunc ob- jecit importunee nequitize gladium postea vobis adversus inscitiam accincturus ; averruncavit a vobis exitiale damnum, mox insigne lucrum adjecturus. Quippe mortalis curriculi cum extremam pene metam se attigisse prasentirel,ut beneficio sallem perduraret superstes, nec prodesse vobis cessaret etiam cum vivere desiis- set, ccepit animo versare secum, elt cum amicis consilium inire qua potissimum ratione studiis vestris quam optime pos- set consulere ; cumque qua parte debiles essetis maxime, idoneis illam presidiis firmare, vulneribus vestris opportuna remedia” applicare, defectus supplere, damna resarcire statuisset, omnia cir- cumspicienti succurrit imprimis dignis- sima beneficentize materia, mathematice disciplinze ; quas cum insignis commen- det utilitas, ingenuee delectationi adjunc- ta; cum ipsarum peculiaris difficultas auxilli plurimum efflagitet ; cum ipsas veteres sapientive magistr! preecipua cura excoluerint, omnis evi homines ingente plausu exceperint, presens autem tas in extremis deliciis habeat; mirandum nescio magis an dolendum sit, in hae ompium disciplinarum feecunda matre, omnium studiorum benigna nutrice Acad- emia, nullum ferme hactenus illis con- cessum fuisse locum, nullum assignatum premium, nullum patrocinium indultam, Tantum dedecus amoliri studens, et quo jacentes scientias instauraret, adjutricem illis subministravit manum, Professione mathematica suis auspiciis instituta, suis opibus liberali stipendio dotata. Quine- 'tiam cum Bibliothecee vestree sublati libri 473 474 Lambethani acerbissimam plagam in- fiixissent, persanavit illam (saltem valde mitigavit) substituta sua, minus lauta quidem, nec perinde magnifica, ‘sed 8868 lecta, pariter pretiosa suppellectile libraria, insigni illo tam eruditionis suze monumento, quam adjumento vestre. Que benefacta cum nullis amplificari verbis, nullis queant coloribus illustrari ; idemque plane sit illa simpliciter re- censere, ac fuse celebrare ; vobis potius committam gratifico mentis sensu re- colenda, quam mihi desumam rudi en- comio temeranda. Adnotare saltem li- ceat (obiter atque strictim), quum (sicut assolet fierit quod pretermissa matre benignius tractentur filiz) plures in sin- gula collegia pronum affectum contestati sint, pregrandia dona contulerint, nul- lum hactenus universe Academie tam officiosum filium, gratum alumnum, munificum patronum obvenisse: quo- rum tamen illud tanto angustioris an- imi, tanto exilioris est meriti, quanto publicus sol domestic lampadi pre lucet, quantoque augustius est bene- ficum influxum ad omnes d'ffundere, quam in paucos derivare. Itidem, ut alii majora prestiterint, nostrum sua pruden- tius dispensasse, siquidem opportunissimo tempore, cum res vestra (diutius neglecta) conspicui favoris indigeret, et deplorata conditio. literarum validam opem iimplo- raret, ab usus summopere necessarios, quibusque nescio turpiusne fuerit an dam- nosius vos hactenus caruisse: alios deni- que beneficio plurimum, neminem eque de vobis exemplo meruisse: quando ni- mirum illi pro temporum Ingenio, et se- culi sui moribus obtemperantes, vigenti- bus gratia literis acclamarint ; hic adver- so sue etatis genio obnitens, invidia las borantes et expositas opprobrio literas ausus est favore complecti, dignatus est prosequl reverentia: tritum illicallem in- gressis comites se vel pedissequos adjunx- erunt; per aviam hic solitudinem dux sibi, nemini socius incessit: spes isti veg- etas foverunt studioruin, hic prostratas erexit, pessundatas restituit, pene sepultas exuscitavit: florentem illi suorum tem- porum famam sustinuerunt aliquatenus, aut tantillum promoverunt ; ; suum hie se- culum nedum_ insigni honore affecit, sed a gravissima iafadaia vindicavit: a vul- garibus adeo benefactis vulgarem_ illi Jaudem adepti sunt ; singularem vero nos- ORATIO PRAFATORIA ΙΝ 485 ego certe cum (ut radios non directo © ter a singulari beneficentia consec est (certe commeruit) gloriam: anteces sorum is utique merita supergressus δὲ longe, palmam certo preeripuit it a suris: ei juxta debemus, que fecit ip: queeque deinceps alii similia facturi su debebimus; quibus, ut patrocinio suble arent literas, faustum omen prebuit, luc i dam facem pretulit, apertam viam pre monstravit: neminem ut posthac pudere possit impense Musis liberalitatis ; om nes vero pudere. debeat viri talis auete ritatem non sequi, tanti ducis vestigiis non insistere. Verum in immense ora: tionis pelagus improviso devehor longius. et plane sentio quanto proclivius sit (8 gumentum nacto tam nobile, tam splendi- dum, tam liberale) nimium dicer e, quam satis: contraham igitur vela: sic ta ut vestram prius, preestantissime μα καρίτας suppliciter implorem. veniam, tuas quod ego privatas laudes, eximiam in Deum pietatem, versus amicos observantiam, in omnes benignitatem ; illibatum candorem animi; inculpatam morum probitatem; singularem in conversando comitatem, in agendo peritiam, in judicando perspica-_ clam, in disserendo facundiam ; in officiis colendis fidem, in factis eequitatem, in dictis modestiam, in proposito constan-| tiam ; sincerum amorem veritatis, ardens _ sapientie studium, excelsam indolem, et” consummatam eruditionem ; reliquasque— innumeras tuas divinas animi virtutes, preeclaras dotes ingenii, egregia vite fa- civora, verecundo potius obtegam silentio, | quam importuno preconio dehonestem: Ἧ cursu delatos, sed medii-densioris inter: | jectu refractos et conturbatos) acceperim, — non usu proprio perspexerim, ast aliena fide subnixus, et solius famee beneficio— cognoverim (fame licet‘certe et indubi- tate, multorumque optimorum et sapien” tissimorum viforum consonis suffragiis — munite) si dicendo persequi vellem, quid — aliud quam cecus clarissimam lucem de- pingendam, surdus suavissimam harmo- niam susciperem emodulandam ? O si. viventis intueri vultum ameena luce cit | cumfusam ; si contemplari gestus placida | severitate Compositos ; si degystare ser- | mones tuos mellea salubritate conditos, | istoque guttulas aliquot ab inexhausto | gurgite facundia mihi depromere licuis- set, tuo forsan pectus impraegnatum affla- | tu quidd: 1m concepisset simile tui, tuo 98 i -SCHOLA PUBLICA m nectare et dignum aliquid pro- set: nunc satius esse duco tantas es omnino non attingere, quam in- male pertractatas afficere, vel in- slo sermone contaminare. Una tan- ‘superest laus (nec illa tamen postre- accensenda) quam nulla ratione de- 1ego intactam preeterire ; felicissime, ), laus prudentiz, illis in deligendis et putandis adhibitee, quibus supremam e (voluntatis exequendze dicam? vel) yensande charitatis curam commen- et. Quippe cum irrita sepe fiant, et rato excidant successu vel optime ab minibus destinata, istorum, quibus com- nittuntur, vel improba perfidia, vel ignava pinitate, vel insipiente vecordia, id nde cavit, ne sibi eveniret, cum testa- mento suo preeficeret duos incorrupta pee'a diligentia, spectata prudentia 3 quorum utcunque non grata recor- la ione prosequi nomina flagitiosum esset ᾿ ’ ipsorum cum erga vos summam servantiam, tum singularem in meip- humanitatem experto. Unus haud - forsan cognitus vobis (dignus men qui pernoscatur ab omnibus cola- rque), ornatissimus et spectatissimus , Robertus Raworth, Elio illi Sexto urisconsulto* Ciceroniano) geminus et persimilis, Egregie cordatus homo cau- usque, qui cum insigni juris peritia non ferius justitie studium coniupxit, cum nagno rerum usu raram mentis integrita- em sociavit : in eo preecipue mirabilis et felix, quod cum ad equitatis normam dirigat omnia, nec unquain honeste faci- i voluntatem bene audiendi gratiz tponat, optimi lamen viri apud omnes ecu, potuit opinionem, et cum recta nscientia integram famam conservare : adratus homo, plane, inque eo, cui psum ratio affixit, situ inconcussus : i tmoris, aperte sinceraeque indolis, Ha involutus nube, nullo fuco incrus- us. In dijudicandis rerum momentis er et perspicax ; in amplectendis con- iis maturus et circumspectus ; in reti- Ὁ proposito consians et gravis 3 ut qui témere suscipiat aliquid, neque se ir patiatur a probabili instituto dimo- ; talis denique, cui cum tuto summa | ἣ haberi, el gravissima negolia recte mitti possint, tum in hac administran- a provincia, tam fideliter, dextre, sapi- r se gessit, ul non ego tantum, et qui * De Orat. I. et Tuse. Qu. ἜΝ a a ee anti- MATHEMATICA. 475 -mihiin hoc munus successuri sunt, sed et universa Academia, boneque adeo omnes literee sintimmortalesilli gratias debiture. Alter autem, nemini vestrum, non ab ho- nesto, quem tot annos, imo tot lustra sus- tinuit apud vos, loco notissimus, a virtuti- bus suis commendatissimus, ab egregiis erga vos meritis colendissimus, Thomas Buck: idem ille, cujus quotidie vestris oculis augusta species corporis, et oris veneranda dignitas obversatur: cujus in- dies promptissimam humanitatem persen- tiscitis : cujusque toties in procurandis gravissimis negotiis vestris, asserendo honore, commodis provehendis, gnavam, fidam, prosperamque operam experti estis. Vir sane, qui cum omnibus bonis artibus haud mediocriter excultus sit, cum pru- dentia vel fide primas concedat nemini, tum vero laudabili industria plerosque (pene dixissem omnes) longo intervallo post se relinguit mortales. Difficile mihi sit (imo prorsus impossibile) quos ille vesira causa exantlarit labores, quales pertulerit molestias, quot susceperit itin- era, quanta devorarit tedia, verbis ex- plicare, vel ipsius in agendo diligentiam mea assequi diligentia dicendi. ‘Testis eram (quatenus, inquam, admiratio per- miserat, testis) quanto ille, dum rem ves- tram typographicam urgeret, cum sue salutis et ret familiaris dispendio, honori vestro prospiceret, commodo deserviret: que nempe laus ejus, nitidis impressa characteribus, ad infimos usque posteros perennabit, ipsisque adeo cum sacris (quibus pretium adauxit quodammodo, gratiammque adjecit) Bibliis eternitati permanebit consecrata. Ceterum in hoc ipso, quod prze lingua habemus negotio, non absque vegrandi stupore mihi licebat observare, virum tate ingravescentem, nec firma satis utentem valetudine, tantas alien rei vigilias impendere vel potuisse si vellet, aut si posset voluisse, quantas nemo forsan alius, etiam etate validus et corpore robustus, sua preestitisset. Tan- tus illum ardor inflammavit de vobis ben emerendi ; tale perficiendi quod occepis- set egregii facinoris incessit desiderium ; ut cum annis accrevisse vires corporis, cum tate vigor animi provectior eva- sisse, et quo ad vite centrum propius ac- cederet, eo ferri videretur incitatius. At quid ejus in hac conficienda re comme- moro sedulitaterm, quum in auspicanda potius enixum studium, et impensam erga * ἄν, =~ »ῃ{( -- 476 vos benevolentiam debeam predicare ὃ siquidem illi tantum non primas_ ingentis hujus beneficii partes referre debetis acceptas; cujus excitatus admonitu, consilio persuasus, hortatu compulsus, mirificus ille Mecenas noster cum math- ematicam hanc instituerit professionem, tum lectissimo librorum thesauro biblio- thecam vestram ditarit ornaritque. Quid enim, annon jure beneficii auctor censen- dus est, qui benefactorem ipsum concili- avit, et quasi donavit vobis; qui aliena re, sua vero sapientia, sua profuit volun- tate, qui aliorsum exundantes munificen- tie rivos in aream vestram deduxit? ab- sque quo certe fuisset, non esset hodie quod tantum ego studiis adminiculum, tantum Academie ornamentum, tantum seculo exemplum gratularer accessisse. Heret profecto lingua, deficit ingenium, collabascit animus verba perquirenti tanto beneficio quadantenus adequata; cujus magnitudinem vos cogitando facilius Pag. 119. . * Pag. 61, 94, ἄτα. 4 Pag. 81. 496 ΡῈ SESTERIO. tando Attica drachma etiam consularem , ferre. Quibus ex suppositis adju _ denarium (tanto majorem Czsareo) 5|tabella computatur. — granis Anglicis exsuperet, ut luculente| Hec tabula continuari potest ad in probat Gravius.* tum, repetendo numerum ultima Consultius itaque visum est a Gravio | le summe librarum in qualibet ennead adsertis proportionibus adherere, et cum | ita fiet enneas subsequens. Semper ver consulari nummo pecunias nostras con-|retinetur in omni enneade eadem 8 | _. {ma solidorum et denariorum respect eee | Conferatur ultima enneas cum pre * Pag. 72. 2° preecedenti. a a peg ee re σοςς Ep I ABA A ELI ORG I LOE | © POEMAT A. _ Mundus neque fuit, neque esse potuit ab ZEterno. , ANNO 1649. _Tentavi: mens Pegaseo super astra rotatu Millia seclorum tranavit prapete penna: _Temporis immensos tractus lustravit, et evi Semotos fontes; vidi incunabula rerum, Quum superi, infantes agerent solennia primi Natalis, lucisque sue promotus in oras Ipse recens nato Phebus rideret ocello. Nocturnis vidi surgentem e vestibus Hylen, Deformem, nudamque tuis, natura, figuris; Umbrosique chao caput hine pretervehor, inde Horrendum eterni pelagus mens longius audax Intrat ab angusti ripis declivibus evi. Usque fatigatus perplexo errore viarum Finibus invisis nec eodem calle relabor Attonitam in lucem squalenti e noctis abysso. Sic pia credulitas videt ipsa exordia mundi, Illustrata oculos divine aspergine lucis. Nec si recurrens temporis impetus Evolvat orbes innumerabiles, Motu retexens circulari Preteriti stadii labores, Recursitando deficiat licet Mundi fatiscens spiritus impiger, Distantias sic assequetur Longius effugientis evi. Gyrantur isthic multiplices suo τ rerniteses vortice reflue, Fontes abyssi seculorum, Invia succiduis senectus. Diffringerentur sphere adamantine, Extingueretur flammula syderum, Et desideret sol anhelus Hoe spatii nimiaum volando. Saturnus errans segnibus orbitis, Et luna bigis mobilioribus Rotata, eodem a fine, cursus Perficeret, numerosque eosdem. Nox atra Incem, vespera phosphorum, Lux clara noctem, phosphorus hesperum, Idem seipsum prevolaret Preecipiti nimium rotatu. Divina virtus aut senior foret ZEternitatis fontibus ipsius, Aut conferetur prolis etas | Dantis eam senio parentis. | Creatus orbis filius est nihil ; _ Est ante prolis mater originem, Eternitati est ante nullum, Ergo recens habeatur orbis. Creatura non potest creare. ANNO 1649. Qui cupis artificis vires ostendere dextre, Creator emulus Dei, Vade, patris magni validos imitare labores, Matris Nihil prosapia ; Nitere, maternam scelerati seminis alyvum Corrumpat incestus liquor, Arguet imbelles proles sperata parentes Nil filius tui, et nihil. I, steriles vacui campos hortare, colenti Ut sponte lzti obtemperent : Mellis ab exucca stillantes exprime caute, Et nectaris rivos sacri ; Paupere de vena macilenti marmor inanis Excide fidenti manu, Visceribusque chao calcem extrahe, nunc age Mausole, mirandas strues. {conde, Fae Gades Indus cireumfluat, insula fiat Ut letiori cingulo, Distantesque polos contactus jungat amicus, Det vesperze Eos osculum ; Perfice iu, que si Eurystheus mandata dedisset, Victus fuisset Hercules : Parva potes, Nihili ac Entis vicinia novit Distautiores terminos : Hec inter tu vincla jube, que conjuge magnus Maritat annulo Deus: In vacuum tua fac resonent edicta profundum, Auscultet auritum Nihil: Dic videant tenebre ; prestet responsa roganti Elinguis os silentii : Concipiat vestro in cerebro feecunda voluntas, Dein loquendo procreet : Sis vel uterque parens, sine conjuge Palladis Juno simulque Jupiter: [ers Siste parum, non illa potes, Res filia coeli ; Agnosce vires proprias : Clauderis exigue finito in carcere sphere, Et limites arctos habes, Ultra quos brevitate coercita brachia tollens Conatus audet irritus ; ! Servatrice manu moreris simul, atque resurgis Instantis unici mora ; Num vacat huic aliud progignere, cujus agun- Natalis et funus simul ? {tur Nec fugitive umbre, tenuis neque sustinet aer Impressiones verberum ; i Sic insensatum, quo quis mage percutit ipsum, Subsidit incapax Nihil. Ergo agnoscatur solius sermo Tonantis, Rerum stupendus artifex. 498 Dantur rationes Boni et Mali aterne et indispen- sabiles. ANNO 1651. Errieres formosa Dei constantis, Honestum, Progenies innata sui, primevius evo, Principioque prius, nullius jura parentis - Agnoscit, nulla derivat origine stirpem : Non ipsum sero feecunda protulit alvo Alma opifex duplicis mundi divina voluntas : Quin edicta Boni, quavis seniora loquela, Imperiis haud scita suis, nec jussa volendo Jura tremenda colit, nec mente recusat iniqua Ipse Deus, facilis Recto summittere cceli /Eternosfasces et sceptra regentia mundum : Divinum est servire Bono, placidisque mereri Obsequiis, nec se justo subducere posse. Siste, quis audebit leges przscribere ccelo, Quis laqueos mandare Jovi, superisque cate- nas ? Quis docili cervice jugum perferre Tonantem Asseret xtherei juris consultus ? an ora Frena coercebunt rerum moderantis habenas ? Nil miri, nec ccelum ideo domuere gigantes : Se regit et freenat, fines 5101 ponit Olympus: Immensum est mensura sui, sibi regula Rec- tum ; ' Is Deus est sibi, qui reliquis ; se limite claudit Virtus inconclusa ; sua est angustia celo ; Cancellos Justi capit infinita potestas : Non externa Venus domuit concreta profundo, Uritur invicto propriz bonitatis amore. Non sibi dissimiles fore, non exemplar honesti Conspicuum delere sui, non linquere tractus Signatos vellent superi, possentve volentes ; Quos, Helice propria vestigia certa regente, Extra se nunquam pellexit devius error. Si nulla ratione regant, discrimine nullo Jusque nefasque habeant, pro libertate potentes Elysio donare malos, in tartara bruto Fulmine dejicere insontes, non dicere promp- tum est, Nil refert Deus an terre moderentur alumni. Velle nefas non posse Dei est, sed velle tyranni : Quas idea Boni leges, agnoscit easdem Umbra coeva Boni Pravum, et contrarius hos- tis: Hee duo sunt Camarina duplex, infixa profun- do, Non ullis jactanda ruentis fluctibus evi: Rident imbelles digitos, viresque sororum Fila colo non texta sua, decreta priusquam Licia prima cito torquerent pollice Parce. Quin et ab his fatum ducit sua stamina lanis, Ac Vulcanus ab his finxit sua vincla metallis: Non ea contingit faciles emergere in ortus, Deinde pudens caput in primos abscondere fontes, Sic Epicureus radios variavit Apollo : Non ita qui stabili semper fulgore coruscans Sol noster, nequit ipse suas extinguere flam- mas : Illis ceu stygiz voto constringitur unde, Nulla quibus possunt exolvi secula vinclis : Lassaret digitos Jovis hos evolvere nodos ; Non licet has fixas Arctos demergere ponto. Mendaces Pulchrum fucos admittere nescit, Nativeque decus charum deponere forme : Nec deforme malum quavis mutaverit arte SPARSA QUASDAM POEMATA. Finge Deum indulgere malis, obducere nubem ~ Fraudibus, et tuta convolvere crimina nocte; Vera loqui et facere; affectus cohibere ruente Thure pio superos venerari, mente parentes, __ Turpe sit et nemesis mereatur verbera juste; Ergo perire Deos, tenebras diffundere solem, — Et lapides sapere, ac Sophiam stultescere fingis : | ἣν Ergo nives fidis Jambant incendia flammis; — Expers sit rationis homo, sevam agna Leenam Induat, et Libycos populetur fervida saltus; — Facta volente Deo fiant infecta, fuisse j Cesset preteritum, Clotho sua fila retexat ; Distet idem sibi, sed coeant contraria in unum. Scilicet ideas Recti a discrimine tutas — Arce sue divina tegit sapientia Mentis. ZEthiopes vultus specie candentis Honesti. : Dantur Substantiea incorporee Natura sua Immor= 7 é tales. ANNO 1651. Esse sacre cceleste genus spectabile menti, Perenne et expers corporis, Ore, nec ambiguo, pronunciat augur Apollo, Pronunciando comprobat, ae Cum flammis Pythiam presago arcana furore — Vis estuantem corripit, ν Interioris et ex adytis emurmurat orbis Insaniens facundia. Hoc Dodonzz quoties sonuere columbe, Lybumque cornutus pater ? Emicuit quoties veri hee scintilla profundi Cavernulis Trophonii ? ; Quin et ei tristes umbre squalentis Averni Radios suos accommodant. a Thessalici precibus que flectitur auris agyrtse, Quis commovetur ritibus ? Que freta vis celata quatit, concussaque sistit, Abigitque ventos et vocat ? Machina que profugos sua in ostia retrahit _ amnes, Ripis suis mirantibus ? Cur vetula mandante fugacia nubila parent, — Tremulique montes audiunt ? py Queis Magus ex Epheso Romani fata tyranni — Oculis videbat, an suis ? ~ Ὁ : Quid vatum inspirat coelesti pectora flatu, Laxata claustris corporis, Ceecum Dircei senis ut collustret ocellum Lumen futuri preescium ? Talibus arguitur signis abscondita virtus, aif Tenebreeque Yerum illuminant, ἣ Quo mihi ceelestes oculos, quibus altera mundi : Excelsioris conspicer aa Regna per immensos ]ucem sorbentia tractus Serenitatis limpide, ; Si diffusa animi regio, liberrima tetris Foetentis Hyles sordibus, Ceu Libyce tellus deserta jaceret eremi, Referta nullis incolis ¢ E veco corpus tam multa tuebitur antro, Animusque cernet nil sui? Sin et magnifici preetoria regia ceeli Nullos habent satellites, + Stipat Achzemenei terrestria Susa tyranni— Augustior frequentia ; | ' Sepius et justos quesiti ad muneris usus { ες SPARSA QUAEDAM POEMATA. 499 Deerunt ministri celites ; Nem rotet immanes gyris constantibus orbes ο΄ _Immunis ether spiritus? Quis Pallenez celebret solennia palme, ᾿ς Hymnisque letificet deos ? -Queis Deus affulget, queis divitis ille recludi Sinus stupendos gloriz ? ᾿ Quis pellucenti divinum pectore lumen xs Admittit et repercutit ? ‘ Quis pia vota hominum fidis attolleret alis Idem reportans premia ? Insidiis quis fortune tutetur inique Urbes, viros, provincias ? Usque perutile, tam sanctum genus, orbis origo Quid obstitit ne conderet ? Non potuit? minus est puras accendere flam- mas Similes parenti proprio, Cogere quam crassos terrena e feece vapores ° Jam dispares pulchro patri ? Noluit ? impertire suos divina nitores Haud invidet benignitas. Ergo ruat vacuo senior Gargettius horto Suicida sevo dugmate : Angelicas certo produnt existere formas ἂς Ratio, fides, oracula : ‘Ergo datur species, sincerior ethere puro, Tenuique vento rarior, ; Foeda venenose que vincula respuit Hyles, + Lethi malignos fomites. Dantur forme substantiales. ANNO 1652. SisTe parum quisquis ceca vertigine mundum Currere, divine nohile mentis opus, Credis, et ignave rigidis impulsibus Hyles . Vivida nature gesta potentis agi; Qui rerum exclusis moderantibus intima for- mis Constare exanimi singula mole putas ; Inspice picta Deum rutilis pallatia flammis, Quaque patent lati cerula regna poli : Brutane materies eterna lege gubernat Ordine fixa suo sydera, mota suo? Quin indefessis potius ludentia gyris Spiritus arcanis viribus astra rotat. Que tua percellit jucundis lumina telis Lux, queque aurato sydera crine tegit, Tota quid est nisi forma, decus, substantia ceeli, Impuri nihil aut materialis habens? Lilam hauris oculo, sine et illucescere menti, Ac animi tenebras irradiare tui. Quid celum petis, et luna deducere formas Niteris, ingrati Musa laboris amans ? Terra quoque innumeras feecunda mater ab alvo Fandit, et in tepido nutrit amica sinu: Testor veris opes et gaudia divitis horti, et Que tegit omnigenus florida prata color: Ecce illibato decertat purpura lacti : Judice me, neutri cedis, amcne viror ; Non ita materies distinguere mille figuras, ‘Non ita prata valet pingere mille modis, utet pellem licet et se Protea jactet, Ac sub multiplici veste latere sciat. it internam species externa, aliusque Vultus inesse aliud cor animumque docet. Quin tacitas intus sub opaco tegmine formas Versari, et nutu flectere cuncta suo, (Non seeus ac brevibus majestas Persica sutis eae sub imperio AEgyptum Asiamque suo Proditur indiciis sub aprico sole peractis, Artificemque suum grande fatetur opus. Thurane que perflant placido Nabathza vapore Rura, aut quos spirant arva Sabea crocos, Alliaque ingratis caput avertentia fumis (Allia Niliacis annumerata deis) Pestanisque vigens horti regina rosetis, Diraque Socratice causa cicuta necis, Vel nulla gaudent, vel eadem singula forma, Pugnantesque uno fonte petuntur aque ? Segnis massa potest nihil, haud contraria sal- tem ; Nec bene materies, nee male, opifor, olet : Que rebus tribuit varias demitque figuras, Que diversa dedit ludere, forma fuit : Illa sub augusti specie preponderat auri, Illa levem plumam in summa volare facit : Hac duce procere nituntur in thera cedri, Flumineasque salix arida querit aquas. Muta suas dicunt operando animalia, possunt Viva etiam formas dicere voce suas : Indicat has raucis mugitibus aera complens Taurus, et argutis has philomela sonis. Quas miramur egpi fabricas fulvique leonis, Exstruxit docta forma operosa manu : Cura sagax mentis, non preceps impetus Hyles, Facta adeo nobis ingeniosa dedit. ; Forma voluptates agnoscit, forma dolores, Conscia sola boni, conscia sola mali : Que sedet in dorso lente gradientis aselli Sentit, et horrendum forma gemescit onus : Impetis absurdo torpentem verbere massam, Materiz nervos irrita pungit acus. Quid referam humanas mentes, sublimia celi Germina, et illustri semine creta Deum ? Cum quibus exanimum satagens confundere corpus Amens se (et me etiam) judice semper erit, Qui pedibus saltem manibusque aut sanguine crasso Exercere putat se rationis opus. Rebus inesse igitur plures ab origine formas, Sydera, terra, anime, vita, animusque pro- bant. Conscientia erronea obligat. ANNO 1652. TyYRANNE vite, fax temeraria, Infide dux, ignobile vinculam, Sydus dolosum, enigma mentis, Ingenui labyrinthe voti, Assensus errans, invalide potens Matris propago ; quem vetuit Deus Nasci, sed orto principatum Attribuit regimenque sanctum : Tuum fatentes imperium odimus, Quod deprecamur suscipimus jugum ; Una fagande, una sequende, Despiciende, colende princeps. Lex mentis omni lege valentior, 500 SPARSA QUAZDAM POEMATA. . Lux mentis omni luce micantior, Hoc sua rideri numina torva vocat. 0 Jus prepotentis veritatis, Exigit ceequali reparari debita lance, he i Vel specie simulata vincunt. Non erit injusto mitis, iniqua sibi: Ϊ Ne pergeremus tramite lubrico Criminis unius maculam non eluet evum, _ fet Natura certum constituit ducem : Derivat labem in secula mille suam. . ᾿ Errare nolle est sammus error, Hos simul ac vidit, simul est miserata rigores, To Hac duce pregrediente nobis. Progenies ceeli nobilis, equa Deo ; ἫΣ Q Si nulla portum sydera preferunt, Faturque O durz mortalia subdita legi! Qu Tristi renidet nulla Helice polo, O nimium juris pacta severa mei! fi Vaga feretur navigator Sic jacet addictus miser immortalibus umbris is Equoris Jonii procella. Luctari debet e carcere nulla dies! a » Fac quod videtur luminibus tuis, Gutta salutaris nostro de vulnere stillet, ist Fac quod putatur judicio tuo: Prosiliant venis pura fluenta meis. i Judex refelli, falli ocellus Hos ubi gustavit vindex Astrea liquores, jr Possit, uterque tamen sequendus. Risit, et a crudo vanuit ore rubor ; i Distant remotis tractibus invicem Deposuit satiata sitim. votumque nocendi, in Legum voluntas nostraque, conjugat Prorsus ab immiti facta benigna Dea: ἢ Mens dissideutes, hee potestas Hac commutavit mors haud invita seipsam ys Jus statuit, statuitque iniquum: Morte, per hoc fatum vincere visa satis : "ΝΗ Hee abrogetur justitiz arbitra, Post hac dediscens Nemesis sua verbera plagas πὶ In ceca stulti proripimur vada ; Commisit Veneris flagra cremanda viro. _ fe Hac luce pauca destituti Sponsorem tantum jus summum admisit, in Te Ancipites tenebras subimus. illo ᾧ Hic nodus artem vindicis Gidipi, ’ Grandis amor, locuples copia, certa fides. TN he Hec antecedentem bivia Herculem, Non impune Deus tulit ipse remittere culpam; — ἢ Perplexitas hec tortuosa Inde vel hine certo pondere pcena ruit. eH Tis Dedaleas operas requirit : Promissa huc patribus, previsaque vatibus, | Lex illud, illud mandat opinio. umbris ot Dedit minori sceptra potentior, Occultata, fide credita, vota prece ; ᾿ Diis elocutis obserantur, Huc sua pretendunt veteres mysteria forme, mn Quz sibi mox reteguntur, aures. Hoe caput antique relligionis erat. 1 ) Menti repugnet si manus improba, Exulis hic hirci czedes, hic simplicis agni, lis Hec fecit equum, hec jussit iniquius ; Hic socie fidi turturis omen habet. OA ‘Non laude numen, sed rependet Sanguine que fuso populi delicta piavit, a) i Supplicio digitos rebelles. Hujus sustinuit victima czsa vices. I) Errore tingat barbara credulas Nam nec nare Deus bibula nidoribus are. γι Si corda flectens /Esonidas, movet Incubuit, liquide nubila carnis amans, ) Necesse rursus, guin piumque Nec bruta magnas animas virtute redemit, _ al). Tingere se patrio cruore. Nec vili veniam conditione dedit ; Ny, Ergo Respexit prisco devotam foedere vitam, _ 4 | | Quod cuique scitur Numinis est loco, Displicuit tante haud eminus umbra rei. | Cogens vereri; nostra scientia, Quin istos etiam mores transmisit in orbem | Seu vera sit seu ficta, nosmet Princeps Tartarei carceris, iste malus ; |p, Compede prevalida coercet. Qui quum ementiti simulator Numinis esset, ==), Instituit simili religione coli : te Hinc olim immanes Tyrii Saturnia placant i Numina, sacrilegi per fera pacta sacri. ΕΠ ἢ Christus per mortem fuit sacrificium proprie ex- | Herculis hine ritus, altaria Tauridis, et que 4 piatorium pro peccatis. | Ceedibus infecit Graia puella suis. | | Sic radiat verum magis, allucenubus umbris,; ἢ ANNO 1652. Expiat inferno teste piacla cruor. | QO mage damnati Furiis incredule regni, | ᾿ Pora diu factis hominum patientia Divum Extorris Getico Sarmata digne gelu! : * Extremam tandem sensit adesse sitim : Desine, nam positas vindicta resuscitat iras, Ceu propinato vultus rubuere veneno, Reffluit in latices vestra medela 5105... Torruit accensus viscera clausa focus ; Abnuis ut Christum tua crimina morte piasse, ἢς Quid sitiente Deo tantum compesceret estum, Amplius hac Christi morte piantis eges. ΟΝ Qui liquor, aut qualis sufficit haustus aque ? | Sic delicta luit sua per compendia mundus, _— Non myste si pro libamine Nerea totum Totque malis hominum subditur unus homo. Funderet in patinas officiosa manus. i ᾿ Peccantes vindicta jubet depascere venas, Restingui haud aliis fontibus ardor habet An tenuis prosit spernendi gutta cruoris, Obedientia Christi non tollit obedientiam Chris- Vilior an meestis lacryma fusa genis? tianam. ; Pestis adhuc desevit, inexorabilis, illi Balsama ne tribuat nobiliora Deus. ANNO 1652. Precipitis sensus, pronique Astrea doloris ; Multa, sed pura, preedita bile Dea est ; Queis gravis incumbit moles mundana ¢0- Eternis odiis, invicta pungitur ira, lumnis ? Nulla mollescunt pectora dura prece ; Quo nititur fundamine ? Orari venias, et blanda piamina culpe, Que movet immoto, que continet ordine virtus Celum, solum, salum, omnia ? Imperium, obsequium ; leges pollentis honesti Jus imperans, pietas sequens ; Heccine qui statuit, serie convelleret ipse Preepostera discors sibi ? Vincula seclorum laxaret Conditor arcte Queis obligavit secula ? Quos fecit justos, justos non esse licere Haud sancta prestat sanctitas. Assidet invidiz, legem sibi ferre merendi, Peccandi aliis licentiam. Justitize celebres titulos, insignia cceli, Inscripta dipthere Jovis, Arripere impuros negat Optimus 1116, recusat: Nomen dari, rem subtrahi : Quod meruit dici, meruit quoque fortius esse, Quod imputari, et effici. An satis externa speciosus pelle nitescat Maculosus intima cute? Quid, qui se nobis descensu fecerat equum, Ferat is sibi nos dispares ? Frena suo implicuit, nostrone extorsit ab ore ? Se jussit et nos non jubet ? Nec nostris urgenda tulit vestigia plantis Dux invium calcans iter ? Discipulusne sui temnat dictata magistri, Famulusve heri, miles ducis ? Quod sua colla jugo Deus ipse inclusit eodem, Tu subjugari respuis ? Quod didicit Dominus servili lege teneri, Dediscet assecla obsequi ? An minor obsequio laus est, tenuataque virtus, Divina vis quod paruit ? Num Christi pietas, quasi Saturnina, voravit Nostram piam ejus filiam ? Non exhausit adhuc fluvios mare, . dum Major minorem absorbuit ? Non nisi conducto radiari lumine prebet Errantis omen stellule ; Que prope ceelestes, aditus infigitur orbis Augustioris limini Pura mente bibit radios, et rejicit auctos Operum bonorum foenore. Celsius officium qua niti debuit ala, Hac deprimetur fortius ? Fax sacra que Domini accendit precordia, nos- tram Extinguet observantiam ? Quo stimulante jubet virtus intendere cursum Calear inhibebit impetum ? Debita quo graviore Deus cumulavit νυ, Eo minus solvenda sunt ? Anne honor a superis cedet mortalibus equus, Corona par, et premium 7 Seu quis magnanimo flagret virtutis amore, Colat Deos, homines juvet, Seu Lerna scelerum stagnet fotente, repugnet Aliis, Diis, patriee, sibi ? _ Hoc pedibus sanctis tritum est dispungere cal- lem, Virtutis ad astra lacteum : Ut positi adversa regione petantur eadem Olympus et Avernus via. Exue fallaces laqueos, spes projice vanas, τς Blandis inherens somniis, Qui pennis cera junctis ascendere ceelum, Mollive vis ignavia : | Connubio stabili gaudent, plaudente Hymeneo, ᾿ς Beatitudo et sanctitas. gratia non- SPARSA QU/ZDAM POEMATA. 501 Jugis amicitie fatali foedere vita Eterna nectitur bone. Justos esse malos non ipsa Astrea, beatos Non ipsa det felicitas. Christus parendo sanctis non officit actis, Ea sed docet, jubet, juvat. Terram esse in mundi centro sitam nullis argu- mentis evincitur. ANNO 1653. O nrmivum faciles prono celestia sensu Metiri, radiisque oculi finire pusilli! Nempe patent circa picti laquearea cceli Syderibus stipata, cavi seu fornice vitri Implantate agiles jaculentur Jumina flamme. Scilicet hos tenuis visus describere fines Jussit et hac mundi campum sepire figura : Iste equas stellis designat in ethere sedes, Seu cursu stabili dubiove errore ferantur ; Ille brevi solem facile constringeret arca ; Et paribus suadet spatiis distantia mundi Meenia tellurem patulo complectier orbe. Haud aliter stetit in mediis erratica terris Delos, et in medio rupes sedet alta profundo, Cujus spumoso Justranti e vertice circa Omnia pontus erunt, deerunt quoque littora ponto. Sic quem fata sinent lunam conscendere pennis Anseris innixum, vel dira mole gigantum, Se putet in medio rerum consistere puncto, Et circum quali convert sydera gyro. Sphera brevis sensus, cceli diffusa ; capessat Judicium ratio, que cum sit nulla, valete. Hypothesis Cartesiana de materia et motu haud satisfacit precipuis nature phenoments. ANNO 1653. Atumne ceeli; flos sophie ; latex, Libella, lumem, lima scientie ; Dilecte vero vir ; fidelis Artis et ingenti magister ; Prostrata cujus cuspide Martia Ignava collum flexit opinio, Nitens arene, comprimensque Deciduas cubito columnas ; Retusa sub quo vindice tetrica Preejudicandi cessit iniquitas, Sophistice contentiosa, Et temere ingeneratus error ; Ignosce sanctis, maxime Cartesi, Si Musa vecors manibus obstrepit, Ignosce, nos te curiose, Dum tua deserimus, sequemur ; Queque abrogata lege tyrannidis Exegeris suffragia libera Dicemus, en te adversus ipsum Intrepido speculamur ore, Timere noli: spiritus arduas Nisu impotenti succutiens domus Radice figit desunata Excidio tabulata tristi. Ingens pusillo machina brachio τ ε - Impulsa stabit: fortius impetum En admovemus; ve, tremendo Verbere personuere nubes ! Heu quale visum lumina preferunt Invita turpis conjugii, sacer Quod nolit Hymen auspicate Ignibus irradiare tede. Informis Hyle, lurida, vivide Immunis aure prorsus et ingeni, Et quapiam vertiginosus Mobilior, Jeviorque pluma Motus, perennis connubii jugum Subiere, faustos accipit annulos Sponsus triumphans, sponsa sordens . Pellibus induitur decoris. Junctis nefanda lege parentibus, Lucina presens innumeros dedit Forma nitentes invidenda, Cartesio perhibente, foetus. Pregnantis Hyles filia prodiit Pulchra universi machina, ccerulus Ether, ferax telluris almeze Campus, et oceani fluentis. Huc nempe ceelestis recidit labos, Fecisse quondam res numero duas, Donasse nobis versipellem Protea, pennigerumque motum. Quas scena mundi visibus objicit Lusus decentis perpeiuas vices, — Persona duplex sustinebit ? Huic Deus invigilet theatro? An mundi ocellos, ztheris incolas Ceco fluentes volvier impetu Volubilis vis bruta molis Ordine perpetuo incitabit ὁ Non cura mentis, non manus artifex, Sed prosper aptz materiz fluor, Quas torpidi miramur zdes Struxit equo, volucrique cervo ? Nec sempiterni turbinis emulum Cer sponte gyrat mille volumina, Reciprocas sed obsequendo Incipit atque perennat undas ? Quid jam cupressi funebris aut cedri Ortus, vigores, semina cogitem ? Non illa rector spiritus, sed Materies operosa prodit. Cicuta tristis, salvia sospitans, Conyza feetens, flos Paphiz rose, Utreque surgunt ex iisdem Seminibus, vel utreque nullis Crescens metalli venula pauperis Centum moratur syderis ambitus, Lasciva dum forte expetitas Mechanice peragit choreas. Propensa nusquam passio prenditur, Infensa nusquam ; cuncta potens amor, Sevum odium, finesque rerum Exilium subeunt acerbum ; Non appetitus viribus insiti, Sed tela vibrans, ac atomos truces, Lupus, monenti te Renate, Exanimam procul arcet agnam, Hoc mens acumen languidior ferat, Et tam corusce vim sapientiz, Inscitize O felix asylum, Pande fores anime fugaci ! Quin ista nude lucidus arbiter Nature ocellis falsa fatentibus Juraret interpres Deorum, Si recitare vacaret, Hermes. SPARSA QUEDAM POEMATA. Reverendissimo Magistro, et dignissimis ἡ Collegii 5. 8. Trinitat. Cantabrigie. Pe: O 1655. ITE preces υἱδηδιόν rutilum moderantis ( pum, (Vati siqua fides), ecelesti semine crete, — Ite, Patrem vestrum placido mulcete Ut vestra virtute polo deducta sereno (In nutu sedet illa Dei, precibusque vocate ἊΝ Supplicibus terras niveis circumvolat alis) "ἃ Alma Salus, comitem non aspernata Came Languentem licet, et vestigia tarda trahente Desertisque sui ripis Heliconis egentem, A ripis gyro ludentibus, alveus intra a Quas clari Sequane Lydo fluit emulus amni, Ad doctos pontes, tumidis quos alluit acer __ Camus aquis, Camus quo non dilectior alter Rivulus Aonidas conspergit rore puellas, (Nec veteres olim qui preterfluxit Athenas Nec qui Parisiis preebet modo balnea ΜΩ͂Ν is Carpat iter matrique memor se impertiat 8 Sexque decemque uteris, millena prole be Officiumque pii commendet nomine gnati: Sed tibi preecipue, reliquas preclara sorores — Ut parvos inter Pheebi soror emicat ignes, /Edes sacra Deo, cujus subsistere trinum Colligat arcano simplex essentia nodo. Vos, “dulces anime, ceecis quibus intima flam-. mis Pectora carpit amor sanctus candentis hon Quosque docent sua sublimes mysteria on Nostra salus petit et charis complexibus a Sed levis obsequii est facilem dixisse slit Heec manat prono cordis de fonte fluento; — ἘΞ ee ee ee ae Oe τ το eS τ τς we ew Majus opus superest, humeris gravioribu Bey tum, * =i Tae Het Officiis equale meis, sed viribus i impar, | : Ies Que vestro vidisse ferunt accepta favori ς᾽ i Ag Debilis exigui custodes luminis orbes, . In tenui tabula vestri$ quoque tradere ocellisg! | a Quzeque iter objecti spectacula debita vestris Auribus, anguste numeris includere Muse. ‘Na Sed quoniam dedit hoe ccelum mutantibus (f usus ἐδ Nonpunquam dubiis expandere carbasa ve 7 it Difficilique viee tremulas committere Diente νη. Ai Nitar, et objectum aggrediar superare laborem, fa Annuat inceptis audacibus zquus Apollo. ᾿ Postquam Thesea puppis rugosior, Argus _ Que numerare annos, Argique foramina posset, Ignibus exponi quam seevis dignior undis, Excepisse sinu lacero gavisa recentem Fortune nautam non disparis, alta petisset /Equora, seu naso Nereus ridebat adunco, Seu miseratus erat formidinis indiga juste 4 Corda suam dubizeque fidem tentasse corm Quicquid erat (nam causa latet) subsidere sum est Marmor iners ponti, nimioque equale sereno: Non ita compositum, tenui cum carcere V Dulichius conclusit utris, nee quando Agmen in /£olii clausiris compescitur Non conspecta prius, nec corrugata profundi Arridet facies. animum mentita ‘faventem ; Vultus amicitiam spirat, sed viscera bellu E quibus eructans salsi violenta vaporis ~ Tela fodit stomachum, reseratque — nostro SPARSA QUAZDAM POEMATA. - Querens extorquere suo quod ventre recondat. | ear quocungue tridente resedat rtius et medico sanat przcordia visa Alma parens tellus, exhalans aera duleem i 6 maris; cujus simul atque tu- emur ita Marte favente animosis littora Neusti, it nova vis animos, nova vita pererrat Corpus, et excedit peregrini nausea celi. - Sic patriis ejectus aquis maris incola languet Squamiger, in dulces cum vi torrentis iniqui Excidit alveolos, insulsaque pocula gustat. Qui si forte suos, ποία felice relatus clemente manu, Neptunia regna, penates — amissi renovans momenta vigoris, In mediam sese pernix jaculatur abyssum ; Sic nos in nostras reduces transivimus auras, Portumque appulimus; cui spem mandasse salutis, Fortuneque sue impulsam civilibus undis Commisisse ratem fertur rex maximus, alba Cujus in augusto florescunt lilia scuto, Qui parvam titulis Diepam regalibus auxit. Crediderim Henricum, quo non sincerius alter Numen adorabat devota mente Diones, Gallia salva viris vix unquam debuit) armis mineis voluisse suam concredere sortem ; Scilicet ignari cunas reperire Deorum | E Paphia Venerem cupiunt deducere spuma ; Nam qui Diepenses mulierum turba plateas Qualis adimpleat attonitis lustrarit ocellis, Queis haud sufficeret gignendis terra, putavit Justius hanc isti genituram cedere ponto : Sed quum mille vides, non est spectabilis una, Hoc tantum Venerem nostris abjudicat undis. Nec tamen hisce magis genitrix dilexit amorum Threicium lasciva Deum: correpta furore Pectora sepe movent durum certamen, iisdem Hectora queis incessebat Telamonius armis. Testis eram, lectis vicino in littore saxis Agmen Amazonium (szvis suadentibus iris) Femineos onerasse sinus, que grandine densa Dirus in oppositam disploderet impetus arcem, ge colit invisis data prefectura tributis. ec tamen hoc animal solum dominatur ibidem (Hand loquor ex animo, liceatque impune jocari) : Huic affine aliud, longuinquo Hyperionis ortu Advectum, pollens etiam conamine linguz, Garrulum, et humani simulator strenuus oris, pictamque cutem jactans pellemque deco- ram, (Et que dicta prius, ne rem repetamus ean- dem ) Affiuit hic nomenque hujus disseminat ore. Sed magis artifices digiti, manuumque labores Atque pedum, quorum juncte solertia cure In rebus magnas operas exilibus edit. Ecce levi pedis impulsu nodosa rotatur Buxus, in extremis acies quos bina terebrat Cerne polos, in quos immotus desinit axis, Dum medium se chorda sequax circumplicat, instar Lubrica per ramos sinuantis terga colubri. Imminet ex alto procere surculus orni Nondum etate rigens, primisque avulsus in i chordam fidi lapsantem compede nodi ontinet, ipse recurvato deflectitur areu ; niculi reliquum sed finem mobile liguum ΄ Excipit, et variis vicibus surgensque cadensque Incurvat teretem, detortamque erigit ornum, Ut pedibus plaeuit, pedibus labor iste dicatur. Dum maaus intentans aciem revolubile buxum Levigat, et placite exsculpit simulachra figure : Omnia presertim studio, ceu Protea quendam, Numidicum vertunt ebur in miracula rerum ; Nunc in subtiles tanquam Vulcania vincla Diducunt telas, digitisque trementibus instant ; (Materia in tenui laus maxima ponitur artis) Nunc denso thecarum inspergunt tegmina flore, Ac dente ex uno fabricantur plurima membra. Verum alio vocor, obstrepero quo vellicat au- rem Murmure, et his potiora dari miracula clamat, Fama nota prius, non lumine visa fideli. Relligio non una, sed uno nomine jactans, Dissona consensu, dissensu consona miro. Quam varii mores et vite regula dispar ! Temporibus diversus honos, adytisque, cibis- que, : Diisque colunt quorum non equo numina cultu ; Multiplicesque habitus, et vestis discolor usus, Collata adversus Junonia cederet Iris, Plures ostentat Thaumantias ista colores, Francisci fecunda domus, cui simplice trunco Plurimus assurgit numeroso palmite ramus. Ille recollectos mores, alium iste cucullum, Hic circumjectos funes in nomine jactat. Gens assueta pati quicquid reperire molesti Ingenium, aut natura potest infligere duri, Quam possent matrem, malunt sentire nover- cam : Non illis nitet et tenera sub sindone gaudet, At riget hirsutis pellis circundata setis: Contiguis plante lignis nituntur, lisque Duritie certare valent, dum tibia nuda, Et quam sola tegit patientia, nobile velum, Quos habet ardores estas, quas bruma pruinas Despicit, atque omnes celorum provocat iras. Est infame malum, cujus perterrita vultum Non secus ac diram lethalibus horret Erynnin Armatam facibus, Stygiosque in crinibus an- gues Gens hominum, et jugi sudans conamine vitat : Pauperiem appellant, haud nomen tristius ul- jum est. Hoc illi monstrum reliquis immane feroxque, Mansuetum domitumque regunt; quo milite luxum Pellunt, et curam, quemque inflat copia, fas- tum : ' Mundi delicias, oculorum fascina, mentis Illecebras, rerum dominos et numina num- mos Calcant, contactusque levi haud dignantur honore. Paupertas operosa gradus habet, illius horrent Culmen et affectant ime subsellia classis, Ac inopes infra mendicorum ordine constant : Non illis reditus, non preedia certa, rogando Accipitur victus, trahiturque precaria vita. Ter videt innixos genubus Ph@beia lampas, Cum minima superum vertigine circuit orbem ; Luna vices totidem spectat nocturna, molesto Cum vigiles somnos Campana intercipit ictu, Dun reliquum involvunt ignava silentia mun- dum. Scilicet hisce putant meritis deberier astra. 504 Quam vellem tantos vera in virtute labores Impendi, studiisque bonis et mente colenda, Hoc breviore via Elysios pertingeret hortos. Quid sectatores Benedicti, Dominicique, Queisque suas leges fictus dedit Augustinus, Totque alios memorem, Musamque impune fatigem ? Sistra sonant, licet infande mysteria miss Visere, difticilesque imitari carmine ritus. Non ego quam pretiosa ornet delubra supellex, Nec quam magnifico rutilent altaria fastu, Neve sacerdotum velamina, murice tinctas Intextasque auro chlamydes, et flore decoras. Ac Phrygius quas pinxit acus, describere for- mas, ᾿ Languentis calami vano certamine nitar. Blanda per hee oculos intrat simulachra vo- luptas, Dum ferit auditum grato modulamine lingua, Harmonicisque aures demulcent organa ventis ; Nempe suum sensus celum hic invenerit omnis. Quid mentem movet interea, quo corda calore Accendunt, animi excutiunt qua luce tenebras, Et quid delicias imo sub pectore veras Concitat, ignorare licet, dubitare profanum est. Arrexi quantas natura indulsit, et illas Haud curtas credo auriculas, vix attigit una E tot vocibus attentam sententia mentem ; Miror, si populus peregrine murmura lingue Percipiat melius, quum cco percitus, igni Exiguos versat digitis pernicibus orbes, Os moderante manu, qua plusquam mente precantur. : Quod nisi jam tantis reverentia debita rebus Injiceret Muse taciturni freena pudoris, Porrigit immensum justa indignatio campum, Quo tumidum pectus conceptas explicet iras ; Quum reputat quali male sanus fronte sacerdos Mirifico tribus evulgatis ore susurris Se jactat fecisse deum, factumque vorasse. Talia divendunt misere Iudibria plebi, Nec pudet hosce fidem sanctam corrumpere monstris. Distribuunt siccum panem, cenzque recidunt Plus toto; sitiuntque aliene pabula vite, Altorésque anime succos ; quo nectare mundus Prorogat acceptam fuso de sanguine vitam. Nec satis est partes benedicte tollere cene, Arripiunt totum, dum publica munera, nodos Dulcis amicitiz, pacis cementa beate, Communesque epulas privato ventre recon- dunt. Ut mater pullis, sic area maxima templi Eminet, exiguis circum stipata sacellis ; Hic cztu excluso celebrant convivia secum ; Nec gratis, merces convivis solvitur ipsis, Et sacro panem communem pane merentur. Juratis opus est, ne plures scilicet uno Audiat una dies prolatas gutture missas, Ne populis exhausta suis, et fomitis expers Purgatoria flamma precum virtute jaceret, Et nimio mystis loculus turgesceret.auro. Sed cum festa digs affulsit sydere magno, Cum cirecumferri pacis sub cortice numen Assolet, evectum celebri per compita pompa, Ille potens dominusque sui est, contraria quis- quis Non intermiscet, nec risu temperat iram : Nam qui non intra solum penetralia sacra, SPARSA QUAEDAM POEMATA. ΤΥ" ΄ Sed Jove sub nudo, sub aprico tegmine ceeli — Omnibus in vicis positas conspexerit aras, Et circumstet eas quam ludicra gaza putavit, Absterrere viros, pueros mulcere paratas; Que disponuntur pup, quo turba maniplo ὦ Incedit, tum que templorum affixa leguatur_— Postibus, et memorare piget, prestatque ta ceri ; α δ Que bonus amoveat Deus, et meliora mini stret. . Magnifice servire.Deo, clarisque docere Indiciis mundum, quanto Dominumque Pa tremque Et cceli et terre et nostri vereamur honore, Augustasque edes condi, ornatusque decoros Attribui, dignoque aras splendescere cultu, Altaque devoto retegi mysteria ritu, Festaque conspicuis recoli solennia pompis, Sacrificisque suum decus, et sua jura rependi, Et quacunque potest nasci, vel nata foveri, — Aut valida ostendi reverentia numinis arte, ~ Non ego, nec cuicunque viget mens sana, ΠΕ garim. His modo prescribant veras sapientia leges, Et dilecta Deo ratio, maturaque recti - | Pondera consilii, et custos prudentia justi, Imprudentia turpis, et ignorantia veri, Dedecus impensis redimi, sordescere vanas Lautitias, magno risum sudore parari, Contemptum Superis facit, et convicia celo. Sed nostra in primo nimium stetit anchora fixa . Littore, Musa moras lascivaque traxit inanes. In letos carpamus agros iter, ecce benigna Fruge struit Pomona vias, quas ordine stipant Continuo, dulcique infammant corda rubore, — Invitantque manus fugientes pendula mala: He sata precingunt, he compita cuncta co- Tone ; ὃ Non infrugiferum telluris sarcina lignum Definit spatia, et campos dispescit hiantes, Ast circumtextus confinia limitat hortus. Prodiga nempe soli latis exterminat agris, Fructusque angustis munit manus invida- spinis, iy Vilia defendens inopi solatia vulgo. Nec certe immeritis conceditur aurea pomis Libertas, et que Saturnia regna deceret ; Illis divinos, latices, certantia Baccho Pocula, sed Cerere imbutas vincentia lymphas, _ Pergratos cordi debent stomachoque liquores. — Non alio furiosa sitis depellitur haustu, Quaque arent Crasso fauces, quaque uritur Irus. Exigui constant, et suavem vile saporem Saltem ventriculis pretium commendat egenis: Scilicet haud nobis vinum Cereale minoris, Ebriaque epotis frumentis venditur unda, Rura per hee segetum flavis uberrima gazis, — Dum segnes urgemus equos, vacat acta subire Tempora, sollicitaque retexere secula cura; Debitaque his nostri generis primordia terris. — Scilicet his egressa locis Mavortia pubes, Signa ducis sectata sui, quem semine nullo Natum, jure suum Fortuna volebat alumnum, . Invasit vestris letum natalibus orbem, ie. + Ferroque edomuit, dubiique favore Gradivi, Adjecit titulisque ducalibus Anglica sceptra, Et cum Saxonico Nortmannos sanguine junxit. | Utque genus ducens atro de funere Troje, | PI τ me ire Argolice, flammeque Pe- The SOE υ-.. intis septena cacumina Rome, OS | agros circumspicit omnes ulis, nec segni indagine querit, fatale forum, surgentia pinis sis Idee juga, num Simoentis arenas mino rerum Tibri cognata fluenta, heasque sagax poierit dignoscere lymphas ; ensas inter segetes si rudera forte eant, Trojz quas conjectura ruinas | ᾿ diu lachrymoso lumine figéns ovo Priami renovat dispendia luctu : 05 recolebat avos pia cura: sed ejus mpit stamen medium objice villa superbo ris, quam tota vocat provincia matrem : Satis, tectis pulchra, instructissima vite diis, populi locuples, uberrima gazis, dives tellus, queis ditius affluit equor ; i per Sequane vicina volumina Nereus onit, duicisque tributa.remunerat unde ; egii Sequanz! solum tamen hactenus; —ultre ix capit angusto majores amne carinas : im exultantes in laxo flumine cursus dit moles sinuosis saxea gyris : haud alium forma, cum fata fere- aed ον. 4 Dall, r tentare parem poterant, equeve patentem ge ludentes per Celtica flumina Nym- » ἀξ, is expertus vires, fluctusque feroces tis aque et belli exitiabilis iras pore quod citius, sevis violentius undis a deturbat) nunc una parte superstes am clare monstrat monumenta ru- lirum magis inspirator acuminis usus- slituit, quem non excisi cautibus orbes S atant, curvis nec ligneus ordo columnis ubjicitur stabili fundamine, puppibus omnis incumbit, variisque incerte legibus unde quitur, nunc elatus torrente superbo urgit, mox deprimitur cum gurgite manco ; ce jam tumidis ut aquarum montibus alti sideant currus hominesque, ac vertice prono spiciant humili subjectas aggere terras ; subsidentis confestim valle profunda bratze superat facies contermina ripe. ed cum non vacet hic vigiles intendere curas, elixisque hzrere moris, splendentia magni ria pontificis, preclara palatia legum, } auro cameras, serpentia muris qua vario celebratur curia ccetu, Mtitiasque fori grandes, luxusque macelli, iliumque domos nitidas, et lucida templa, quibus eximias ostentat Oventius, aras, Miucto condent ingrata silentia velo. t nimio fulgore ferit fugientia turris nec de se sinit ambitiosa taceri, Qua sola ex trrbus a trunco surgentibus uno /Eminet, a impellit acuta cuspide nubes. ‘Hee nos ad matris Domini, matrumque serene |Add tit dominz titulis insignia templa, {ue reliquis intervallo prelustria longo, gusti splendore chori pretiosa, patenti recta situ, et sublimi marmore clara, -ornatus debent authoribus Anglis, demissis animosa Britannia Celtis aad generosis omnia palmis, Vor. SPARSA QUADAM POEMATA. Virtutisque suz passim monumenta reliquit. Ossa cubant isthic arctis damnata tenebris, Que cum vitali gaudentia luce regebat Spiritus, indomitas expavit Gallia vires Magnanimi ducis (haud oculis comperta re- narro, Sed fama fretus, quanquam ceu visa referre Jure viatoris deberem et jure poete) Occubuit miseris quocum fortuna Britannis, Gallica res animam penitus contrita resumpsit ; Herois monumenta rapi, manesque lacessi Tranquillos (magnis terrentur scilicet umbris Degetieres anime) vana exoptantibus ira, Rex etiam fato oppresse virtutis amicus. Abnuit, et, qui se potuit defendere vivus Judice me, dixit, meruit post fata quietem. An posthac fortes violavit iniquior umbras Impetus haud scio, sed tumulum spes irrita- querit. Qua merito minor Ambosius sub marmore clausus Conspicuo perituri oblivia nominis arcet : Marmora quid loquor? hunc resonabit buccina major, Et spisso clamore per sethera differet altum Immani vocis certamine Georgius ingens : Cujus in eloquium si vastam impellere mo- lem Vis hominum posset, Gangetidis accola ripe Ultimus audiret perculsa mente sonantem, Exaudiret totus, et obsurdesceret orbis ; Concussas nutare domos, fragilesque fenestras Dissultare, feros flatus regnare videres. Is posspt clamor cunctas perrumpere spheras, Adque ipsos penetrare Deos, symphonia ceeli Debilior nostras nondum licet attigit aures. Oris quale cavum! non eque grandis hiabat Machina ventre suo Argolicam complexa ju- ventam. Quam spissus munit paries! hand crassior illo Murus, quo Nini Babylonem cinxerat uxor. (Ne mirare adeo, nec mendacem argue vatem ; At perpende animo glebis ea mcenia coctis In Jaterem, hos solido muros constare metallo) Quis furor insedit mortalia corda, stupendo Intima pro strepitu predari viscera terre Divitis, et totas simul exhaurire fodinas, | Ac se tam valide conari reddere surdos ? Que manus ad celse turris fastigia tanti Pondera prodigii evexit, cceloque locavit ? Illi Gnosius AEtneusque loco decedet uterque Dedalus, et quisquis prisce miracula Mem- phis In pontum sub ea deduxit mole gementem, Unaque ingentes oneravit caute carinas. Sed te materies hebeti gratissima Muse, Plumbi stridula massa, tuasque relinquere sedes Sevus amor compellit, et insitus ardor ocellis Lustrandi nova, nec tepido precordia voto Accendit regni caput inspectare cupido. — Sic dum pomiferis celeres excedimus arvis, Persequimurque diem medium, fontesque ca- lorum Obrepit Bacchus sensim, parceque trementes Exerit in limbos inimici frigoris ulnas, Mox terpidi afflatu factus fidentior Austri Densius objectat vineta feracia, tandem Ebria continuo saturantur lumina Baccho ; Ast bumili Baccho, nec qui conscensibus altis Aerea tenues ramos circumplicat ulmo, Contentus terre affixis incumbere palis. O quam te taceam, variis Momorantia vallis Affiua deliciis, per quam domus inclyta, primos Admissze jactat que relligionis honores, . Sed fati rigidis insultibus obruta, Lethes Nescia vivit adhuc et nomen vindicat evo. Nec mera vina crepas et munera sola Lyzi, Calles haud invita tuos peragrantibus offers Altera dona, tuis rubet altera purpura campis. Ecce verecundis cerasis ut consita rura Indefensa viis irritamenta rapine Objiciunt, nullo munimine tecta, sed illo Quod prestant probitas et rara modestia vallo. Egressis hoc Elysio suprema laborum Meta sub aspectum venit. Pandite nunc Helicona Dee. Parisus, Feb. 9, 1655. Iter maritimum a portu Ligustico ad Constantino- polim. NOV. 6, ANNO 1657. Louxerar illius soboles gratissima, cujus /®terna fasti nobilitate rubent, Que sceleri devota evasit sacra saluti ; Hec prior, illa dies sexta Novembris erat, Cum dulcis terre placidis amplexibus acti, Inque tuos lapsi, Doris amara, sinus, Deserimus Ligures oras, arcesque Liburnas, Subditaque Etrusco littora clara duci. Ut tamen exilii patientia mitior esset, Et foret intrati parca querela maris, Fecit amica ratis, que dum felicibus auris Spumanti eequoreas perruit ere vias, Visa fuit medio turris discurrere ponto, Visa rapi tumidis altera Delos aquis ; Tanta superstabat moles cedentibus undis, Sub tali gemuit pondere pressa Thetis ; Haud illa major. nec pulchrior altera navis Tradit in ASoliam vela superba fidem, Per medios cceli ardentis quecunque calores, Et sevum pavidas per mare querit opes, Perque ea, que priscis ignota tonitrua nautis Fulminei vincunt tela trisulea Jovis. Hac nos Tyrrheni suleavimus zquoris illas, Quas adiit primum Lydia pinus, aquas, Quasque errabunda tranavit Dardana pubes Fatorum dubiam classe secuta fidem ; Levum puppe alta spectantibus Itala tellus, Occupat adversum Cyrnus iniqua latus : Saxa tenent medium, trepidis que cognita nautis In nostro nullum carmine nomen habent. Tum regina deum, veteris non immemor ire, Quam peperit forme palma negata sue : Ventorum pater, angusto qui carcere ventos Comprimis, arbitrii sub ditione tui, Trojanum genus, et Brutum jactare parentem Ausa secat Tuscos gens inimica sales, Hos modo tu: verbis assibilat AZolus, Ultra Non opus est, conjux imperiosa Jovis ; Et simul emissus claustris resonantibus Eurus Avolat, ac nostrum consonus Auster iter Reprimit ; abripitur variis obnoxia ventis, ubditaque incerto Jassa carina salo ; Undique vesano fluctn jactata volutat, - SPARSA QUEDAM POEMATA. Et nunc has partes, nunc resupinat e Instabiles titubant mense ceenantibus, 0 r jo Desiliunt, patinas dira ruina trahit ;— v6 ᾳ! Hunce aries, illum lascivo bubula cornu " Impetit, 6 patula deflua lance caro, i Jus ruit indomitum, polentaque niscia ju ti “ Limitis humanos irrigat amne sinus ; “ee eg Quid fragili vitro speres, Bacchoque sala ke Edit mirificos ebrius iste choros. : hg Senserat injuste ludibria seva sororis, μι Et fremuit moderans cerula regna Deus: Hec patitur, qua non gens navigat nee qua Insultat dorso charior ulla meo? - Composuitque fretum, Tegnces cadentia | sant Vela leves Zephyri, ἧς τι δον τ via, ' Aspera Sardiniz lustramus littora, belli Infaustas Tyriis Trojugenisque faces. Tum procul AZtneus speculantes campus oce los Detinet, hunc Mavors durus adire vetat. Ὁ Mox Siculos inter fluctus Libycosque renidens Allicit incertam Malta superba ratem; = Infelix scopulus, si Parea benignior illas, _ * Quas natura negat, non tribuisset opes : Scilicet haud dulcis torrentia pocula Bacchi, — Nec flave Cereris munera leta crepat, Grandibus insignem factis Mavortia tollit — Fama, rudes clivos inelita palma colit. Difficili turres saxo natura tuetur, Adjicit ars vires ingeniosa suas, Plus pia virtutis species, fulgentia summis ἢ Aggeribus nivee signa decoracrucis. τ΄ 4. Floreat zternum juste prosperrima sedes 7 Militiz, heroum prodigiosa domus : his Queis dedit haud animos, scelerata nec induit- A arma was Lan Fluxus opum, aut vani falsus honoris amor: j Nobilis obstrinxit sancti tutela sepulchri, Agaridasque sacro pellere cura solo: i Effecit numero pollens ignavia, tandem Desererent voti prima theatra sui: an Expulsis Phcebea Rhodos concessit asylum, Phebeam gestis nobilitare Rhodon. ἐκ Ἢ At novus exundans Rhodopeis montibus imber Hac quoque belligeram depulit arce crucer 5 Extremum tandam ‘profugi munimen honori Hesperii Meliten munere regis habent; Inde suis vastant Saracenas classibus oras, Ὁ ) Sanctaque adhuc giadio vindice bella gerunt. Hanc adimit confestim auris abrepta sec ndis | Pinus, et lonie pervolat equor aque. Vix semel immensi eyrum percurrit Olympi — Flammigeris peragrans thera Phoebus € quis, Cum puer, aerei prospectans vertice mali, Provocat aspectum bellica prora meum, = Persequiturque eadem cupido vestigia cursu, Expandens nostris emula vela, refert. α At si vera crusis Melitee insignia preefert, Congressus faciles optat amica comes, Hinc dubiam nobis tenuit sententia mente An foret hostili concipienda loco : | Ceaptum urgemus iter, pavor haud i pulsat Corda, nec indigne sordida cura fugee : Senas impendunt “quater horas, jam prope } tris Ut verbis possint verberibusque frui; SPARSA QUEDAM POEMATA. Jam non ambigue agnoscit presagia pugne, Armaque tutele dux animosque parat. Quis tamen, aut quanam de gente feroculus Ι τ audet ͵ ΠΆΡστεββα tantam sollicitare ratem, _ Transtra per et cellas votis dubitatur acerbis, _ Perque feros nautas pignora spissa volant : Hic, prefert tantos Hispania sola furores, Pugnacesve edens Flandria dura viros: _ Jurat cornigeras malis insistere lunas, Et vecordis Afri despicit ille minas, Istaque luna meis, ait, offuscabitur umbris, Nullaque cras, que nunc dimidatur, erit : | Que tamen accendit timidos audacia Mauros ? Quarum dira fames extimulavit opum ? _ Quod vix ausuros integra classe putarem, Virtutem nostram provocat una ratis. Vespera telluri tristes obduxerat umbras, Cum prope nos tacitum dirigit hostis iter, Quique futurus erat certaminis arbiter, undis ' Sol caput Hesperii gurgitis abdiderat : 15 simul ac rosea rutilum jubar extulit Eo Clarus, et in supero reddidit orbe diem, Tempora candentes ostentant fusca tiaras, _ Distinguitque hostes certior ira suos. Hinc nostri erigitur signum fatale Georgi, Cruxque suas edit sanguinolenta minas, Inde vacillantis presagum insigne levatur Imperii, mutila Cynthia luce rubens ; Quam ferruginei jugulo displosa canalis Compellant raucis ignea tela sonis : Hanc tibi, si nostro gaudes sermone, salutem Dicimus, hoc Anglis convenit alloquium ; Has tibi portamus merces. argentea frustra Exigis, a nobis ferrea dona refer , Responde, si grata tas vox impulit aures, Surdescis? sensus arriget illa tibi. Languidior certe, at nostr cognata loquele Mauri rhetorice subjicientis erat : Continuo obstrepere crescens discordia rixe Verberat horribili garrulitate polum ; Inter utramque rater conferto fulmina cur- runt Agmine, venture nuncia meesta necis. Hec graviore sono, raroque per aera cursu Sulphurei patulo gurgite missa tubi Impellunt solidam lethali vulnere quercum, Et tractus linquunt signa tremenda sui; Exiguum corpus, tonus est argutior illis, At densa ceeli lumina nube tegunt; Et profugam extrudunt angusto limine vitam 5 Utraque funestum musica murmur habet. /Eminus his piget cternum colludere telis, Et vano strepitu dilacerare polum ; ‘Lintea rimosis perfossa meatibus auras Transmisere leves, pervia mille locis, Irrita sed longe cecideruut fulmina, costas Nescia robust perterebare ratis. essibus interea tardis processimus, omni “ Immunes trepide suspicione fuge : Scilicet in spissos tenuanter maxima nodos, Sola suum retinent vela minora situm ; Que dum propellit nisu leviore, modesto Pugnantes defert mitior aura gradu ; Acrius insistunt illi, et furialibus acti Consiliis agiles in sua damna ruunt: Nec sibi proficuas admiscent viribus artes, / Quosque fovent semper Punica corda dolos. Qua ferit obliquus cendentia carbasa ventus, Invadit dextrum vis simulta latus, 501 Ocyusinverti mortis funesta supellex, Et tristis scene vultus abire prior, P Ac nostris propiora relinquens flamina velis Barbaricam fallex flectit habena ratem ; Invenit ex omni fallacia parte paratos, Nec steriles zstus quod sibi plaudat habet. Admotis propius crevit certaminis ardor Ultimus, et segues non tulit ira moras ; Incitat hos numero rabies subnixa, repulse Dedecus, et prede barbarus urget amor ; Nos urit justum decus, indignatio pungit Nobilis, et patriz gloria sancta rapit, Almague libertas vitali charior aura, Libertas! bullit cor, animusque tumet: Ut tibi subjiciar, monstrum servile, coactus Ut subdam arbitrio libera colla tuo: Ut tua perpetiar generoso verbera tergo _ Vinctus, simque tuus, bestia foeda, canis! Me prius irato percellat Jupiter igni, Intrepidum ferient tela superna caput : Aut mihi si tellus discluso ventre dehiscat, Ingrediar terre ]zetus ovansque sinus. Vexet acerba lues, paupertas durior illa, — Quam fero, squalenti comprimat arcta jugo ; Sanguine perfundar totus, per vulnera mille Exultans luteo carcere vita ruet: _ Fluctibus exagiter, quos aut fortuna ciere Aut fatum valet, aut mitior ira deum, , Sim liber modo, nec mea mens obtemperet ὉΠ], Dum mea, presertim, barbare Turca, tibi. En modo concurrunt, nostram contraria pup- im Dura sed invalido verbere prora ferit. Suavia dispensant extreme basia caude, Quam fragrans memores diffluit inde vapor ; Mox latus exzequant lateri, mensuraque nostris Congrua limitibus barbara navis erat. Ne tamen amplexus divelleret ullus amicos Impetus astringunt ferrea vincla rates. Taliter accipitri conjungitor ardea prepes, Presidium vite ferre coacta suze: _ Sic depascentis viridantia pascua tauri Involvant avidum cornua flexa Jupum. Prorepunt portis serie tormenta minaci, _ Tartareisque edunt claustra referta focis: Estuat inclasus latebris fumantibus ignis, _ Pregnantes satagens exonerare sinus. ZEmula discludunt raucis mugitibus ora, Et rixze gaudent tempus adesse sue : Non ita terribilis latratu nigra trifauci Cerberus inferni personat antra Jovis: | Nec sic Trinacrii monstrum ferale profandi Dulichios verio terruit ore senes. Nos prime dubias vires tentare procelle Juvit, eis potior cura preire fuit. Quos penes arbitrium nostras displodere flam- mas, Acclinant imo corpora strata solo: E quibus indomiti subridens pectoris unus, Et stolidos temnens, jam moriturus Afros, Accipiamus, ait, que nobis munera preestant, In prompto nos quod retribuamus erit. Dixerat ; extruse ferali fulgure glandes Bis per nos cursum corripuere decem: — Bis denis duram quercum terebrare fenestnis, His aer, illis excipiuntur aque: Obvia discerpunt fragilis tabulata caring, Inque neces nostras altera tela creant: Undique distracti vibrantur fragmina ligni, In dominos seevit navis adacta suos. 508 SPARSA QUEDAM POEMATA. Tres nobis socios tempestas abstulit 1118, Excipit hos Stygiis altera cymba vadis. Spherula que reliquis parca retinente volabat Tardior. incautos conficit una duos: Certius ut caderent arrecto corpore temnunt Fata, rati instantes preteriisse minas. Purpurea alterius dispersis area membris Sternitur ; innumeris mortibus unus obit. Qualis erat falsis indutus tempora ramis Venator, canibus preda nefanda suis: Aut qualis fugiens inceste jussa noverce Hippolytus, pavidis dilaceratus equis. Huic pila preedatrix humerum detruncat acerbo Vulnere, nec lacero e corpore vita fugit ; Ille manu prefert, et turpi stigmata fronte, Alterius signant lignea tela genu. His stimulis accensa ferocior emicatira, Mortiferas Nemesis preparat zequa faces ; Hostibus ultrices videas impendere Parcas, ᾿ς Inde suas transfert mors inopina vices ; Qua seges uberior, potioraque pabula letho, Qua cupidam satiet justa caterva necem. Barbara tum stipat Lethzas turba paludes, Et vexat querulis infera stagna sonis. Is debellavit perculsos impetus hostes, Corda repentino diriguere gelu, Dum feede contemplantur monumenta ruine, Tincta cruentatis strata cadaveribus, Pertusa immanes rimas in puppe patentes, Ac irrumpentis lubrica stagna sali. Deterrent Britonis studiosa silentia naute, Constrictzeque fores, tectaque nuda viris, Nec audent inferre pedem, licet imperet atrox, Et stricto ductor barbarus ense micet : Hic patulas lethum fauces intrantibus offert, Parca dolos nobis insidiosa struit ; Anglicus e loculis globulos hiscentibus ignis Spirat, in expositos plumbea grando cadet : Ingressus facilis, nee quem ferus obstruit hostis, Preclusus callis ne redeamus erit ; Nos subducamus presentis clade procelle, Alter preecipites in mare turbo feret. Vocibus his, tremulo prebent alimenta timori, Maturique abitus corda cupido subit. Quzaue injecerat imprudens fiducia nobis, Cautior abrupit ferrea vincla metus. Barbarici redit huc integra recensio questus, Quod nostrz tulerint mutua clona rati; Legitimo funes cumulatos foenore tempus Reddere cum rursus congrediemur erit. Nos penes interea verax harpago tropheum Servatur, memoris pignus amicitie. Scilicet experti sapiunt quod tutius illis, Quam junxisse, rates dissociasse fuit. Ridemus quali fugiens conamine Maurus In fluctu ducat gesticulante choros ; Ut procera ruens alternis nutibus arbor His modo, nunc illis osenla figat aquis. Illis, dum lzto profugos comitamur ocello, Nec gibbe visum prepedit equor aque, Certamen dubium rapidis indicitur undis, Atque insultanti lucta secunda salo, Vovimus absorptos inhianti gurgite, pinguis Predo pisciculis nobilis esca foret. Nec deerant animis furiisque ultricibus acti, Hus quibus inflavit sevior ira modus: Quin sequimur timidos verso temone latrones, Non elabetur debita poena reis. Queritur exilis nobis vindicta, fugatis Hostibus, a mersis gloria major erit. | Procinctum pugne reducis premonstrat eo~ —— Sed potior vincens miseros sententia fares __ Tradidit in sortis jura manusque sue; Prosequimur tardis alacres incessibus illam, Quam primum cepit navis inire, viam ; Nec tamen erigimus ventis afflanda secundis Carbasa suspense pallida signa fuge. “dem | pe hs Belli procedens ordine pompa minax, u Donec victores oculos non pertulit ultra bs Barbarus, et jam non conspiciendus erat ; At prius excelsa subducunt puppe sinistree_ Vexillum sortis quod modo testis erat ; Sive verecundam pravo certamine lunam Subter horizontem jussit abire pudor ; I Seu ducis occisi, nos ut speravimus, inde unt Descendit versus Tartara nigra comes. BM Quicquid erat, faustum pronis amplectimur ‘' ἢ ulnis ἘΝ f Omen, ovans ceeptum plausus adurgetiter. —_ Nunc quibus auspiciis tanti discriminis estum } _ Fugeris, unde salus venerit ista, refer. Die Debita justarum celebra preconia laudum, q Presidii causas grata camena ul. Ἂ" ) bet Precipuas sibi flammantis moderator Olympi, ὃ Frugiferique soli, ceruleique maris | ae Asserit, afflicti vindex zternus honesti, Q Proque fera pcenas improbitate creans; Ha Cui Nemesis pia vulnificis accincta flagellis ἡ Paret, queeque bonis excubat almasalus, δὶ Lubrica cui digitis victoria flectitur 9615, ᾿ Et fluxas debet bellica libra vices ; Cer Legibus astringens servilia fata, necesque Vitasque excusso dividit ille sina. εν. } Is mala deflexit Saraceni pondera plumbi, \le Direxit certa spicula nostra manu, | Densa per hortiles immisit fata catervas, (0 Distribuit nostris vulnera rara Viris; μ Ny φ4 Illi obstringimur, ztherea quod vescimur aura, h Nec sit in umbrosam vita redacta domum: Et nostri juris quod libera colla feramus, ᾿ Terga nec excrucient verbera, vincla pedes : ) Quod navi portum subeamus sospite, Justas ἵ Diripuit preedo nec violentus opes ; va Quod bene pugnatum est, reliquos quod laudi-e ἡ bus cequis ' Decantamus, eum gloria sola manet, - q Auspice quo, nullum Mervine tacenda per @- vuln, r 4 Si mea quid possent carmina, bella geris; a Sit licet is nimium tenui pro carmine magnus, Ὁ Nec belle Atlantem pumila Musa canal, Vecture est pars magna sue, vix continetillum ἢ Ampla, foret lembi grande minoris onus. 4 Vix sua sublimen dominum supereminet arbos; /Ethereo nubes vertice percutiens. ὃ Caleanti depressa tremunt tabulata, minatur 1 Decussam in fundum precipitare ratem. Nec minor est tanto residens in corpore virtus, Par mensura animo, moribus zquus honor; Cor bene compositum, frons exporrecta, benig- num Ingenium, sermo comis, aperta manus: ; Proh miras aqueis dotes animanubas, errant if Rara per incultum talia monstra mare. i Nec vigil admitit suaves in lumina somnos, Fluctuat instabili dum sua cura salo; Instruit officiis nautas, hortatibus acres Accendit, resides increpat ore minax ; SPARSA QUADAM POEMATA. Nunc diduceré vela jubet, modo pandere, rur- sus _Flectere quo venti pronior aura vocat. Designat puppi vestigia, voce gubernat Indice, morigera quam regat ille manu. Navis iter numero confert labentibus horis, Quid juvet, et currens quid remoretur aqua, Disserit ; equoream plumbo rimatur abyssum, Explorat scopulos, littora fida notat ; Inspicit attentus dubii presagia cceli, - Noscere quid nubes vaticinentur avet ; Qua venti faciles spirent regione requirit, Unde procellosus turbo pericla vehat : Vix natas tempestates dijudicat, ortas ᾿ Distinet, arte sua fallitur ira poli. Errantis nunc objurgat mendacia charte, Nunc directricis vim meditatus acus, Qua gelidos spectat vultu directa Triones, Et quibus intorquet lumina straba locis : Sydera scrutatur tacito labentia cursu, Digerit astrorum tempora, jura, situs; Directo quibus impendet sol vertice terris, Quas ferit obliquo verbere molle jubar, Definit radio; quam sero sydere celum Scandat, quasque obeat Delia fiuxa vices. _Anxia perpetuus precordia concitat estus, Quzque ratem, dominum jactitat unda ratis. Haud dulci curas mordaces solvere Baccho - Sustinet, aut justas accipit ore dapes. Sed noster, postquam portus intravit amicos, Tiphys ab hoe quantum discrepat ecce viro. Ceu navim mentemque suam simul] omnibus illam. Mercibus, hanc curis omnibus exoneret, Letus amicorum cunctas circumvolat «des, Alternisque illos in sua regna rapit. Colloquio, cantu, vino conviva benignus Teedia fert Incis, tedia nocte tulit. Integra ventre giganteo vineta recondit, Nec dubitat plenos evacuare cados. Haud epota queror prandenti flumina Medo, Nec me quod mendax Grecia fallat erit ; Unus qui poterit fluvios haurire Lyzi, _ Lymphz millia tot cur potuisse negem ? Nec vino cerebrum gerit expugnabile, spernit Pampinei vires insidiasque Dei, Quamvis extremos is debellaverit Indos Thyrsiger, haud valet hoc exuperare caput. Ah quoties festo cum stridere mensa tumultu, Convivasque inter serpere multa salus wi at ille ταὶ dixit mihi Cynthia cordis ulla nec imperium Delia mollis habet, Collegium tibi pro domina est; age pocula plena, Pocula dilecte sume dicata tue ; Sic pateram accipiens ut nunquam lztius ullam, Plurima pro vestra vota salute fero. Denique cum talis rector, convivaque talis Sit, dubito pugnet fortius, anne bibat. - Scilicet invasit cum nos Saracenus, in illo Gnavi virtutes emicuere ducis : Providus expectat discrimen, idonea pugne Omnia prudente dexteritate parat ; Instruit excubias, obstacula submovet, arma Prebet, distribuit munia, navis iter Dirigit, exemplis animat precibusque, procellis Objicit intrepidum fulminibusque caput. Justa manent reliquos nautas encomia ; mitto Nomina, dum memoro fortia facta virum. Cum nos infenso studio sequeretur, in illis ΄ Hostis contemptus, non metus ullus erat; Miscebant fremitumque jocumge, his risus ocellis, Illis atroces incubuere mine. Nec strepitu belli crescente réfriguit ardor Martius, accendit fertior ira viros. Surdas terrificus clamor circumsonat aures, Czcis luminibus lethifer ignis adest. Hine obversantur sociorum funera, sparsi Artus, restagnans per sua strata cruor ; Mors volat undique flammigeris invecta quad- rigis, Nullus adhuc pulsat pectora firma tremor: Digni quos palmis fortuna remuneret equa, Deliciis, opibus, nomine perpetuo. Quis non interea duri discrimina secli Ploret, queeque misor damna viator adit ; Et quibus objectat mercator chara periclis Pignora, spem vite presidiumque suze ? Vis nova predonum nunc omnibus incubat un- dis, Et diris'portant organa facta malis. Antiquis facies horrori lurida cceli, Emissusque cavis nubibus ignis erat ; Aut siqua ambiguo cautis demersa profundo Occupat incautas insidiosa rates ; Fundaque damnosum torquens balearica plum- bum, Vel balista gravis saxea tela vibrans; Aut que stridenti nervo decussa fugacis Evolat Arsacide recta sagitta manu : Jam nihil ista movent tormenta, potentia celi Ridetur, sevi temnitur ira maris. Imbelles ludunt Neptunia sceptra tridentes, Cumque suis telis fulminibusque Jovem : Deteriora suis tellus dispendia natis Edidit e gremio dira noverca suo, Improba sanguineis predonibus arma minis- trans, Flammivomum sulphur, Tartareumque ni- trum: Impetus his major, scopus est longinquior, ictus Certior, horridior vox, citiorque via : Saxea non illis obstant, non meenia ferri, Perrumpent solidas ex adamante fores ; Lignea ne speres obsistere valla, nec ulium Contra compages ossea robur habet. | Auxilium coli dedit hinc emergere, et inde Vela per Ionios accelerare sales ; Ocyus attigimusque tuos Cytherea recessus, ΖΕ σοὶ portas introitusque maris : Que juga famosis coluit Venus aurea templis, Nunc Mavors Veneta possidet arce 5085. His adversa jacent Pani sacra Meenala, queque Tantalide Pelopis littora nomen habent, Heroum nutrig tellus, celeberrima magnis Urbibus, ingenio militiaque potens Magnanimam Sparten, Agamemnoniasque Mycenas, Nestoris antiquam regia tecta Pylon, Elida palmiferam, Tegeam, bimaremque Co- rinthum, Junonisque Argos, et Sicyona crepans ; Nune inculta jacet rigidi sub jure tyranni; Tantarum rerum nil nisi fama manet. Dicteos subito colles transimus, alebat In quibus infantem parva capella Jovem ; Terribillis belli scenam ; perfundit agellos Undantes Venetus Threiciusque cruor. 510 Hanc pretergressos nos opportuna receptat Melos, habens tutos insula parva sinus: ~ Hic conquassate reparamus damna carine, Vulnera’ Dedalea reficimusque manu: ὁ ὁ Jam post bis denos terrena-revisere soles . Littora, deque cava scandere puppe datur : Imbibimus cupido nativos ore vapores, Queis putris equorei displicet aura salis ; Ingressos nova corripiunt ostenta, videntur Feminei vultus, oraque nuda comis ; Ast inclusa tegens corpuscula lanea vestis Haud valet exertum tangere curta genu : Quz tamen immenso spatium circumfluit orbe, Quale premens Tityus jugera mole novem, “ Diductis sinuata plicis; extensa patenti. Congruerent stadio finibus equa suis: Et quo queque suis fortunis amplior, illo Uberior gravius stragula preestat onus : Hee sibi circumdant proprii monumenta la- boris, Queque suo ducunt pollice, fila gerunt. Forsitan hee risum poterant movisse tuenti, Excutient fletus altera visa tibi : Deformis rerum species, neglectus agrorum, Irriguis manans lachryma crebra genis, Et querule voces: Quid duro vertis aratro Providus et pinguem semine spargis hu- mum ? Quid teneris sponsos adjungis vitibus ulmos ? Mitia cur dura germina falce putas? Cur armenta boum subigis, mollesque capellas, ᾿ Vim bellantis equi, lanigerosque greges ? Mox aliena tue complebunt horrea messes, Abductos comedet barbara turba boves ; Ti sitiente tuo spumantia pocula Baccho Hauriet indomito gutture miles atrox : Squalenti lanas pectis tegumenta latroni, Teque tuumque ferox Turca domabit equum ; Aut Antenoria dominus de classe superbus, Mercedis sitiens Dalmata, Russus inops. Hee miseros fortuna manet, cervicibus aptans Pressuram gemini duritiemque jugi ; Quicunque A‘geis circundata fluctibus arva, Ambigui Martis centra polosque colunt : Tutelam neutri debent, utrique tributum, Presidium nemo commodat, ambo volunt Presidii quod eget: nec mitius illud, ab agris Quos ipsi fructus diripuere petunt. Cumque suis domini populantur classibus oras Ancipites Venetus Threiciusque latro, Matronalis honos incestz damna rapine Deflet, virgineus tristia probra pudor. Annua frondescunt ramosa fronte maritis Cornua, vix cervis certior illa seges. Linquentes Tyriam Melon scopulosa repente Circuit amplexu densa corona suo, Delon Apollineam (que quondaan erratica dive Obtinuit stabilem munere fixa situm), Andron conspicuam, Bromiique palatia Naxon, Frugiferam Tenon, marmoreamque Paron ; Et turpes Scyron latebras que cessit Achilli, Ventremque implevit, Deidamia, tuum ; Excelsam Myconem, Gyarosque, brevemque Seriphon, Queisque minor fama est nobilitasque locos Vidimus : his parcas sequior natura ministrat, Quas aliis nimias accumulavit opes ; Fecunde spicas Cereris, pinguesque Minerve Succos, queque fluens dona Lyzus habet. Irrita Gradivus nature munera prestat SPARSA QUADAM POEMATA. ‘Prominet ecce caput sancti celeste Jacobi, Improbus, hee miseris que dedit, 1116 rapit. His eluctatos anfractibus amplius equor Concessit cursu liberiore, frui, —- Donec progressos intercipit, aspera curve Subtendens Asiz littora, clara Chios, an Ubertate soli reliquas cultuque sorores, = ZEdibus, ingenio, moribus exsuperans. Que licet Osmanide tenera cervice tyranni Perferat enervans libera cordajugum, Jactat adhuc Latii vestigia prisca leporis, — Et generis retinens signa notasque sui, Altricem Genuam tectorum mole, loquela, Deliciis, habitu, relligione refert ; ae Hinc pellucentes sucvos, stomanchoque beni nas ᾿ P ξ & a Incisz lacrymas arboris orbis habet; Queque poetarum validis collata Falernis Festiva attollit pagina, vina bibunt. ez &e =F sss Se = Ostentatque tuos, inclyta Smyrna, sinus ; Florentis fame, cum res Romana Decorum Consiliis felix auspiciisque stetit ; Nunc quoque magnifice jactas monumenta ruine, * ᾿ ‘a δ! Splendoris testes reJliquiasque tui; ς᾽ ut Saxorum cumulos, inscriptaque marmora claris Priscorum titulis, nominibusque ducum, Rudera castelli, tremulo circundata vallo, Wl Nunc quoque post ipsos ambitiosa rogos, * Multiplicesque arcus, numerosisque antra 60- lumnis . Ὗ Fulta, cavernosos permeat unda tubos. ς᾽ Temporis anteferenda aliis preeclara tropheeis Acclivi surgunt amphitheatra jugo; Antra notes licet, et caveas aditusque ferart Et spectatores quos tenuere gradus: . ; Quid Polycleteas forsan vel Mentoris artes, Com ef etst=tete ; Pr f Te Heret longa quibus fabula, signa loquar? f Vel Polycarpei nugas sordesque sepulchri “aq Ves Ridicula memorem credulitate miser ? q Audebat vero qui vitam impendere, nullo he Aut tumulo dignus nobiliore fuit. ἐν». 0 Nec speciem rapuit tantum, vultusque prioris — i Attrivit nitidum foeda senecta decus, = I Sed translata situ, et clivo deducta salubri ς iy Urbs modo depressos occupat ima locos ; 4 Solibus objectam, vacuamque patentibus aur Morborum invadit sepius atra cohors; Floret adhuc tamen et cultu sub paupere celat — ι Vespera quas et quas advehit ortus opes ;_ Hic cupidi nodus mundi, quo confluit agmen Queis sacer argenti pectora torret amor ; — Armenia huc molles longinquaque Persia setas, Gazas Nile tuas mattis, et Inde tuas ; Avulsosque capris tenues Ancyra capillos, π᾿ Cuncta suique oriens dona superba 501}. Ipsa dat arboreas gossypia tenuia lanas, = Nulla quibus tellus eequiparanda, sibi. Gallus ab occasu lati vagus inco!a mundi, a Et solers Italus, Belgaque gnarus aque. Metces quisque suas ; potiores impiger a Angelus, lanigere nobile vellus ovis, ~ Pallentis stanni, segnisque gravamina plumbi, — Utraqne Mavorti sacra metalla novo; ᾿ Omnes argentum, natura futile pondus, Sed nimiam ex usu vim pretiumque ferens. — Scilicet adversa Pheebo vertigine mundum ἢ = Circuit, et fontes Indica gaza suos, Peruviis effossa jugis petit (ultimus illue Terminus occidui solis, origo novi) ; Tom loca monstrosus que dissita lambit Hy- eae Queisque Mogul magnus predominatar adit ; Et varias peragit dum massa volubilis orbem, i vultus effigiesque refert. ‘Quas onerat multas Hispanica gaza carinas, Vicinis semper Smyrna tuetur aquis. Quague nec emittit, nec portibus excipit ullam, _Affulget miro lumine rara dies : Nec plures nec majores gens ulla ministrat, Quam preses salsis Anglia nostra Viis ; Nuila tot et tales fortune prestat alumnos, - Quos bene partarum palma coronet opum ; Dignos sorte sua, quibus arte instructa fruendi Divitiis addit mens generosa decus. Comiter excipimur cunctis, intrantibus edes Prostant, ingressis libera mensa patet. Detinet invitum mansnetis viribus hospes, Difficilis cupidum evadere pugna manet; Distrahit incertos adversa copia lucta, _ Qui jubet ut maneas suadet abire pudor. te presertim, consul dignissime, versu, -Quzve canat dotes digna Camzna tuas? Inclyta majesias proceri corporis, oris Par decus, urbano nectare lingua fluens ; Nobilitas animo, cultis elegantia comis Noribus, ingenio gratia dulcis inest. Eminet in rebus peragendis plurima virtus, Prudentem, fortem fama, bonumque vocat; Cumque suos placido moderamine dirigat An- OS, Terrbilem adversis indomitumque ferunt. Nec te illandatum sileam, suavissime pastor, Alter Smyrnzi tu Polycarpe gregis : Communis soboles ornamentumque parentis, Et matrem redamauns officiose tuam ; Vestris me fultum meritis, et nomine, citra Quod fuit in voti credulitate mei, Ingenua bonitate excepit, fovit amicis Consiliis, juvit consiliisque rudem. Integritas vite siquid, facundia lingue, Et facilis morum candor honoris habent, Siquid pacifice mentis prudentia felix, Et sibi cura suum conciliare gregem, Hunc merito vestrum jactare potestis alumnum, Certus ab hoc vobis germine crescet honos. Me sibi devinxit certe, nec debita tanta Excutient animo secula mille meo. regit imbelles agilis dum spiritus artus, Excidet immemori gratia vestra mihi ; pite qui mensa cepistis et hospite tecto Ignotum vobis immeritumque virum. Dum peragit septem lampas Titania gyros, Hic sumus, octava capere Juce fugam pimus, in liquidos iterum descendere cam- pos. Et magni portam Thracis adire juvat. rrantes pelago scorpulorum cingit acervus Alter, in his palmam Sapphica, Lesbos ha- bet ; uz cunas Theophraste tuas divine, tuasque Psittace, preeclaris terra superba viris, iceique chelyn, et jactat Arionis illam, Que pisces valuit sollicitare, lyram. xerit hine sublime caput Vulcania Lemnos, Gleba sigillatum prebet opima solum. bros detegit et canos Samothracia montes Ardua, mystarum relligiosa parens. SPARSA QUZDAM POEMATA. 511 Hesperi simol est titulos insculpta tyranni, Implicat invitos tandem statione maligna, inus hac penetrat Persica regna via : Nostra equidem Tenedos non bene fida rati ; Queque decem Danai classes Agamemnonis annos, Nos totidem plage detinuere dies : Hinc Veneti rerum, depulso Thrace, tyranni, Inde viz cupidos seva moratur hyems; Interea faciem pelli spectare nefandam, Et rigidi Martis tristia signa licet, Ambustas edes, direptaque predia, passim Quzque per incultus ossa seruniur agros. Qua sunt aggressi terram regione, quibusque Victrices scopulis applicuere rates ; Quo tormenta jugo Saracene obnoxia turri, Queisque alacres turmas disposuere locis, Demonstrant, vacat attentis admittere dicta Auribus, invise dum tenuere more : Rumpimus has tandem, cursumque iterantibus olim Inclyta Dardanii littoris ora patet. Florida planicies, placitis delecta Deorum Artificum, sua qua Pergama sede forent ; Nobilis heroum circus, fatale theatrum Virtutis, prisci Martius orbis ager. Europen Asie commisit, Troas Achivis, Diisque adversantes bellica scena Deos ; Hectoris eximii volucrisque effusus Achillis, At magis ingenii campus, Homere, tui: Condita divina ceciderunt menia dextra, Ast eterna tuo carmine Troja viget. Nec procul umbrose vertex ostenditur Ide, Quo funesta fuit lis agitata foro ; In mare contracto Simois ubi defluit amne, Cum Troje allureret mania, major erat. Dum vix elapsa est oculis Sigeia tellus, Et sua adhuc memori funera mente sedent, Altera suppeditant tragicos spectacula luctus, Et cedunt aliis Troica fata malis. Angustas fauces Athamantia deteget Helle, Quas fallax toties nobilitavit amor. Diffusos Asie tractus, plagasque patentes Europe tenuis distrahit unda freti, Quam tumidus vanis vexavit Persa flagellis, Et fluxam stulta compede vinxit aquam. Quis Seston nescit, prisce quis nomen Abydi, Adversas arces, claustra gemella maris? Cui non dicta est noctivagi jactura Leandri, Parque Herus pulchre flamma, sepulta salo? Non licet his curas impendere, tendimus ultra Ignave, contra vim venientis aque ; Donec liberior Propontidis alveus ipsam Explicat ; effuso deficit amne vigor. Rursus aberrantes angusto limite ductus Congregat, et stricto continet ore salum Bosphorus : attollunt septem fastigia turres, Et patet urbs longe meta statuta vie. De Religione Turcica. AKE®AAON. ANNO 1658. Mentisus his residere metum studiumque Deorum Quis putet, aut animos divinum tangere cultam Humani expertes? Jovis ut Cyclopica corda Cura premat, Cceli fateantur regna gigantes? © 512 Authoris natura sui, rerumque parentem Ignorare vetat rerum fatalis origo; Numinis immunes non vivitur; occupat omnes Relligio, plus falsa juvat, quam nulla ; docemur Hane facile, cupidaque stupentibus aure sa- cerdos Imbibitur nugas, et inania verba susurrans. Hine simul ac patriis bellatrix turba latebris Emersit, Scythicisque opulentam Persida sceptris Supposuit, servos domini accepere magistros, Succubuit victor domitis accessio sacris. Seva superstitio, bellisque creata ciendis, Indulgens ire, pronzque effusa remittens Lora voluptati, martis simul improba fautrix Et veneris, votis ac moribus apta ferinis, Barbara corripuit subita precordia flamma: Quam faveas modo, Musa, nec indignere la- cunis Stercoris impuri te immergere, protinus omnem Excutiam, quo fonte, quibus defluxerit olim Alveolis, arcana rudi mysteria versu, Absurdos ritus, commentaque vana retexam. Primus Arabs, humili deductus stirpe, sed alta Ambititone tumens, pravi molimine fretus Ingenii, cum rem Christi marcescere foedis Corruptam vitiis, lacerique labascere vires Imperii, populum luxu grassante solutum, Immemorem priscze fidei, fallique capacem Cerneret, e Stygiis immissa luce tenebris ; Proditione prius satagit grandescere, cives Sollicitare, jugum veteris convellere regni, Allicere incertum studiisque accendere vulgus Se diro prebere ducem stimulumque furori : Judiciis saperum mox inclarescere ; labem Obscuri generis detergere, desuper ortum Illustrare, potestatemque ascribere ccelo: Mira per humanas mendacia spargere προ Se libertatem sublatam vindice terris Restitui, morum se correctore reduci Justitiam, precepta nove veneranda salutis Se preferre, sua reparari secula lege; Quam non terrena cretam ratione, suique Pallada jactaret cerebri, sed ab etheve summo Divinoque sinu rapidis deduceret alis Dux superum Gabriel, Coeli fidissimus Her- mes: Aut inspiraret solite sub imagine forme Nobilis aura Dei, mites imitata columbas, Et docili arcanos stillaret in aure susurros. Sic e spernendo venerabilis, eque latrone Vates, nil infra commercia numinis audax, Ense simul stricto, falsoque feroculus ore, Marte Jovem, sevis oracula miscuit armis. Hine preclara fides Mahometis ; filia turpis Perfidiz, quam viperea detrusit ab alvo Seditio, Lucina manus scelerata ministras Prebuit impostura, tumentiaque ubera lacte Sacrilego admovit, nutrix Bellona replevit Cedibus, et crudo crescentem sauguine pavit, Credulus effudit per conscia pectora terror. Emanavit ab hoc fidei synosura recentis Angelico doctore liber, densissima monstris Pagina, nugarum locuples, fecunda Chimeris Colluvies tetra errorum, sentina, lacusque In quem sectarum detrita volumina sordes Deposuere suas, quas aut Judea creavit Aut pagana superstitio, ve] pejor utraque Heresis, obsccenos Christi velamine mores Sic habet: inseruit sensum nascentibus altum | Pestiferamque tegens specioso nomine virus : Omnis in hance fluxit sceleram contagio ie SPARSA QU/EDAM POEMATA. Quale chaos rerum, tenebre, confusio, Vox deilranti similis, mens (siqua) furenti; Et methodus, qualis connectit somnia; miror Si sanus, vigilem certe scripsisse negarim.° Propouit, nec persequitur; per mille vagatur =~ Lubricus ambages, nec se extricare laborat. Mille licet vicibus repetat sua, nausea donec Ingruat et patule arescant raucedine fauces, . Nec meminisse sui valet, aut consistere In cantu sibi perpetuo discordat eodem. B Undique dicta rapit, compilat scrinia preedo Deformat vultum larva celante priorem. ay ϑ os weet we ee lt” eS υ"-.-ἕ "τῷ -΄-. Ee [= = = Callidus, immutat fallax sua furtacharacter, Polluit historias, veteris dictamina fame ; Transponit loca, secernit vicina, remota, Germanis Indos, Rheno conjungit Hydaspem: — Conturbat seriem fatorum, tempora rerum Invertit, seros proavis preferre nepotes oo Ausus, Alexandram Cyro, Cyrumyue Sesostri: Attexit nova, que nullus firmaverrt author, Seria ridiculis, fucatis vera remiscet : ry Confundit brutis humana, et sacra profanis. ἕ Iste tamen liber, ut miracula vana, libido Lascivus, novitatis amor, metus, improbus er=— ror, : ; th Persuasere fidem falli proclivibus, alas τ Explicuit, variasque absurdo dogmate gentes Afflavit, comes armorum, quibus obruit orbem Turbinis instar atrox Nabathze cultor arenz. μὴ Vis illata duplex mundo; cervicibus arma Aptarunt juga, sed juga mentibus Alcoranus ; Ἃ Quem velut ztherez scintillam lucis Olympo Delapsum, veri canonem justique supremum Ὁ Et solum, sub quo decidunt judice lites, Pensant facta, regunt mores, viteeque tenorem Componunt, miro Turce dignantur, honore ; Descriptum pulchre limbo radiante coronant;— Solertes immensa reportant premia scribe : Mille coronatis totidem mendaecia constant. Ast animo quisquis memori, cerebrique tabellis Mollibus insculpens defuncti verba prophetze Respirare dedit, reverentia lautior illum Prosequitur, meruit suffimina, numinis instar Exigui colitur, decorat convivia prasens. . Objectum non ablutis accedere plantis, = = Immunia tractare manu, contingere spurco Corpore, luminibusque sacrum inspectare VO= Ὁ lumen Haud bene purgatis, fuerit deflebile crimen. Lustralis tibi lympha deest, cum tollere librum _ Usus et officii ratio imperiosa requirit ? κ᾿ Armatos adhibe digitos, et forcipe puro Suscipe, vel medii defensum tegmine panni. Ve tibi, ni caveas cortra lustrare profano 4 Podice, sacrificove opponere terga legenti. ) O curas secus impensas, a cortice sordes 3 Externo prohibere, latentia stercora sensus - Turpis, et impuri maculas celare recessus ; Ac faciem dictis, sed non advertere mentem. Hnjus amor scripti non in se terminat, ultra Promovet affectus, et chartas consecrat omnes 5 — Nosque reos peragunt infandi criminis ausos Natibus infestis sacram temerare papyrum, = Religione sua inscribi (' um denique) ἀἰσηδθη: Nec Venetis se perpendunt debere cloacis, = Mirificam que nanc involvunt lintea vatem. Dotatur miris virtutibus illita libro “a Exceptis membrana notis ; comitatur habentem «-«-- = ἘΞ eS Ss =" τὸ" — ak SS = = “ut os = — LL Chr: δ SPARSA QUADAM POEMATA. i 513 Certa salus, fugiunt depulsa pericula ; tutum Quis dubitet, tereti quicunque monilia collo dat sapiens chartacea, brachia sanctis uniet armillis ? quis tam temerarius illum Ut violet morbus, damnum manus inferat au- _ dax, Aut prope non nimium przceps accedat alastor ? Pugnatur? quoties inimicos obtudit enses Affixum signis carmen fatale, caducas Restituitque acies, dubiamque arcessere pal- Attractu valuit? panduntur vela, procella Ingruit, antennis circundata, chartula pontum Compescit, nubes abigit ventosque, serenum Allicit, in magico tanta est fiducia versus. Stylus Arabs libri, sensus sublimis, ut illis Esse solet nullus quibus est; evolvere cuncti Non intellecto quamvis scrmone tenentur, Et legere ignari: studium persolvit ocellus, Mens vacat officio: quid enim, nescire profanam Excusare manum meruit, digitique recidet Ignavi curas ? quo scilicet indice voces Enumerant, literas, accentus, commata, ver- sus 5 Qualia queve legant czci, quota nosse labo- rant ; Mole fidem, non vi; numero, non pondere consent. Ne tamen ignoret penitus miserabile vulgus Quz melius nescire foret, mysteria fidus Explicat interpres textumque enodat acerba Pensatus trutina, duroque examine notus. Nunc que depromunt ex illo dogmata fonte, Quos cudunt fidei articulos, exponere Musa Aspirante juvat. Seni numerantur in ore Communi celebres, primaque in classe locandi. Esse Deum, angelicas mentes, sacra biblia, vates, Judicium extremum, decreta bonique malique. De quibus uberior que sit sententia Turcis Dicam, nec posito deflectar ab ordine. Primo Est Deus, eternus, nature simplicis, unus Persona ; similis, consortis, comparis expers ; A nullo genitus, genitor nullius ; origo Ipse sui; factor, custos, moderator eorum, | Omnia que patulo mundus complectitur orbe. _ Transcendit sensum ipsius proportio, membri, Partis, divisionis inops, non competit illi | Forma, nec effigies vivo simulanda colore. | Ante, simul, post res fuit, est, erit; haud ,. Manet usquam Mlle loci, nec abest ; fixusque per omnia currit. Nec minor esse potest, nec major; commoda nulla, | Affectus, curas patitur: desciscere mundum | Finge, fides cesset, reverentia numinis omnis Exulet, involvat sacrorum oblivio terras ; Nec deserta suis fument altaria flammis ; In cineres abeat ccelestis machina, priseum Terra chaos repetat, nihili redigantur in alvam | Omnia, funestaque cadant absorpta ruina ; ) Nec dives minus aut felix erit, haud premet illum | Cura, vel afficiet dolor, aut urgebit egestas, Intra se plenum consummatumque, suisque Contentum saturumque bonis. Perlustrat aprico | Lumine cuncta; cavernosis que clausa late- | Que defuncta sua fugere evanida vita, [bris, Illaque, que nondum mundane conscia lucis, Imperfecta jacent dubie sub semine cause ; | Quo manifesta magis, presentia, facta tuetur? Vor. Il. 65 7 Cognovit pater Oceanus quot lambit arenas, Quot numerat Ceres, ignavum quot grana pa- paver, Qui foliis census debetur, quique capillis. Herentem scopulo polypum dijudicat, atre Formiceeque super nigrum vestigia saxum, Obscuros gressus sub opaca nocte tegentis: Percipit elisos submissa voce susurros, Atque verecunde pressissima murmura lin- gue. Quogue nihil fecit natura abstrusius, ille Intima rimatur taciti penetralia cordis. Nec tamen aspiciens oculos habet, aut quibus audit Possidet auriculas, est totus lumen, et auris Totus: ab humano penitus perceptio sensu Abludit divina. Illi mortalia subsunt Omnia, preevalidisque obsistere nescia parent Imperiis : ejUs contra nihil accidit usquam Aut preter decreta, manus, moderamina : nutu Absque Dei nec musca suas levis explicat alas. Non illum neglectus iners, non perfida Lethe, Non presumptio vana trahit, nec devius error. Lucis inaccessz longinquas incolit arces, Quo penetrare nefas, etsi sublimibus esset Ingeniis : ea mortalem mysteria captum Excedunt, illuc spectare superbia nobis Stulta, stupor sceleratus erit ; pia suscipit illum Credulitas, qualem descripsimus. Esse, se- cundo, Angelicos confide choros, ccelestis alumnos Aulez, syderei comites proceresque tyranni, Participes regni, mandatorumque ministros, Ignaros peccare suique excurrere fines Obsequii, quod nec flagrans remoratur edendi Cura, nec importuna sitis, nec prolis habendz Impatiens studium distractos occupat ; illis Non gula, non venter, non est distinctio sexus ; Non Ceres est, non bis genitus, non filia spume Cordi, indigna suo contemnunt numina cultu. Quilibet officio vigil excubat ; atria servant Flammantis stellata poli; subsellia cingunt Augusto substrata throno, despectibus alti Verticis intenti, quo designante parati Ceruleas pennis findunt velocibus auras, Et peragunt opera sublimia jussa fideli. Non situs est idem cunctis, non omnibus unum Officium ; perstant erecto corpore quidam (Corpus enim si credis habent) discumbitur illis Mollius, inflexis genubus reverenter adorant, Et figunt alii ceelestibus oscula stratis. Hic laudes celebrans placidi concentibus oris, Aut agili volucres pertentans pollice chordas Carmine mirifico totum demulcet Olympum, Et superas grato modulamine personat aures, Ille polo non invitus delabitur exul, Nube coruscantes humeros indutus opaca, Praefectus custosque datus mortalibus ; oras Perlustrat sibi commissas; bona, prava recen- set Facta, fovet donis meritos, p@nisque coercet ; Sustinet auxilio labentes, erigit ipso Prolapsos, levat oppressos, succurrit egenis ; Eludit technas exquisitique labores Consilii, minimo digiti conamina flexu Subruit immodicas vires jactantia; carsus Humanos tenui sufflaminat objice; forma Conspicuus nulli, et radians caput obrutus umbra Apparet liquidis effectibus. Omnibus ingens 514 ‘\ Robur, sed gradibus distant ac ordine certo. Viribus excellent aliqui, immanique gigantes Membrorum referunt habitu ; de culmine celi Vix intervallum labentibus effluit hore In terras ; Scythicas tractu pernice sagittas Vincunt, sulphureoque emissum fulmine plam- bum ; Impellunt quicquid properantibus officit ; una Immensos penna montes subvertere, terre Radices aperire, ostendere tartara possunt. Inter eos Gabriel forma ac virtute supremus Eminet: Esrahil, lethi niger angelus, Orco Addicit tristes animas, Ereboque reducit Palantes: mirum si non‘talaria plantis Aptet, somniferamque manu virgam quatit al- ter Mercurius. Summus postremi examinis index Insertam tenet ore tubam, jussumque moratur Numinis, inflabit monitus pulmonibus acer Israfil, et mundum ferali perstrepet ere. Perculsum clangore genus mortale peribit, Corporibusque animas fatum commune seque- tur ; Ut tener occumbit violenti flatibus Euri Flosculus, aut fragiles Borea incursante fe- nestrz Dissiliunt; non ipse suze vim perferet aure Obstreperus tubicen, vitamque efflabit ab ore. Per denas quater orbis erit desertus aristas, Extabitque nihil vasti per inania mundi. Post hec Israfili vitam, ventumque, tubamque Restituet Deus, et cantum renovare jubebit. Ingruet angelicos manes, animasque jacentes Eriget, immittens reduces in pectora motus Spiritus, horrendum quo possint ante tribunal Comparere, 5185 rationemque edere vite. Nec licet indignus fama reticebere, lucis Transfuga, tartarezeque hospes caliginis Iblis ; Non superum populos inter postreme beatos, Ni dederat summo malesana superbia ccelo Precipitem, placitisque Dei parere negaras : Nuper cum luteum Pater immortalis Adamum Fingeret, ethereis animans precordia flammis, Et propriz pulchra gavisus imagine forme Ceelicolas operi cultum przstare juberet Applausumque suo; tumidus natalibus altis, Nec memor Authoris, sua cui deberet origo Se quoque, temnebas rigidum livore maligno Inecurvare genu: quid enim, clarissima lucis Progenies vilem cceni veneretur alumnum ? Ut rerum confundatur justissimus ordo, Nature pereat meritum, sublimia cedant Depressis, terras axis stellatus adoret, Serviat obsccena lampas Phoebea paludi? At quid vana loqui, lingua velitare procace, Adversusque Deum tumidas obtendere nugas Profuit ? obsequium non detractavit inultus, Fulmine pallentes decessit adactus ad umbras, Lucifugamque colit ccelo detrusus abyssum. Hine miser invidia turget, stirpemque perosus Immanis causam lapsus, flagrantibus iris, Hortator scelerum, patratorumque severus Persequitur vindex homines; nec simplice pollet Nequitia, similes immundo semine natos Progenuit (mestis nec abest Venus improba regnis, Est sua Plutoni Proserpina ; sexus abesset, Non foret infernus, nec demon posset haberi Infelix, expers consortis; credite Turcas SPARSA QUDAM POEMATA. ‘Deceptaeque manus scelus, aut injuria m Imbuit: ut piceis facies informis abyssi Dicere, non ego sic teneros aversor amores), Infensum nobis agmen, rabieque Least” “a Accensum ; macie tenues in corpora nosira Insinuant sua, perversos in sanguine tae ΕΝ i, In nervis, in carne cient, rationis amico | Ἕ Discordes regno ; sensus a mente rebelle: Abducunt ; Taqueos, i inimicaque retia tendt Virtuti ; pravos affectus indere, vanas Spes, stolidosque metus, czcosque -cupidin ignes, Curasque ancipites, querulasque superstitiones Omnigenisque student animos oa monstris. Successu scelerum gaudent, sannisque subac- tos Excipiunt, hilares nostris cruciatibus — » Deformes edunt subducta nare cachinnos, Et sua solantur nostris dispendia damnis. In mala non cogunt, nec apertis viribus instant, — Astuto tantum possunt impellere suasu: Qui cavet insidias, est quod non horreat illo: Victor erit quisquis venientibus obstruit aeres, Sed guid furciferos lemures moror? an furor ijlis Possessum rapit? articulus se tertius infert Quatuor obtendens effusa volumina sacro Afflatu, non ambiguo munita sigillo JEterni Regis, totidem inspirata . prophetis a Biblia primeevus Moses, David edidit bce ἊΝ Christus Evangelium, Mahumetes Alcoranum. — Tres persenserunt hostilia fata priores, ᾿. Annosz rugas, corruptelasque senecte, a Omnia mutantis. Calamus peraravit iniquus, Errores irrepserunt, turpesque hture ; Nil primi retinent illibatique decotis, Nec priscam meruere fidem liber : altimu Sy evo Ultimus, anterior (de se si creditur ipsi) Et princeps pretio ; purus, sincerus, abundans Nil falsi admistum, nil veri jactat omissum ; Que reliquis desunt supplet, decisa resarcit, | Confirmat genuina suo, fucataque truncat Arbitrio; quem non fraus invida leserit quam, ἢ ο » Temporis, anliguum tenet incorruptus hono- Trem ; «ἢ Defectus nullos, contagia nulla veretur, Hac perdurabit signata coronide veri oe Regula, defuncto dum conclamabitar orbi, Magnaque funereo flagrabit machina busto. _ Quarta fides sanctos vates credique facitque _ Credendo, radiis perfusos pectora lucis " Insolitze, superoque intinctos nectare linguas ; Mentis et eloquii promptos comprendere sen- sum, e Comprensum proferre Dei, preconia veri Ν Accinere, errorum nebulas dispellere, mores Dirigere, et certze callem signare salutis. Fatidicee gentis numeroso palmite oe ' Diffusam, | gemino conclusit limite magnum Par, caput Adamus, Mahometes cauda mee phetis. , Fictilis is coeni exueca compage, favillas δ ZEtherei rapiente foci, genitalia vite Semina, nature preegnans virtute recentis, — Nuper prognati cecinit primordia mundi, Authoremque suum teneram cognoscere lem a ἡ wi δ. ig iq -agly τ΄ ji) bi Aree - - Lal 5 aa » hoes “- - SPARSA QUADAM POEMATA. Obsita squaleret tenebris ; ut czrula nullis Picta coruscare: stellis, nec luce serena Rideret regio, varios nec ludicra gyros Ederet ; ut Sterili tellus obducta palude, Nocte rigens et morte, nec usquam surgeret alto Ornatu nemorum, viridi nec serperet herba. » Ut pax nulla foret rebus, non pulcher inesset Ordo, nec arbitrium legis, temeraria molem Confusam instabili premeret discordia regno. Ut tum divini nitidissima filia verbi Turpibus emersit cunis, et preepete cursu Qua patet immensum subito perfulsit Olym- pum, | Mobilibus collecta globis. Subsedit aquarum In pontum digesta palus ; tumefacta vigore Prolifico tellus foecunda protulit alvo Omnigenas segetes, sylvas, animalia, tandem Se caput et finem perfecti a Numine mundi. Talia vaticinans reliquis prelusit Adamus Rusticus et simplex. Mahumetem immanior olim Corripuit furor; haud quamvis lymphatica Musam Exagitet rabies, totusque invadat Apollo, Ille magos inter quantum prefulserit omnes, Nobiliter demens, insano carmine promat ; Quantos inflato superarit pectore montes, Quam rigido arrecti steterint horrore capilli, Quot rabido spume modios excreverit ore, Incumbente Deo domitus ; si vis tamen illam Ulla domare potest animam, que condita seclis Omnibus anterior rutile in fervente camino Lampadis, tern duraverit hospita flamme ; Sulphureis donec delapsa penatibus, aura Frigidiore fruens, mortales induit artus, Ut spem dzmoniis faceret, generique salutis Humano, fidei reserans oracula mire Perpetuo mansura, feri nec dentibus evi Subdita, nec sevo fatorum obnoxia juri. Hee qui suscipiunt devota mente, favore Numinis eximio summoque beantur honore, Precipue chari, neu quis dubitaret amicam Doctori preestare fidem, permulta superstes Ostendit, non ambigue concredita fame, Plura per Elysios edet miracula campos, Postumaque attonitos mulcebunt fascina manes. E digitis vivi latices manare reclusis Prosilientis aque : celsi manus emula montis Sudavit gelidos rapido torrente liquores, Et siccas Arabum fluctu irroravit arenas. Vanus Athon fictor juvenis sub imagine fusam Pellzi latum dextra profundere flumen Pollicitus narratur ; habebit fabula robur, Et transibit in historiam ; nec pagina vatum Ulla laborabit dubii formidine veri. Vocalis Dodona fuit, reor; Orphea circum Cantantem aurite salices duxere choreas ; Thebanas sola testudine condidit arces Amphion ; lanam Circe deduxit Olympo Carmine ; cur prisci sacris sermonibus evi Suspicione negem assensum detentus iniqua? Quando poetarum nuper transcenderit omnem Materiam, torquere fidem majoribus audens Prodigiis fugitivus Arabs: A®sopica vatem Ore salutarunt animantia ; seepe prophetam Asseruere Dei linguis arbusta canoris, Nec conjurate tenuere silentia rupes. Intendens digitum flexu pollente Dianam OO a 515 Quos simul affecit cupido devotio eultu, Deseruere sue rutilantia culmina sphere, Ingressique sinum vatis fovere beati ; Intumuit magna gravis hospite lena ; subinde Officio perfuncta brevi, satiataque charo Amplexu, patulo manicarum emissa meatu, Orbe recollecto risit, dictaque salute In superas alacris remeavit Cynthia sedes ; Non ita Dictzi stimulo pastoris acuto Inflammavit amor Pheeben, cum languida celo Decideret, placiteeque infigeret oscula forme. Interea vos ethereas qui scanditis arces, Ambitiosa mente ; poli qui regna patentis Dissita, flammigerosque orbes indagine freti Audacis*radii spatiis includitis, astris Cancellos, finesque suos preescribitis ipsi Astrorum Regi; queis stat sententia concors Integros Arabum saltus excedere lunam, JEgyptum licet et Libycas adjungere syrtes ; Dicite, quo contracta modo sibi tecta Sabeee Induerit chlamydis, loculique fornmine parvo Immensum rutili vultus demerserit aurum : Dicite, quis mendax fuerit, Ptolemzus an ille Sortilegus, gracili vestras qui stringere pugno Anderet stellas, Epicyclos clauderet arca, Nummorumve instar sacco confunderet omnes: Ve vestris, illi si creditur, esto trigonis, Quadrisque, et refugo ductis in pulvere gyris ; Prospicite astrologi, et vestras defendite curas. Interea, quintus musz conamen anhele Provocat articulus, summique ferociter instat Judicii terrore minax: nisi credis, acerbas Promittit tibi vindicias, preessagaque monstra, Divino sapiens Mahomet que prodidit ore Summum precessura diem. Seductor Averno Impius emerget, polluto semine, Christo Oppositus nebulo, Graiis cluet Antichristus, Deggiali Turcis ; ccecas innectere fraudes, Et pravo sataget per vertere dogmate mundum, Se caput ostentans, preeceptoremque salutis. Quem simul aspiciet fulgenti desuper axe Terris grassantem et virus lethale serentem, Indomita pectus generosum percitus ira, Non impune meum numen contemnet alastor Tartareus, populosque meos abducet inultus, Dicet, et illustri solio delapsus Iesus Cominus aggressu furiosum proteret hostem, Inficiet piceo rorantes sanguine terras ; Invectusque triumphali per subdita curru Regna ferus victor spoliisque ornatus opimis Incedet, plausu comitum stipatus ovante. . Interea viridi Saracenus origine Muhdi Nascetur (sic lingua virum cognomine signat Barbara, Director Latiis sonat auribus), illum Conveniens Christus, fida solennia dextra Foedera conjunget, pulchraeque cupidine gnate Accensus dicet socerum ; felice jugales Protinus ardebunt tede fulgore, vocatus Faustus Hymen aderit, thalamisque recepta superbis Nympha decens magno peraget solatia sponso. Dum denos quater evolvet Titania lampas Tramitis obliqui reditus, regnare videbit Per terras omnes quam nunc describimus unam Assertore fidem Christo, Christoque probatam Judice ; sic levis antique dictamina legis Deseret, eque suis desciscet transfuga castris, Doctior effectus: credat Saracenus Apella Non ego; pulchra licet prono commenta favore SPARSA QUADAM POEMATA. Credulus arripiam, quibus illustrissima clarum { Visceribus vacuis insanus seviet ardor, Dant argumentum Gog Magog nomina: mures | Non gelido prohibendus aque non aeris Rugosz sileat galeatos casside cruste, Innixi pedibus stabunt ; sedilia nulla Et bellatrices ranas nugator Homerus ; Restituent artus jugi languore solutos ; Pygmeosque truces inter quos tristibus iris Palpanti tremule salient formidine vene, Sanguineosque grues exarsit nobile bellum : Emissusque pavor stupefacti fonte gelato Corpore debilius, sed stragi fortius agmen Cordis sudores rigida cute, stercusabalvo ΄ Fimibus extremis Scythiz, solisque cubili Excutiet, laxisque invitas renibus undas. Nascentis, czecis in apricum reptile claustris Mox versus superos ignes, solisque camino Prodibit Gog, et Magog; gens nana minorque | Ardentem plantis gradientur inermibus auras Formicis, gravis est minimum queis sarcina | Caleantes; Nemesis flagris crepitantibus in — granum, stans : aie Millia Galfridi comprendit quinque patenti Urgebit tardos, lapidis distantia donec ) Calceus hospitito, populisque palatia cedet Discretos tenet unius, precordia Pheebi » Ampla giganteis, vastamque colentibus urbem. | Ne subeant, liquideeque natent in gurgite flam- Qui simul innumeris dorsum terrestre catervis -' Oppressere, avido cunctasque voragine fontes me. ἍἊΝ 1 Bulliet in venis insueta febre laborans. _ ν Absorpsere lacusque; et maxima dulcibus un-|Sanguis; fusus adeps; caro colliquefact dis _medulle om Flumina detexere cavos exhausta canales ; In rorem undosum macerate ; durior ossis Enecuitque homines tristi sitis arida flamma, |Compages domita in viscum lentumque ma Heredes vacui traducent secula mundi: dorem ~ Ingens parva stupor percellat pectora, prisci Rara pelle colabuntur; circumfluushumor Sydereas arces monumenta tuentibus evi. Proluet innantes sibimet, pinguedine coctos 516 “14 CT SS Sea ESM Se SS τ Tunc oblita sui cursus natura, soluto Nativa, inque sui demersos balnea succi. ΜΡ Ordine, primeve violabit foedera legis ; | Hos vada sudoris tenui manantia Jambunt ua Errabunt omnes stelle ; sibi dispar Apollo Alveolo, talis genubusque coercita summis; ὦ Ducet in eois nocturna silentia plagis, Illos ad renes evectior amnis inundat; | ae Hesperiisque diem revehet przposterus oris: | Sunt quibus ad collum turget liquor, et caput Impatiens salse putrebit squamiger unde ; extans Infecto volucres languentibus aere pennis |Gurgite contiguum despectat ; sunt quibus ora’ Precipiti lapsu devolventur : fera saltus Insugunt salsos latices; sors ultima genti Nulla venenatos, nec inhospita lustra subibit. | Contingit miserz, capitis cui vertice sammo % Strata cadaveribus moestissima scena ruine Pendulus alluitur fluctu insultante capillus. Continuo tellus celebrabit funera lucta ; Hoc angore fatigati, dum secula centum Cuncta repentino occumbent animalia fato. Quinque teret vicibus fatali pollice textrix Sedibus avulsos montes violentus avitis | Clotho, spe tremula summi decreta manebunt Impetus zethereos adiget conscendere campos. | Judicii, meritis exact congrua vite. μ". Sublimi dubium carpent iter astra volatu Momentis librata bilanx aptabitur equis, ἘΝ Inter, et occursu committent prelia duro ; Qua bona cum pravis collato pondere facta Spherarum moles subitis adamantia flammis | Certabunt nisu adverso; queis pregravis an= — 8 ie Corripietur, et in fluidum diffusa liquorem Migrabit ; cum feralis deszeviet ardor Alliciet virtus libre in devexa sequacis, Sopitaque refrigescet celeste metallum Elysii virides lucos sedesque beatas Sulphuris ignivomi cholera vehemente, recen- | Intrabunt; quibus evincent sequiora, subibunt sam tes Cudentur ceeli; renovatis purior axis Fulgebit radiis ; redivivi candida Phebi Frons arridebit, macularum sordida nulla Fece, nee umbrose disparens objice nubis. Nos quoque morte resurgemus, sopore Discusso, nudi, quales emersimus alvi Materne latebris peregrina luce recepti, Sed preclara pios, doctores atque prophetas Involvet vestis, demissaque purpura ccelo Nobilis, Hulet habet nomen: jumentaque Burak Inflammata jubas radiis labentur ab alto ; Ignibus aurigam qualis circundata Phebum, Et Phaetonteos post se rapit ungula currus. Has induta togas, atque hos conscensa caballos, Gens proba migrabit superi sub tegmen opa- cum Letificasque umbras solii, placidaque fruentur Tranquillz mentis requie: pars altera nudis Expositi membris Boream frigusque severum, Torrentisque feros cruciatus sentiet estus ; Affligent inopes stomachos jejunia macra, Parcaque pallentes tenuabunt pabula vultus ; Inferni tristes umbras Stygiamque paludem: — Lethesque | Captivo resoluta cadent ; suffusa pudore | Ritum sincerum, et puri commercia coetus, Soe ἘΞ -- Ρ- Ss SFPSse Ss SS SyPrrrberEe FSS Yew Ni facilis Deus eximie bonitatis amico ~ " Impulsu, sancti vel prepellente subactus Supplicis oratu parcat, dureeque remittat Arbitrium legis ; tum ferrea vincula collo Ultrix poena retro cedet, victrixque triumphos Solennes toto ducet clementia ceelo. . Ast cui vera fides morienti defuit, extra - Nulla precum misero vehementia proderit irae Devoto, nec flectet inexorabile fatum. ἣν Cui fortuna favens genuino lumine mentem Perfundi donavit, et expirare fidelis Intra septa gregis, licet indulgentia nulla, — Intercessio nulla fuit, quee pondere pressum Peccati gravis immodico defendat acerbis a Suppliciis, animamque addictam subtrahat Orco; et Post exacta suis delictis debita justi << | . i Consulet oppressis vindex Deus ; arbiter omnis Abscedet, peraget propriis examen ocellis : SPARSA QUEDAM POEMATA. t a sevis rigidissima justa tyrannis ; quicquam fecere boni mercede rependi Deposcens, si doctrinam coluisse prophete, Cultum promovisse sacrum, donaria templis [mpendisse, scholas studiis struxisse fovendis, spitia zegrotis, quosque ardua cogit egestas, ᾿ Ostentare queant, Deus hec, erepta tyrannis, Afflictis dabit et passis enormia probra, ns lesi damnum virtute nocentis. Sic perdet Nero florentis benefacta juvente, Et magno cedet Senecee Thrasezque probato Imperii quinquennis honos ; Callisthenis am- plum en Alexandri decerpet fortibus actis 7 indigna, nec abfuerit sua portio Clyto. - Qui meruere hihil, nec habent quo Numinis iras - Imminuant, humeros alieno fasce gravatos THorum peccata prement, quos cede peremptos merita quondam, vel iniquo carcere clausos, Aut aliis affecit atrox injuria damnis. uot Romanos proceres civesque levabis, Caie furens, scelerum penis, tuque ultime Flavi, Commode degener, et solis vesane sacerdos, Jedecora humani generis, pestesque maligne. ns Sirath pilo telaque exilior illa, Quam de nativa contexit aranea lana, Lamina subtilis, mucronis acutior ore ‘Terribili, stagnis super extendetur Avernis. Trajicient omnes, Parca instigante coacti ; Hi velut excussum pugnacia nubila fulmen Transilit, ad morem ventosi turbinis illi ; ‘Ut sonipes quidam, Piszo in pulvere, palme Emicat impatiens, laxis effrznis habenis ; Incedent alii passu graviore, velut qui Succussator equus quatit alterno pede terram ; llicito lentoque gradu procedet onustus eccatis, cursumque subinde abrumpet anhe- lus ; Ulterioris amor ripe flagrantibus omnes Alliciet votis cupidos transmittere : felix, Ancipitem quisquis librato corpore lapsum Effugit, et placita victor consistit arena ; e levis culpz, vitamque innoxius egit. Quem vero in seram dilata piacula mortem, Multiplicisque gravat damnatum sarcina noxe, Nunc partes propensus in has modo pronus in illas _ Deverget, tandem subita vertigine raptus In preceps immane ruet, vanusque labantem Sustentare labor, certamen inane sequetur ; Subjectam longo casu pertinget abyssum. Ante polum quam conscendunt, stellataque summe Aule porta patet, Jano reserante, vireta Irriguis vicina colent manantia rivis : Nectareis stagnabit aquis piscina prophete Cuilibet, unde sua potet cum plebe; videres Ludere perspicuo ceelestes gurgite truttas. que restinguat Saraceni lympha palati Ardores, teneramque gulam Mahometis abunde Exaturet, clarisque oculos pellucida gemmis, Major erit reliquis, suavique placentior unda ; purum candore suo, dulcedine mella, Assyriam nardum fragranti vincet odore, Pestanasque rosas ; qui degustaverit {ΠῚ Viscera non, wstus, nec hiulcas torserit unquam ZErumnosa sitis fauces, non attrahet urgens Ventriculus, sed delicie gustusque bibendi. 517 : Nascentis’celerem Lune comes incipe cursum, Progressuque pari dum lucida cornua crescant, Dum totum radiis fraternis compleat orbem, Dum sensim curva declinans luce senescat, Et vultum tandem radiosum evanida celet, Carpe viam, tanto protenditur intervallo Oppositas que disjungit distantia ripas, Lata quibus platanus, pinus procera, cupressus Densa dat, et placidas Tirynthia populus um- bras Inficit admisti viridantia littora floris Discolor ornatus ; sincero purpura lacti Decernit, neutrique viror decedit amcenus ; Lilia contendunt violis, rosa suavis utrique, Omnibus intendit costus certamen odora. Pocula neu desint, et sors constringat egena E manibus ritu Cynico potare cavatis, Aut prono latices subjectos lambere labro, Festivi devexa lacus numerosa coronat Amphora, non totidem Pheebo subeunte cubile Hesperium sudo numerabis in aere stellas. Nunc age Musa refer Saraceni gaudia cceli, Quo semel ingressi peragent eterna quieti Secula, nec lasciva retro vestigia flectent ; Nemo tranquillis abigetur sedibus exul, Nec stolido cupiet transferre habitacula voto. Non ibi mors unguam funesto pallida vultu, Nec simili quicquam referat quod imagine mor- tem, Apparet, minuens vires mutansque colorem Precursor lethi morbus, lethique satelles 9 Luctus, deductusque agnato sanguine somnus ; Non interrupto perfecte vivitur evo ; Nec labor exercet corpus, nec passio mentem ; Languida nec pravi pariunt fastidia mores ; Nec querulz lites ; discordia nulla lacessit Conjunctos animos placide ferrumine pacis. Cum bellis odium, comedens precordia livor, Credula suspicio, timor anxius, improba fugit Ambitio, sincerus amor moderatur habenas, Regnaque perpetuis torquet ccelestia sceptris ; Non rugas erumna vocat, nec cura seniles ; Non etatis hyems illic furibunda, nec anni Adspergunt canis homines sylvasque ; fruuntur Vere novo semper, semper florente juventa ; Ipse perdurant illeese a tempore vestes, Nec telas rumpet, neque conteret Atropos is- tas. Terra placens musco molli setaque virenu Vestitur ; celsis pallatia splendida surgunt Turribus ; e solida fundamen iaspide constat, Cuditur in lateres argentea massa struendis Meenibus, et fulvi series intexitur auri Alterne ; paribus decorantur tecta metallis ; Sunt eboris tabulata, micant laquearia gemmis: Area magnificis insternitur ima tapetis, Cervicalia queis Phrygii monumenta laboris Incumbunt, auro pulchrisque superba lapillis ; Omnia regales longe superantia luxus, Innixi quibus exercent convivia festa. Safficiet quascunque dapes optare, subibunt Sponte fores patulas, nullo sudore parate Arte coqui nulla, cupientibus omnia pleno Prodiga ceelicolis effundet copia cornu, Gemmea scintillant infuso pocula Baccho, Eximio qui cor recreat stomachumqne sapore Permulcet ; calices forma prestante ministri Distribuunt, roseo convivas ore beatos Torquentes ; qualem Nymph rapuere proca ces 518 3 Ploranti Alcide, vel quem sua vina Tonanti Misturum Phrygia evexit Jovis armiger Ida. Post dulces epulas divini nulla supersunt Excrementa cibi, nullo vesica liquore Turget, nec spurca sturcus stabulatur in alvo ; Crapula desudat blando resoluta vapore. At quid delicias prosit sentire minores, Ambrosia satiare gulam, distendere venas Nectare ? cur placeat celum, Venus aurea ccelo Si desit ? pulchras igitur Saracena puellas Inseruit superis prudentia, menstrua nulla, Nulla puerperii passas incommoda ; lata Grandes tronte micant oculi; pinguedine carnes Assurgunt tenera; forme complura recensent Signa, verecundé injiciunt que frena came- ne. Nativa egregio species augetur amictu. Recta periscelides aurate crura, decoris Collectz nodis, armille brachia, torques Lactea colla, comas undantes vitta coercens, Purpureisque genis illudens pendulus aures Annulus exornat ; irritat quicquid amores, Sopitosque valet sufflare cupidinis ignes. Virginibus titulus brevis Hur, sed gaudia longi Prestant concubitus, coeant in secla licebit Quousque placet, rivo decurret sperma per- enni. Nec satis est illam cui non natura repugnat Invexisse polo venerem: celeste cinedi, »Oh pudor! ascendere solum, vultuque pro- batos In pueros elegante furit perversa libido. At satis indultum est, capiunt fastidia cceli Pertesum, saturos invadit nausea sensus ; Assuetam meliora juvant solatia mentem. Jane fores aperi; valeat paradisus, agatur Quid rerum miseris furva Plutonis in aula Manibus inspiciam: per meesta crepuscula primum Provocat obtutum species horrenda Draconum. Colla camelorum paribus crassissima gyris Exequant, magnisque neget qui cedere mulis Circuitu vasto tumefacti ventris abundat Scorpio; percutiunt immania monstra malig- nam Dente venenato, et furialis verbere caude Demonis infausti sobolem, populumque rebel- lem. Heu quales edunt gemitus, cum pestifer anguis Insultat! resonant tenebrosa ululatibus antra ; Semineces artus, nimiumque tenacia vite Membra parum optande, populatur vindice flamma Humectus, piceaque aspergine fortior ignis, Qualis pervehitur paganica Tartara rivis Sulphureis Phlegethon, atraque voragine tor- rens. Morsibus attrite carni flammaque vorace Depastz nova succrescit, reparata dolori Esca, recens semper tormenti pullulat heres ; Quilibet est instar Tityi damnatus, habetque . Immortale jecur, fecundaque viscera penis. Ah refugee quoties inclamant nomina mortis, Surdaque sollicitis obtundunt fata querelis! Quippe perire datur miseris, periisse negatur. Non fuga, non venia est, non spes ibi lumine dulci, ΄ Optima vexate mentis medicina, refulget. Nullus ille objecta sopitur janitor οἵα, SPARSA QUZEDAM POEMATA. Nec ferus aurati placatur palmite rami _ Portitor. Eurydicen nullam revocaverit illine Nec vanis fidibus Ditem incantaverit Orphet Assidue multos in amceno carcer opacus Detinet hospitio ; sed quod dimiserit ullum, Quem dabis authorem, quo digrediente sonor Unquam tartaree crepuerunt cardine porte? Hee nobis stricte patefecit rima fenestrae, — " Quz muris umbras pertusa revelat Avernis; _ in Non ita fugissem tenebrosa in claustra recep- —S>_ tus, ΜῊΝ ὌΝ ν΄. ye Consultum est revocare gradum, ne conscius Orcus am 1% Explorata sui doleat secreta profundi. = = =, Pergendum est quo fata vocant, quibus ultima. | it sedes is oe a ifr Ἢ : i} jie Competit, in fidei, nam sic voluere, caterva. Que fuerant, quamvis fusca nue obruta, Lethe, . Que sunt, preesentesque lacessunt obvia is sus, | | ΜΠ Quicquid habent olim volventia 56 618 futurum, Ἵ in Quod nec ab annexis intenta scientia causis Eliciat, levibus nec conjectura prehendat Auguriis, nullisque sagax prudentia signis — Colligat, abstrusumque latet radice profun Que bona, que mala, que media sunt c locanda, ial Omnia perpetuis extant insculpta tabellis, _ Que penna manus omnipotens adamantis” aravit. ia au At bona, ceu sincera fides, devotio fervens, _ Justum, forte, tenax veri, compescere ventrer ay | eM, a) A het | Munificum, prudens, miseris succurrere, puke τ chra ᾿ an ᾿ Virtutum series, non tantum scita, statuta, ς΄ Ἢ Definita, sed zeterno munita sigillo, a ‘ Consensuque probata Dei, cognataque juxta fn Premia consistunt ; nitidissima pagina fulget _ Ve Auratis depicta notis. Capit altera pellis = ii Cum peenis delicta suis ; decreta Tonantis ἢ Cum jussu citra placitum ; meruere superni — 1} ' Notitiam, sed non suffragia Numinis ; atris _ Signantur literis, atrodamnata lapillo, Omnis in hoc doctrina volumine, regula mo- Ἢ rum ΝΣ Figitur, est legum codex uberrimus, artis ᾿ Omnigene secreta patent ; thesaurus habetur ὦ Historie locuples; varias ut pendula rerum Scena vices mutet ; quoties astuta malignos Ediderit fortuna jocos ; qui magna volutent, = a ἵ Et subitis casus evertant regna ruinis : ΟἿ ᾿ Bella legas livet, et spumantes sanguine cam ἢ pos, . οἱ ΝΎ Ir Foedera mox pacesque, legas licet acta viro- h rim, AG ‘4 7 4 Dictaque currentis lingue, mentisque recess@ — Nocte magis tacitos, citiores fulmine motus. Ere quoque in solida nature viva latentis Ducitur effigies ; videas effecta licebit Principiis connexa suis; quid suscitat estus /Equoreos ; Pharium flumen quo fonte c Explicat estivos ; quo magues percitus cestro Immotum certa vertigine respicitaxem: —_ Ambiguas que distorquent miracula mentes, — Que nobis incerta fluunt, dubiique videntur — Eventus, cecoque rapi temeraria cursu, = Et sic ut possint aliter contingere sortis } Arbitrio, fluxis hominum nitentia curis _ Consiliisque vagis, nec sunt obnoxia legis ᾿ Preescripto, nisi quam nullis astricta catenis Imposuit, jurisque sui regina voluntas ; Quz levis ad motus, celerique solutior aura gonte sua ferri, nullo cogente, videtur. z chartis mandarunt omnia Parce. cecidit casus, sortisque accisa potestas ; Nec celi tantum depulsa cacumine, cultu” ' Excidit, eximio diveeque potentis honore ; _Nasquam extorris agit mundi, nec repperit | usquam In terris fortuna locum, venerandaque tantis Gentibus, in nudum contabuit irrita nomen. | Hine alacris projecta subire pericula miles, | Vix declinato frustrari corpore tela, ~ Nec cautus vitare feree contagia pestis, Lethique instantis patulas incurrere fauces. | Si preefixus enim quicquid luctemur habetur Exitus, a nostris qui non dependeat actis ; Si libertatis fictze nos Sp iw ek Ὰ Σ 1. 407] Ἐπ ae : 54 ie | τις , 2131 vn. 6. -. . TL. 593, 702) xxx. 16. ; 7 } xix. 16 : θυ rwi. 7. ; ; 11. 324] xxxi, 22. “. ¢ τ 675 xix. 17 lo “iti fra ta. : ἂν: 19 | axe. Bey κὰν . I. 59 xix. 18 . ἢν 4297 1.1 : IT. 193, 381 | xxxii. 29. : It: ἼΒΕ xix. 30 id 631 vii. 2. >. ᾽ . ἢ. ΑΒ tee ck : 1 ΠΗ Ι xix. 34 . 2 Saar ya. “ἢ. Il. 608] xxxii. 39. é ΤΙ. 292,384 ant tee) yin, 11. .. 72 | xxxii. 43. ot 2 αν [Ὁ 117, 365 Ἢ xx. 24, 25 II. 594] viii. 13—18. I. 333\xxxii.3... . I. Gan xx. 24, 26 I. 259} viii. 23. I. - 446] xxxiii. 5. 9... «1. ΘῈΣ κα 35. ἘΠ | ix... Τ. 98 ; xx. 26. a: © oee | ix. 6, 13 11 Gen JOSHUA. _ xxi f ἘΠ 501 χ -42: ΠΡ ΘΠ Ὶ . 1 ΒΝ xxv. 47. 11 °323:.%. 12,13 Ξ ae 21 fi: 9. a7 I.- 681. xxvi. 2. I 63] x. 14. y II. 287, 614 |. vii. 19. 1. 8 xxvi. 8. Tiida 16. £9 Σ ΝΠ Tis 2200 Ὁ ὉΠ} I. 0 x. 47. I 119] xiv. 8 . I. 48 NuMBERS. x. 20. I 479 | xix. 51 ‘ : Il. ΤΕΣ +. 2 . EL OT πὶ 215: I 19) xxi «ἡ: ‘ . IL 2a ¥iz: Ὁ. ὃ : I. 103) x. 22. τς ξ Κι ᾧ 2414 mri. ως 5 & 119 xiii. 16. 4 : “Tl. 5346) xin: 5. ; Σ Τ 4821 xxiv. 16; : : L 666}. κῶν Ga.¥T. - : II. 147] xii. 28. ξ II. 449, 656 we ΧΙ ΤΣ ; ΤΥ ΠῚ, san. 11; ΤῸ JupGEs xiv. 9 II 34] xiii. 20. IT. 3824 1} I 118 xiv. 16 II 66] xiv. 2. ' II. 593, 702 | iii. 9, 15 IT. 98, 626 xiv. 41 I 250! xiv. 21 ΤΙ. °-3234 ii. 15 I 103 xv: 27, 30, 31 Th ὙΠ xy e3, 12 ΤΙ, 3231 4422 I 103 xv II. 289} xv. 7, 11 I 325] v.9 I. S600 xv. 39, 40 II 18| xv. 10. I 329] v. 20 I 113 xvi. 3, 13, 14 I. 189] xv. 18 I. 352] v. 23 1. ΒΝ xvi. 11, 30 I 598 | xvi ITs 1384 ὺ 7 I 103 tania 22: in II. 273] xvi. 19. ᾿ .. ἢ 75. vi. 36. I O37 xvi. 32, 35, Th Ὁ 417}; xen. 8312, " = 159.) wi 97. ᾿ " I. 448° XVi. Al. ὃ Σ Il. 3270 1 Ἐν 12. : . Του 08 wii Ὶ : I, 113, 530g XXi. ‘ A . Il. 661] xvii. 13 . I. 109] ix. 8. ἷ : II. 348% δεν.» 5. : ; I. τ 145) xvii. 15, Ε . Ik. 3937) ΧΕΙ. I. ΟΣ χα, ἢ. feo ἘΠ er DOS seem. 119. : 1. 2855) xiAde I. 1ὸ. XXili. 19. ' r II. 292) xviii. 13. . Jas 140 xxv. 3. : rae | © As) xan: 157... Ἶ II. 119 Rutu. { " Sev: 11. 3 ‘ Ἐν .43) xviii. 15; 18. . Ty 4a. δ : . 1 ΤΌΣ xxvii. 16. ‘ DE 285) κυνί 18.119: 1. II. 359 - παν. 28. .. ὲ II, 8081 xix. 19. oO” ἘΠῚ ΝΡ I. Samve. y xix. 20. ες ρθη Μ ῇ. ς eI. 0959. DEUTERONOMY. a3. 2 I. * -/44O0 1 515 I. 407 ὅπ: , . . III. 446] xxi. 23. I. 364] ii. 2. Il. Some i. 16. 4 Ξ Τὴν 919] καὶ. 21, 23, 1 ΡΒ ne. I. 215, 578 1. 11. VR : Ἐν {8}}} xzy, 1. . ΤΙ. τ 223% vie II. 384, 480 i. 28. : . IT. 993. xxv: 2, 3. I: ΒΥ l. 5345. loth. Oke Ἴ ΕΣ 1021 χύ 8, I... -3h09 i: 9 L ὧὖὲ iii. 24. ; : II. 383] xxvi. 18. HI; :: 7024 tipi: 41. 28 ὑγιεῖ; 152 i « Er 323) χεν 98: 1 Νὴ 180. I. 31, 357 iv. 6. : II. 180} xxviii. 1. I. 19] iii. 13. Il. ΞΕ imsd. % ἢ π᾿ 9031 xxviii. 27 . I. §2 | iii. 17. I..° 14 iv. 16. ; : II. 306] xxviii. 8, 12. fz. 18 | iii. 10. ἃ I... 4 iv.24. . . WM. <156)| xxviii. 14. I. 47} vi. 9. II. 270 iv. 29. : μ I. 58 | xxviii. 26. Tis Vit xed, I. 908. τὰν δ, 1 : ΣΝ 193) xxviii. 29. | 20} xii. 5. I. 162 iv, 34, 35,39. ; i ol} xxviii. 36. , or 97 | xii. 23 I. | 265m igsvas. ὁ . TIL. 341] xxviii. 58, » 0. 119, 163} xii 24. I. 75, 5647 γος, II. 323, 504} xxix. 4, ; . ἡ. * ban ahs es Le Townes ’ . AD, 9881+ xxix. 14, 25. II. 323] xiv. 6 I. 113; 5388 V. 9. ‘ : I. 253) xxix. 19. I. 250] xiv. 44 Ι. toe v.20 % : Pa, & 47| xxix. 29, Il. 156] xiv. 45 l. τ᾿ v. 33. ᾿ II. 194, 718] xxx, 9. a 18] xv. 17 I. |. ee vi. 1, 16. ‘ . I. 323) xxx. 19. II. 4} xv. 29 Il. δε. VER. 7 ἡ: Pace.| Cu. VER. ; . 2 .. 19 eee 25. I 353 7. I. 216, 250 | viii. 27. II. 288 ν 15. . I. 356} viii. 32. I aa xvii. 5, 40. Ame δ 24, 27 ae xvii. 45. . hy SOLE een IB; 32, 34 I. 96 xviii. 1. I, 241, 265] xi. 15, 24. I. 416 Xviii. 25. ὧν ae 114 xi. 30. II. 656 ee 13. Z: 162 | xi. 33. I. 97 xx. 14, 15, 17 Ι. 166| xii. 15, 24 . ‘Ter! sea mee 17. = ies ΠῚ 2. . IT. 265, 584 xx. 30 ἀπ’ ΘᾺ τῆς 6. . Be xxiii. 17 I. 265 | xv. 30. I. 97 xxiv. 5. E |». 162) xvii. 1. i: ~2 xxiv. 16, 17 Ε 291) xvii. 6 I. 30 xxv. 3. 8 438 | xvii. 21. II. 483 “εν. 11 i 333 | xvii. 21, 22 I. 103 xxv. 32 II. 30) xvii. 23. ; Th. + 717 xxxi. 9 I. 104 | xviii. 17, 18. 5: 192 XViil. 21. II. 48 II. Samve.. xviii. 27. τ ΤῊΣ mi2,.24.- . I.° 98] xviii. 36. Il. 205 iii. 9, 35 I. © 162) xix. 2. 1... 163 vii. 9, 16 I. 96 | xix. 10. ἃ ἄγ, ᾿᾿ vi. 22. II, 170} xix. 11, 12 I. 180 vii. 13. Il. 354] xix. 14, 18 Π. 28 vii. 16. i 358. wake. 15. ik. sae 7 2. I. O46 | xix. 20. II. 205 xii. 1 I. 221) xx. 10. I. 162 “πὶ. 7 ΕΤ SSA) eek... I.. .485 xii. 14 [. 38 | xxi. 13 I. 185 xiv. 17. Ε 101 Xiv. 17, 20. Ἐς: #7 II. Kryes. xv. 4. π: 222: ii Ὁ. 5 . Be 5 xv. 5. I. 50] ii. 11. _ II. 205, 504 xv. 26. ΕΓ 953. . ἂν ΟΝ xv. 31. I, 113} iv. 35. II. 483 xvi. 3. I. 195 | iv. 36. ΕΝ... Fiz xvi. 7. I, 424) v. 2. I. 537 xvi. 10. ΕΓ ΤΕ $1. I. 162 xvii. 51. I. 102] vii. 6. δ ΣΝ Xviii. 3. I, 95 | ix. 3. II, 348 xix. 13. IS’ 162) xi. 12. I. 95 xix. 27. I. 195} xii. 8. : i ae maa 1. 3 Ἂ E 97 | xiii. 21. . IT. 483, 717 xxi. 7. oe Weg 166 | xvii. 14. II. 168 xxi. 17. I. 95 | xvii. 21. I. 97 xxii. 6 II. 477} xix. 15. . ee Δ xxii. 28 II. 215] xix. 15, 19 . II. 296, 617 xxiv. 1 I. 97 | xix. 16. . Il. 629 xxiv. 24. I. 365) xix. 28: L.rhas xix. 35. I. 113 I. Kines. xx. 3. I. 49 i. 29. ὃ . we. ΕΙΣ, EE «ἍΨ{18 ἃ. 31. κε 956] xxiii. 25 τι 96 i. 39. II. 348] xxiii. 26 E 97 i. 48. Ξ. 108} xxiv. 19 I. 95 See 5 ὅν ὟΝ 166] xxiv. 20 I. 98 ii. 19. . . ID. 502, 685 tt 9 . ἘΜῈ I. CuRonicres. ii. 27. I. 24 i xvi. 8—36. . I. 108 ii. 35. III, 242] xvi. 22. If. 347 iii. 8. I. 540" xvi. 40, 41 I. 62 iii. 9 I. 569] xvii. 1. x «13 iii. 12. ᾿ ἢ Ι. 44] xxi. 3, 7, 17 I. 97 iv. 20, 21, 25, 27, 30, xxii. 9. II. 345 32, Go... . ἢ, 569] xxii. 10. II. 354 iv. 29. I. 540| xxiii. 13. “ II. 632 Vili. 1. 569) xxiii. 30. I. 62 viii. 21, 22 I. 162] xxviii. 9. . I. 59 VoL 68 537 Cy. Ver. Vou. Pace. xxix. 10, 11 . Kk 276 xxix. 11, 12 . II. 287, 614 xxix. 12. I. 36, 357 xxix. 14, 15 II. 280 yuix.. 85. I. 4 II. CHRoNICLEs. li. 4. ᾿ Ἅ 62 iv. 1. II. 454 vi. 16. Il. 3858 vi. 23. I. a vi. 36. I. 106 vi. 41. I. 140 vi. 42. 3 . b- a vii. 16, 21. : lL vii. 33. Ξ . i. Fa xiii. 12. ἘΠ ΠΕ xiv. 11. I. 104, 113 xv. 2. I. 441 xv. 12. 5 ἣν . 59 ms... I. 104 ve 6. .ἡς ἢ . Les xx. 9. Ἂ - Gc - i Ee 13537, 25. . L 1Ὲ τὰν 17. ‘ : II. 34 se 30°. II. 207, 573 een; FF. I. 95 XXvili. 9. : Ε. 44] xxix. 4. 11—[5, 20—25 III. 212 xxx. 19. I. 54 ἘΜΈ. 4. 1. 137 χχχὶϊ. 19. ‘ I. 145 xxxii. 20, 21. Ἐς. 10 xXxxii. 25. ᾿ — 97 χάση ΤΣ 18: -. ΞΕ, 6105 Xxxxiv. 2. Σ . 48 xxxiv. 29—33. IiI. 212 xxxv. 24. a 95 xxxvi. 13. lL. oe xxxvi. 16. ὁ 59 Ezra. iii. 3. 3 62 v. 1. } 9. vi. 10. I. 100 v. 12. II. 449 vii. 16 a 54 vii. 27. 1. 97 viii. 22 I. 59, 103 iz. '7. ΠΗ. ix. 13. J. 219, 428 x. 5. 1. 166 > 8. II. 710 NEHEMIAH, ii. 3. A 95 ii. 11. Σ ΝΗ v.12 I. 166 viii. 8 Il. 630 ix. II. 327 ig,’ ὅδ. I. 41] ix. 6. . Ii 240. iz, 13. II, 21, 38 ix. 15. ὦ ΕΣ ix. 16 II. 193 ix. 17. I. 71 ix. 20. Il. 96 ix. 25. l. 564 in ἡ" 708. μι . Fan all — Pye pol nd pd fed oe al oe ee fom bet ks δὴ eb al rb . , , . " . . . . . ᾿ . . . ᾿ ᾿ Ny t Ρ ᾿ ᾿ Ρ xxvii. 19. ᾿ XXviii. 12, 21. xxvill. 15, 16. XXViii. 28. xxix. 12. XXix. 12—16. xxix, 14. XXXi, 16, 17, 19, XXxi. 18. mx, 24; =~. xxxi. 24, 25. xxxii. 8. Xxxii. 9. Xxxili. 4. xxxili. 14. i. 14, 16. . 9. xxix. 9—11, 21, 22, Ree Οὗ Oe Ve Pe Pe HE RRP PP Pe ee Se ee eS a i ir 4445 dS 5 S555 SAG SRS RRR RRR , 21,22. . PsaLMs. ἘβΕτ πε 9 . . . . See ee SP eee «re Pee ed A a aed Pee a me Ἷ AD 4 a 4 ) } — Load — | bed wall ed at — Ld ed — hed a τὰ Δ". : laa i τῶ, Gn wl al el al |] |i CR RR AR Pe et et το et tt Ὁ 4 : " > HMMM MOM ee μ-π | ν τς" ποι 7. [5] δὰ Pe es ney Ss σ᾽ om «1 μ Ὁ »"" > < a , ᾿ * , ξ ee wd mt es cD Eno SOO MAMAN SH es all tad Ξ Στὰ σὺν μὸν δῷ ἢ0 μα κα * ὦ n Ww G2 ὃ . oO "νυ . . = . = OO e . . . . . . . . . e , . . . , 5 w συ" e e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . οι ᾿ Vou. Page. I. 339 I. 92 : 73 Ἧ, 117 | ee) ιν 114 1 59 I. 120 I, 50 1... £132 i, 17519 Es S82 lL. + 261 i, 114 i. 50 Il. 46 I. 58, 440 | 110 1... 467 1. 113 Il 34 ts: 8551 ry: = 9 Τ᾿, oa ee ae % att ok. ame I. 681 ΕΙΣ 121 Tl. 96 2%, 80 - I, 58 . 2. oe 11... aia tet ὦ 50 Σ᾽. dee a) a II. 675 I. 10 Τ,.- 2436 : 563 I. 385 I... 418 ΤΠ, 149 Ἐν Gis 45 lL. « ta ) 45 I. 15 Bic, ae Ἐπ ae I, 56 i 77 1, 478 I. 48 Il. 466 II. 667 I. 57 Ὁ ae II. 286 I, , 588 ἘΠῚ Gee I. 49 | I, 45 I 108 I. 202 i. 4. ΤΡ $73 INDEX Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace. mn. 2.12, 3 if 82 mex. 3, 4. Il. (252 oe. 7. I. 45 xix. 7—10 II. 178 “ix, 9. Τ: ae xix. 10 Lot! ae ex. 12 ΤΠ. .918 xx. 5. τ 322 xx. 6. ok £17 : a aa I. 102 ἘΡΕΙ͂: 1, 2. 1: 117 > a ιν 1. 98 xxi. 5. I. 35 xxi. 6. I, 16 XXii. II. 467 Xxii. 1. II. 216 xxii. 1, 18. IT. 154 Xxii. 6. ifs 33 Su. ΘΟ. I. 364 xxii. 7, 8. Il. 375 xxii. 8. ᾿ II, 495 xu. 817. =. I. * 364 ee } -, I, 538 eeu. 15, 16. II. 660 ΣΧ. 165. I: © 563 wan. 17: Ε II. 658 sau, 19° ᾿ RK Agi XXii. 22. : 1. 5 =. 26... 1: Be =n. 27. : 11. -363 way. 4) I. 48 Xxili. 5. ᾿ t../ 5665 wy. 1° tw 1... 985 xxiv. 4,5. . A. 48 axa. 6.) . I, 58 XXiv. 7, 8, 9. Il. 505 may. θ΄ Il, 407 xxv. 3. ‘ 7 59 xxv. 4, 5, 8. I. 56 xxv. 4, 9, 12. iz 45 xxv. 5. 3 ἣν 58 ary. ‘7 it! 2a xxv. 8 ΤΙ: 96 xxv. 9, 12. I. 385 xxv. 10. i. 117 xxv. 11 I. 456 axy, 12 Il. 875 xxv. 21. I. 48 πανὶ, I, 11. I. 49 xxvi. 1, 12. I. 45 Xxvi. 3. I. 71 ΧΧΥῚ, 4, ὦ 51 ew. 7. I. 74 XXvi. 8. I. 39 XXvi. 11. q; 56 XXvii. I. Ξ Sin, XXvii. 1,2,3. . II..34, 290 xxvii. δὶ a heey, bt xxvii. 8. I. "ΜΕ XXvii. 11. ne 2 XxXvii. 14, I, 18 XXvili. 1. Il. 666 xxviii. 5, A © 70 XXviii. 7. I. 478 πα, 1. Il. 605 maz. 1, 8. ok 39 xux: 9. mm Ὁ} xxx. 4. 3 121 xxx. 6. I. 429 Cu. VER. Vou. Pace γεν. 7. 1, 42 xxx. 1, 7 85 xxx. 12: I. 149 xxxi. 3. fT. ‘457 ¥rri. 5; I. 197 xxx1. 7; : Ἐ' 121 ΧΙ, -Ὦ 8. 85 ἄπει ΒΘ. Ἐ, “es xxxi. 19. ἘΞ ΕΞ Ἐπεὶ 2. II. 216 Teri. 23. I. 240 me. 24, I. 18 mex. 15). 2, Il. 561 wen: 93: . ἘΣ 57 XXxii. 6. I, 55 exxii. 7, 8 I. 56 xxxil. 10. II. 70 xxxii. 11. Δ. 22 XXXili. Ii. 105 wart. 3, ᾿ς z..¥* 242 Xxxiii. 1, 21. es Ε mexi..4. . i. 25 Sxxiit. δι | a - wexi..6.. . Il. 272 XXxlii. 6—9. II. 286 Srv. 8. ἢ ΕΒ xxxiii. 8, 11 II. 292 XXXili. 9 II. 302 Xxxili. 10. oh ie Xxxili. 12. ᾿» ΤῊ 5 Xxxili. 15. . ἮΝ 42 XxXxili. 16. I, ΟΣ ΧΧΧΊΙ. 16, 17 Il. 1 Ἐπ τ, 17. I. 668 Xxxili. 18. : 1. 29 xxxiil. 18, 19. iH 18 Xxxili. 20. : ἔα. δ6 XxXXiil. 91. | 49 xxxiv. l Τ. 69 xxxiv. 4, 17. ἢ 56 xxxiv. 5 ὟΣ 49 axaivsé..'/. I. 465 xxxiv. 6, 7, 8. . Tl. 271 xxxiv. 6, 10. I. © 251 XXXiv. 7 . 30 xxxiv.8. . i. 66 xxxiv. 9, 10. . 52 xxxiv. 9, 10, 19, 20. I. 18 xxxiv. 9, 17, 20. I, 25 xxxiv. 10. ‘ « aE 70 xxxiv. 12, I. 12 xxxiv. 12, 13. Σι ΙΝ xxxiv. 13. 3 50 xxxiv. 14. Il. 15 xxxiv. 15. 1, 29 xxxiv. 15, 16. Π. ὦ xxxiv. 16. ΠῚ +t xxxiv. 18, - I. 452 xxxiv. 19, 20, If. 275 xxxiv. 22. ; 1. 49 XXXV. ᾿ I, 243 xxxv. 5, 6, 7. ¥. 86 xxxv. 6. I. 45 xxxv. 7. ‘ ΟΌΣ 50 xxxv. 7, 11, 183—15. II. 134 xxxv. 8. 4 I. 114 xxxv. 10. i. 2 xxxv. Ll. I. 188 xxxv. 12. 265 μ μά “ , . , ἊΝ we SR! μ νά KA 4 oe ee oe oe = ~~ > ‘aq xxxviil. 1. xxxvii. 1, 2. XXXVii. 3. xxxvil. 3, 4,5, 19, 23, 24, 28, 34, 39, evi. 3 XxXxvii. 3 Xxxvii. 4. xxxvii. 4 XXxvil. 5 xXxxvii. 5 xxxvii. 6. XXxvil.7. . xxxvil. 7, 34. xxxvii. 8. Xxxvii. 9. xxxvii. 11. xxxvii. 12. xxxvii. 16. - xxxvil. 17. xxxvii. 18. xxxvii. 21, 26. XxXvii. 23. XxXvii. 23, 24. XxXvii. 23, 31. xxxvii. 24. xxxvil. 25. XxxVii. 25, 26. XXXvii. 26. . XxXXvii. 28. XXXvii. 33. . XXXvii. 37. xxxvil. 38. XXxXVii. 39. XXXViil. xxxviii. 1 XXXViil. 2. XXXVIiil. 3. Xxxviil. 3 3 xxxviii. 5, 6. . XXXiX. ΧΧΧΙΧ. ΧΧΧΙΧ. ΧΧΧΙΧ. XXXix. XXXix. XXXix. 13. xia. Zi » Zi | + xl, 7, 9. xl. 8. xl..10. x] 12. OD OE Or * . a Ld ed ek EE (Su) ie 8) Or len! HH pe et πὸ et τ: to Or is) . . . . , , . , , , , ᾿ . . μι ~ © al a - Ὁ - “«ΦΨ On oe με μ On μὰ». Or ) i 48 ua 52, 269 305 μι cee Oh ce Bt a an en OB en μῚ . ar . . . . . . . ᾿ Γ w -- -- — οι -- μι: τι ee | -- = ἰὼ] ee ed μεὶ με μὶ μεὶ TRS νας ΟΣ χων πος => Oo INDEX. ~ Cu. VER. ~ Vou. Pace. Lee * cE Tt ae xli. 13. ᾿ Et 185 xiii. 1. I ΘΒ. xlii. 3. I, # 242 xlii. 5. Τ 4.5 xlii. 14, Lo) as xliii. 3. I. Se xliiij. 4. ἊΣ 15 xliii. δ. 1... ΟΕ xliv. 3. 1. i¢ 382 me. δ." ᾿ς τ ΓΕΒ xliv. 6. 1.5 5385 xliv. 8. I. 123 xliv. 16, 17 If > aa xliv. 18. IL. 48 xliv. 23. 1 τ 456 xliv. 24. ἜΣ ΒΕ xliv. 24, 25 L- 14 xlv. ΤΕ 3295 xlv. 5 Il. 630 xlv. 6 II. 119 xlv. 7 II. 66 xlv. 16 Ill. 178 xlvi. 1 Toit ΠῚ: xlvi. 2 Il. 34 xlvi. 4 1... 4a xvi. 5, 9 let 2 xlvi. 6 11 459 xlvi. 10 I; > 422 xlvii. IL.- 6% xIvii. 1 L« .120 sn, 12: . IL 619 xlvii. 7, 8. ἘΠ -2ar xl viii. 2. II. 449 xviii. 6. & 113 xlviii. 8. . if, 310 xlvili. 11. Ἐ 121 xlix. Τ. - 53 xlix. 6. i. 7 six: 7. . r. oe xlix. 10, 12, 17. ΤΣ 443 ξεν Ὁ 12. . ΤΠ. 754 xlix. 15 ΤΙ. 478 1.51: E.'S 455 1. 8, 9, 14 II. 328 La. I. 22 1.318, I. 194 }. 19. I. 193 }, 21. || A496 1155. II. 19 li. 1 Ls 2a li. 6, 16, 17 Il, .326 li. 9. ἔ Τὸ & A}. 1... 2 fie 42: 1 101 “5. Li. ΜΕ li. 18. 5 98 "1. Il. 46 lii. 2. I. 186 hii. 4. [4 4197 lii. δ. Il. 666 lii. 6. Ἐ 9 lii. 6, 7 I. 122 lii. 9. I. 58 lili. Il. 530 liii. 5 1.. 418 liv. 1. 82 lv. 1. I 581 lv. 10. I. -*3 Ca. VER. ly. 12. lv. 17. lv. 21. lv. 22. lv. 23. ly. 20. <% lvi. 1, 9. lvi. 3. lvi. δ. lvi. 5, 6. lvi. 11. lvi. 13. lvii. 1.. Ivii. 3, 4. lvii. 4. lvii. 6. lvii. 8. Ivii. 10. Iwill, 4, δ. Iviii. 10. lvili. 11. lvili. 12. lix. 7. lix. 9. lix. 13. ]x. 6. [πι.5 xi; 36, }xi. 4 ἐπὶ. 1. }xti. 2. lxii. 8 lxii. 9. lxii. 10. ἔτη. 11. Ixii. 12. Ixiii. 1. lxiii. 3. lxili. 3, 5. xiii. 5. Ixiii. 5, 6. isin. 3-7, }xiii. 7. ἴσην 11. Ixiv. 3, 5, 7, 8. lxiv. 3. Ἰχῖν 9, 4: lxiv. 5, 6. Ixiv. 5, 7. Ixiv. 6. lxiv. 9. lxv. _ lxv. 3. Ixv. 8. : Ixv. 9, 11. Ixv. 11. ‘ Ixv. 11, 12. xvi. 2. , Ixvi. 2, 5, 16. Ixvi. 3, 5. Ixvi. 3, 7. Ixvi. 9. Ixvi. 10. Ixvi. 13, 14. Ixvi. 17. Ixvi. 20. Ixvii. 2, Ixviii. 3. Ixiv. 9,10... "᾿ "᾿ . . . . ‘ Se en Bia ae Been Ἐπ μι ee πὶ ee ᾿ . ἊΣ ᾿ , , . , . < ᾿ πο et et tt να: μι . ΝῊ . μι πρὶ τὶ ees . . . — * “Ss . | a Lom μι — SR ee προ m= . 1 Ixxviii. 5. 593 | Ixxxix. 46. =) all ale μεὸ τῷ oO }xxviil. 7. 122 | Ixxxix. 48. Cr Vou. Pace. | Cu. Vex Vot. Pace. | Cx. Ver. Vou. Pace “Ixvii Ixxv. 7, 11 I. 34 | lxxxviii. 12. I. 505 xvii o [ἘΚ αν]. 1. Il. 593] bexxix.1. . I. 74 xviii ‘ Ixxvi. 2. Il, 705) bxexxix. 3, 27, 36 Il. 350 Ixviii Ixxvi. 5. I. 113) Iexxix.6. . I. “29 ᾿χυ Ἴχχτυι. 7. Il. 5901 Ixxxix. 6, 8 II. 285 xviii. 21 , ixxvi. 8. «I. | 150} Boexix; #1. lL. Ἐς eae 2 Ixxvii. 2. I, SP ixexix. M4. I 197 Ixvili. 34. . : Ixxvii. 6. d δ δ 58 Ixxxix. 16, 17. I. 123 é - 4431 χεῖν 7. . Ly’ Son Ixxii. 14, Ikxxii. 19... oh 120} xciv. 9, 10. II. 154 Ixxii. 17, Ixxxiii. ς II. 132] xeiv. 11. I. 623 Ixxii. 18. Ixxxiii. 5. » I. 107] xeiv. 14. I. 116 Txxii. 18, 19. Ixxxiii. 16. i. 58 | xciv. 19. I. 15 Ixxiii. 2. Ixxxiii. 17, 18. Il.' 260/xcv.5. . . LL 333 iii. 3, 17. Ixxxiii. 18. I. 112)xev.8.. . . I 16 Elli. 5, 7, 12 Ixxxiv. 1, 10. > Loi... , ΡΝ xiii. 6. Ixxxiv. 2. . Oe 1. τ Ὁ ΟΣ Ixxiii. 7. παν 10. ..1. ΒΤ ΧΟΥ 2, δὶ . . Ty 100 Ixxiii. 8, 9. Ixxxiv. 9. . I. S56)xevi.5.. . . I 296 lrxiii. 8, 17. Ixxxiv. 11. . . Ἢ 18] χονὶ. 10. . - Il. 290 Ixxiii. 11. xv. τ. .. II. 3681 xevi. 11,13. . ΩΝ 121 Ixxiii. 11, 22. Ierxv. 1h, .. .-) I 128) xevii.1. . . IW a xxiii. 12. ieeevi. 1 . I 102] xevii.8,9,11,12.. 1, i121 xxiii, 13, 14 Ixxxvi.1, 4,17, . 1. 456] xevii. 10. “τ. 17. Ixxxvi. 5. . . I. 525] xevii. 11. I 18 ii. 18, Ixxxvi. 7 : . I. 106] xevii. 12. I 418 « 19. Ixxxvi. 8, 10. . II. 409] xeviii. 2. I 108 i, 22. Ixxxvi.9. . IL. 365] xeviii. 8 : Il. 290 24. Ixxxvi. 10. ; I.) 114} xcix. 3. . : . Ὁ 25. Ixxxvi. 21... PB 56 | xcix. 5. II 15 . 26. Ixxxvi. 15, : I. 197] xcix. 8. . Il 56 πα. , ἤν π΄... -. 1 δε) δ. I 82 1, lxxevii..4.. . , - Iie . 666} c. 2. I 15 6, 7. Ixxxvii.6. . . IL. 476) ci.5. I 192 7. Ixxxviii. 11,12... 1 71 cii. I. 243 Vo. Il. 69 542 Cu. VER Vor. Pace. cial, 2. 1. 117 cii. 2, 4 k 243 en. 3. I; 499 cli. 4. . τ 477 ci. 5. bs 192 cli. 6. . Bl. viedo cil. 13, 16. I. 98 Cili. : “(᾿ 252 clii. 1 \ & 73 ΟἿ. 2. . Ae 71 Clii. 4. a 257 clii. 6. ς “Ὁ 117 e1i.8. « II. 53 cili. 9, 14. ik. 56 cili. 10. . I. 487 δ: 11, 13. .. a4. 54 en, 43. ὃς 1 275 clii. 14. δ" uel Ciii. 15. I. 499 ciii. 17, 18 I. 240 cili. 19. i. 27 clii. 20. i; | ea. 212. Il... 6297 ΠῚ 21, 22. R 552 civ. : " 251 civ. 5. i... y2a2 civ. 9, 19. Τ|.. +263 civ. 10, 24. II. 51 civ. 14, 21. : 116 civ. 24. . IL. «305 civ. 27. i. «273 civ. 28. ds 88 civ. 29. II. 4148 civ. 30. Il. +-552 civ. 32. ΗΚ 120 civ. 33. I. 73 cv. 11. 5, 193 ev. 1. , 120 CV. 2. 1. 120 cy. 2,3 i 123 cv. 3. Le 242 ev. 4. I. 457 er. 5.1 5. 72 cv. 15. AT. αὐ oad cv. 17. J. 580 cv. 18. I. 363 cvi. sy 105 evi 1. II. 50 evi. 2. if 79 evi. 6. [ΠΕ 564 CVE. ἐν I. 117 cvi. 7, 13, 21 I. 401 evi. 8, 44. i, 70 cvi. 9. ᾿. 440 evi. 12, 24 11... 103 evi. 13. Ss 385 evi. 21. I. 381 cvi. 23. i. 403 evi. 24, 25 II; »° 520 evi. 30. ᾿᾿ 225 evi. 30, 44 Re 103 cvi. 32, 33 I. 98 evi; 48. a 93 evii. 4. I. 438 evii. 6. I. 106 evii. 6, 9, 13, 19, 28, II. 70 cvii. 6, 13, 19, 28. I. 103 cvii. 8. ; Τ᾽ 251 evii. 8, 16, 21, 31. I. 115 INDEX. Cu. VER Vou. Pace. evii. 9, 40 me) ἢ 440 evii. [0. . II. . 675 evii. 11. ae. 250 evil. 12. 5 hs 242 evil. 13. GR 76 evil. 15, 22, 31 I. 120 evil. 17. I. 429 cVii. 27 [es 46 evii. 32 II. 19 evil. 40 Ii; 282 evii. 41 I. 43 evil. 42. . 1. 121 evii. 43. I. 70 eViii. ΤΠ. 106, 108 eviii. 1. ΤᾺ δ4 eviil. 3, 4. 1. 72 eviii. 4. II. 51 evili. 12. Le 114 cix. Ἁ II. 467 eit:.2, 9... If. 484 Ci.* 25. ; it. . 3ivo cix. 27. VB 112 cix. 29. I: 127 cix. 30. i. 19 cx. 1. II. 416 cx. 3 II. 419 cx. 4 UW, 881 ex: 7. Il. 494 στα. 1. “at. 19 ἜΣ ΟΤΌΡΑ i: 70 cx; 3. q> 72 cxi. 6. see 117 cxi. 9. a: 163 cxi. 10. wa 16 ΟΣ I. : ῚΣ 15 exu. 1,,3, 7. . a 18 exam, 2. 3 ΙΒ 19 cx. 3, 718. ΕΙΣ 47 cxii. 6. ΠΣ 48 cx: Ἢ. - Ise 8980 een; 7, B:... oe 386 CXil. 9, μ I. 321 cxiii. 4. 3 I: 3287 cxiii. 4, 5, 6. . .. LD pie CXili. 5, 6. 3 i 79 Cxiii. 6. IL. 283 Ὅσο. 7. <2 i 440 exiii. 7, 8. I. 346 cxiv. 2 Il, ;~705 cxv. 3 If. +278 cw 9. ΟΥ̓ i 122 cay. 46: or Di. 37222 exwi. Ἐπ} Ii 77 exyi. 1, 2: I. 66 cxvi. 12. I. 79 exvi. 13, 14 I. 7 exvi. 15. II. 468 exviii. 1, 3, 15 Τι ΟΣ cxviil. 5. A 57 Cxviii. 6. Il. 34 exviii. 8. 1. 382 cxviii. 8, 9. Is) 7,401 cxviii. 15. Τὶ 474 exvill. 15, 16 Il. 455 exviii. 16. II. 502 cxviil. 92. ἢ ΤΙ 87D CXViii. 22, 23 Il. 454 cxviii. 23. Ty 119 CXxviil. 24. ΤΠ a cxXviii. 1, 2. CXxvili. 2. . exxvili. 5. . cxxix. 4. exxix. 5. CXXX. > Cu. Ver. | Vor. P. cxix. TH : nx: 2.1 ἘΠῚ exix. 5, 133. I, cxix. Ὁ. : fy exix. 6,.39, 46. . I. cxx. 9. . : a cxix. 9,10, 27, 33, 35, 130. » one exix. 9, 100, 130. II. exix. 15: ae ks cxix. 16, 24, 35, 47, 70, 77,103,105, 118: I. cxix. 16, 24, 45, 47, 70, 77, "92, uae 117, 133, 145, 165. Hho oe a A Oe a ὥς I exix. 23. II. exix. 32. } 5 exix. 34. a cxix. τ 99, 104, 130. im cxix. 5 II. cxix. 54. iz exix. 57. lL. a exix. 60. I. 518, 52 cxix. 64. » cxix. 66. Il. cxix. 67. . Se ἢ omix. 67171, 75: ἢ Ih. cxix. 71. ’ i; -| exix. 75. I. cxix. 78, 80 Il. cxix. 89. Ik exix. 103. : I. exix. 103, 111, 142, 151. ἜΝ cxix. 106. Le cxix. 107. 1. cxix. 120) . i exix. 125, 133. 1. exia. 10a). . i cxix. 136, 158. ae exix. 147, 148, 164. I. Gus. 165; “;. : ἘΝ cxix. 176. Ik cxxi, 2. 11. art: 3.0 1. cxxi. 4, "ἃς exxi. 6... i cxxii. 6. ae cean, ἢ: I. exxiii. 2. a cxxiv. 6. ) exxiv. 8. . cxxy. 1, : Β ον, 6: . i. exxvi. 1. me © & cxxvi. 3. Is cxxvi. 5. . ae cxxvi. 7... qe? CxEVi.-1.:. I, eCxxvii. 3. i, I. I. I. 1. I. ia ~ INDEX. » Cu. Ver. Vor. Pace.| Cu. Ver Vou. Pace. - 9, 16. II. +282] iii. 5, 7 . = Sy |) τ΄, Il. 2987 ii. 6. I. 386, 539 . 10, 16, 18 ι a 251 | iii. 7. . ἘΣ "τ΄. i 58 } iii. 9. I. - 15, 16 I. 552 | iii. 11. . a 4 £0: L 88 | iii. 12. i. “17: Pa. 4 416 | iii. 13. ee fo aie L 106 | iii 14, I. . 18, 19. ὙΠ 49 iii. 14, 15 ; SB pees! Ὶ. I. 18 | iii. 15. I. ~ 1920. ΙΒ 240 | iii. 16 ‘a tS i. iM 255 | iii. 17 » Ee 21. " 108 | iii. 22 ie i. ἮΙΣ. 2931 in. 23 . ae ποῦ 1 81] iii. 25 I. ‘dhe I, 101 | iii. 27 5 ἘΞ i. 4. I. 505 | iii. 28 I. id. I. 382 | iii. 34 .. ἮΙ: ; 1. 6. L. 117} iv. I. ; ay i 2 240 iv. 1, 20 : ἯΕΕ : 1. 7,8, 9 I. 88] iv. 7 I. i i. 8. Ι 253 | iv. 8,9 . " i i. 9. I. 374] iv ΕΝ i lvii. L οὗν iv 16 + ae 1] exlvii. 1 i: 92] iv. 18. 3 > i I exlvii. 2 I. 431] iv. 18,19. . K omExvili, 7. . 5p " 107 | exivii. 3. L. 10 5... τὶ : y 408, exxxix. 1. 2 I. 596 | exlvii. 4. Il. 232] iv. 25, 27 ; I. cCXxxix. 2 Ἧ: 578 | exlvii. 5. : a 251] iv. 26. . ae be I. 215 | exlvii. 5, 6. . I. 240} iv. 27. ee exxxix. 3, 13. . IL. , 294) exlvii. 6. : πον 88 ν. 12. Il. CxXxxix. 4. ‘ i 155 | exlvii. 9. ° I 116} v. 12, 13 1. oxmxxix.7. . Ait (26 lenivi. it . ., Loy ΘΒ, 21. a exxxim 7—10. . 11. 614] exlvii. 14. ; Il. 70] vi. 6. in eexxix.8. . Il. 476] cxlvii. 15. . . at BB se. . ἮΝ exxxix. 14, 15, rv a & 87 exlvii. 19,20. . IL. 322) vi. 10. 3 CXXXix. 17, 18, arb 72 | cxlviii. . ; ye) κ 89 vi. 11. . ΟΧΧΧΙΧ 23. : I; 496 | exlviii. 5. . ; i, 412] vi. 17. I. cxxxix. 24. © 45 | exlviii. 6. : . Ler Bal we 18. .᾿ ἂν» exl. 5. I, 50 | exlviii. 8. . ὲ II. 239] vi. 19. I. cxl. 7. i 461) exlviii. 13. . 3. Ἃ, 41] vii. 24. . ie exi. 12. . tot {7} viii. 5, 8, 9 I. exli. 3. Ἐ 172 PROVERBS, viii. 11. L oxi. 1. ; 1. 106 | i. 4. Pat 45] viii. 11, 19 I. exlii. 2. 1. 57 | i. 4, 7, 9, 10. : II. 180} viii. 15. I. exlii. 4. I. 114} i. 7. : . Ἅἱ 16] viii. 17, 34, 35 I. exlii. 5. 1. 436 | i. 7, οὐ, : ἢ I. 572] viii. 18. I. exlili. jv 243 | i. 7, 30. Α . ἅΜνψειῖΐζ } ve 50..". I. exliii. 2. I, 120 | i. 10. ᾿ : ἘΠ 41} viii. 34. I. exliii. 3. Il, 476])i.16. . I. 556] viii. 35 I. exlili. 4. I. 477 | i. 23, 25, 29, a1. 3| viii. 36 ¥ | exiliii. 4, 7. ΤᾺ ΑΙ ΘΑ; . I. 57| ix. 7, 8 I. exliii. 5. : 71] i. 24, 29 ΤΠ. 85 | ix. 10. 1 exliii. 6. L 2411, 25, 30 el 385 | ix. 11. τ _ exiliii. 7. II. 666] i, 28, 29 5. 524 | ix. 18. Il. exliii. 10. let 45 | i. 29. . ΤΥ ΠΑ x. 3, 6, 24, 27 1. ‘exliv. 1. ae 499 | i, 30, 31 1. 626 x. 4. I. | cxliv. 3. 1: 284 | i. 32. ὌΝ 439 x. 5. I, exliv. 4. ΦΎ 461} ii. 2, 3, 4 I. 541] x. 6, I. exliv. 10. I. 102 ii. 2, 4, 5 : Ὁ ὅ09᾽ x. 7. . I. exliv, 15. τι SRR es. 10,21, I. 570| x. 7, 25. 1. | exlv. lien: 2061-6. οἱ a 56/x.9. . I. 44, exlv. 2. mrt ¢ 69 | il. ἢ. Ι. 48 x. 1]. I. exlv. 5. I. 74/ii.10. . - (BE: ΣΙ x. 12 1. exlv. 5, 6, 11 τῖνν S001 88, 16;. 3, 45 | x. 15. 1, } cxlv. 7. Rat = 119} iii. 1, '2, 6, 16. I. 18/x.18. ὦ I. 50, 186 | exlv. 8. 1. 466 | iii. 2. I. 624| x. 19, 31. exlv. 9. ΟΝ 72} iti. 4. 5. URS) es I exlv. . II. 49, 56] iii. δ, 6. Il. 1] x. 23. I 544 Sines: ay ae ns nn Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace.| Cz, Ver: Vor. Page. ||Ca. Ver. Vor. x. 24. a 26) xv. 6, Τ. 14 χχ. 24. ae x. 24, 28 I. ἡ 46] x98 I. 52] xx. 25. aa x. 28. . 1. 478) xv. 11. Tl. 476) xx.27. . Le x. 29, I. ΟΠ se 15. ΤΡ 233'| xx. 28. 1..Ὁ ΧΙ. 3, δ . 18 xv: 14, I. 575 ἤρν 90, . Ee xi. 4. Ι. 443) xv. 15. . 1. 480] ΞΘ 1. Ee xi. 6, 20 . 1 48) xv. 16. I. 539} χχί. δ 8 xi. 9. iB 50| xy, 7. rae 320 | xxi. 6 : I xi. 10. - ἈΠ 12 xv. 19, I, 54S |pexi. 13 . = xi. 10, 11 I. 96| xv 97, ΤΙ Μή xxi. 15 I. i, 12. : . 1. 188] xv. 96, I. 184] xxi. 23 oe? 13. . I. 280) xv. 30. ~ Le ΒΘ ΕΗ 25. i: xi. 17. . 1. 310) xy, 39. I. 618] xxi. 26. . & xi. 18, 20 I. 52] xvi. 1,9 a 1| xxi. 28 I, Xi. 18, 25 » ἘΞ ΘΒ χα, 2 I. 5915] xxi. 29 te xi, 24. I. 322] xvi, 3. 181} 18 | xxii. 1 I. xi. 25. . 1 330! xvi. 5. Il. 75 | xxii. 1, 4 ~ iE Xi, 27./ I. 202, 307| xvi. 7. - 1. 30) xxii. 2. I. xi. 28. . Lb 350| eet 9° I. 56] xxii. 3. ee xi. 31. L 19 xvi. 10. ~ L > ~ 228 lexi. 4, Ig xii. 2. ν-- Ἐ: 29 xvi. 12. Τ᾿. {9 χΧῆϊ 5.:.} . πὶ ἘΗ. 3. I. 19} xvi. 16. - Le ~ 576i κεν 6. I. xii. 5. . B ΔΙ 17. I. 47| xxii. 6, 15 oe xii. 6, 22: I. 197} τὶ, 94. - Ἢ 179 xxii. 8. Rk muss. |: . 1. 572) xvi. 97. I. 197 | xxii. 9. ... xii. 8, 26. I. 14} xvi, 28. » ΤΠ 188) σῆς 1117 I. xii. 11. I. 539} xvi. 31. I, - 532)|\xxii. 13. . "ἢ xii. 14, 18 . TO 144) xvi. 39, ts i 15 | xxii. 16. I. xii. 16. «ὍΣ 50] xvii. 1, 1. 39) xxii. 17 oy xii. 17. I. . 190i τ 4. _ 1. 186] xxii. 29 I. xii. 18. . TL. 186] xvii. δ. L 183 | xxiii. 4 I, xii. 19, 22 I. 51, 202 xvii, 9. . Le — 198 exit, 5 i I. xii. 21. Pale 18 | xvii. 10. I. 179] xxiii. 10, 11. ee xii. 21, 28 I. 47 | xvii. 14. . ἯΠΠ °3064) semi. 12: It.# xii. 22, . ἢ 418) xvii. 15. I. 207 | xxiii. 15. =a xii. 24, I. 540] xvii. 16. . ΤΠ 575 | xxiii, 17. ΤΙ.. xii. 26. ae: 29| xvii. 17. . I, 323) xxiii. 17, 18; ay xii. 27, I. 545! xvii, 19, : . 1 321) xxiii. 18. I. xiii. 2, 3 - 1, 144] xvii. 243° , 1. 44 xxiii. 21. I. xiii, 3. 3 Ι, 186] xviii. 4. F a 23 | xxiii. 26. & AS xiii. 3, 16. - ‘I. 50) xviii.g. I. 321} xxiii. 32. Ι΄. ΝΕ xiii. 4, I. 535) xviii. 6,7,21. . I. 186] xxiii, 34. Ι, 526 xiii, 5. . TL 50) xviii. 7, 21. I. 200] xxiv. 10. I. 419 xiii. 6. I, 20} xviii. 8. eee 188 | xxiv. 14. Ll 4 xiii. 7. . 1 848] xviii, 9, 1. 539 | xxiv. 17. II.. 30 xiii. 9. ἃ: 43. xviii. 10 ae 18 | xxiv. 21. I. 106 xiii. 10, - I. 302! xviii. 12 I. 1057 xxiv. 23. IL. ὃ xiii. 11. Ι. 539! xviii. 14 ere 26 | xxiv. 24. - 1ς ΟΣ xiii. 11, 12 Ι. 47} xix.3 I. 418] xxiv. 26. Ι. 144 xiii. 13 Π. 171} xix. 4,7 . I, 324) xxiv. 29, Ι.. 424" xiii. 25 Ι. 18} xix. 5 I. 202] xxiv. 30, 31. me 36 xiv. 2. I. 02 | xix. 8 ‘I, -5754 xxiv. 54: a xiv. 2, 6. ae 44 xix. 8, 16 I. 618] xxv. 8. . I, 07 xiv. 3, 4. I, 96] xix. 11 Pak: ἢ 50 | xxv. 18. I, 197 xiv.6. . » τἄ: 45) xix. 15 I. 536] xxv. 21. I. 288 xiv. 8, 15, 16, 33, I. 60 xix. 17 I. 77 | xxv. 23. I. xiv. 9. ἡ - I. 157) xix, 21 II. 1| xxv. 28. L xiv. 11. I. 181 xix, 25 Re i 30 | xxvi. 12, Il. xiv. 13. . I. 473) xix, 98 ΤΙ 198] xxvi. 13. I. xiv. 15. Ι, 194) xx. 3 I. 320] xxvi. 16. Τὸ xiv. 17, 29 . T.. 464] xx. Δ a; 536 | xxvi 17. L xiv. 20. Ι, 135) xx. 6 ΤΙ, 10 | xxvi. 20. ἢ xiv, 21. . ἘΞ’ j273) xx. 8 I. 40 | xxvi. 22. 3 L xiv. 23. I. 9} xx. 9 .1. 140] xxvi. 25, 27. I, xiv. 31. om 39 | xx.'10 I. 263] xxvi. 26, 27. Iy xiv. 34 I. 12| xx. 12 I. 625] xxvi. 28. xv. 1. - Lo 179) xx, 15 I. 575 | xxvii. 1. I. xv. 3. I. 6552] xx, 19 I. 230] xxvii. 2. Il. xv. 4, 23, I, 144] xx, 22 1, 58 | xxvii. 6. IL. a , a . , "ΑΝ be bd 3 « ALN NOTE HPP ol Oo: iii. 13. iii. 16. iii. 17. . μι | mets "πιο τ We el el | td vel , , , . aa et μι μι μι με eed . »"»" , . . Xxxi. 13, 14, 27. XXxXi. 20. xxx. 30. μι μι μι μι μι et με et καὶ δε δ δ᾽ δ᾽ ἃ Sar ties | a Δ, . "- ww . , μι μι ee | ,᾿ , | ee Mel , " μας : = = nore . DS Lom) . ii. 11, 13, 15, 16. ii. 13. — ᾿ iii. 11, 12. iii. 12, 22. et οὶ Ἐὶὶ et ed ee ed RR .;... . , a_i . " " . . . ᾿ , . . " - - w~ κα οὖ Noa, Na "Von. Ill. 1, 13, 16, 17, ἡ IL. 70 Il. 348 Il. 503 Ι. 545 Il. 346 Il. 345 Il. 473 I. 539 I. 539 Lae Il. 675 Le kt 4 L. 412 ΤΙ. 9 I. 464 ἘΠῚ 571 I 491 Il. 514 Il. 515 Il. 342 Ι. 230 l. 569 I 166 I. 102 I. 50, 52 I. 584 bea ae I. 521 Lt i 4.5 Il. 515 I. 582 Il. 514 Ss I. 443, 534, 544 I. 101 I. 526 I. 23, 549 I. 47, 50 I. 283 I. 554 I. 544 Il. 269 I. 346 I 581 Il. 514 Il. 523 Il. 515 IL 531 I. 527 I. 4683 I. 569 I 515 Il. 347 Il. 345 I. 280 Ι. 284 I. 249 I. 41 Il. 330 177 I. 455 B «96 2 4a Il. 28 328 i. 13, 14, 15. . I. i. 14. : je i. 16, 17, 18 I. i. 16, 18. j & i. 24. . ἘΠ i. 25. oe ma. . 1 ce il. 2. 3 Il. ii. 3. oe ii. 4. Il. iwi. | u. 17, 18 Il. il. 19. E “i, 22. Il. li. 1. . iii. 2. Il. lii. 9. . 16 ἢ]. 10. I, iii. 10, 11 .« ae iii. 12. ᾿Ξ ili. 21. - 2 iv. 2. IE v. 3. 4 v. 4, Ι, v. 11. « me 42. I. v. 13. o* a v. 18. L Wael. oe v. 23. Il. v. 24, Il. vi. 2. I. vi. 3. IL. vi. 9. Il. vii. 14. I. viii. 10, 11 Il. viii. 13, 14 Il. Vili. 14. Il. viii. 17. 5 viii. 20. I. Vili. 21. I. ἕν. Il. 8:1, 2 Il. ix. 3. Il. ix. 6. I. ix. 6, 7 Il. oe. 7. Il. ix. 13. I. “2. U. x. ‘3. ll. x. 13. Il. =. 15. αὶ Ww. (22. Il. ae 2...) i. Il. xi. 1, 10. Il. a 2.. |. Ἑ, m2, 3, 4. Il. ae - xi. 4. Il. xi. 0. Il. δ. 6. ΤΙ. xi. 9. Li xi. 10. ‘ Il. xiii. 11. Il. xiv. 8, 11, 13, “Md, 16, I xiv. iL . xiv. 11, 16, 17. ; 1. xiv. ΟἿ. .- oO ΚΣ see. 7. XXViii. 15, 17. evil. oi. ° mx. 10. ‘tix. 13. x®ix. 19. ps a 1. « πχα. 2. ex. 10) ex. 12, xxx. 18. ἝΝ. 91. Xxx. 33. wee. 1. XxXxii. 3. xxxii. 8. XXxii. 17. XXxXiil. 2. Xxxili. 14, XXXiii, 15, 16. XxXxiv. 6, πεῖν. 1; Xxxv. 4. xxxv. 4, 5, 6, 10. XXXV. δὶ xxxv. 8. Xxxvi. 6. xxxvii. 16. XXxvii. 18. xxvii. 23. XXXVii. 35. XXXviii. 18. o:1. ἃ gil, 2. INDEX. Vou. Paace.| Cu. Ver. Vou. Page. lI. 349) xli. 23. Meri II. 384 TT. 011 |i 4. Tx 254 II. 292) xhi. 1, 3. ‘ IT... %530 ἯΙ. 9 69) shi: 1, 3, 6, 7. II. .°362 II. 292) xlii. PY 3, : ΤΙ. 256 I. ρον a L..2863 I, . 215i S. 1.907 I. ΒΘ zhi, 6. ΤᾺ 1580 11. .365) xhi.-8. II. 409 Il. 132) xiii 10. Il: 737 Ti... 345 | xiii. 2, πὶ 30 i) 15] xh. 3. TT... 52h I. 478) xliii. 5, ἃ ΤΙ. θη I. 578] xhii. 8, 1, 25, II. 409 I, 418] xhiii. 9, ΤΠ 995 Ξ. SWOS tee. 11. I, 107; 981 I. 455) xliii. 18. Il. 369 I; abies aii. 24. I. 288 L ΔΘ πα. 25. ΠΡΌ JI, ΞΕ xliv. ; T9268 II. 666] xliv. 2, 24. Its {a6 1: 6S) lm. 3: TI. 126 1. 00 i eey.6.7. II. 405 I... 294} σῇϊν. 22. ILS ΜΕ 1. . 605) 2hve25. 18 I. 164} xliv. 26. Lit 243 i; 15} xliv. 28. . Ser aa 1. 1 56] aly, II. 265, 584 I. .1423) ahy. 1. . gL Et ee 11... 10} Σὶν. 6, 18. ἘΠῚ 407 1 προ air. 7. 2. ΤΕ 2408 i 59 |, xlv. 9. Τι 20 a AS} Siz. 11: ἢ 1; 4538 EH: JUG av. 42: » II. 240 1.) 6423 xiv. 15. I. 592 Th)! 186) zlv. 21. I. osa8 Li ΗΘ. xiv... 23. I; .164 I. 18] xlvi. 2. ΤΙ. 918 Ty) 445 [ xvi, 9. 11.: 868 ΠῚ 397 |. xtvi. 10, I, 418 I, 481 xlvi. 10, 11. ΤΠ Ὁ I. 381] xlvii. 10. 1. 7623 ΤΣ ΠΗ ebrit. 2. Ik, : 283 11. 345) xlviii. 4. lL, ae 11.77.1256} xlviis 106: I. 783% Ti, #186) xiv. 11: |. II. 409 i. 45| xlviii. 11, 16. EI. . 3553 I.. 423] xlviii. 12. TI. } 408 ΤΠ; 241] xlviii. 13. II. 288 II. 476} xlviii. 22. I 26 J. £243 |} zhz. 1, 5. If. ἃ 8. τ. 96| xlix. 5. Itt 858 ΠΑ | xix; 6; li. Ὁ IT. 6119 | xlix. 7. Il... 136 ai .1477 | xh. 7, 58. II. 368 II. 386] xlix. 8. Ἢ I. 55 II. 365} xlix. 8, 26. TL) 344 J. 442) xlix. 13. 1. τ 15] IE. 9292 |. xlix. 15 II. 280 II. . 356 | xlix. 23 I. 58 Il. 614] xlix. 25 I 3 6881}... «Cy I. 57 I. 578} 1. 5, 6,7 II. 356 II. 240) 1. 6. I? ane Ι, $8 | 1..'7. I. 382 T.: 405/11. 11. I. 52 Tie’ deli: 5. I. 382 I. 580} li. 7, 8. I]. 108 ΤῸ. 446} lis. 9. II. 20 Cu. Ver. M38. li. 5. KAT. lii. 7, 10. li. 7, 13. hii. 10. li. 13, 14. Mii, 15. lili. ex. 1. ‘ hii. 2, 3, 4, Ἢ; lili. 2) 3 8. 1111. 2-8, 10—12. | hii, 3. lili, 3, 4) 135 lili. 3, 5, 12. 1111. 4, lin. 4, 5, 6, 10, 11. 1111. 4 6. 1111. 5. liii. 6. 1. 7. 1111. 8. 1111. 9. τὸ 9.10. liii. 9, 10, 12. liil. 10. bi: 10:11. 12. Jill. 10, 12. 11}. 11. his 12. hig 1. liv. 1—5. liv. 7. liv. 17. ἐν. 1. IT. μι . ena . - . . . . . μι μα αὶ μ͵ὶ καὶ καὶ Ἐπὶ ee eB Ἐπὶ oe πὶ πὶ | - ᾿ . ἢ ae . . . 7 . . . . ᾿ . SE I. ey 1. ao ὁ Il. ,. 3. 4 IL. S40.) + Aes am. 2. Il. 368 eZ ee 58 τῆ. 1: . Tl 345 3. s ἜΝ 45 ii. 9. . Il. 60 aa 9, 15. os © 278 Ixiii. 10. . £ 564 ἢ 16. : 2°? Se πῆι, 17. ἢ δ24 lxiv. 3. «ae 114 Ixiv. 4. . HE, ΠΥ Ixiv. 6. i Γ)4Ὁ lxiv. 8. II. 287 Ixv. 1. ne 241 Ixv. 2. I. 3 _ Ixv. 2, 12 ἌΡ: 1. 85 lxv. 3. ii, 12 Ixv. 5. . ae 628 Ixv. 12. I. 57 lxv. 16. ves 2 164 oy. 17: '. II. 332, 369 Ixv. 25. 4 τς SS Ixvi. 1, 3, 11, 14. Il. 335 Ixvi. 2. : re | 119 Ixvi. 3. II 65 Ixvi. 4. I 57 Ixvi. 10. I 124 Ixvi. 12. ἢ . ΤΕ “ae Ixvi. 14. ᾿ δε 117 Ixvi. 18, 21, 22. II. 331, 596 Ixvi. 21. 4 me 127 | Ixvi. 22. : I ‘tae JEREMIAH. . 6. Α 2 I. 403 “5, . ἢ 32 i. 10. Il. 74 ii. 7. ὦ ὦ 564 | ii. 8. I. 613 ii. 13, 18 . a 423 ii. 18. E 553 ii. 30. Ἂν. 110 1... 7. Il. 59 iii. 15, 16 . > a iv. 1,14 Il. 59 iv. 2. I. 147 iv, 22. we 159 iv. 28. II. 292 mi. . II 28 γι. I 110 v. 4. Il. 327 w, 5. I 422 v. 21. I 310 pot, 22. Π 9210 » ΞΕ ΓΗ μι μὶ καὶ καὶ αὶ αὶ ἘΠῚ Ἐπὶ oe Ἐπὶ ἘΠῚ asl oe ae lon πὶ ἘῚ αὶ ΚΙ ΕΘ αὶ ΚΞ ἘΞ ἘΠῚ πὶ πὶ μὶ πὶ μὶ μ»ὶ μοὶ μος, μοὶ πδ΄ 2 PS ἘΠ μι μδ΄ ὁ ν΄ eh μ 9 μὰ δῖ Βαϊ ὁ. 9 δ᾽ ὁ ὁ μαι sme μι . . “ , , ΄ ΄ ᾿ . . . . — me Mod . . . . . . — BASS SSS Serre ΕΣ " -- - --. _ 2 ΕΣ Pace. | σε. Ver. Vou. Pace. 34 | xxii. 21. pa 439 243 | xxii. 22. . a 33 50 | xxiii. 5. UO. 119 43 | xxiii. 5, 6 . Dae 177 | xxiii. 6. Il 123 603 | xxiii. 10. : & 168 613 | xxiii. 11. \ a 613 12 | xxiii. 12. a 45 429 | xxiii. 18. I. 578 335 | xxiii. 20. . ie 581 188 | xxiii. 94. Il. 288 59 | xxiii. 36. I. 189 325 | xxv. 4. Il. 59 409 | xxv. 12 Ik. 265 280 | xxvi. 5 I. “se 377 | xxvi. 13. ΤΣ 59 60 | xxViii. 15. x 200 3 | xxix. 7. I. 99 3 | xxix. 8. Ii. 292 167 | xxix. 10. Il. 265 12:1 xix. 11; ) Ἐ 417 7 bax. 8. -: Il. 349 188 | xxx. 9. I.'> 338 385 | xxxi. 9. I. 457 628 | xxxi. 9, 20. Il. 276 243 | xxxi. 14. I. 129 168 | xxxi. 18. I. 552 291 | xxxi. 20. I. 278 34 | xxxi. 22. Il. 440 120 | xxxi. 31. Π. . oe 296 | xxxi. 33 II. 93 232 | xxxi. 34 i ΒΝ 623 | xxxi. 36 I. ‘263 613 | xxxii. 3. lL 95 56 | xxxii. 17. . II. 310 249 | xxxii. 17, 27. II. 286 60 | xxxii. 19. I. 49 666 | xxxii. 30. : ΤΠ. “380 66 | xxxii. 30, 33. Il. 59 59 | xxxii. 32. ; L 97 72 | xxxiii. 6. Il. 56 613 | xxxiii. 6, 7. Il. 60 > 164 | xxxiii. 15. ; Zi. 219 626 | xxxiii. 15, 16, 20, 21. I. 126 524 | xxxiii. 16. ε ΤΕ ee 106 | xxxiii. 17, 21, 22, 26.11. 353 177 | xxxiii. 18. . 1. 127 104 | xxxiii. 91. I. 96 524 | xxxiii. 25. II. 263 619 | xxxv. 15. 57 60 | xxxviii. 4, 6. II. 205 250 | xlii. 15. Il. 423 208 | xlv. 4, 5. 1. 447 382 | xlvi. 25. Il. 208 484 | xlviii. 11. ji 523 429 | 1. 15. I. 118 47} 1. 34. II. 283 287 | li. 15. i... 59 | li. 48. ἐξ 122 250 | li. 49. I. 118 613 249 LAMENTATIONS. 37 | i. 12. ' ) 410 157 | i, 22. ) 451 34 | iii. 1. 1. 450 66 | iii. 14. Il. 45 353 | fii. 22. ¥ 428 429 | iii. 25. I. 59 249 | iii. 25, 26 I. 58 548 INDEX. Cu. VER Vou. Pace. | Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace.| Ca. Ver. Vou. ili. 26. ; I. 418 | xxxvii. 24, . I 119} x. 12. . ΝΣ iii. 27. . Le 684 |) xxevil. 24,295, ... IL 1518 }8| L iii. 32. Il. 53\|xxxvii26. - . I. 363|xi. 4. 3 iii. 33. . I. 219 xi. 8. : I. lii. 38. | 416 DANIEL. πὶ, > ΙΒ iii. 39. I. 422 fii aan 104 | xiii. 4. I. iii. 40. li: / 492 | a. Ι 95 | xiii. 4, 10. iv. 20. I. 95 | ii. 21. II. 287| xiii. 6. i v. 16. . Π. 26 Jil. 44, 45. Il. 364] xiii. 9. i τ 5. 5 Ἀ II 269 ἘΖΕΚΙΕΙ.. iii. 9. 3 : ΜῈ 96 JorEL. ii. 4. . , » Se ΕΒΓ 16,17, 18... . πὸ δ ἷν tr iii. 7. I. 522 J iii. 25. ‘ . I. 448) ij. 16. i iii. 11. . ik ate: a... να ΔΕ Εν ae iii. 18. I. 613 }iv. 17. . , SSP at eee. L vil. 17. oe 30 J iv. 25. : ς 1. ΒΕ 116) Gi 46. με vii. 26. I. 613] iv. 27. ΝΙΝ vii. 27. ae) ee. 2 i xi. 19. II. 93 | iv. 34. ; ae 39} .. 6 MOS. Ι xii. 2. . Bt γύθα [ἐπε 95, Ἐς . . toa F . - xiii. 32. I 30\v. . + Ee . ΜῈ xiv. 14. _ L104} v. 10. I ὁ. Re I. xiv.21. . lL d56\v. 18. I. 539|1Y: πὰ i. Xvi. . . IL 315 |v. 20. ΠΕ τ νον I. xvi. 7. I. 564} v. 23. ΠῚ Ie ele II. xvi. 49. . LL 549 | vi. 6, 21. oo τ. - εἶ : I. xvi. 61, 63 I. 529 | vi. 10. τ es I. xvii. 4. . 1. 605 | vi. 10, 22, 23. I. 205 at ἊΝ I. xvii. 15 I. 423 |vi. 94. I. 114) * 41 I. XViii. . IL 59 | vi. 26. Ι. 119| 1® 42. UI. xviii. 16. I. 280 | vii. 1. 104 O XViii. 23, 32 . Tbe - 58 [Κ8.10. Tl. 689} 45 i ee XViii. 25. I. 578 | vii. 13. II. 129 Set xviii. 27. . I. 525 | vii. 13, 14 Η, (449 F xviii. 30. Il. 343 | vii. 27. I. 287] 4°, ONAH. xx. 13, 16, 24. Π. 17 | viii. I. 104) 1 2 I. ae Il. 594 | viii. 11. 1. 60 ad xx. 43. . I. 529 | viii. 91. I, 1965 oh ICAH. μ᾿ xxi. 2 II. 167 | viii. 25. Il.’ age ΗΝ as xxi. 10. Lr 0 50 ie ΤΣ ΘΑ ΠῚ : Τ XXii. IL, ~ +59 | ix. 2. Il. | 265): ax ° xxii. 2. ; IE 449 lix. 24. HL i 360) Brae ὦ 1. xxii. 6, 26, 27. I. 177 | ix. 24, 26 IL. |. 368 | Boge 1. 0. 0. I. 188 /ix. 26. (| 436) 8 1. xxii. 25—30 Il. 329]x. Ls eS: τὰ xxii. 96. I. 6'3 | xi. L ΘΑ ΤΥ: - τ΄ xxii. 27. I. . 289 | xi./35. 1.0). aor “iat . xxii. 30. Il. 28|xi. 36. I. 145| ¥ ΦΆ 1. xxii. 30, 31. Il. 43|xii. τ Sane p te I. xxiv. 6. Il. 449 | xii. 2 Il. 33, 37, 197] Vi: : I. xxvi. 16. I. 128] xii. 4 Il. 353 Vie Ἶ I. xxvi. 20. Il. 464 vil. 18. I. * xxxill. 7. 1, 30 Hosea. xxxiii, 11. By); ΑΔ 1% 7: : 1.) B45}: Nanum. Xxxiv. 22. II. 349 |i. 10. II. 365] 1-9. I. Xxxiv. 23. . £919 11.44. 11. 153}. 15. Il. xxxiv. 23, 24. Wi, 151 | 0.18. L. 30 XxXiv. 23, 25. II. 363 | ii. 23. 1. 365 HABAKKUK. xxxiv. 26. I. 253 | iii. 5. Il. 62] i.2. ἐὺς Ἀν ΝΣ χχχν. 15. . 1. 118 liv. 4. 1 {608 18. Il, ὧδ xxxvi. 20. IL. 38 | v. 15. Ve 438 | i. 13. I... ΝΣ xxxvi. 21. . II. 110 | vi. 6. ΤΡ | S30 0, I... 3a xxxvi. 25. II. 369 | vi. 9. 1 - 7 Ὁ. lL. ὅς Xxxvi. 25, 29. Il. 362 | vii. 11, 13 Ι.. δα μὲν. l.. 2 χχχνὶ. 26. II. -125 | viii. 7. I. 555] ii, 11. lL. 12 XXXvi. 27. . II. 359 | viii. 12. k 250 | ii. 14. Il. - xxxvi. 31. \ §29 | ix. 3. I. 168 | iii. 2. I. 219 XXXVii. Il. 565 |ix. 15 I. . 177) iii. 4. l aS xxxvii. 21. Il. 349 ]x. 6. I. 385 | iii. 6. I. 662. 549 j Vor. Pace.| Cu. Ver. Vox. Pace. oy iv. II. 73 } vii. 9, 10, 11. . eee 5 iv. . IL 103] vii. 11. . Eas il. iv. 19. ΠῚ. 106, 298} vii. 12. . - . Boe iv. 21. . I. 106] vii. 13. . “ΘΝ yo Haceat iv. 23. le) ΗΝ 14 CC . Lr me. :ς ᾿ . Te Hels. : Ἐ a vie 15."". A | 2 592 ii. 7, 9 Il. 359) y.1. Il. 400| vii. 15, 16. . IL 576 Aw γ. 3. : : oe 103 | vii. 16. . ἃ I. 172 ud ZECHARIAH. v. 3, 4. I. 454] vii. 17. : : . 14 i. 8. 7 - δ4} ν. 7. ων ὃ 329 | vii. 21. ~ . I. 519 ni. 1. 1. 101 y. 8. lL ong )| Wb ΧΕ». . . kh aa iii. 8. Il 119) γι: Lae 306 | vii. 22. . 3 I. 379 ' @e: 10 EL 2564 y. 10. 1. 281 | vii. 22,23. . a 29 5. | Os 168} vy. LI. 2» ae. ari vu. 24... 1. 606 vi. 12. II. 119] y. 11, 12 Il. 421} vii. 28. . ᾿ : Rhee vii. 11. Il. 59} vy. 12. wad ἢ 375 | vil. 29. . : Il. 343 Vii. 11,.2 Il. 85} vy. 13. L. 156 | viii. 3, 4, 19. ΖΦ ikea Vili. 6. Il. 483] vy: 13,14 «ἢ. 27 | viii. 3, 6. ; Ih >see ix. 9. II. 116, 361} v. 14. Il. 15 | viti. 4. - : sae = 12. Il. 416] y. 16. : Ὁ 2U | viii. 4, 24. : ΠΟ ΞΘ ΝΣ x. 20. Tk? ».436 | -yi-17. i: γ 8. Ὁ. ,. noe xii. 1. . LS 2 48. > ι. Ἔ: 518 | viii. 11. . : Il. 69 xii. 10. f : Il. 136 | v. 21, 24. 1. 464 | νἱῖϊ}. 12. ; ι ik ie xii. 11. ὡ" 8 Obl 4 22. ὺις εἰ 1 175 | viii. 17. 4 1. 125 xii. 19. L 54 | vy. 23. I. 296 | vili, 20. " Ὁ 409 xi. 1. II. 362] y. 23, 24 Whe > 321 | viii. 24, 25, 26. II. 293 xiii. 2. Il 369) vy. 29. | i, 512 | viii. 25. hw 107 xii. 7. I 136 | ν. 32. . Il. 290} viii. 26. : ὃ 469 v. 33. if 168 | viii. 29. 3 : ΣΕ Matacut. v. 34. : & 174 | ix. 2, 6. II. 638 c:3. 5 «ΤΣ ΘΕΒῚ v2 34, 37 I 147 | ix. 2, 10, 22, 24, 30, i. 6. lL, 613) v.37. . ει ἢ 172 es ἃ LL: Se i. 8., Vk 131 | v. 39, 44. 4 465 | ix. 2, 20, 32. . ee? a aol. I. 127 | v.44. . Ἔν 88 | ix. 3. : Σ | κ 189 ii. 7. . L131] v.44, 45 I. 338} ix. 4. , Lo ii. 8, 9 ; I. 613) v. 45. as. © 258 | ix. 4, 23, 34. . Il. °@57 iii. 1. IL. 119 | v. 46. EB 253 | ix. 5, $225, 2... TE 388 ili. 1, 2 I: ΒΕ v.48. ΚΝ = 140 | ix. 6. - IL: :.. iii. 5. δΆλε 162 | vi. Il. 7 | ix. 8. - 39 iii. 14. Ι ὃ Ὁ Δ Fiz 2. Il. 9/ ix. 12. 1 125 iii. 23, I. 437) vi. 1, 2, 4—6 Il. 14] ix. 14. Il. 356 iv. 2. I. 119] vi. 1, 6, 17 Il. 15] ix. 28. Il. 294 vi. 1, 19 Il. 172)ix.28,29. . . Π. 214 MatTTHew vi. 8. ~ Ἢ 59 | ix, 30,33, 34... II. 390 i. 18 ‘ Il. 439] vi. 11 i 430 | ix. 33. : eh 364 i, 20 Il. 353, 428, 436 | vi. 14 ὅς ἢ 985 | ix. 34. : ‘ Il. 194 i. 20, 24 II, 386) vi. 15 Ul. - 173) tx. 35. : . 281 i, 21 II. 110} vi. 19 ; Fo? 328 τὰ; 86. ἱ ἘΠ ΝΣ i. 23 Il. 354. vi. 19, 20, 25 I.) Sb] x ms ii. 5 11. 441! vi ae 606 | x. 1. i oe ii. 5, 6 Il. 354) vi. 21 I. 509] x. 2. III. 79, 104 ii. 6 I. 586 | vi. 24 ick 246 | x. 4. I, 377 ii. 13 Ill. 386) vi. 25 I, 336 | x. 6. Il. 116 ii. 23 II. 345] vi. 25, 33 : OC 200) x. 8. Ny. Ge iii. Il. 600 vi. 25, 34 I. 426] x. 11. II. 108 iii. 3 II. 407) vi. 26 . I. 640}x. 14 If 105 iii. 7 ὸ I. 177 | vi. 30 ὁ 1161] x. 16, 25 Il. 357 ni. 8 II. 103) vi. 31 1: 420|χ. 17 II, 388 ili. 9 Il. 303) vi. 31, 32 Il. 281] x. 18. II. 40 πὶ. 10. ὼ Il. 60 | vi. 33 I, 19, 52| x. 20. Il. 548 iii. 11. It 386 | vi. 34 ) 441 | x. 22. L iii. 12, 13. I. 218} vii I. 288 | x. 24. II. 427 iii. 15 Il. 346] vii. 1 I. 210] x. 24, 25 Il. 602 ili. 16 ‘ Il. 396) vii. 2 ) 221 | x. 25 Il, 414 iii. 17 3 Il. 89. vii. 3 I; 191] x. 26, 28. Il, 34 iv. 5 4 II. 449) vii. 3,4 I. 222 | x. 28 } κα 513 iv. 10 ᾿ II. 407) vii. 6 1. 233 | x. 29, 30. Li 116 iv. 11 P Il. 386) vii. 7 I. S551x,32. . II. 528 iv. 15 ‘ Il 354 | vii. 8 I. 103 | x. 33 I. 64 Vor. ΠῚ. 71 Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace. | Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace. | Cu. Ver. Vor. P. Se ἧς 512 | xiti. 57,58. . ~ AL. 1104 ΝΗ Ἐν ! ΤῊ x. 38. : ee i: 376 | xiv. 9. ᾿ ; ͵ 167 | xviii. 18. σός x. 38,39. he Il. 49 | xiv. 14. . I. 277, 357 | xviii. 20. i ἮΝ me 39:6 4. f . ΠῚ 202 | cee: 20 Il. ©3711] xviii. 28 II. x. 40 I 39 | xiv. 23 ἢ: 409 | xviii. 30 II x: 41 I 378 ἡ πα 26:5 . i. ΒΥ} sya ae I x. 42 J 295 | xiv. 28, 33. Ill. 76] xviii. 32, 33 I πὰ, 5 Il 125 αν, 29.0¢ |. I. 383 | xvili. 35 I xi. 6 I 368 | xiv. 31 I; .) 460 )xix, 5.5 Il xi. 10 II 386 | xiv. 31, 36. Il. 293} xix. 7, 11 III. πῇ 15 I 58 | xiv. 36. ΤΙ. 688) ΧΥΣ 13 II x1, 15 Il 186 | xv. 2. II. 130] xix. 14 II xi. 15, 19 L II 193 | xv. 2, 6,9, 14 . = 613 | xix. 17 : a: xi. 18. : - ἯΙ: 61 | xv. 6, 13, 14, 32. TT. 2357 ἘΣ 20. | xi. 19. : : : 189 | xv. 6, 14, : . Il. 283] xix. 20, 22, 23. i, xi. 20. Ξ - Tis» 832 χὰ ἢ. : . I. 164| xix. 21. oe xi. 21 - : I 60 | xv. 7, 8. : ἜΝ." 165 | xix. 23, 24. 1 ° 32 xi. 24, : ἄγω, - 197 | xv. 7, 14.. ον ἫΝ 177 | xix. 24) 26. > . ae xi. 25. : : τ; 480 |xv. 8 . : ἘΝ ov (kee. PGr τ IL. πὸ, 27. : . Αι, Bao lay. 6, 9.5". : Il. 11) 3be 27 ; > xi. 28. 2 : ie > 16 i evpd, 12 g . ΤΠ (283 | sem Sat nn xi. 28, 29, 30. . ey OO ἡ Ἢ. ᾿ ; 3 615] xix, 29. 2 . xi. 29. ‘ : 2 402 | xv. 17. ΕΥ̓ 428 | xx. 2 II xi. 30 II 289 | xv. 18. 1. 492 | xx. 15. I xii I 208 | xv. 24. H. »°116) xx, 17. Il xii. 3 II 328 | xv. 27. Il. 214] xx. 18. II xii. 10, 14, 25 II 357 | xv. 28. Tl. 303] xx. 19. II xii. 12, 25 II 387 | xv. 30. Il. ΘΒ | ake 2Opea 11 xii. 13 II 84 | xv. 30, 31. Ii. 15900} αι: I xii. 16 ΤῸ 30] xv. 32. I, ΟΥ̓ ΉΣΑΝ Π πε ΤΥ I 598 | xvi. ΤΙ. . 101] xx. 24. Il xii. 18 II 89 | xvi. 1. IL. ~357) κα 95 I xii. 19, 20 II 356 | xvi. 3. I 119] xxi 2527 ek 01| xii. 23 I 364 | xvi. 4. I 177 | xx. 26. xil I 189 | xvi. 6, 12. I 613 | xx. 27. I xii. 24, 31, 45 TI. 194 | xvi. 15, 16, 22 11.3470} gue 28: Il ΧΙ ‘ Til. 171 | xvi. 16. . ἯΙ. B68) Ἐκ ok II xii. 28 Il 140 | xvi. 16, 17 11. etd eee 94. II xu. 29 I 371 | xvi. 17. Il. 94 | xxi. 5. II xii, 32 I 245 | xvi. 18. ἘΠ. ° 448 bess, Ὁ. I xii. 33 Il 28 | xvi. 19. ΤΟ, 662 | xxi: 9, 42 II xii. 34 I 141 | xvi. 20, 22, TI. 130] xxi. 15 Il xii. 34, 39 Ξ I. 177 | xvi. 21. ἕ i ae 361] xxi. 18. II xii. 36. , .- ἜΣ {Πα ν, : ΤΙ Sofi hz. 18, 19. xii. 37. Ἢ ΤΙ, οὐ 9 πο]. 23. 2.) =e 178 | xxi. 19. Ι xii. 42. ; . Ἢ. pees 28°) - ᾿ I. 476 | xxi. 21. I xii. 50. : ᾿ II. - 442 | xvi. 25. ᾿ . EE. A OU eee 22. I ΧΙ. a. 4. 2 eee Pee 26. +. : I. 618 | xxi. 27. I Ἐπ Se 2 i.’ 162.1 xvi, 27: : 4) δὲ 559 | xxi. 28. II 2.08, -. - Π. 67 xvi. 1, 2. : Ill. 79) xxi. 31. Il xiii. 5. ; ; I. 604 | xvii. 2. ; . HH. ΙΗ ἜΣ ΠΡ II ma 911. . ΙΓ. 938) gon. 5. : Il. 401) xxii. II xiii. 9, 13. : II. 133 | xvii. 5, 29, 2. Tl. μεν ὰ c i: xu. 9,a3. ~. . I. 186] xvi. 12... - 11: 5988} xen. 5, ; a xiii. 11. ; a: en63,| xvu. 17, J =. 177 XXii. a), ll xiii. 13. 7 ; ae ἢ xv 2010 . ὃ 1: 383 | xxii. 5. 1 xiij. 16, 17. ; Ti, . 119 | xvii. 25. ἱ . TL 00) xxn: 16. I xiii. 20. ἊΨ, Ἢ 476 εν. 21. τ.: F Il. 357) xxii. 18. ἐ Ι xiii. 20, 44, 45. a. .aeio.| Xviti. 1. > III. 83, 102] xxii. 18, 21, 34, 35, xiii. ΟἹ, : Ἦν 5100 [χΥἵ[ῦ..3.. . I. «103 46. ; . = xiii. 22. 3 8 349 | xviii. 5. , Aye > 378 | xxii. 29. . II 30 xiii. 28. y a " 321 | xviii. 6, 35. : II. 715 | xxii. 32; 42. Il. xiii. 31, 32. : ΤΣ ΟῚ | Evil. 7. ; . IR Rs Ser. : Ε΄ 28,2 Zi. 37, 98... “᾿.- 84 /xviii.8. ες ; I. 512] xxii. 38. , 7. xiii. 42, 50. - Il. 197 | xviii. 10. : . Ἢ, 3207 ee Ge. ie 256, * xiii. 46. : I. 355, 510 | xviii. 11. ; Il. 78 | xxii. 40. ‘ .. Ὁ xiii. 54. 2 Il. 357 |xviii. 12. > L ΑΝ an, 423 Il. xiii. 55. ὃ a 467 | xviii. 13. : Il. 713) xxii. 43. Il. 3 fs i Il. 371 | xviii. 15. : >) ἘΠ 16] xxii. 44. Il. g Xxiv. 42, 44, 48. XXiv. 45. xxiv. 45, 46. xxiv. 45, 49. I. ἘΠ Ἑ, τι. I. il — _— -- τινα τω τιν ΜΝ: Pare: 606 Vou. Pace. | Cu. Ver. INDEX. Vou. Pace. xxvi. 37, 38. E 365 xxvi. 37—39. ah ° 471 xxvi. 38. I. 243 xxvi. 39. a 406 xxvi. 39, 41. 3 Π. 109 xxvi. 40, 45, 50. I. 469 XXVi. 41. . We 558 xxvi. 50, 52 56 iL. > SF xxvi. 53. ΠΣ 410 xxvi. 55. I. 361 xxvi. 56. » cee a9 xxvi. 60, 61 I. 190 xxvi. 61. ἘΞ 360 xxvi. 61, 65. li. > 662 xxvi. 63. ἘΠ °-354 xxvi. 64 ay XXxvi. 65 I. 189 xxvi. 67. If. 643 xxvii. 2,18. . II. 441, 655 XXvVii. 2, 26, 37, 38. II. 643 XXVil. 20, 50. De. - Gis xxvil. 38. Η 450 XXvii. 39. δ im 364 xxvii. 40, 63. i os 360 xxvii. 42. : i’ 104 xxvii. 45, 51. Il. 457 xxvii. 46. : 243 xxvii. 50. Il. 463 xxvii. 52, 53. Th: -Fa7 xxvii. 53. Il. 449 xXxvil. 56. It. - 36 xxvii. 63. ΤΕΣ. ga Xxvii. 64. Il. 491 XXviii. 7. Il. 601 Xxviii. 14. Il. 446 XXxviii. 17. Οὐδ Xxviii. 18. I. 381 xxviii. 18, 19. Il. 366 Xxviii. 19. . Il. 81, 86 xxviii. 19, 20. Il. 5. xxviii. 20. . 3 594 Mark. ig, 8. ε Il. 416 i. 13, 15. ‘ a 409 i. 15. : , She? 1 i, 24. A Il. 354 ee ; Hy. -.) 387 i. 41. ὲ ji 277 ii. : ee | ΕΘΒδ ii. 7. ) Π. 409 iii. δ. ὲ εἶ 278 iii. 9. o.. oes iv. 19. Σ΄: iv. 39. II. 388 v. 43. II. 358 vi. 3. ΤΙ, : 256 vi. 6. τι 409 vi. 20. 7 606 vi. 52. Π 167 vii. 23. js 484 vii. 34. II. 388 vii. 36. II. 390 vii. 37. ἘΝ «' S67 viii. 17. I. -- 167 viii, 23. II. 358 viii. 26. II. 390 viii. 30. Il. 357 viii. 36. 1. 513 ~ “Ὁ. FRO δ᾿ Soe eat She bake να Behe he Heke de peed fend fede Sets fete Oats feds Omid Pale: μιϑο fuse badd pede μὰν fuse! μῶν beds meds μήν μές μυΐν 5 yg Βα Ot ἂν ΡΝ . . : ᾿ . ay ἀφ... 8 . Μ " . ᾿ . . 0.5 Ρ Σ 27, 32, 48. 28, 48, 49, 91. 31, 35, 42, 31, 41, 43. 3 : ‘Luxe. 51. 43. Vou. Pace Ἧ. 387 . 598 Ill. 445 . JE I. 361 ee 380 < 378 . Ia I. 512 ,. 246 I... 37 Il. 426 Il. 206 . Lae E 466 . I-67 Il. 34 . AL---@9 IL ae I...’ S97 I. 526 7 365 Il. 463 Il. 354 Il. 685 Il. 448 j i 364 I. ~ 45 II. 463 Il. 168 Il. 91 Il. 401 Il. 392 I. 30 ΤΙ. 501, 511 Il. 484 I. 140 I. 64 Ul. 647 Il. 74 Il. 438 Il. 3886 . Eta II. 442, 650 Il. 642 Il. 439 Il. 648 I. 126 II. 402 I. 353 Il. 119 II. 649 Il. 544 Il. 436 II. 286 Il. 425 Il. 116 | 126 κ 370 Il. 419 Il. 344 II. 100 Il, 124 II. 261 I. 278 Il. 435 I. 321 552 INDEX. Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace.} Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace. | Cu. Ver. Vou. P ii. 4. Il. vi. 30, 35. a ἘΝ li. 6, 7. . ae vi. 31. I. - » li. 9. Il. vi. 32. I. Lat 1. 10. : ἘΕΡ vi. 33. .: ee . ii. 10, 14 Il. vi. 33, 34 I. ΤᾺ li. 11. ee: vi. 35. Pam 9, 10. ae * ii. 13. Il. vi. 35, 36 Ἵν 9. 18. 1 ἘΣ, ἢ. 14. « & vi. 36. ey 10, 13 . ΕΝ ii. 21. I. vi. 37. Il. ς ΕΒ ii. 29, Aes :, vi. 37, 38 . & ; : ἫΝ ii. 30, 31, 32 Il. vi. 38. 1. ἑ ΠΕ ii. 31,32. Ι. - γὶ. 39. οὐδ : iE ii. 34. Il. vi. 40. L : 3. VP ii. 35. he :. vi. 44, ἯΙ 21, 22: «Ὁ ἍΝ ii. 37. τ vi. 46. ΤΠ. 22. IL. li. 38. - vii. 12, 14, 22 I. <7 SS Sit ii. 40, 47, 52 Il. vii. 13. 1. 27, 28. Il, VAS Sa ἢ vii. 14. IL. 363, 28. oe iii. 5. 1 vii. 16. II. 36. 5 iii. 6. mi? vii. 16, 29, 36 ΤΙ. 37. ΤΙ. i. 10, Li I. vii, 22. I. 41. ἐς ii. 11. +e vii. 29, Η: 44, 1. iii, 15. : Il. vii. 30. Il, 45. I, iii. 16, 22. oe Vii. 34. ‘> 46. LE ili. 22. I. vii. 41, 43, 47 IL. ol. Ξ L iii. 23. : ἘΜΗ͂Σ vii. 44, 47. IL 52, I. 111, 33. : 5 Il. vii. 47. - δ4. 4 E iii. 35. ; Bik i Vili. 3. I, ; i ee ii. 38. é : 1: vill. 12. IL. 2,3 L ay. 1. : =i, a Vili. 24, 25 Il. ΣΤ iv. 1, 18. 3 Il. Viii. 28, II. : ΤΩ iv. 15. : ae Vii. 37. Ἕ 8, 9: point iv. 18. ; Ε Il. Vili. 39, 56 Il. : Il. py. 18,19. . <* oe vili. 43, 47 τ 10. ΤΕ iv. 22. ; : I. ΙΧ Il. 14. x ΤΊ iv. 24. : = 5. . II, 15. ar) ae as ee ix. 19. II. 15,36. 36... iv. 30. ; aay 1 ix. 22: I. 19. ‘ ee τι a π ix, 22, 51. Il. 20. ae iv. 32. Ay ὑπ 23. Ἶ I, 21. 3 i iv. 34. ‘ Il ix. 25. : I, 29. Il. iv. 34, 41. wil ix. 26. : I. 29, 31 i; iv. 38. - ΠΙ ix. 28, 31, 38. IL. 33. τὴ δ ἦν. 39. ae | © ix. ‘31. : Il. 34 Ill. iv. 42. «fel iene. ΠΙ. Ὁ ies re v. 3. ΟΕ, ix. 34. 1. 35, 36, 45, 46. — IT. v. 7. ey ΤῈΣ ix. 41. I. 36. : ᾿ v. 10. III. 106 ix, 43 II. 358 37 ‘ ΤΩ v 12. ; Il. ix. 44. Il. i. 42. ; AK v. 13. II. ix. 46. IIT. ii. 45, 46. : 3 v. 16. iF ix. 53, 56. τ: i. 48. Ξ I. v. 17. I. ix. 55. I, 56. I. ¥, 21. Il. ix. 56. II. Ἢ . a y. 24. ΤΙ. ix. 62. . Π. 2, 52. IL. v. 29. Il. x. 8, 9, 17, 19 Il. 8." I. v. 31. Il, x. 9. : Il. 16. IL. vi. 8. IL. x. 10. fee i . oy vi. 12. Il. x. 13. Il. ii. 24. ἿΣ vi. 17, 18. IL. x. 16. . ἯἊΣ ii. 25. εἶν ἢ vi. 19. IL. x. 18. II. ii. 26. I. vi. 20. I. x. 18,19 IL. i. 26, 27 Ι. vi. 20, 24, 30 II. x. 19. L i. 27. L vi. 22. Il. x. 20. . oo i. 29. Il. vi. 22, 23 Il. x, 21. I. 32, 33 Il. vi. 23. Ε x. 22. -, an 33, 34 II. vi. 23, 35 IL. x, 24. 1. 34. L vi. 24. Ll x, 27. de 7, 12. ag vi. 27. I. x. 29. I. Δ, ἍΝ vi. 28. I. x. 33, 34 Il. iv. 10, 11, 33. II. xiv. 26, 33. xix. 44, =e. 2. x. 3, 12, 24, 16. xz. 1B. ex 35. ; xx. 35, 36. ma 36. ; ax. 2. xxi. 8. am. [2. xxi. 19. XX1. 25, 26. XXi. 34. ay. 36. ex. (4, 15, 46. XXil. 11, 32, 42. xxii. 13. XXil. XXil. 22, 29. en. 25. xxii. 26. καὶ. 27. ; xxil. 28, 42, 44. xxii. 28, 44, 64. xxii. 29, xxil. 31. Xxii. 37. xxii. 42, xxii. 43, Xxil. 44, ΕΝ. 51. xxn. 52: xxi. 53. xxii. 69. Zea. 2. XXiil. Xxiil. 3, xXxiil. 14. XXill. xxiii. 27. xxiii. 31. xXxili. 34. Xxiil. 35. xxill. 35, 36. xxiii. 40. xxili. 43. xxiii. 46. Xxiv. XXiv. : 5 xxiv. 11, 37, 41. xxiv. 19. 4 14. 24, 46. me ee ee ee ee ee ee —_s os _—_—: . . ---- - rd - - δὴ mate ate patio pete, pale patie μη) rat peace μαῦ ο: emo μαι». eo, Deals pedo μὴ. γα pin © medio σὰς μῶν μῶν» pels μα» μα. μὰν κῶν δὲ μὸν μὲς , Γ ᾿ , ᾿ , , . , . . ᾿ , . , , " , . . , , , ΕΣ , . . - 7 Ν — oe mee . . . . iil. iil. iil. iil. ili. ili. Dawwor8 οι JouN. o> » xxiv. 25, ili. 9. χχὶν. 25, 26 iti. 13. xxiv. 25, 46. iii. 13, 31 Xxiv. 26. ili. 14. xxiv. 27, 29 iii, 15. XxivV. 27, 44 ili, 15, 36. xxiv. 41. iil. 16, xxiv. 44. iii. 16, 17, xxiv. 45, iil. 16, 18. xxiv. 46, iii. 17. xxiv. 46, 47. ili. 18. xxiv. 47. Il. 212, 213, iii, 19. ἱ . Il, iii, 20, iii. 91 iii. 21, 22, iii, 27. iii. 29. iii. SI. 5538 Vou. Pace. ae 63 Il 415 II 406 II 428 II 209 II 609 II 404 ΠΤ." 4Ὁ II 405 Il 184 I 403 II 78 Il. 71, 410 H, tae ‘IL. 123, 400 Il. 386 II 470 II 99 I 545 II. - 350 II 347 II 416 II 386 II 103 II 90 II 436 , II 354 II. 401, 437 Ill. 76 Ill. 110 Il 127 I 209 II 351 Il 507 I 279 II 389 I 387 Il 357 II 429 Il 379 I 190 II, . 409 I 207 II 412 II 182 II 276 II 43 II 141 I 524 HI. - 386 Il. 408 ἯΙ. 404, 499 I. 366 Il. 350 Il. 500 ) 259 Ἱ 10. Il. 400 Il. 67 Il. 165 Il. 83 i, ΝΣ Il. 17 tL. ~~ Il. 9 ΠῚ 153 Il 416 wits 13.40. : xiii. 13, 14, 15. - ͵ 554 INDEX. Cu. Ver. ΄ “Von. Pace.| Cu. Ver. * Von. Pace. | Ca. Ver. lil. 33. . FL. 9200 | wasea: : : ix. 6. ili. 34, 3 ; 1, 369 | vi. 33, 38, 50, 51, 58. ix. 15, 41 lili. 35. I: 381 | vi. 35. : Og ree. ili. 36. : = ὟΣ 397 | vi. 37. ix. 28. mG. 22%, . : TI. 429] vi. 38. ix. 32. iv. 6, 31 I. 409 | vi. 39. ix. 41. iv. 8. i. 249 | vi. 44. x. 9. ay 10. ἢ; : . If. 357] vi. 44, 45. x. 11, 14, 16 lv. 14. : : I. 476} vi. 44, 60. x5; 16. iv, 24, . : . IL » S&F) χὰ. 346. : x. 16. ime 25. : 7 Il. 347] vi. 46, 64. x. 47. 34. Ἢ: Σ ἄν} 28 | vi. 47. Ks 47318: iv. 36. : : Τ, 558 | vi. 51. zis. iv. 39. . : :. TE 9207) yi. 53, 54. Υ x. 20, 39, αν ; Se ee ae x. 21, v.43. ὦ 3 . Il. 380) vi. 61. : , x. 25. iv. 52. 3 : II. 387] vi. 62. x. 25, 38. tts oy ae - be , ΘΒ ῬΑ. : Xii. 27. A v. 39. j : ἢ 614 | viii. 24, 49, 50, 54. Xii. 28. |) v. 40. 3 . is 983.4 ΝῊ 95, : ‘ ἘΠΕ. ᾿ v. Al, : ἴ II. 358 | viii. 28, 50, 54. xii. 32 } v. 43 , πο 377 | viii. 29. = eae xii. 36. . v. 44 J 510 | viii. 31 xii. 37. . v. 45—47 Il. . 207 | viii. 31, 32 xii. 38. v. 46, 47 Il. 209 | viii. 34 xii. 40. v.47 11. 194] viii. 36 xii. 42. vi. II. 397 | viii. 37, 40, 59 xii. 43. vi. 1 II. 357 | viii. 39, 44 xii. 46. vi. 11, 31 ‘TI. 356] viii. 44 xii. 47. vi. 14 II. 351] viii. 49, 50 xii. 47, 48 vi. 15 II. .358] viii. 54. xii. 48. vi. 19 Il. 387 | viii: 56 xiii. 1. vi. 27 I. 511,558 | ix. 1. xiii. 1, 37 vi. 28 i; 378 | ix. 3. xiii. 3. vi 542 | ix. 3, 4 xiii. 4, 33 A. wb. , 29, , : I. vi. 29, 37, 44, 45, 65. II. 209 ix. vi. 30. ; . ἊΝ i INDEX. Vou. Pace.| Cu. Ver. Vor. Pace.| Co. Ver Vou. Pace Il. . 487) aa. 2. : ᾿ I. 279 | xx. 29. i Il. 643} xvi. 4, 12. Ὁ, ΞΘ απ Sl. IL. I. 283| xvi. 5,7, 10,28. Π 511| xxi. III. 79, 116 II. 658} xvi. 6. IL.’ δ Σεὶ Ὁ II. 5. 380 | xvi. 7. II 142 | xxi. 7, 20. Ill III. 90} xvi. 8, 9. Π. [65] xxi. 15. III. 76, 115 I 408 | xvi. 11. II 108 | xxi. 15—17. 0 Il Tis)... 269 | 291.12. II 94 | xxi. 15, 21. Ii I 39 | xvi. 12, 13 ΤΠ, τ 146) ex. 17; II II ood | xvi. 13: II 130 | xxi. 19. I I 365 | xvi. 13, 14, 15 II 554 | xxi. 20. Il III. 110| xvi. 13, 14, 26 Ill. δ6᾽ xxi. 23. ΠῚ IE: . ἈΖΈΕῸ xvi. 13,15 Il. 548] xxi. 25. 1 ἘΠ᾿ 503] xvi. 14. ΤΕ ἢ 545 Ι 266 | xvi. 14, 15 II. 408 Acts OF THE APOSTLES I 258 | xvi. 15. II 635 | 1. : Il. I 264 | xvi. 20. z {5 & 2. IL. II. 511] xvi. 22, 24 I 474 | i. 2,9 II. ΠῚ 6] xvi. 23. Th 219543) 1 2, 9,10, 11 Il. I. 281] xvi. 23, 24 > Ὁ .5 ΤΙ. II. 466] xvi. 27. . ‘E> 2102256) £4, 15. Il. II. 508] xvi. 27, 28 ‘ ΤΙ. 429] i. 6. Il. II. 4056] xvi. 30. TE .* 2092109. I. II. 503} xvi. 33. I. Sl A Εἰ. Ὁ Ξ ὡς De II. 456 xvii. 1, 2. BH. - 5626) ΚΣ : z III. II. 150} xvii. 1, 5. ἘΠ ΑΒΕ] ay Se ΠῚ. II. 209] xvii. 1, 6, 7, 11 Il. 356] i..15—26. ΤΙ. II. 206} xvii. 2 I. 964 |. 9046. «ἢ If. I. 383 | xvii. 2, 6, 12 ΤΠ. 638). 1. 20:99: 94, Ill L 385 | xvii. 2, 22. Il...’ 628}. 21, 22. ΤΕ Ez “261 =n. 5... II. 604] i. 22. I. E 174 | xvii. 3, 8. I. SPr i236. ἘΠ᾿ x 474 | xvii. 4. Hf. . 356'| it 4, 33: Il. HE) $45 | xvu..5. os 282 | ii. 4, 43. Il 4 606 | xvii. 6. ΤΙ. - 465) te 11: II I. 244} xvii. 6, 12. II. 420} ii. 12,43 I II. 102] xvii. 8, 24. II. 269} ii. 14. II I. 239 xvii. 10. Ii. | 64:1: i814, 32 II Δ, CFR Mee. 11: : | 2 380 | ii. 15. II “II, 145, 697] xvii. 14, ; :- Ὁ 491 ii. 17. Il ΤΙ, 105..155] xvii. 18. ? I. 379 | ii. 20. ΤΠ II... 45] xvii. 19. c ᾿ς 2 ἘΕ 109 | ii. 22. II II 547 | xvii. 21. I 241 | ii. 23. I I 241 | xviii. 4. II 463 | ii. 24. I I 479 | xviii. 10. 11 76] ii. 27. II I 56 | Xviii. 11. I. 410, 471| ii. 29. II II 210 | Xviii. 14. st TE 90 | ii. 30. Il II. 513] xviii. 20 I. ~ 81] ii. 33. Il I 38 | Xvili. 23 Pe 470 | ii. 33, 36, II 1 4101] Xviii. 30 I. 360 | ii. 34. Il 1 356] ΧΥΪ. 36 ae 3081 ii. 36. : Il. II 417 | xviii. 37 I. 363 | ii. 38. Il. 137, 177, I 281 | xix. 1 . Il. 643} ii. 38, 39 ‘ Tl, I 258 | xix. 6 II. 123] i. 40. Il I 380 | xix. 11. E 363 | il. 41. Ul I 369 | xix. 12, I 180 ii. 41, 42 II I 15| xix. 25, 33. II 463 | ii. 43. II II 606 | xix. 30. IL AG4 | ii. 46. I I 383 | xix. 30, 33. Il 665 | ii. 47. : . ae I 468 | xix. 37. II. 456} iii. 1. ; P ) II 187 | xix. 38, Il 471} iii. 6. 7 -' Ss II 49| xx. 4. II. 110) iii. 12. y : Il. II 427 | xx. 17. Il 428/ iii. 12,16. . Ἄν. Il 130 | xx. 19. ΤΠ 480 iii. 13. ; : Il. Xv. 22 I 97 | xx. 21. ΠῚ, 81. 107] iii, 14,15... ee < xv. 22, 24 I 614| xx. 22 ἘΠ $55) iii. 15. : , Il. xv. 24, “ II. 379) xx. 23. : . eee 704} itl, 16. ; oa mrt 26,.4) . , ΤΙ. 393, 697 | xx. 27. : ‘ Il, 485) ini. 17. : j Il. xv. 27. ; . SL bl aa. : . eee 408) 18:17, 16. : ae 556 | INDEX. Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace. | Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace.| Cx. Ver iii. 18. . TL. 126) 1665 37! | walh37. ἢ 1. 2209 ΠΈΣΗ; 9} ν ni. 19, : TI. 212 | viii. 37, 38. Ξ I; κ 211 | ei, om ili. 21. -oo- . TL ΘΗ eee, 85: τ δὰ LIE 140) 5. 11, 22. 2 . Lobe ὉΠ, ς . . OL. ΙΕ ΕΡ ἯΙ. 22, 24. k ΠῚ Uy ΟΣ ae. . II. 408] xiv. 14 lil. 23. . : . Lat 660 ΠΣ ΘῸ ς . MIB. : 0 eee lil. 25. aaa 8 Tis} 249 Neen: 1 ΤΠ... 214 | ae 16 ili. 26. : it 384] meee. ae 344, 359, 370 | xiv. 17 iv. 7. εν: Lv) ΝΘ ΕΘΝ i: : a 134 | xiv. 22. iv. 10. : .. Dy ᾿ δ ἡ κ 9:. : . TL.) 4481 Sit. 27. , iv. 10, 30. : i. 380 | ix. 32. ' III. 110, 128 | xv. : av. 11. : . Loe, 27 pm. 35. : io SECS Bee 2: iv. 13 TL 895 jax. 36 ~ Lo) | 326 | ays 2; 216, 7 iv. 14 II. 140} ix. 42 IL. |. 209] xv.'7,9. . iv. 16 II, - 194 |x. {τ 965} aye, iv. 17, 18. Tl. . 491] x..2 : E 64 | xv. 9, 30, 31 iv. 19 I. 611/x.4 ‘ I... 336 | avi 10}. 58 iv. 20 HT. i+ 464}, 19. 11... 548] xv. 13—18 iv. 24 BT. .() 295 fo 60. 1 I. 443 ναῦς ς 1V... 27 a, 45 | x. 28. FL! (120 ae 168- : Iv. 28 ΙΕ 580 |x. 33. . TE, αν 17. 17. 31.. II. 393 |x. 34. IT. 83, 594 | xv. 19. iv. 31, 32. II. 485 |x. 34,39. Il. 64 | xv. 22. Iv, 32. ἘΞ - 98 5:} ae 'Bo. Lo S42 eee 28 iv, 33. “TL. | A066 |x. 36 Tf 260 | wes $2: av; 34:5); es 965 | x: 37, 38 ΤΙ. |. 651 | 8 1.4. iv. 34,35. ἘΠ AGS: | B38 I.) 2BL) xvi. 6, 7 v. 3, 4. IL. 2850: σαοιθο ΤΊ. 484] xvi. 6, 9 v.9 1. 149|x. 40 ΤΠ... 6885 waa 9. ἢ ΗΟ II. 392)x.41 TI. 82. xy 14: v.14 Il. 209|x. 42 iI. 78 | xvi. 14, 15 v. 15, 16. I, 281] x. 43 1. ἀρ Ἐν 14,05, 32; v.28 II. 491 χὶ 44, 45 ΤΠ. 3595] xvi. 17. v. 29 Tb B12 sec: Il,“ 209 | ayn.25, v. 30 iH. ΡΟ ΕΙΣ ΠῚ 9} ae 30. v. 30, 31 Th 2447 | G2, 125,18 TL) 3:89 | ave 34. Beal. : ; 1. 48686) πὐοῖδι ἢ . . oh. 1898 ΠΕ 2, Se Waser ἼΣ. ΤΙ. 177,.9815.212 5| 918. : TL) 222 πὴ: Shai v. 36 : ; I, - 595: 84 ἰ᾿ al, 23, Il; 212) xvit.'3,.2) 11, 12. v. 41 τ, 375} 31,5 Ill. 198] xvii. δ, “ vi. 2 III. 88 | xi. 93, I 240 | xvii. 6. vi. 2—5 IIL, 2236: | mi.: 24 TL); 296) wy. 21: vi. 5 Ill. 88) x1. 26 ILL": 433 tev. 21. : vi. 7 1: 1166 | 2ns2 TT, 2/99 | xvii. 24.) . vi. 10 3 Il. 487 | xii..20. . ‘ . FL. 490] xvii. 24, 28. vi, 13, 14. . 182 | xii. 23. : i; Oo) evi. 25.1... Vii. 21, 54. : II. 168 | xii. 24. ὶ ΠΡ ΒΟΉ Τα 2G: vii. 24. : - Un + R225 eM 2. 3 : Το 680] νυν 73". vii. 26. : ἢ Di pooh ene, ἌΣ. . EE: 31) mvii.'27,, BO. Vii. 35. ΕΣ 403 | xiii. 8, 10. : ΠΣ 118] xvii. 28... vii. 35, 38, ep 1 5362 "xii. 22. ; . 1,140, 244] xvii. 29. vii. 37. ; «ah, RTS: porns, 26,46. q TI: . Uae ew, 30; vii. 51. ᾿ ἑ iE 606 | xii. 27. : . ΜΠ ΕἸ ea vii. 52. : ὩΣ δῦ. | xtht. BOT: ᾿ II. 209} xvii. 32. vii. 55. 1 : TI. . 684 | xtii. 31. ; . ΤΠ. τε 4859 aaa, vii. 55, 56. Ts £503 ΠΧ ΠΡ. Liv: SOBy ‘vai. 2. vii. 60. L. 275 | xiti, 32, 33 11. °610:\-xviil. 3. viii. 7. i, 281 | xiii. 33. TT.) 400 ΟἹ... om. 12.0) . : ell | xi. 34. I 126 | xviii. 9, 10. viii. 12, 21, 37, i 813) | xiit. 36. II. 464} xviii. 17. ‘ Viii. 12, 37, 38. be ΜΠ xiii, 38. IT. μα 2234 vad, 2asP. ; viii. 14. : III. 90 | xii. 39. II. 223) xvili. 28. viii. 17. . I. © 392 | xiii. 41. II, :> 194) may 2 Vilir 18. III. 116 | xiii. 41, 45 1, oad ety Ὁ; viii. 21. . Ij) $218 | xiii. 45. Π.. , 2734 maa, Ὁ; viii. 22. I. 179 | xiii, 46. . I 372 | xix. 8, 9. viii. 23. . ὃ; 177 | xiii. 46, 51. IT. (708) minal i viii, 33. I. 463 | xiii. 47. ΤΠ 99] xix. 20. viii. 36. I. Κδ70 ΧΙ, 48. II 103 | xix. 28, 34. CH. xx. XX. =. xx. =x. xx. xx. ix. xx. ie. xxi. xxi. xX. ee ee ee δι Oy. δον FP Ee ge μου μα Bat yc SS BRS w «τ . . ἫΝ ᾿ ΡΤ, a a Ὁ Οὐ Οὗ «1 σὴ 5» δ» σ᾽ σὺ σ᾽» σ᾽ ὧι ἡ. κα ᾿ . “ . . e re μ᾿ =" WwW. “ . ων μ] μ "πῃ . . . se πα: .. . 9, 19, 23. 19 . 19, 20, 23. 20. iv. 3, 6—8, 22 iv. 21. 00 Cie theres Ὁ τῷ οὐ 00 οὐ δ) δ᾽ σ᾽ σισι RR Or — Θ᾽" μ-- Οὦ πος πὰ » °° — - Ὁ μ- Θ 10, 11. CASS SASS δῇ Pio homewares Ss ᾿ , " “, τῷ -- Οἱ Cr em δῷ 09 , - ᾽ 6. vi. 6. vi. 6, 11—14, 20. vi. 6, 12. vi. 6, 12, 14, 18, 22 23 vi. 7. vi. 22. 7 vi. 22,23: . wa, 23. ; Vii. Vii. 3. vii, 4, 6—8,10,11,13. vii. 5, 18, 23. vii. 6. vii. 7, 8. vii. 12, Σ \ a vii. 12, 16, 18, 22, 25. IT. . 10, 12, 16,18. . ΒΡ ae vi. 6, 14, 18, 22. 558 Cu. VER. Vou. Pace. vii. 14, 15. II. 92 Vil, 22. i 481 Vii. 23. Il. 109 vii. 24. II. 188 vii. 25. le 74 vii. 8 . 4 :. 477 viii. 1, 13, 34. Th. 73140 ἐς viii. 5. II 109 Vili. 2, 9, ul, 14—16. iL. 0148 Viii. TE. Οὐ Vili. 2. 13. i 371 Viii. 3 17, 99. ΤΙΣ ΕΑ viii. 5, i; 510 Vill. 6. i. bi Viil. 7. 3 245 viii. 7, 8, 9. II. 419 Viii. 9. II.’ - 140 viii. 9, 14, 33 ΤΙ. 224 viii. 10. LE 398 Vili. 11. . II. 498 Vili. 11, 23. 1. + 716 Viil. 12, 13, 21 i. » .500 Viii. 13. Moi Δ viii. 14. . Il. - 558 wi. 1417. . ii. 71 viii. 15. 7 ι 3276 viii. 16. Il. 394 - wee {7}: L 374 viii. 17, 18, 36 II. ..202 viii. 17, 29. II. 403 viii. 18. i 437 viii. 18, 28, 32 x 19 Viil. 21. Il... £497 Vili. 22. . It... wat viii. 23, 26, 17 Ti; + $56 Viii. 24. Me. nikT@ Vili. 26. I. 542 vili. 26, 27 II. 698 Vili. 27. Il. . 697 Viii. 28. I. 18 viii. 29. Ἵν 375 viii. 30. iL .2299 Vili. 32. ol. 315 Vili. 33, . 144 viii. 33, 34 Il; . 2237 vili. 34. : 370 viii. 35. Hi. “205 viii. 37. Il. 626 viii. 38. 1. 558 ix. II, 6 τς. 1. 2, I. 278 τὰ». Ἢ I. 266 ix. 4. II. 116 15. Il. 77 ix. 8. δ δῦ iz; 4.15.1. i. 73 ix. 11, 31. II. 170 i312, 27. II. 41] 95.417; 1. 524 ix. 20. 1, 577 ix. 22. a 525 ix. 23. Ii. 122 ix. 24, 25, 26 ΤΠ. 368 ime 127. IL4.i-226 ix. 33, 1: 2gi6 ἘΠΆ. fs 275 χ 8. ΠῚ viva > τ Il. 170 x74, TI. “188 INDEX. Cu. VER Vou. Pace. x. 5. a. 91 x6. i. 212 x6, 9 Il. 498 κὰν. ΤΠ. “476 x. 8. Il 9179 x9. ΠΣ 208 x9, 10, TE: 2210 x29,,10;-13. II. 416 xcag: i. 15 it. Fs S801 x4); 151 II. 619 χ..19. Il. 64 x. 12, 13; 14 II. 408 πὶ 14: II. 100 x. 45. : 610 x. 16. II, .-194 χ. 18. il. 2 x,- 19. 1: 396 2531. i. 85 πὸ Ὁ; ΤΙ. 406 xi. 6. II. 170 ΣΙ; 7, 8, 25 11. “ai xi. 8. i; 605 x14. II. 61 xi. 13. III. 93, 94 xi. 13, 14 : 396 x14, II. 99 xi. 20. Πι 2)5 xi. 26. ih: —.218 xi. 30—32 ts. 227 “i022. οἰ ae 358 xi, 33. 1. 74.618 xi. 34. ee 578 xii I. 69 xii. I. ἸΣ 76 a2. 1: 557 miss 3. y: 486 xii. 3, 10, id 612 xii. 3, 10, 16. I. 70 xii. 3, 16. B 623 xii. 4. ἐγ 500 mai. 3: . 7: 264, 343 xii. 5, 6. ae! 611 xn, ἢ: i; 586 xii. 8. a; 295 xii. 9. I. 268 xii. 10. ἜΝ ἢ 2715 sau, 11... 41. 223, 533, 562, 567 xis: 19, ὁ 58 xii. 13, 15, 17, 20. ti: ΕἸ xii. 1 a: 175 xii. 15. ) i 88 xii. 16. ~ we 595 xii. 16, 18 Ts 285 e177. . i: £2, 22 xii. 18. I. 279 xii. 19. 7 ὦ 118 xii. 20. i 465 xiii. 1. ae Τ᾽ 11 xiii. 2. I. 104 titi. 3—6. «ὙΠ. 31 xiii. 4. I. 39 xiii. 6. be 99 xiii. 8, 9. I. 258 xiii 9, 10. . ΠΣ 328 xiii. 10. E. 269 xiii. 11. ΙΒ 528 xiii, 12 Il. 17 xiii. 13 I, 35 Cu. VER. © xili. 14. Xiv. iv. 1. xiv. 4. xiv. 4, 10. xiv. xiv 8. . 8,9. 9 1 CoRINTHIANS. i. 1, 12,428, re; oe ee ee ee te προ te pet SoINS τ τ ρον ας ΝΠ Pe eee Bee | — — “ μ᾿ oO τ ᾿ — μι μι RRR ΜΗ ΙΒ ΒΕ ΒΗ ete \] ΠΡῸΣ Ζ aa = po oe - Il. L Il. ~I .5 Σὲ > σι. ἃ 125 ΤΙ » = = Ἐ > 18h e Ξξαξδξὰξ PD = οἵ Se i » cps GD OS? ee St er μὴ Ss μον ΩΣ μὲν ODA i Θ iv. 11. mw. 11,12, 13. iv. 12’ iv. 12, 13. iv. 14, 15. μι μι μι eet tt et -_ © mete .: ΠΕΠΕΒΕΒΕΒΒΕΒΕΙ — — — _ μι ᾿», . 314 ae PaGe.{ Cu. Ver. II. v, 10, 11. HH MHHH KH MMA KK RRR RRR RRR RSS. : f=: —_ o_o ‘ e Φ - . ᾿ . . Py Dt ted te μοὶ μῷὶὋἘ Ἕ πὶ ey μαὶ μὶ ed κι ΠΝ oe Oe 5 Σ " > , " — 7 δὰ hic Od COS a ee 40 δὲν Re ie ees Ate ΕΑ ese - - σὺ - mS Il. Il. 560 Cu. VER. Xv. 12, 20, 23. xv. 14. we. 17. xv. 20. xv. 20, 23. Xv. 20, 24, 33, ,49.. Xv. 99° αὐν. 95. Xv. 25, 26. xv. 26, 54, 56. Xv. ΟἿ, xv. 42, 43, 44, Xv. 45, xv. 47. xv. 49, xv. 50, 52, 53. XV. 51. xv. 51, 52. xy. 52. ey. 54, xv. 54, 55. ew. ὅδ}: xv. 55, 57. xv. S¥. . xv. 58. ma. 1: . Xvi. 9. xvi. 13. xvi. 14. xvi. 16. xvi. 16, 18. 2 CoRINTHIANS. oe ee ee eee μὰν τ . . . . . . ry ἧς . . INDEX. Vou. Page.| Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace. II. 717] iv. 4, 6, II 184 II, 497] iv. 6. II 110 Tf. °<@96 | εν τ: I 368 1: 673 | ἀν B. I 266 If... 402 awed. Ὁ II 45 II. 498} iv. 10, 11, 17 II 202 II. B80) dye 13.0; II 145 Il. \: 506 | apy 14. I 476 ΤΥ ἢν 10 Ι 419 This Ld Sere 7. I 19 i. 381} iv. 18. I 574 Ἰ. ΔΑΒῚ 1. Ι. 266 Il. 716] v. 4, 8. TI. « * 666 1; 86] v. 5. ‘2 394, 556 TT. 7B o.n6. 11. τ 600 1. ΑΘ 7. [ᾷ 456 TT. ἡ 404) .:8, 1. 464 ΤΕ τ 10. Τ. 517 i. 4. HAST weil. Τ. x Bae Il. 530] v. 14. a; 239 II. τ 693 17.16. II. 438 I, τὸ 388} wi.17. Ἶ Ll. aoe II. 458] v. 18, 19 i. ai I. S71} ¥.:19. i: 259 II, 473) v. 20. t. 131 ἘΠ | ‘627-] 4-21. εἴ 372 II. 499] wi. 2. i, 55 ΗΜ 557 | vi. 3. i. 22 ΠῚ 281] vi. 4. i 586 H.: « ‘706 | vi. 5. < a 282 i. S58 1} 7. Il, 201 I. 184 | vi. 8. i. oe 46 i; 586 | vi. 9. ΤΠ. 38 ia 589 | vi. 10. a ΠΝ 280 vi. 16. 11. ἡ 54 vii. i; ΕΣ 475 Wie 98] wi. 4. Ἶ 281 { 474] vii. 5. Is TH Ἐ, Be) wir ἢ. i. 480 i. 281] vii. 10. ae ες 418 i 480 | vii. 13. 1. 456 ~ 31.4) ΒΡ | Sat: ἢ. i) 281 II. 14 | viii. 8. I. 328 Σ 172 | vili. 9. Ἦν 3 280 II.. 394) vit. 12. I. 295 i. 686 | viii. 14. “ἢ: 283 Ts) Ae 7}. 1. 204 III. 232] viii. 20, 21, Il. 13 TT... 309") νι}. 21. ; . 14, 21, 39 Τ' 554 | ix. 2. . ἋΣ 589 EL. τ 061 ix. 6. 10; I, 323 a, 7. | am: 7. he 73 11. 4 π 8; ἧς 326 ΤΣ 486 152511. ὡς ΑῸ 203 ΤΙ, 93 | ix. 11, 18. TI. 19 I, 56, 383 | ix, 12, 13. I. 259 ΤΠ ΝΡ.) isi 13. zs 12 ΤῊ 296. ix, 15. I]. 458 ah, ehh Ἰςξ. 10, II. 488 Bs 611) x. 4. j " 001 Rs 546 | x. 4, 5. ΤΠ» 746 i, ΠΝ x. 5. kK, 249 il; 4 te | x. 6. i, 594 10 ΒΒ... 8. i. 593 ὯΙ x. 13, 18. II. 10 Il. 394] x. 18. II 215 TI. 4686) xi. 2. Il... +258 1,108] xi. 5. Ill. 77, 94 II. 108| xi. 5, 23 Ill. 295 Ὁ " ᾿ ᾿ me . “, P tw 1 »" yy ὧν | . beng ec way Cr. VER. Vo. xi. 6. a πὴ 9, 98. i. wihis, iP re x); 13, 15, i. xi, 17. . 11 xi. 23. 1. “Wg xi. 23, 24, 25 1. § xi, 25, II. xi. 27. ἃ ἃ, xix 28. i; xi. 29, i. xh 30. i. xi 91. II. mi. “ες ie xii. 1, iy mii. 2. 11: xii, 5: II. eu. 7, Eo fe xii. 9. i xii. 10. i. mii. 1h II. xii. 11, 16, 17 ΤΠ: xi. 12, II. 37 xii. 12,13 ἮΝ, 94, 106 wit 15, 1. 285 δ xii. 20. I. Xiii. 4. If. xiii. 7, 8 III. xill. 9. a xiii. 10. 5, οι! 14, . xiii. 13 ὁ if. xu. 14 TE. GALATIANS. et. ; : II. 93, 109 iil, 02) it. as II. i. 8. Ill. i. 8, 9. 150 £2710, II. ey A2. Hl, 1.8. 111. ἢ... 14. II. {16.117 Ill. i. 18. III. 92, i. 19. III. 11. ΤῊ: : hi. 2. III. 91, 94 ii. 2, 6,9 III. 77, 2 ἡ Ὁ. 1 it, ii. 8. III. 98, eM οἷς IIT. 96, Sas 11...9, 11: 1Π. 0.1. III. ii. 11, 14, III. 95, ii. 12. ΤΠ: τ 3S, te TI. ii. 16—20 Il. ii. 20. i. iil. ’ Il. ili. 2, 14, 26. It. ili. 6. ; 11. iii, 10. ᾿ It. 66:10, 13... : , iii. 10, 12, 13. Tl. iii. 11, 12, 13. Il. ili, 14. F ul, ii, 14. . i. eS Se ΌΥ CUCU ᾿ ΒΡ. INDEX. 561 Vou. Pace. } Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace. a. Th. ἀν. 5, 6.4) -. : Il. 637 é I. 259 | iv. 6. : . GF, 909 ᾿ 1. 578 | iv. 7, γι 12. P Il. 686 iii. ΐα Il. 94, 310, 316, 322 | iv. 8. : . noes iii. ; L. 58 | iv. 10. Il. 684: iii. : Il... 588 ΓΜ 11. ΤΙ. 81, '86, 98, 117, = 111. : II 146 | iv. 11, Il. 610 iii. : I. 556 | iv. 11—13. . It. 140 iv. Ἶ ν Il. 495] iv. 12, : . I. 506, 699 fv.t, 3,3. : . 20. , : II... 417] iv. 14, P I, 607 iv. 2, 3, 9. ag ποὺ Em. coe ee iv. 3, 9. : Mi20—22. Ξ ἘΠ.» 638 | iv. 16. : cee δ 560 iv. 4. I. aaeyE.2h> . WEES 1 7.51). Ἢ Ὶ Il $24 iv. 4,5 Me i BE ee : Η I. 381 | iv. 17, 18, 19. . πρίν iv. 4, 5,7 II πα τῆς. .1 : Pa 266 | iv. 18. ’ d I. 73 εἶν. δ. Il 98} i111, 2, 3, 12, 14. FE) 1920 fae 18, 232... -. . ἫΝ 358 Iv. 6. ΤΠ ©? WAS 1 is A, 5. J . EK 489 jie 2, 24. ὃ I. ‘te iv. 7. II. 606] ii. 1, 5, 8, 19, 22. IE. — 243.) ee 22. ; . Il. 189, 201 iv. 8. PWS 1901 ΟΣ : Ά oS 108 | iv. 22, 23. . tT, “40 iv. 10. II. 466] ii. 2, 3 Ty. | eae }ivs22, δὲ 39... TE ΣΝ iv. 13. ἘΝ 887} tii 8. II. . 144 } iv. 23. d . ose iv. 14. I. 586 | ii. 4. I. 338 | iv. 23, 24. : ΤΠ. “2s av. 17. By 171 | ii. 4, 5. Il. 7W14/iv. 24. . : . ae 271 iv. 18. ΙΑ 55 | ii. 4, 7. ΤᾺ 95 | iv. 25. : Ὶ I. 170 iv. 19. I. 398) ii.5. ἢ I. 358 | iv. 27. : I ‘3 iv. 24 1. . 142} in. 5, 6. : Ἵ 1: 408 1 985. ὅς : i 322, 565 iv. 26 Il. . 399, it. 5, 7, 8. : . EE! - 468 liv. 29. é Tae 157 iv. 27 Il. 366} ii. 6. If. 500 | iv. 30 Il. 94 v.1 TE 5565] it 7. i. τἀ }ivesl 1. 182 Ὁ, 13 Ill. 166] ii. 7,8 Il. 469 | iv. 32 1. 278 v. 3, 18 ἘΠ - flies. I. 543 | v. !. I. 266 v.6 1. 296 | ii. 8, 9 ἯΙ. ..291 j}@vial, 2.2 I. 258 wit 1. : : IL. 48/ii.9. . ὃ ΠΝ ee I. 273, 282 ES ae eee I. 369 v. 14 : ; L ΙΝ 0 ee 4 II. 173, 552 | v. 3. | # 159 wii, 22. 5 > 2 239 | ii. 12. ; : j. 258 | v. 4. iy 149 «v.17. F Η a... BOG) ik, 23, 14, . . 1% 259 | v. 5. 4 a 337 ΠΕ : - , | tee ee ον BL ΒΕ Ὁ, 1818 17 Π., 182 ν. 20, 24. , It, / 273) τῶνδ, 16. ἢ . & 371 | v. 6, 17. E 614 Mie.) -: ; - Ὁ 254 | ii. 16. : ᾽ II 1481γ}}6. 18. i. 1% v. 24, : : : Sal t-te. 17. -'. ; ΠΝ ἢ 384 | v. 7, 11. Il. 41 po ae ; 2, dks 850 Ln 19; ; : II. 148/v. 8. Il. 21 v. 26. ; ; τιν 2981 ΘΕ. - : <3. QAR 8, 18: £ 20 =. 1. ᾿ ia 3 178 | ii. 20. ; . II. 7041] 9. I. 271 Vi. 2. si 265 18/21. 0. , BS . 764 THA10. .. a 613 vi. 2, 10. I. 124 ii. 22. : ; UT. im 10, 15, 99 a. 557 vi. 3. I. Sar in: 25. ... ; . Ee Were. 11. - ἘΣ 232 vi. 4. “ot 483 | iii. 1—13. : 1» 281 |v. 11, 13. Il. 17 vi. 7,8 EF. gon 7 ἢ ὅ. |. .. ov 888 15-14, . * abe «) Ὁ vi. 8. : = 355 | iit. 7. ITI. 93, 94 | v. 15. I. 516 vi. 9, I. 419} iii. 8. II. 185/v. 16. = 528 vi. 9, 10 . «ἧς S36 1581. 9. ΤΙ; 131] v.19. I. 59, 385 vi. 10. £ 30 | iii. 10, 19. Bm “15 τ. 20. » “ae 276 vi. 14, I. 371) iii. 11. ) 358 |v. 21. i, 587 vi. 15. II. 64 | iii. 12. id 384 | v. 22,25 ink 12 iii. 13. ; , Il. 187) v. 23. Ill. 153 Eruesians, lil, 15, : .. Ben SEL ΥΥ.9ὅ, 27 ae i. 1. 3 . II. 93) iii, 16. F é Il 147 | v. 29. | 617 4-3, J 131 | iii. 17. I 390 | vi. _— Σἔ 69 i. 3, 4. I, ΣΎ ΠΗ 19. I. 369] vi. 1, 4 I. 12° i. 3, 6. I. 384 | iii. 21 I 383 | vi. 4 . ἜΣ 530 i. 4. : I. 370 | iv. 1. I 38 | vi. 5 I. 561 i. 4, 9, 11. . ἃ, 358] iv. 1, 2. I 284 | vi. 5, 6, 7 . I. 641 i. 6. I. 627 | iv. 2, 5, Il. 426] vi. 5,9 i, ll i. 5, 6, 8 . ὩΣ 860 | iv. 3, Ι 285 | vi. 6. ‘a 16 i. 6. Il. 112] iv. 3, 4, Il. 701 | vi. 7. I, 557 i. 6, 7 Il. 225} iv. 4, Il 700 | vi. 8. I 559 i. 1. ον «> WH 226) iv. 4 δ, Ill. 155 | vi. 9. ] 283 i. 8, 14, . ΜΙ ΒΥ iv. 5. ‘ I 414 | vi. 11, 12 I 189 γον. ΠῚ. , 74 A re a—_— 562 INDEX. Cu. VER Vou. Pace.| Cu. Ver Vou. Pace. vi. 11, 16 II. 108 : 19 vi. 12. & 290 A: 12 vi. 14. iB 558 : wy 321 vi. 14, 18 1. I. 414, 424, 430, vi. 15, 16 Il. 200 439, 452 vi. 16. IL. I. 415 vi. 18. ἣν i: 271 vi. 19. 5 Zz. 278 vi. 25, 26 Τ ΡΒ. I. 328 5; 7 PHILIPPIANS. ΗΝ 329 ba: 2 4 τ. i. 8. , ki CoLossIANS i. 9, 10. I. ἯΙ, 83 1..10. Il. DL. 2s pai. 1: i. 5991 i. 14. I. Ti θη i. 15, 16 ΙΝ 1: 58 i. 20. Il. i. 38 E23. Il. Tl. 147 1. 24, 1. I. "419 25. Il. i. 36h i 9. I. ii..; 71, 636 i. 28. Il. il: ΡΒ i. 29. I. Il. 610 Γ᾿ | te Il 297 ie. A II. 634 1218. I. Il. 288 li. 4, 1: i. 41 n?6. ΙΝ Τὸ 914 ii. 5, 6. ἕν i. ὍΣ ii. 5, 6, 7. 1. Ἐ am 11. δ---8. Il. I. 360 ii. 6, 7. Il. i; “62h ii. 6—8. II. Il. 99 ii. 7. i. Il. 662 ii. 7, 8 II. Il. 98 ii. 8. 1: Π. 408 ii. 8, 9. ΤΙ. ἐ Ὁ 177 τ 6—11, Il. 282 il. 9. I. 375, Il. 75 ii. 9, 10. a ἢ : II, 408 1.11. Il. ᾿ II. 209 um 42. ae 88 ῬΑ i. -.- 21st ii. 13. 1. 7, 8, 18 I. 614 11. 14. > Jt ὃ Ill. 293 ii. 14, 15 Ii. Il 505 ii. 15. > II 123 ii. 17. I. Th. 2210 ii. 29. > ae ii; 7556 iii. 1. ὃ I. II 681 ili. 2. L. Ὁ ; I 92 ili. 6. Il. ; Il 497 iii. 7, 8. OE : I 371 111. 8. I. Ρ II 108 iii. 8, 9 ὁ ee ; I 216 iii. 9. Il. 16—18 ἘΠ 157 iii. 10. Nee 1: : ϑ ον 120 “11,321 Il. ὁ II. 156, 679 ii. 12. pom | : , ©, 564 iti. 14. I. ; Il. 71 iii- 16. i 5 a. (2 iii. 16, 17. I. ; Il. 500, 687 iii. 17. « i : . 149 iii. 20. Il. j II 474 iv. 1. « Ὁ ‘ Il. 510 iv. 3. IL. : . i543 iv. 4. Ὁ: Ἶ I 337 iv. 5. I, , 6, 8, 13. II 173 Cn. Ver. ~ Vou. Pa : 111. 6. il. ΜῈ iil. 7. . Dae ii. 8. - ba ii. 9. ΜΕ. ili. 10. ΤΙ. iii. 11. a ΜΝ ili. 12. Dh ni. 12, 13 ; ili. 13. I. lili. 14. Κ ay lii. 15. 1. lil. 16. ie iii. 17. 1. iii. 17, 24, a ili. 18—21. » ¥ ili. 22. ie. 23, eS ili. 23, 24 Il. ill. 24. ae ili. 25. IL. iv. 1. Ret iv. 2. L. ΝΣ we 2, aa: Per 58 Ww Bh Tl. 706 iv. 5. . 1 iv. 6. | ed 184 wy. » ἘΠ 209 iv. 11. Il. 346 ivi2i2. ree 61: 1 THESALONIANS. ἦτ, 282, vi 21 CO IPM Or wo Y aa Peper e a eo) ὧδ "Ὁ . . ry Θ PA GAY οἰ νὰ πὰ σὰς aT SS BRD ΠΕ ee RRR 3 Οὐ 55 Sr CO a τ δ᾽ NY -- = sO. © Ξ “--- - eR SNe ΠΗ’ INDEX. | a. Vou. Pace. | Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace. | Co. VER. Vou. Pace. II. 693 1 Trmorzy. v. 22, Σ 7 Il. 709 TE. >. Fae pees. ᾿ : I. 381] vi. 1. 3 Il. 22 Il. 692 fi. 1, 5, 19 Tl... 290 Pi 3. ‘ LP 156 HH. ΕΣ II. | 272] vi. 3, 5. . vA 701 J. 456 |i. 3. IT.) “803 Pw 4: i ‘i 195 ἘΠ᾽ 693 | i23, 4. js 591 | vi. 5. : ὅν. ἢ 177 ie it Tine, 3,6, 19 {AD 93 | vi..5, 10, 18. Tr. ie ἯΙ Γι 5 ...}}5. I. 958 7:6: ΠΝ": 27 I. 20 Ji. 6. ἣν ἢ 268 | vi. 7. i 502 a ἃ 558 |i. 6, 7 Ἑ 593 | vi. 8. eh 421 IL: 2021 8. If. 196] vi. 9. Τ. 429 - i MA 32.11.15 Τ. 610 | vi. 9, 17 ‘ae 240 12 223.4 16-12. Ill 93 | vi. 10 a 349 . & 589 |i. 15. I 376 | vi. 11 . Eee E: 137 1 35°16. Π 61] vi. 12 ie 558 ey: 298 |i. 17. I. 53, 576 | vi. 13 Pa 363 I. 213, 280 |i. 18. II 171.| vie 15 is 101 if 359 | i. 18, 19 I 558 | vi. 16 «ὍΣ 576 IL. 115, 472 |i. 19. I 595 | vi. 17 :: 19 81 |i. 20. I 603 | vi. 17, 18 I. 326, 564 L 53, 60 | ii. 1. ; . 87 | vi. 17—19. ὲ a 511 I. ie 2 Ξ I. 93, 312] vi. 18. ἔ a - 281 II 149 | ii. 1, 4 : αν ἢ 8.1 vi. 19 i 330 I 614 | ii. 2. I. 40 | vi. 20 I oyl I Bek ΠΣ 8. en ἡ 101 li. 4, 1% 412 2 Timotuy 2 THESSALONIANS il, 4—6 > ile 95} i. I. ἣ Ill 93 ; I a7) tS. I. 259) i. 5. II. 208 II 523 4 4.6 S a 360 | i. 6. 611 Il 516 | ii. 7. Il. 67 | i. 8. ΤΙ ἦς II 511 28: ἃ & 105 | i. 9. 1. 358 II 598 4 it. 12. i Il. 711i. 10 I. 371 II 689 | iii. 1. III. 84, 160] i. 13, 14 Il. » 558 II 165 | iti. 2. ᾿ i. 3268 | 1.. 15. Il, 198 Il 197 | iti. 3. i. 600 |i. 18. - Il. 527 II 19 | iti. 5. I 586 | ii. 1. il... 38 I 542 [1]. 5, 15 ἘΠ᾿ ΠΥ 2, 28. ᾿ 586 I 614 | iii. 7, 10 .. 590 | ii. 3. I. 558 II 709 | iii. 8. ἘΣ. 48 | ii. 4 I. 237 III. 288 /iii. 9. ΤΌΘ bai7 I, 2a II 693 | iii. 10. , Ty Sasi. 9 |S 282 II 385 | iii. 12. II. 190] in. 9, 10 ΙΑ 281 ae 383 | iti; 13. ς : Ὁ δ 11. 3 I. 360 A277) Qi3: | iis 15. . 5 ᾿ 130 | ii. 11, 12. i. S38 II 192 | iii. 16. : 2 360 | ii. 12. I. 64 Il 169 | iv. 2. Bi 592 | ii. 14, 16, 23, I. 591 : II 165 | iv. 3. : . ἘΠ 209) ii. 16. II. 120 II. 193, 207 | iv. 5. : : "ἢ 384 | ii. 16, 17, 18. Ε 595 : II. 909] iv. 6. ‘ . I. 464) ii. 19. k Il. 400 Il 141 | iv. 7 ι 558 | ii. 22. Il, 279 II 558 | iv. 8. ᾿ ὼς ἮΝ 9 | ii. 24. ia 259 I. 267 | iv. 10. . ζ ii 546 | ii. 24, 25. I. 178 Il. 344 jiv. 13. i » OL. eae. 25, i 181 ᾷ Il 490 | iv. 13, 16 II 586 | ii. 26. x I. 30 Il. 36 |iv. 14 : , ἃ 611 | iii. 2. ὺ Ϊ. 264, 616, 621 II. 190] iv. 16. ᾿ 5 II, 626} iii. 8. I. 177 1, 592 | v. 1. | F 232 | iii, 12. ‘ . ἃ 375 a 594 | v. 1, 17, 19, 20, 29. I, 588 | iii, 13. ‘ , % 591 I. 388, 586 | v. 3, 17, "ἢ 35 | iii. 14. ; . ἢ. ὅν I. 69\v.5. ἢ I. 58 | iii. 15. roll ΕΝ I. 547 | v. 6. . ἢ §00| iii. 15—17. . i ae 1. 560 |v. 8. i 12} iii. 16 : P Il. 550 I. 548 | v. 10. Pie 5 326 iii. 17. . ᾿ . th aaa 7 234 | v. 13. ι 213 | iv. 1. . ἶ Π. Soa Ε i Σ 419 |v. 14. Il. 22 | iv. 2. : ae 55 iii. iA, 15, a 318 | v. 16. ἜΣ, - 279) iv. 3. Ἢ . I. 591 iii. 15. I. 179 | v. 17. ᾿ς ΝΣ ἘΠ νι 4. . , IT. 166, 183 iii. 16. Ἑ, 321 | v. 20. 3 176 | iv. 5. 3 ᾿ ΤΠ. 8 ; v. 21, stm | 2i4/iv.6. . . Th 666 564 INDEX. Ca. Ver. Vou. Pace.| Cx. VER Vou. Pace.| Ca. Ver. Vo. P. Wim, 2) . .-. SEL ΕΝ ΚΕΝ, I. 30 | vi. 9. ". ae wv: .. Ἶ a 508 | ii. 1. " ΙΑ 604 | vi. 10. kL meat, Ge.) ti -.. 599 | ii. 1, 3 .. 443: τῷ ἰ 5... 4 = ae 478 } ii. 3 i 559 | vi. 11, 12. La iv. 10. . I. 76, 88, 98, 106, ii. 3, 4 ΤΠ. - 315) 5... I +4 iv. 12. ‘ ae 2 586 | ii. 4 II. 166, 181} vi. 16. Ὁ I iv. 15. I. 589, 603 | ii. 5 II. 369] vi. 16, 18 II iv. 16 ° iil. . 129 ine i. “aye as I iv. 18 a. 71} ii. 7, 8. ; Il, 417} vi. 19 I ii. 7, 11, 16. Il. 81 | vi. 20 Il Titvs. ii. 8 a 1. 381 | vii I gf : Σ 11} ii. 8, 9 II, 503| vii. 1 II ἐτῶν" I. 3958 ii. 9 I 43 | vii. 3 II nS. I. 610) ii. 9, 10 I 375 | vil. 7 Ul i334, us 588 | ἢ. 10 I 403 | vii. 16 Til oe. A, 328 | ii. 10, 11 THI. 317| vii. 16, 17 II i. 10, 16 I. 177} ii. 11, 18 . I. 408] vii. 18. a - 8} τ. ΣΝ ΤΠ! ΟΣ F ea 343 | vii. 18, 19. ; II. #173. I. 176] ii. 11, 12, 14, 16. Il. 81 | vii. 19. ; » 2 i. 14. L. 094/ ii. L1I—14. - II. 439) vii. 22. Il. Lm. ᾿ 2 L721 44. L 371 | vii. 25. Il. i656. . . II. 20, 176, 203) ii: 14, 15 II, 4751] vii. 25, 26, 27 II. ii. 4, 7 Σ ἜΜ. Ἢ 13} ii. 14—16 Il. 428] vii. 26. ie iD. a; 12] 8. 16. II. 111] vii. 28 1. il. 6. 1. 531} ii. 16. I... ahve 1 Il. maT. 1. 686 ii. 17. ΤΕ 476 | vili. 5 Il. il. 7,8 II. 486} ii. 17, 18 1 P A38 | vill. 6 Boe | ii. 8. Il. 32 | ii. 18. : 30 | viii. 7 ΤΙ. ii. 9. ἘΠ. ΜΘ, ὦ. 4, 556 | viii. 7, 13 i. ii. 10. i? 161} iii. 3. Τ. - 5531 vi. Al. II. 93, 1 ii. 10, 13 Il. 77\ iii. 4. TE (4081 Με. ὦ ¥: @a11. ‘ 1. 259 | iii. 5, 6. I. .~403 1 we ¥7 Il. ii. 11, 12. II. 139) iii. 6. I, 15 | a2"7, &. Il. “189 13: ‘Il. 541] iii. 6, 14 1. 543 | ix. 7, 24. II. ii. 13. . Le VSSQ) eet; I. 566 | teaBs +. Il. ii. 14. i 360 | iii. 7, 15. ΤΙ. 1631-9. II. ii. 15. 2: 134} iii. 8, 13. II. 168] ix. 9, 10 Il. ὩΣ 1. I. Lt} τ 19... Il. 1651] ix. 9, 15 IL. iii. 2 I. 174, 300| iii. 13. L 534 | ix. 10. II iii. 2, 4. I. 2859] iii. 18, II. 393 ix. 11, 22 Il iii. 3. II. 73 | iii. 19, 1... 276-1 aed: I iii. 4. 11 915) iv. 2. ΤΠ. © 183] #512, 33, 14 Il il. 4, 5 Δ. Fast piers. i 440 | ix. 14. . I mae. i δ . Te 94 iv. 8. Il. 346] ix, 14, 21, 26 II iii. 5, 6, 7. : Τ 229, 231] iv. 11. 7 558 | ix. 14, 24. II iil. 6. A : II. 408] iv. 12. 1. ‘Ol tee. 15. I iil. 7. ; Je ἢ 71) iv. 13. I. 114 | ix. 20, 24 II iii. 8. I 98] iv. 14. TI, 493 | i522; 22 II iii. 8, 14. I 326] iv. 15 ἐμ 360 | ix. 23. II ili. 9. : : , 591] iv. 15, 16. . Ι 438 | ix. 24. Il iii. 10. : - I. 848} Gv. 16. I 49 | ix. 26. Ill iii. 10, 11. Zz. 592 | v. Ὁ. I. 360 | ix. 26, 28 4 Il. iii. 14. I 328 | v. 4. Ti. | Fal Bee2i: 3 , ἘΣ v. 7. 1. 4711. 1, Ἐν 4 II. PHILEMON. v. 8. L 375|x.4. ™ ΤΙ: 2 . ire gee eat ye.) ἴ I. 476] x. 4,8, 10. Il. 10. “GL. 272 | νυν Ὁ. 10. TL. ΟΊ sea, Li Il. 16. Ἢ ΒΗΒΙ ΨΠ1. | I. 605 | x. 5. ‘ : & v. 11, 14. 1671x510. ἢ» ὟΝ Heprews. Weis. 4 607 | x. 7. ‘ ᾿ Wi pt. Ill. 14] v. 14. 4, 608 | x. 10. . ΠΩ͂Σ δ. 5, I. 281) vi. 1. 140 | x. 10, 12, 14 Ill. }'s. ll. 344| vi. 2. ΠΤ, °° = Wi. a © i. 4,5,7 Il. 403) vi. 4. . L524} x. 12. τ. πὶ i. 5, II], 401} vi. 4,5 Il. 93 | x. 12,13 _, i i. 6. I 123 | vi. 6. ee 781 x. 49. ὲ La 7, 2 I 282 | vi. 7. L 282 | x. 19, 20. La i. 8. II. 414} vi. 7,8 ὡ x 75 | x. 21, 22. Il. 4 i. 13. 4 ΤΙ 506 vi. 8. 1. 91} x. 22. ΝΥ τ. *~ * * INDEX. 565 Cx. Ver. _ Von. Page. | Cu. Ver. Vou. Pace.| Ca. Ver. Vou. Pace. me 2, 23) Tl, 145 | xiii. 5. : 1. iv. 3. , . ἘΞ 49 ma 23. 3 Il. 543 | xiii. 6. J Il. iv. 4. L, 028 x. 24. I. 223 isu 7,17... . iv. 7. Il. 47, 201 ey 25. P Il. 527 | xiii. 8. 5 : TI. iv. 8. L (a x. 26. Il. 209 | xiii. 9. I. iv. 10. . &t 2 x. 26, 29. Il. 373 | xiii. 11. I. iv. 11. 1. 175 x. 26, 38. Il. 231 | xiii. 12. Il. iv. 12, Il. 427 x. 28. II. 413} xiii. 14. :. iv. 13. IL 382 x. 29. 1 §24 | xiii. 15. ι 3 v. 1. . a 439 x. 30. A Ls 466 | xiii. 16. τ, v. 3,5. I 247 =. 31. I. 601 | xiii. 17. I. v. 4. . LL... &...33. L. 364 | xiii. 20. I. v. 5. I. 349 x. 34. L 337 | xiii. 20, 21. Ἐ v. 9. « 221 %. 36. 1k 452 | xiii. 21. : | v. 10. 1. 377 Ἐν 56, 37 * EE 448 v. 10,11 Ι. 4389 x. 39. IL. 86 JAMES. ἡ v.11. P ᾿ 278 xi. Il. 346}i. 1. i es III, v. 12, ‘a 147 xi. 2 a. 5 (A Te: yf v. 13. Ι κα 92 xi. 3 I. 193 Ji. 2, 3. Il. v. 14. i 384 xi 4 Il. 667 |i. 2, 12. Il. γ. 14, 15. Il. 564 xi, 4, 8 IL .:: 2606 | £2. II. v. 16. οι. ΩΣ 103 18. ὅ Il. 504/)1. 4. τ: 17. ἃ I. 396 xi. 6 . Il. 175, 176 [1]. 5. ᾿ v. 20. «1. . 288 xi. 7, 19. . IL 46611. 5, 6. I. xi. 8. qi 188 | i. 5, 17. i νὰ 1 PETER. xi, 10, 23. Lk ΦΙΒΑΝ bs. III. 1. Ill. 121 xi. 11, 12. 1. 403] i. 8. ἢ i. 2. . IL δ46 mil, 19. II. 185]1. 9. a S &f. i 3. é Ε 546 xi. 13. 2 ΠΡ ΒΘ, 11. j ἢ i. 3, 4, ΣΝ 87 xi. 13, 40. Il, 329/1. 11. ἢ ἐγ 4, " I. ἊΝ xi. 15. ‘ I. 4997/1. 12. | i. 4, 5. « de eee xi. 16, L 241} i. 13. Il. i. 4, 8. I. 19 xi. 17, 19. . ER: eer 1017. II. i. 5. II. 202 xi, 19. ἘΞ. 254 tt. 16. . Δ i. 6. I, 437 xi. 20. II. 348 |i. 19. I. i. 6, 7. I. 438 xi. 24. 1. 265 |i. 19, 21. οὖ & ¥. I. ae 48.935. ‘ L 442 11. 20. L ΕΝ, 8. II. 193 xi. 26, 34, 35. « TSA. » 6. lL. 15 xi. 33. Ὰ Sabi 22. I. i. 9. Il. 177 xi. 36. 5 . = 364 | i. 35. ae te i. 10 ini te xi. 38. J ᾿ I. 450 | i. 27. ie i; 10... i. Se xi. 39. og. (ὦ JB 256811. 7 * i. 11 II. 129 xii. . II. 171 | ti. 1,9 Il. i, 12 I. 574 ae. 1; Νὰ ἜΝ ἡ 61 |i. 5. ὩΣ ae i. 13 I. 55 xii. 1, 2. Ἂ i 399 | ii. 6. Il, i. 14 i! ΠῚ xii. 1, 6. ‘ » BB :190 1h 8: I. i. 14, 15 Il. 609 | xii. 2. . : is 43 | 1. 10. Il δ 15 I. 399 xii. 3. a οὐ 365 | ii. 10, 11. Ill i. 15, 16 II. 434 xii. 4. Ξ 4 Ἐπὶ 1.8 1513. ᾿" I i. 16. 1. 268 xii. 5. > . L .4068᾽ ἃ: 15-.--17 τ δ᾽ 17. 1 76 xii. 6. ‘ I. 89 | ii. 16. ‘ L i. 18. | 378 | xii. 6, 7, 8. Pie + 451 | ii. 17, 18, 26. ᾿ΕΝ i. 18, 19 ) é 373 xii. 7. P ; L 444 | ii. 17, 20, 23. Il i. 19. me 370 xii. 9. : . Bt 8 sa. 18. Π i. 19, 20. ll. 666 xii. 9, 10. Il. 280] ii. 19 I i. 20. =e xii. 11. oi ἃ 437 | ii. 21. . ra: * Bi 22 i 262 | xii. 12, " 281 | ii. 23. ἢ II. 185, i, 23. . | 259 xii. 13. “ik 45 | ii, 26. ἢ ἣν ἮΝ ὲ; 94, : I. » Se xii. 14. ὡς 279 | ii. 29. I ii. 1. > 170 xii: 16. . Ἴ, 016191 at'2. ΤΣ. I ii, 1, 11: I. 499 xii. 17. ᾿ 524 | iii. 8. I ii, 2. ae * 531 | xii. 18, 26. ἂν; * 194 | tii. 13. Il δὲ 4. Ill. 153 4:99... . I. 543 | iii. 14, 16 Il ii. 4, 15, 19 . I 708 Xii, 22, 23, . [Π. 312] iii. 14, 18 I ii, 5. . 1, 596 xii, 23. Ξ Il. 690 | iii. 15, 17 II ii. 5, 9 Ill, 312 xii. 24. I 259 | iii. 16. ἢ I ii. 5, 18 Il. 702 xii. 28. Il 197 | 1. 17 I ii. 6. I 49 | xiii. 2. I 327 | iii, 18 » I ἃ Υ͂. II 127 xiii. 3. ; I. 277 J iv. 1. I ii. 7,8 "ἘΝ 868 Vor. Ill. 75 ν Dd 4 SAta22a2 Yor! > wo SePPrr > > I. 88 Il. 227 I. αν ΤΣ, ¥ 19 1. 35 I. 590 III. 268 II. 424 1Π. 140 τ Oe H...shSe ii. 90 Il. 641 I. 259 Il. 641 I. 453 ᾿ ἐσ I. 5878 Il. 415 Il. | 397 L. is E0870 Π. 415 ae ἄν 385 I. dda i. Sea III. 316 I. 285 {. > kee I. 29h a. bse: II. 190 Ty =: 6 II. 182 I. “58 Τ . 423 I. 266 i. .059 ΤΙ, 1 δὴ Il. 459 1. S875 Il. 473 1. 459 Eh! 474 I. 528 I. 543 Il. 527 1. Nh55 I. 182 UW Pris I. 564 I. 610. Ι. 452 iy R10 II. 303 i. (0538 I. 212 1. 209 I. 423 ΤΠ, 87 I. 378 Ill. 84 Il. 641 I. 600 I. 586 I. 558 I. 128 3 δ 7. Ae: Sh iQ 2 1 H. VER. CP DID Ὁ OR Se σι κι = — a ee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee Βαν eines δ' Σ ὁ τ ee ie τον. Oe ae Se ere τ jor) —e - νῶν μν . . . . ..ο . bet ee pee μὰν . πο ee et "πο tem pede μαὶο bem ae pee pee pe μαδο μ- iii. 2. rT — γὼ — 5 - ili. lil. INDEX. Vou. Pace. ; Cue Ver. ὡς LL 454 ii. 23, 24 . Ἢ 336 | ΠΕ 4.. 7 ΤΙ 321 | il. 27. Ἷ 1..1.1891] ΠῚ: II. 108, 201} iii. 2. Τ' 338 | iii. 2, 3. 11: 201 Bae. ὶ : 11.4, 23. 2 PETER. nid. II. 176, 195 | iii. 6. a © 19 | iii. 7. ; A; 476| iii. 8. ΜΝ 557.) imo; .. i i; 958 ili. 11. ὦ IL. 86 | ill. 11, 23. : 543 | ii. 15, 1. δ It, 6. 1. 55.) med 7. Il. 665 | iil. 18. 11. Ὁ ABD) 1s Bi II. 387| iii. 20: . IL. * 600) i920, 51 ΤΙ: 92 | ili. 21. III. 289 | iii..21, 22 TTS | 501] 00.022. 7) 1. 373 | ili. 23. I; 614 | iii. 24. Il: -. £97) ee: II. 28 | iv. 2. qi. AQ | twe2; 3,9. II. 44 | iv. 2, 15. ΗΠ U2 ET eee. I. 104 | iv. 7, 11, 21 1. 17S 1 8. US I. W274) 1B; 16 I. 592) ivi®. |. IL. 422 | ig, 10. I, $23} oe 1O.ca I}; 88} iv. 10, 11 III. 86, 87 | iv. 11. Ι. 158 | iv. 12. II. 192] iv. 12, 20. II. 528 | iv. 43. I. 412 iv. 14. L. 581 | 1.15. II. 166] iv. 18. ἯΙ, 69S) iy 19; IE. (S36 |) rei, Ξ i. 558 | iv. 21. Ρ I: 592 |v. 1. ὴ Tl. 6. shin, ᾿ 614 ν. 8. wid; 1 Joun. v. 4, 5. ie | A428 ν. 5. . IL” 405] v.6. ες ‘Ube ee ΟΣ : I. 57 | v. 7, 8. ‘ AT} v. 9. ; _ ave) e200." ὦ ; "ve ἀρ v.11, 12) 20 ; I. 239} 243, 4 ‘ h 380 |v. 14. ; Il. 108] v. 16. 4 I. 245] v. 19. J 445 | v. 20. 4 :. 498 | v. 21. ᾿ ΤΟ * II. 188 INDEX. 567 Cz. Ver. Vou. Pace. | Ca. VER. Vou. Pace. | Ca. Ver. Vou. Pace. : 2 Joun. nS. , ᾿ ΤΠ. 2801 xiii. 10. Ir. 190 π- Il. 409} ii. 7. Il. 133) xii..13. Ἐπ ν ae I 599 | ii. 7, 11. TI. 312} xiii. 18. wo fo Il. 177)| ii. 8, 21. Il. 405/] xiv. 1, If. 503 L a8 fa, 10. Il. 107| xiv. 4 . eae "11. . Ἢ, Bol xuv.7 i. δὲ 3 Jonn. | ii. 20. i. ἸΠῸ6Ὶ χῖν 2 . (a ae 491 | iii. Ill. 156/xv.3 L 585 . I 275 | iii. 1. 5. 524 | xvi. 7 II. 529 I 276 | iii. 2. ἘΠ 538 | xvi. 9 L. 39 ili. 3. i Sora L. 558 JUDE. 111, 4. II. 719 | xvii. 5, 6 Ill. 133 Ε 3 I, 177 | iii. 7. II. 704/| xvii. 9 It. ies 5 . E Δ] }ῖπι. 12 Tl. 399 | xvii. 14. IL. 81 Ξ Il. 971Π|. 14 II. 403 xviii. 20. lL, 122 ; + a 104 iii. 19 Ii, 4525) xix. 1,2. 5; 85 , 10. I. 992 | ili. 20 ) 479 | xix. 2. L 585 6, 19. , we aoe tm 51 IL. .. SIs fT xix.-6. II. 290 : 1, 175 | iv. 8 Il. 283 | xix. 6,7 Il. 124 J ΝΣ ἢ 182 | iv. 8, 11 III. 5 i ax. 7. i. “32 3 592 | iv. 11. 1: 412 | xix. 10. Il. 443 . IL 533] v. 2,6. II. 503] xix. 15. Il. 399 3 Ἐ. 104} v. 5. \ Il ΘΟ xix. 16. : Il. 287 «, we Sat wv. 6 II. 503! xx. 3, 10, 21 II. 197 . II 7U2}/v.9 i ἘΠ Τ Ἐκ. 6. > . 22, 23 if is 40 | v. 9, 12 II. 460/ xx. 12. Il. 72 4 & 226 | v. 10 II. 71 | xx. 13. i. ΙΝ Se ll j|v.11 Ii, 207) xx. 14. ie : Il. 370jv.12 Il. 370) xxi. 2. Il. 399 αἱ, ἡ 1 976 | v. 12, 13 Il. 407! xxi. 2, 10 Ill. 313 v. 13. Il. 137 | xxi. 4. = 447 ; REVELATION. vi. 2. ἘΓ ΒΒ τς π΄ a i. : Il. 110] vii. 10 τ 371|xxi.10,14. . . ἯΙ Se i. Il. 137] vii. 17 I. 474 | xxi. 14.- , Il. 704 ‘ II. 509} viii. 3. Li. Sar χει &: . a “4:0 1. Il. 71 | ix. 20. . WM 20) xxi. 24 Il. 88 i. ΝΕ Sets 6: Il. 297) xxii. 3 Il. 407 i. a Geiss: Ὶ Il. . 124| xxii. 8 Il. 425 i. I 374 | xi. 17. II 283 | xxii. 9 Ill. 286 i. II 405 | xi. 18. II 421 | xxii. 12. I. 415 A iS II. 384 | xii. 3,9 TI 108 | xxid. 13. Il. 405 te -Ύεξὄε.ετἕἔδἰὔὄἀκς. ΄. :π΄. 165] xxii, 15, Lo ie. 5 . III. 326! xii. 10. δ F = 196 | xxii. 16. II. 126 ii.1—7. . ; Il, 311 | xii. 11. . . Il. 4731 xxii. 20 Il. 542 > a δ, ἈΝ ᾧ 2 588 | xiii. 8. ᾿ Mm Il. 465 > ͵ . τὶ ΕῚ 7 ἕ ® 5 te ᾿ , »Ἅ. ᾽ ᾿ INDEX OF SUBJECTS. > The Capital Letters designate the volume, and the Figures the page. . x Vou, Pace. a ae Vou. Pace. AssoLUTion, τῆν ποτα causes of If], 167 τς; ἰμων ὅν of contrary i to Holy ae particulars Ill. 287 ς Adam’s sin, punishment of Il. 56 | Anger es Sect f 192 Adaptation of natural things ee ra als, t of τ δ᾿ the being οὗ God. Ii. 237 bei Frome ¥ the Pere - ᾿ Adrian I., Pope IIT be “Gn Panna : τι ΤῊΣ ΚΝ ve Avice ee waniniteg - . ~ Anointing, antiquity of the ceremo- a ὰ se . ny o : . 7 gerne for it to Ἢ re- L 6,53}: os consecration by, among Eneas Syivius, concerning ; the eccle~ “ ee ᾿ “Se ae =f er ating wi rol men, improper med- — Yee iniquity I. 139 Affections, government of the by the Anau of the Ἑ “αν : ΠῚ 35 power of religion s 1. 5 Antonin citin κα pone ee ae Afflictions, bearing aes. ὁ 131, 451,507| God and divine Providence . I. 29 πε wana” ig ἊΣ μὴ τον translation of the word _ ; ἱ , . 440 ᾿ hope in IL. ~ 461, ore Ayesacy of the Devil, caused i by In- natural . elity Il. 17 Ζ ns omy 5 support oe I. 3 Apostles, authority of the Ill. 3 Riratho, Pore 280, 459 character of the Il. 485 a henes De” Α : . : ἮΝ — : doctrine and livesof the II. 485 Allegations for the Pope’s supremacy Ili. [00 « τε αν of th = YE Almah, a term applied to the Virgin ao equality ofthe. TL 50.03 Mary; and translated by Aquila, ὌΝ “ lives of the . : ΠῚ. 93 ε manner of life of the i. 03 Almighty mighty power, the ‘only perfection « method of teaching I. 211 ee “a ε miraculous “tterd | Creed. : ‘ not commun e, an Ambition, Sains, Semen to the ΜΞ “a . not successive 116 Anacletus and Cletus identical λῪΠΙ 134 . ae oes "panne Screen of the Romanists ἘΣ 294 ον we ὅδ ΠῚ. 116 cient Canons 189 « Successors to the Il. 117 sen ete — dence of ΠῚ ΜΝ « without relative εν. Ancient Discipline * TIE 187 | Apostolic office, the 92, 120 Angels, creationof . “TL. 297, 302 Ryomtiica! ical ont 2 “ὺ 236 Νὰ or cope of good men I. 30, 48 | « Apowslical thrones” ΠῚ. ἮΝ «Mini ister bape oo of Il. tes 304 Apparitions ; exceptions against Il. 267 a - Spirits to Τὸ ro prove the existence of ν Popish linet Ξ tli 286 a realty of e ; ἪΝ 26 3 “ “« production of Il. Appeals satioaneed 1 ii. 261 “ quality of ™ 24 Ἢ om iit, 205 . Appeals to the Pope ΠῚ. 205 . ¥ 5 ΕΣ 570 Vou. Pace. Appeals to the Pope disclaimed ΤΙ. Aquila, translation of Almah, acne by II. 440 Aristotle ; not credulous and fanciful II. 250 τῷ notions of, concerning the Supreme Being Il. 250 Arrogance ‘ 3 Il. 9 Aseension of Christ II. 501, 684 Ascent, and judgment Ab.) 186 ‘grounds of 1 184 « relation of judgment to Il 187 Atheists, civil eats τα το destroyed by : ; 175 “ folly of : : ὶ ἪΝ 145 “« principles of yb PC ΣΕ Attribute of God, the only, mention- ed in the Apostles’ creed : Π 295 Attributes of God, obligations of hu- man duty from the 412 Augustine, opinion of concerning jus- tifying faith, with the consequences IT. 218 Auricular confession : ἘΠ 67 Avrapketa ; bake see, iv: 11; im- port of "δ 414 Author of universal consent II. 23 Authority of Bishops IH. ‘229 κε of Councils i ae ἢ of the Apostles A ea 9 τς of universal consent il... 252 6; Papal ; I. 53, 66, 69 Avoiding of μὰ compliance II, 540 ¥ of error : : ΠΕ 1 B. Bad company ἯΣ 40 Baptism II. 86, 88 “ grace communicated by “IL, 94, 141 . Holy Ghost displayed by II. 548 . Jews received proselytes by III. 42 ( Justification dispensed by II. 230 af Mystery of : Il. 43 δε Personality of the Holy Spi- rit manifested by Tl 9548 ; Representation the, of the Resurrection LS 18 Base compliance, avoiding of © II. 540 « mischiefs of II. 32 Base fear II. 32, 46 Basil against the Supremacy of the Pope " III. 146 Basle, the Council of a... te Il. 232—271, 577—604 Being: of God attested by discoveries of divine power II. 584 ( attested by divine Pro- vidence : Il.- 585 “ attested by natural ef- fects : 578 ( discovered by the com- bination of food Il. Sat ° sé discovered by theear II. 237 « ΟΕ It. war ( ( plants II, 55] 237 4 ” “ relation of things Π,. 236 « discovered by the taste II. 237 ( proved by human na- ture II, 242—253, 579, 580 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. VoL. Pace. . 260 | Being of God proved in the capacity for the nn ΠΝ of Il. 2495 « proved in the deriva- : tion of II. 243, 244 5 at proved in the relations of ‘ : . i. =e ᾿ proved in the resem- vag blance of to the Cre- . ator. ς ll. “Ὁ. ἕ proved in the soul of Il. 244 a proved by supernatu- ralevents II. 263—271, 584 ἡ proved by divine dis- “3 pensations II. 268, 585 of proved by Miracles II. 265, 584 { proved by the predic- tion of future events II. 264, 5 - shewn by the frame of the world II. 232—242, 579 A testified by the univer- sal consent of man- kind II, 252—262, 582 — 1: testified by the common inclination 254 ον testified by the convin- ? cing reason. 254 | ᾿ testified by the natural light Il. 254 - testified by the same source of instruction and intelligence ἴῃ a Ἢ Belief of divine Revelation j } Benefit of afflictions nee L ~ 41S τ 3 Il. 611, 461, 522 — Bellarmine ; allegations of concerning justifying faith aege 229 as improper comparisons of concerning the two natures of Christ II.. 431 “2 vain pretence of for the Pope’s Se, III. 52, 182 Boza Theodore : II. 478 Bishops ; authority of III. 177 called “ Clavigeri” ‘by the Council of Comprigne II. ( censure of Ill. a conformation of “ΟΥ̓ the Pope οι 419) si constitution of hb a, 6 deposition of Ill. 248 a difference of, in order and ᾿ privilege ἯΙ. 156, 160 — ( dignityof τς τ ΝΣ « discharge of their offices by Ol. a ( election of ; : 134 “ equality of rae « highest order in the ‘church III, 158 “ Metropolitan a 158 « oath of obedience by ΠῚ. 70, 205 a ordination of ‘Ill. 035) 237 { Power of ἴο call Councils III. 218 Precedency of I. 587 ( residence of III. 54, 124 as restitution of III. 255—259 ( rights of II. 55 successors to the "Apostles ἯΙ, a INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Vou. Pace. Hahops, translation of ἘΠ} } 0492 Bishops and Pastors ; authority of in the primitive ages III. 232 ἐν « characterof , III. 160 of Rome, oath of Ill. 160 Blasphemy, the true ap ged of the term - A. 175 Blind obedience ; Iii. “293 Blind zeal, one cause of Infidelity ἘΠ ἘΠ Boast of the Romanists : ἘΠ 865 Boniface VIII. Pope : i. Ὁ 57 Bounty to the Poor II. 321—357 advantages of II. 354—356 «“ aids the enjoyment of divine mergy ; ὃ ΜΕ, τ 50 a attributes of ϊ 3 If. - 326 + Christianity demands wilk. “352 “. Christ’s poverty requires IJ. 342 ee demanded by the character of man ; » ἐν ΤΡ 8595 «divine rewards of ὁ Il. 328 “ encouragement to the exhi- bition οὗ. : so. ‘334 “« enforced by Scripture ἘΠ, 325 at equity urges : : ll. 346 ad essential part of the divine laws 326 “ evidence of a right disposi- tion towards God 336 4, expression of gratitude to God Σ . Σ 334 és followed by the favour of God . 399 “ fulfilment of God’s law If. . 328 4 honourable to him who man- ifests it F : sell. *356 ge human frailty requires Il. 346 ἐ human indigence exacts II. 344 “ human instability demands IJ. 345 “ included in piety 327 $6 increases riches ᾿ avdi. ‘351 “ inculeated by examples 11. 327, 352 se load of needless wealth light- ened by 4 2 II. 349 μ man’s impotence exacts Il. 344 “ man’s mortality enforces II. 346 “ man’s sensitive nature im- pels : geil. (343 “ mischiefs οἵ ᾿βαρογῆπουδ wealth removed by II. 349 “ motives for Il. 343, 347 “ neglect of i Il. 330 ae omission of, injustice to God Il. 339 “ ordered by divine Provi- dence ‘ F Ii. © 341 “ preserves wealth sm. «350 ε proceeds from a correct es- timate of mankind II. 339 “ . proof of attachmenttoGod II, 331 “ punishment for the neglect of ‘ : ἘΠ » “330 “ reason urges Il. 344 4“ regard to at the final judg ment II. 330 “ renders our devotions accep- ; table to God ; Il. 335 «« required by the existing dis- tinctions between man II. 340 " secures a good reputation II. 354 . 571 Vou. Pace. Bounty, spiritual consanguinity re- quires it ὃ Il. 44 State of the Poor demands it II. “ testimony of conformity to God IT. II. i ties of nature exact ye uncertainty of man’s condi- tion ‘urge are TT. Wealth improved by Il. Branch, Netser, a title of Christ II. 345, 441 Breach of Charity III. Breach of faith by the Popes ΠῚ. 286 Brevity of Life ag lv 498 Bulls of Popes III. 56—63 τ Gregory II. Hit. * Gf by Gregory VII. Il. 59 δ Pius V. Ill. 56 * Sixtus V. Ill. 56 ον style of the ag Tih. 64 Burial of Christ Il. 462, 672 Business : ‘ ἃ I, 223—238 ἊΣ admonitions concerning Il. 235 “ advice to men on oo Ὁ τα 232 ss attention to our own If. 223 a cautions oe the, of others II. 226—231 (6 directions concerning I. 231 τῷ interposition in contests respecting Il. 234 a meddling with the, of oth- ers II, 224—226 « _ reproof of men concerning IL... 232 C: Call of Councils " Ἶ Ill. 209 Caxutnes, Christian - é : kh 553 - Industry in I. 556, 563, 567 5 " reward of I. 562, 57 δι of Gentlemen “νυ. 562 « of Scholars Ι Ζ, 567 “ referred to Christians Be 556 Canaanites, sinand punishmentofthe II. 58 Canon—Law, the without obligation III. 220 Canons—account of the by Zneas Ill. 276 «Alteration of the Silvius by Popes Ill. 220 “ancient ’ Ill. 189 ‘* apostolical III. 143, 189 «“ exemption from the ΠῚ. 221 « of Popes above those of Ge- neral Councils ‘ ΠῚ. 224 “ of Sardica é ΠῚ. 262 «policy of the ἐπ on concern- * , ing the II 220 «silence of the, respecting the Popes’ authority (IT. 152 «universal ; ς ΠῚ. 220 Carthage, Council of Ill. 118 Catholic; abuse of the term. ΠῚ. 201 ee Church II. 558, 700 - the term favourable to the Pope’s pretences Ill, 201 Causes of Roman Absolution III. 287 “ ee Ceremonies ΠῚ. 168 Celebration of Councils ; . Ill. 206 Celestine Pope III, | 239 Censures ; ecclesiastical, advanta- geous to the Pope ΠῚ. 210 “ Prelatical : Ill. 245 Censuring of others i 210 . “- 5 343 342 338 342 345 347 286 572 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Vou. Pace. Vou. Pace. Censuring, allowed towhom . ἃ. 212 | Charity to the Poor—not an argument causesof. a 210 of unity in “ condemnation of self by I 221 church- gov- «exemption from I 215 ernment III. 334 folly of I 222 Ns τ Reward of I. 328 δέ impertinence of I 212 | Curist— ᾿ Π. 2 «impiety of 2 | BES = Abiding of in us. . iL a “ infatuation of : I. 221 a Adjuncis of his death 1. 464 injury of ood 221 “a Advantages from the man- a τ injustice of 1 219 ner of his sufferings II.. 452 a partiality of I 217 a Ancient prophecies concer- ε prejudices of I 203 ning : 3 -' EL, a ¢ Popish doctrines of iT. 84 tf «of Carthage a. . 115 τ Preferred by heathens to A “ of Chalcedon I. 188 honour. II 37 ; «¢ of Compeigne III. 105 ἐν Satisfied by the Christian 66 a of Constance 111... a religion II 312 ( ε of Constantinople II]. 208 τ Scrupulous : ik: 602 ἐ “νυ οὗ Ephesus - ‘Ul. "209 ἐν Society sustained by es 165 ( τί of Florence TT. (oom «« Usurpations over, by the Ro- « “ of Lateran |. ae man Priests Ill. 293 « τ of Nice ‘ III. 209 Consent, Author of universal IL: at 2ee ( ee of Pisa » 1D. * oe Consideration ‘ [ ε ἊΝ νυ 198 ( ἐς erairemt IIT. 54, 269 Constance, council of : ἱ Ill. 72] Courtesy, non-compliance with, an Constantine, Pope - +. It. 62] — imputation on religion Π.- 39, 40 Constantine the Great—donation of Covetousness produced by the disbe- pretended by - lief of Divine Providence : il. {8 the Court of Creation—Beauty of : ἡ ἢν ΣΝ Rome TIE. 190 ( Manner of } ; UT. oa 9 m first Council in ( of the world, error concern-~ the reign of III. 190 ing : ; . ἢ oe > % judgment of . ae Order of ; ‘ Il. 5805 concerning v6 Reason of . Lae Eusebius II. 129. Credulity, compared with incredulity Il. 2650 Constantinople, the Council of Ill. 208 | Creed of Pope Pius IV. : TIT. 2055 Constitutions of Clement . III. 143) Creed, the Apostles’, so called Il. 569 Consubstantialists, the : iglbery peo «” the attribute of God mention- Contemplation of the future state 1. 456 ed in Il. 2a Content in religion ‘ : ἄς 23 | Cross of Christ—Refer to “ Sufferings Contentedness from faith , Ii. 200} of Christ.” ἢ Contentions, interposition in and ma- Crucifixion of Christ Ἶ II. 652 nagement of : ; ἵν 294) Cup in the Sacrament—withholden Contentment, the virtue of I, 414, 424 from the Laity by acts of 11; 415 Roman Priests III. 167 ες attainment of Be 424 ( “ Cause of it III. 168 Ἴ demeanour from i 421 Custom and example—in sin . 1. oS ag effects of 1. 417 ‘“« Pleas of against " inducements for a 452 religion vain II. 40 os learning of i. 424 ( ( Remedy οὗ οὐ ae 515 { object of i, 414 | Custom in sinning, authority of II. 248 re persuasions to i, 425 εἰ «¢ Mischiefs of i. a id promotion of I. 444—461]| Customs, innocent, to be observed I. 307 e with God . . TL 495] Gvertan—account by, of Peter’s arp τ with our own state I. 430—444| macy of order. ‘ TIL. : 98 ἐς with ourselves é 427 | Cyrin— 11. 249 Contests : elit 234| “ Appeals ‘introduced "γ᾽ ΚΣ IL.” ae Conrroversies—Ancient 7 III. 148| <« Substituted for Celestin in the 4 Determination of Til. 146 general Council ot Ephesus ΠῚ. 214 Conversation, rules for : Il. 12 Council of Compeigne » {11,0 206 Ὁ. “ Style of Bishops by . ΠῚ. 105] Daille on the right use of the Fa- Councin or TRENT— ¢ DI.» §4 thers . ΠῚ. ΤΣ “ ec Character of III. 269] Damasus, Pope Ill. 63 . we False notions of ( Epistle of respecting the respecting jus- Pope’s Supremac rs u- tifying faith II. 216 sist : rv ΠῚ. 182 Ἧ 4 Injunctions of ἃ- Danger of bad company . tf aa bout the Popes’ Deacons, institution of . . is 58 supremacy III. 67] Dealings of God with men ᾿ 73 Councirs—Authority of . ΣΡ Dealings of God, consideration of the eo ‘74 “4 Call of, at first, Ἢ 11, 209 ( «influences of the Il. 76 “ Celebration of i . Ill, 206 ( “ justiceof the . IL. 7 - + . INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Vou. Pace. PeaTH—contemplation of it wise I. “ of Friends «¢ Philosophers’ viewsof . I. “ yemembrances after : Ι Ῥεατπ or CHRIST Ὶ i. - adjuncts of ttre Seri. belief of the ‘ II. “ “ benefits of the - a. « ἐ effects of the | Per “ “ influence of faith in the . nature of the 4 ΤΙ. 433 517 505 664 656 671 471 670 671 441 575 Vou. Pace. 517 Discipline, church, dispensation from ILI. ‘ “ ecclesiastical laws concerning πε . “ form of in the pri- mitive churches III. “ “Jaws for enacted by Emperors ΕΞ ΠΕ order of Ill. violation of Ill. Discontent, from overvaluing world- ly possessions Tespeneations ecclesiastical _ “ ({ “ee “ : Ii. “ authority for III. 167,278 231 228 228 231 , 228 . 322 459 206 -“ < practical influences of If. 473 DecaLocue—deposition of 12 ὅς “ for unlawful 6 Obligation of on Chris- marriages tians 3 3 Tit, “+ 44 by Roman ee Primary applicationof III, 12 Priests Ill. 208 Decrees of Popes against the ancient “ “ἐς grants of for canons. ὁ é TLE, * 222 various in- * Introduction of the ἘΠ. 231 iquities by DecrETAL Erist1es, advantage of to Roman Rome . : > 25H.” 291 Priests and ς Forgery of d We 211 Prelates Il. 204 Degrees of reward and punishment - | Dispensing with laws by the Pope _ hereafter ; I 529 and his ‘ spiritual Janizaries’ III. 230 Delay in religion danger of I 518 | Disputes abounding in the Church a ra folly of A 522 universal 220 “ of repentance : ; Τ᾿ 527 | Dissensions among the people under *¢ mischief of I 518 the Papal yoke III. 198 Delight in learning I 608 « mischiefsof the III. 198 «in religion . 1. 472 “ “ profit of to the Deluge of the world the goodness of Court of Rome, God in ‘ Il. 57 and their Je- | Through infidelity : . 2 17 suit Priests If. 203 Democracy ] : 3 I, 587 . reconciliation of among ᾿ Deposition of Marcianus Ill. 248 Christians 3236 “ Popes III. 138 | Divine assistance in religion ὧν a 407 Ἂν Prelates : . III. 248] Divine interpositions prove the ex- Descent of Christ into Hell . IL. 475--674| istence of God ‘ : II. 268, 585 Detraction : Τὶ 203 | Divine justice, instances of 4 If. 55 4 acts of I. 20f | Divine mercy, illustrated by the di- “ baseness of I, 208 vine justice ὑ Il. 268—270 δ᾿ causes of I, 206 | Divine Providence ; Il. 263 3 evil effects of I. 209 | Divine Revelation, belief in οὖς Der 167 fF folly of I. 208 « “y benefits of : ἯΙ. 313 Ἂ impiety of I, 207 a “ character of Sy 4 S816 2 injustice of I, 207 a « ground of absolute « irregularities from 1, 207 belief 157 a mischiefs of εἰ i, 209 ue * necessity of ¢- Ibe, 3 “ noxious to society I. 209 | Doctrine of the Papists respecting the “ obstructions arising from διποῖρνεε: ἘΝ uncertain and illu- to goodness 208] sory Ill. 67 “ pravity of , I, 207 | Doing all i in the name of Christ ) 377 ἐξ uncharitableness of L 207} “ asin his presence I, 386 Devil, the need of the from infi- « by his command 5 I. 379 delity Il. 176} “ explication of the phrase ἔπος τ Devotion ὁ I 456} “ from affection I. 378 « contentment from we 456} “ in his strength I, 380 “ efficacy of : , I. 457 “ in imitation of him I. 380 «« grace procured by I. 456} “ on his behalf & 3738 «performance of I. 164} “ with honour to him I, 378 a - private Il. 11 “ with hope of success I, 383 “ public ‘ ὃ Ἶ Il. 15 “ with invocation for his blessing Dignity of Peter τς ἂν and aid ; ς 384 Dionysius the Areopagite ΠῚ. 144 | Dominion, titles to ; - Il. 418 Dioscorus of Alexandria ΠῚ. 252} Dreams - ; ; ; Il. 266 Directions for advice. . ΨΩ 6 Discipline, ehurch , ΠΙ. 231 Ἑ. “ and order II. 231] Earth, the II. 301, 620 a 516 - INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Vou. Pace. Ecclesiastical censures voy Ew 206 es jurisdiction . IT. = 232 ἐπ orders, antiquity of III. 331 - «« distinction of III. 228 > persons 2 : Ill. 85 ὦ Refer to “ Priests.” τ presidencies of human origin Ξ HI. 187 - traditions at. ΠΕΡ EEL - #167 Effects supernatural ‘ ; E. ..;264 a ¥ causes of iphe.. 263 “ enumeration of II. 265, 266 » Ἢ objects for which they are wrought i. . 270 Refer to “ Miracles.” Emperors, authority of 211} - calling of Councils and Sy- nods by il. 207 5 confirmation of the elec- tion of Popes by ii. 233 1 Presidents of ancient Coun- cils and Synods, either in person or by deputy III. 213 μ᾿ testimony concerning their ecclesiastical authority by Roman Pontiffs BE y. al Empires, increase of 3 : ὙΠῸ 288 -: neglect of religion by the rulers and people of ἢ. 42 ( original of " ‘ Ill. 198 τὶ ruin of through impiety, ) and irreligion II 42 Employment honest, the means of contentment : 458 Emulation, power of, to excite to vir- tue 3 , 5, 395 Enactment of laws : : HY... 231 Endeavours, our own, ori i to happiness - 406 Enemies, love of, required 1, 909 ω “proved by the suf- feringsof Christ II. 459 Enemies of the Christian “religion IJ. 189 Envy—absurdity of ΤΙ. 34 “ Fear of, for the sake of religion II. 35 “ mischief of . Il. 35 “‘ opposed to the Christian religion ΤΙ; -173 Ephesus, Council of Ty. 5911 Epicureans, the false aa of re- futed ἴ 24 Epicurus, opinions of on the bestow- ment of benefits I. 311 ὦ “on the production of man : a) 244 Episcopacy, alleged design for iy, 123 Equality of the Apostles ᾿ III. 82, 85 “ οὗ Bishops Ἶ Ill. 177 Equivocations sanctioned by the Ro- mish Priesthood Error, mischiefs of 2 I. ‘of the Collyridians P Il. Errors of the Romanists bs a dah Eucharist, the ; j 3 Π]. Eugenius, Pope III. Eusebius, character of by Constan- tine 6 testimony of respecting Clemens Romanus Vou. Pace. Eutychians, the heresy of the, con- futed by the ascension of Christ II. 510 Events, future predicted : II. 264, 584 Events—proofs of a divine special Providence : « ἘΞ ΤΟΝ τ reasonableness of I. 114 ἐ strangeness of I 112 4 suddennessof . A k. 113 Everlasting life é τ IL 566, ΙΒ Evil-speaking in general ‘ I. 174 τ cautions concerning 1, 178---184. é condemnation of i. 184 “ duty respecting I. 174, 176 ( explicationof- . L 174 « folly οὖ. I. 186 re inconsistent with religion , 16Ν és indecorum of Ξ Τ' 188 ee inducementsagainst I 184 “4 limits of duty respecting I. 176—178 6 mischiefs of Ξ 185 ee _ perversion of the design of speech 186 es prohibition of 184 - punishment denounced against > 184 a symptoms of a disorder- ed mind 185 Example and custom, vain pleas a- Examples of holy persons _ , [1 Excellence of good- examples bad, mischiefs of duty concerning good, the best. directions humana, imperfection of imitation of imitation of Christ’s obligations respecting power of ς ; Scripture instruction ‘con- a best. directions for pre- exceed in excellence _ lessons for our improve- gainst religion for practice cerning dvantage of above pre- cepts cepts ment -ι SH μοι : all μιν : et = Lae ae gl ee = = A a 4) i Oo μ- Excommunicated persons, not admit- ted into communion by other churches in primitive antiquity II. 321, 336 Excommunication of Princes 1Π. 62, 204 Execution of divine justice arn 55 Exemption of Roman Priests from secular jurisdiction by the Popes _ III. Exemptions—the Roman Pontiffs not authorized to grant 4 . i aa “ “ Existence, degrees of . Il, 246 Existence of God U. 232-271; 577—604 proofs of from the belief in a future judgment . Doe frame of the world II. 292, 242, vd human nature _ II, 242253 579, 580 supernatural effects II. 263 _Vox. Pace. a of God, universal consent f ‘of mankind II. 252-262, 582 F. _ Facetiousness I 150 νὴ allowance of I 151 ἡ examples for I 154 Hy) good for the confutation of error I 153 4 harmless : yi 151 mys ironical : I 152 a limits of I 154 as useful for reproof I 152 ff useful in retort I 153 x utility of against unjust obloquy and neo 1. 153 ᾿ warrantable I, 154 Faith i in God and Christ ἃ Il. 176, 573 acceptable to God Σ Mg.*; 176 “ and compliance with the grace of God ‘ 182 “and compliance with the provi- dence of God 183 *« and good conscience always i in- separable : . sip eins 279 « and hope in God Il. 473 “ and works Ew, - 376 “benefits of : Hs): 396 “ conduit of divine grace Mey WA “ content from As. 200 “description of Il... 192 “ effects of Il, 195 “ examples of its power "III. 204—206 “¢ fruit of God’s spirit Ties, 183 “ gives knowledge me ALT “implies a good useof reason I. 180 “increase of II. 186, 189 “ from the consideration of Christ’s resurrection 1, 498 4 from the consideration of Christ’s sufferings, Hy... 457 “influences of II. | 195 “ ingredients of 11. 188, 189 «joy from II. 200 “ justifying © II. 206 «« mistakes concerning iI. . 192 ‘nature of . me Go STF “ objections against De * 17% “ original of ᾿ if... 189 ‘¢ power of , III. 204—206 «preservation of the unity of the church by , III. 315 «previous to pardon Bee: 518 ‘* proceeds from sincerity anda sound judgment II 186 “ proof of piety II 176 “reasonableness of Il 180 “ root of spiritual life II 176 “source of knowledge . ΠΣ LTT “ unity ofthe Church preserved by HI. 315 “ value of, as implying divine knowledge F Bs ΤΊΣ “ voluntary I, 192 “ without reason impossible II. 180 “ wrought in us , Il. 473 _Fataer—tTitle ᾿ II, 271—295 «attributed to God Il. 277 “ import of the name La isates to Π 272 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 577 Vou. Pace. PAaTHER, RE of that title of God on us II, 288 «reasons for calling “God our Father” 272 Father, iniquity of panished in his posterity il 23 Faters—account by, of Peter's dignity UL. a g Bellarmin’s accountof III. 111 ἦς censure of their writings III. Mis 11 a character of the III. 150, 151 ει detesiation of the errors of the Collyndians, ad the T. 443 τ expressions by culpable ΠῚ 111— 113 * notice of Peter’s dignity by : Ἶ ᾿ 77 τ views of respecting Pe- ter’s primacy diode. «TD és writings of Il, 111 Frar— TL, sing 49 “base, prejudicial 4 1. 32 “ causes of infidelity . IL. 166—172 “ God the special object of Il, 34 «“ power of oy; Adee i «“ prejudice to religion ‘from base fear 4 Il. 32 Fear or Gop— Il. 34 66 duty and obligation of the 94 of promoted by the be- lief of divine provi- dence ‘ L 119 (ἐ fear of man Il. 32, 33 Freep my SaeEr—Romish exposition of ᾿ ἃ 100 δε ἽΝ ἐς true interpretation of ΠῚ. 107 Felix III. Pope Σὰ) ὗς Festivats—Jewish and Christian 1. 138 a business on ‘ Ἐπ.» 1 ὦ christian ‘ — we {808 ¢ commemoration of II. 138 « correspondence of II. 138 “ Jewish II. 138 Fidelity—contempt of Il. 174 ἐς mischiefs arising from want of 1, 1 Fierceness, ἃ cause of infidelity. τ ee 6 FJattery—mischief, remedy, and sin of 4 ; : ᾿ II. 484, 485 Flavianus, Pope εὖ ML 351 Flood the, the goodness of God in sending ‘ ; eon’ ἢ 57 Florence, council of lil. 69 Foolish talking , I, 149 4 “« attributes of I, 155 ἊΝ “ includes obscenity 1. 155 Ἄ « _ profaneness I, 159 " ς. seurrility 1, 156 > ‘ ΕἙΣναϊΐηῃ boasting ol. 161 δ᾿ « —_ want of seriousness I, 161 « precept concerning LI. 149 ¢ prohibition of . 195 ὡς « properties of, evil 1. 155 Forgery of the Decretal Epistles Ill. 20 Forgiveness of sins . ITI, 559, 710 , «>. Dao 578 Vor. Pace. Fortune, character of that idol, and the pretended powers of disclaimed II. 318 Friendship, obtained by religious practice ΩΣ Ὁ 90 Future events, predictions of IJ. 264, 584 G. Gelasius, Pope 2 jo he mi. 61 General Councils f Il. 206 German Ubiquitaries, confutation of from the ascension of Christ + ie Gift of the Holy Ghost - a. ΎὙ537 “ benefits from the IT. 142—148 “ nature of the ; 3 Ye ὯΝ Glory —Yain : : : Il. 7 indecorous : : if. 9 “ infatuation of . Il. 8 “ injustice of : ΣΕ Β 8 « mischief of : : . 9 “ not satisfying : τὰ ΑΝ 01} 8 “ uncertainty of : 3 Il. 8 « unprofitable : " Il. 8 Glosses of the Romanists on the Scriptures : Ill. 110 «corruptions of the ΡΤ). 41Ὶ “partiality of the ; TIE. -112 Gnostic heresy the, concerning two gods i . 303 Gop—actions of determination con- cerning ἢ ‘ Aces | 129 “ almighty II. 283, 610 “ attributes of ; : a i 576 “benefactor F ΑΝ; 77 “ benefits of right conceptions respecting 185 *« christianity only represents aright . II. 258, 259 “ ereation of the world by Il. 263 ‘“« determination of the actions of I. 129 “ duty to , : ὃ I, 412 “ eternity of : Jee. 3) Ae “ig ἐσίβίεποα of, proved— + from human nature II. 242 εἰ - from 2 ia ef- fects i, 263 ᾧ ἐν the belief of a future judgment : 270 “ κι the frame of the world : II. 7932 ἐξ τ universal consent II. 262 “ father the II. 271, 604 “goodness of . IL. 49—64 “ government of the world by ΤΊ. ae « hand of . : 3 E: 112 “ honouring of 3 : ee 31 ‘“ immutability of Ἶ j LE; “82 “import of the titles of Aad Fite y “ maker of heaven and earth 11. 295, 616 “ names of . 1. - as “ notions of the perfections of I 37 “ obligations to I, 77, 412 “ omniscience of I. 495, 516 “ perfections of 4 a 576 “ power of ΜΗ in the hea- ΄, vens ‘ II. 239—241 «providence of I. 112 “ representation of by ‘the Chris- tian religion , ; II. 185 * right conceptions of II. 185 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Gop, right titles of : Bde 0 Oe « unity of proved— as “from the harmony in the universe from the suffrages of all mankind : “ wisdom of displayed in the heavens é “« worship of God Almighty { as God the Father Il. 271, 604 by the adoption of Christ’s rethren : ἘΠ oe “ cause of all things . 1. 9.0 “( ογρδῖου of the universe . It. ΠΣ “ effects of our alliance with Il. 279 “ faith, hope, and devotion to- wards Τ.. 2am “ gracious designs of, towards us II. 280 “ humility from us in reference to Il. 279 “ imitation of . ἢ. Oia «“ lessons taught by the title il, 2a “obedience to ot iL oe “ of all good men : . IL 2a OF christians 3 i. 2a “ of intellectual beings .- Ἢ. ae “ of Israel ; a Il. 278 “ of mankind in general : IL. - 2a “raises believers in Christ to | glory ‘ IL 2a “receives all who trust in him i, 2 “ reliance on the good ΕΣ , dence of : . 2am “renewal of our nature by IL. 27am “reverence from mandueto MII. 277 “« submission to II. 280 “teaches us to love all our fellow mortals : é . | 9388 Godliness : i: 9. «affords the best friendship and society 2° 29° “« blessings of to posterity _—_‘I. 19 , “comfort in affliction by La ‘deliverance by from trouble I. 18 «“ enjoyment of the fruits of industry by ; . ΡΝ “ enlightens the mind iB 20 ‘“« ~ furnishes beneficial employ- ment ae 28 «“ good name through. a 19 & guidance by I, 18 «“ improvement of by. exercise I. 31 “Jong life by : ΝΣ 18 “ peace δῃὰ joy Ὁ. I 18, 22,5 «“ preferment by q «prescribes the best rules of action ; Te 20. «preservation in safety by I. 18 “¢ produces happiness I. ε΄ τὰ profitable 3 I. ec for all other good I. ae és «« for the world to come «| ae i « « for this life . “ee it a“ “ to all men 5 il; ὧν “to every condition of life I 13 TI. 239—241 ‘. : aay 283—294, 610 God, maker of Heaven and earth II. 295-310, 616 37 =~ INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Vou. Pace. θυ... promotes vanial inter- course 90 <¢ prosperity from deuce . ‘1. 18 «protection from in danger I. 18 “ reconciles enemies E 30 «“ rectifies human practice I, 20 “ satisfaction of our desires by I. 18 «“ supply of wants through 1. 18 «support in trouble by i, 18 “ the blessing of solitude I. 31 “ utility of i & 20 « wisdom in acquiring of En 91 Good company a remedy ae dis- content I. 458 Goodness of God ‘displayed Il. 49—64 “effects produced by the con- sideration of the Il. 62—64 ‘in divine justice Il. 55 “in divine providence lI. ol “in the deliverance of Israel and Judah into Assyrian thraldom ee © 58 « jin the deluge universal Il. o7 ‘ in the destruction of Jeru- salem Il. 60 “ in the exclusion of Adam and Eve from the garden in Eden ὲ ἘΣ, 56 “ in the extripation of the Ca- naanites f 58 “ inthe frame of nature ΠΙ. 50 Gospel benefits and doctrines of made void by infidelity II. 166 “« ignorance of mM. ° 367 “ nations unacquainted with II. 87, 99 “perfection of é II. 259 “ prejudices against «“ terror of Government—civil destroyed by A- IL, 167, 168 II, | 223 theists | ee 118 “ maintenance of I. 131 oe of the church Ill. 187 μι support of by religion I. 132 Refer to “ Societies.” Governors of the Chiirch bul Le 38s Grace, abuse of ‘ I. 525 communication of to heathens II. 95 «“ danger in abusing of by ne of repentance 1 525 «« dispositions for receiving II. 103 “ effects of in heathens Il. 95 “ falling from ἘΠ. 21} «“ οἵ God ‘ II. 92, 93 «previous dispositions for I. 525 “reception of : II. 103 “ state of a. Χ215 Gratitude, learned from Christ’s suf- ferings : - ; Il. 456 Garcory L Pope ; ILI. 61, 62 “ authority of, against the papal titles IIL. 103—105 “ “ character of, Ill, 103 Gregory II. Pope IIT. 61, 62 Gregory VII. Pope - Ik 59 Gregory Nazianzen, denunciations by, against Ecclesiastical Councils LT. 160, 178 Grief and pain i.” 305 Grotius, a of on | justifying faith II 229 579 Vou. Pace. Grotius, improper companions of, re- specting the twonaturesof . Christ Il. 431 Gunpowder treason the, of Novem- ber 5, 1605 ‘ I, 108—124 H. Hades, interpretation of, Il. 476 Hadrianus <« Tae Hamakom, title of the J ewish Doctors II. 288 Happiness, attainment of by religion I. 26 as future I 559 “ “consideration of, means of con- tentment oar 456 « “ degrees of, I, 529 ee hope of x. 2 se sought from the remem- brance of the shortness of life I. 509 Hardness of heart Il. 168 Harmony of the world, proof of the Unity of God 261 “Hear,” in the scriptures, meaning of oi. 482 Hearers, religious, “character of I. 603 Heart—the chief seat of the soul 1. 481 “ deceitful ont 484 « diligence respecting the keeping of the ne” 480 «“ knowledge of, ΕΝ ho- liness~ : fe 494 «“ keeping ofthe : ae ΝΣ 480 cs advantage of ] 486 os % conduces to the knowledge of human nature I. 495 ε “ defends against the harsh cen- sures of others I. 487 “ os destroys self-con- ceit : 486 ( ts disposes to a so- ber mind I, 491 ἐς “ extirpates _ self- love F I. 486 imparts prudence and wisdom 1. moderates the pas- sions | F necessary to the well govern- ment of the heart ; I, preserves from mistakes iL produces equani- mity, patience and solace I, promotes godly practice I. prompts to expe- dition and con- stancy in duty 1. reforms the heart and life I. regulates our prayers and thanksgivings I. 493 580 Vou. Pace. > keeping of the, spiritualizes devotion I. 493 “ — duty-of 3 ν᾿ B 482 “meaning of the phrase ¥ 481 «neglect Of, mischievous I. ~°484 Heathen mythology II. 257, 258 Heaven . a 296, 617 ‘¢ ancient fathers declared in- ; accessible before Christ’s ascension : $ II. 508 «“ extent of the meaning of ily «297 ~ & place of God’s special pres- ence ον, 09 “ signification of the word. i: 296 Heavens the, discovery 'by of infinite wisdom and power II. 239, 240 « Jewish notion of II. 296, 617 Hell— - II. 476, 675 «“ descent of Christ to II. 475, 676 id - vain conceits respect- ing : . II. 480, 679 “ torments of Il. 567 Heresy, of Gnostics concerning two Gods 303 “ of Simony, Popes cuilty of the Rae’ 3) “Heretics, ancient confatations of Ill, 86 « denounced Hil.’ “G6 Hermogenes, error of concerning the creation of the world : 303 Holiness promoted by knowledge of the heart : : ‘ 1..4902, 494 Hoty Guost— IL. 542, 694 ἐξ attestation of to the Christian religion II. 393 blasphemy against II. 548 τὰ divinity of II. 550 3 efficacy of II. 436 a effusion of 2 il. 393 a i gift of Se ἢ 9d God. II. 550 a miraculous efficacy of II. 436 ἀν name of if. -**-542 τς nature of Il. . 544 - offices of II. 555 ᾿ “ operations of Il. 556 ἐς origin of II. 554 ¢ Tlapaxdpros, Il. 556 a personality of Il. ~ 546 “ procession of . II, 554 Holy life, promoted by the knowledge of our own hearts < I. 492, 494 Honesty Il. 12 ae public behaviour II. 16 «< before men : ai. 16 a «“ advantages to the world Il. 27 66 «“ beneficial to ourselves II. 29 “ ‘* beneficial to society around us 5 Il. 16 6“ “ claimed by piety II. 22 a “ demanded by charity to ourneighbours 11. 24 vd “exacted by justice Il. 25 “ «“ maintains the dignity of the christian pro- fession ‘ 20 “ “ necessary for the honour » of God els iv « ᾿- 18 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Honesty before men, needful to pre- ( έι “ {ς ( duties of “ excuses for the neglect of ai. “ affectation of not being hy- Vou. Pac iam i serve a good σέων: : tion proof of good princi- ples I required by virtue ΠΙ. : Il. pocritical ek Ὁ deference to the opin- ion of an ungodly world Il. dislike of singularity I. dread ofenvy . IL. expectation of re- proach or ridicule II. fear of man the Il. pretended alarm lest religion should be. dishonoured sinful cowardice solicitude to be deem- ed courteous the vain plea of affect- ed discretion, which is perverse wisdom Il. ΕἸ. and subtle craft II. “48. ‘¢ Meaning of : a. 13 (τς Neslect-of -ῷ Σ Ξ . IL. 382-48. ‘obligations to 8 iL 16 Honorius, Pope Th ἦν III. 285 Honour, true I. : attainment of να Ἷ “ Desire of : I, 39. “ in religion Ἶ I. 14 “Security of 3 35° “¢ Usefulness of ras «“ Worldly, σα of ὃ Honouring of God Ἄ ΤΣ 31 benefits of . I. 36, 42 «“ ~ characters of Ι 30 “« duty of Seyi ΤΗΝ 86 ‘¢ honourable to man i: 42 “ leads to imitation of him 11. 42 «« manifested by—dedication " of our propert ; to hint * Ἶ 1. 39° ne “ esteemofhim I. 81. τ “humility before him , I. 39° “4 ‘¢ improvement of our talents to a his -praise I, 39 ‘¢ penitence towards a him Ξ 39. “ νι κ΄ practice of piety I. 38 i “ regard for his ᾿ servants L 39 ( ‘¢ religious duty ᾿ fulfilled ᾿: 38 ᾿- “ respect for his Ἰ sanctuary x 39. εἴ “ reverence for him I. 37 ( “submission to his ~ ORE >> aul, 468 é Bu negligence. 1. 266 bs INDEX OF SUBJECTS. ° Vou. Pace aphaclity causes of offence at apparent- 9 ly severe truths II. [168 perverseness ofwillIl. 168. “prejudice through ignorance. II. 1 ( ( pride : 5 Heys εἰ ne pusillanimity . Il. 171 “ « sloth . : I Ta 6 “stupidity a. ἐξ « want of love for ie truth © . a “Character of : , J. ae “ Consequences οὗ, . Il. 176 ‘¢ τ effects of 4 : : LDL oe ἐξ - evil OL ; ᾿ 0. ΝΕ ΟΠ or : 4 . ΠΡ ΝΣ ( nature of ! : 1: ἫΝ «“ naughtiness of ἡ. .- I. ΕΣ “root ofallsin’ . : Il. a (( sinfulness of ~ TL) an “ unreasonableness of . II. 165 Infidels, not doers of good actions II. 176 Ingratitude punished by the Persians I. 92 Iniquities of Fathers punished i in their posterity 23 Injunctions of the Council of Trent . concerning the Pope’s sts aid Ill. Gia Innocent 1. Pope Ill. 146m Innocent III. Pope Ill. 58 Innocent IV. Pope ᾿ lil. "a Inspiration divine; pretences to by . Councils, Popes, ‘and Synods ἯΙ. Zone Intemperance, opposed to the Chris- 1 tian Religion ; = 1. ΣΝ Irenzeus τὸν Le Intermeddling with the affairs of oth- er persons. l.. 2 Israelites, goodness of Godtothe IL. 53, 54 “ judgments of God onthe 11. 58—-60 i A James the Apostle not the i si of ᾿ . Jerusalem Il. “ae Janizaries of the Pope ΤΙ, 2005 Jenovan—in Scripture—the title of Christ : . ἢ. 2 ‘¢ Title of God Ul. ὅσος Jerom, testimony of, respecting Cle- mens Romanus Jerusalem, destruction of, not an ar- gument against divine Providence i OL 60 Jesting, limitations of : . 3 150 © ἐς foolish, prohibited . 2 tee 149 Jesuits, character of the — Ill. 204 Jesus—the true Messia II. 344, 628 ‘¢ adoration due to II. 411, 636 “ advocacy of . tL. ‘“ aggravation of impiet and sin by rejecting . 7 , If, 413 “ appointmentof . . II. 348 “ ascension of “Il, 501, 684 — “ Attestations to Il. 379 “ «( by celestial appa- ritions 1 II. 880 ( ( by his office of Prophet II. 397, - ὑΐ Ἦ by his preroga- tives, as King II. 398, 631, 686 / ᾿ INDEX OF SUBJECTS. 583 9 Vou. Pace. Vou. Pace. Jesvs—attestations to, by his Priestly Jesus—proof of from the time of office II. 299, 400, 632, his advent II. 352 689] « reason of the name given to A; 7 by his resurrec- Christ . es ΝΣ tion from the “resurrection of II. 481—500 ; 679—684 dead . JJ. 392] « reverence due to . IL. 411, 636 93 “ by inherent m- “ salvation by . . - II. 77 raculous en- “ Saviour the Ἵ Il. 626—628 ergy . Il. 387] “ sitting of at the right hand of 4 τ by predictions II. . 385 Godt ὰ II. 501—514 ; 684 τς - by the gift of “ Son of God ὃ Il. 402. 410; 633 miraculous “ suffermgsof . ‘ > “veka 443, 652 powers to the - teaches the dignity of our na- | Apostles . IL. 392 ture and condition - Il. 412 a by the prophetic “ thankfulness to . , Il. 412, 636 Harbinger, « the title implies that he was the John : ia, 386 Son of God in the exclusive ε Si, by voices from sense of the phrase ‘ II. 633 heaven . If. 387} “ twonaturesof “ ᾿ Il. 643, 644 “ deathof . - I. 462; 664—672} “ urgeshigh esteem for, and sub- “ birthof . . : ἃ Il. 648 mission to the evangelical dis- ἢ “ pburialof . : , Il. 462, 672 pensation F Ii. 413 “ comfort from . . II. 686] Jewish notion of the name Messias III. 76 “ condition of in early life II. 355,371} Jewish Passover . 2 . ee) {0 “ confidence in : . Il.- 412) Jewish Pentecost ᾿ Il. 138 “ crucifixion of 11. 447462 ; 657—664| Jewish religion, imperfection of IL 322, 593 “ deathof . - . Il. 462; 664—672| « 4 not an imputation on _ descent ofinto hell 11. ‘475 ; 674—679 Jehovah . : II, 328 “efficacy of the sufferings of I. 410,636} Jews; belief of in the Midrash i. £2 “endowments of mle II. 355! “ inhumanity of ᾿ ‘ dp 313 “ extent of the salvation by . II. 76; “ vwncharitablenessof . =< αὶ 313 τ a of God inthe giftof If. 6236) John 11. Pope . r Γ : Ill. 60 «hope in ; , II. 412, 636| John VIII. Pope . " - iy θα “ incarnation of . II. 428—443 ; 642} Joshua, a type of Christ. . ν Il. 346 “ Jewish notion of the title Ill. 76| Joy—from a belief of divine provi- “ Judge of the quick and the dence . ᾿ : Ls 121 dead : . Tl. 514—542, 657] “ Spiritual . . Ee 1 * Jove to God for the giftof 11. 412, 636! Judaism ancient, not to be found iL. . 88. Sion, . . Il. 414, 415, 637} Judge upright : . ᾿ i... a “Name the . II. 345, 625 Judges, office of . ἢ , I. 212—218 “ philanthropy educed A 2 A12, 636 Judging of others . , I, 210 “ Proof of : Hl. 852] .“ allowed to whom Ἱ. 211 - “ from his endowments Π 365) « as Impertinence of I. 222 “ “ « doctrines a 965." a Impiety of τ νὴ : 218 « “ “f erection of a | « a injustice of ᾿ I. 219 spiritual, u- 6 { Rashness of “ΔῈ... 21 niversaland { Ms Regulation of II. 222 ky aan ( ( ΘΌΡΡΟΥΙ under false II. 294 ingdom 11. 363—367|} « « Uncharitableness of I. 220 “ “ “ institation of Refer to ““ Detraction.” a new cov- Judgment, Bad, a cause of Infidelity I]. 166 enant. II. 362 Judgment Future— . 584 a es “ performances 11. 359— 4 account of in divine 361 Revelation -_ ih “ “ 4 sufferings II. 374 + Belief of, the great- ε “ “ the consequen- est incentive to ces of his virtue : II. 517, 518 works . If. 367 és Certainty of .‘ JL. 526 ~& “ “ qualities Il. 355 se Circumstancesof Il, 527 “ « from the circumstan- ( Discovery of life ces combined _ by ; , Il. 270 with him II. 352 “ Divine proceedings . “ a “ his first con- justified by . IL 525 dition of life 11. 355, 371 ἐ Effect of, to refor- ( ὰ “ his family Il. .. 353 mation - Ι. δ16, δ19 Bice. | “ the manner of a Equity of ἡ Il. 517 his birth Il. 354 Be Impartiality of . IL. 72 “ a “ the place of his ae incentive to virtue Il. "518 birth II. 353 τ influence of on our lives II. 196 * ' 584 Vou. Pace. Judgment Future, justification at of the divine pro- concerning ceedings . II. 270 μ supposes ἃ virtuous « reasonablenessof II. 514 mind 191 “s reformation, thro’ the belief of 1. 516, 519 K, m1 ( solemnity of . II 533 Keeping of the heart ᾿ ae " 480 Judgment human ΜΒ 211 “ advantages of 1. 486 Judgment of Prelates by the Roman « «“ diligence in I.. 480 Pontiffs : 3 : Ἶ ΠῚ 233 } “ ee Melty or. os L 482 Judgment the last. : : i. O33 ( ‘neglect of mis- J udgments of God on the Israelites II. 58—60 chievous lL. Δ8ὲ unsearchable [. 575 | Keys, the powerof the .. Th. * ‘7033 Julius, Pope ‘ III. 63, 146 11. 104 Jurisdiction, Papal, commencement “ communicated equally to all the of Ε 5 Tt,’ - 232 Apostles : ° lit. 1055 a ecclesiastical TIT. 282) ® . exercise of + °". : lI. 7u8 ἐν nature of ili. 233] τς imstitution original of ὦ. Il. 709 δι over the Romish priest- *! necessity OEs FP irs its Il. Ti hood IYI. 196—198 | “© occasion of : : : i.” 79 2s presumption ofthe claim «practice of : 5 1. 7 to ; F AS | ise aE on, 3. te OE ΉΝ - temporal, asserted by the “ usefulness of i: 7 Pope 281 | Kingdom of Heaven, explanation of II. 705 Ξε universal, arrogated by Ὥ “: opening of Il, 563 the courtof Rome III. 280 King ; return of the : hay 93 Justice in our dealings. : II. 538 | Kines—authority of . 3 ἣν 40, “ of God, instances of : II. 55 Ill. 277 “ to our neighbour, obligation to “ church prayers for ΙΝ 105 as part of a holy life . Π. 25] ‘ duty of prayers for εἰ: 93 JusTiFIcaTION— IJ. 472] “ example of ; Se 40 εν acts of God applicable “ honour to I 100 to II. 221] « instruments of God’s providen- ἐξ and sanctification equi- tial kingdom . I 102 valent terms 231 | «ὦ. obedience to I 100 τ Augustin’s use of the “power of to call ecclesiastical word Ii, 230 councils ἡ. 211 «¢ Bellarmin’s allegations ‘| §* practice of the churches to offer of : TE. "229 supplications for I. 105 «benefits of ὺ ay 20a e δῆς prayer for I 93 ee deprivation of ἃ a Boe sc acceptable to God I, 100 ὦ differences concerning II. 220} “ “ advantagesof . I 103 dispensation of Ἴ it.” 230 ( “ commanded by the gos- «disputes respecting TE; |. "220 pel ‘ pee 93 6 Fathers and schoolmen 6 ‘“ demanded by common agreement upon ik, 220 charity I 94 a“ Grotius’ allegations con- 6“ “ enforced by equity. I 99 cerning : ΠΡ ΡΟ " “ gratitude claims I 99 i import of : ; i: ΘΟ ΎΥΥ ‘honourable service I 100 * nature of : i) ee “a “© means of redressing the “ not an infused quality If. 227 wrongs done by them I. 104 ( not learned from gram- “ “ motives to I. 94 marians : is 22735 “ necessity of, for their use- ao Paul’s explanation of II. 223 fulness : 1, 101 “ΤΟΙ . II. 230]. “ “ personal welfare urges I 98 sod reconciliation of disputes ( *« public good requires I, 95 concerning ἢ, 2a ὦ unreasonableness of denying ἐ schoolmen and fathers, the power of to call ecclesias- agreement upon ΤΡ 220 tical councils ; . | Tt ΦῸ a time of : pee ΕΝ 1. ὦ Refer to “Emperors” and “ Sovereigns.” ἡ ὰ Tridentine Οουηο)}}5 Know .epee, desire of, an argument sense of ‘ iI, Ὁ for the origin “of. the 6 by faith - Ἶ i. Pea soul from God, and for Justify, not used by profane writers its immortality Il. 249 as in Scripture ᾿ ὃ a.” ee od imperfections of in this Justifying faith ᾿ , II. 206 state . I. 577, 623 _ errors concerning - ip * learned through religion I. 15 6 nature of + 206 νι love of, universal I, 485 “ objections to S 6230 a ofourownhearts . 1. 483 ἃ «>? INDEX OF SUBJECTS. ” Vou. Pace, Justifying faith refutation of errors _ ‘| 218 ἐν ι - INDEX OF SUBJECTS. t > * an... . Vou. Pace. he Knowtenvee, religion teaches . 1. 485 b ‘Knowledge divine, attained by faith II. 179 “excellence of ΤΡ 5178 ᾿ ( «perfection of II. 180 ‘Knowledge human, uncertainty of 11. 179 . Knowledge secular, vanity of a: Ἢ 505 : II, . 379 “ power of . ; ; + TK, ..«384 «“ Pretencesto by Romanists III. 168 “ Prophev’s power to work 11. 381 © reasons of. : II. 382 Miraculous powers of the Apostles III, 116 66 of the Prophets II. 381 Mischiefs of base compliance ey ple 32 Moderation recommended . ; δ 180 Modesty, when blamable ν pth 32 Monarchy—abuse of TIL.» 829 ἕ « ~ And Democracy . I. 587, 588 * In Church and State . III. 160 329 Vou. Pace. Monarehy—Universal . .- JUL. Les ἐς «© Impolitic . III, 160 ( *¢ Inconvenient III. 160. Monasteries, exempted from secular jurisdiction by the Pope Monkery : ἢ Moses, history by antiquity and cre- dibility of the ‘ Movernpeov, translated in “the first versions of the Bible by the word ΤΙ. III. Oaths, rash “ {{ Sacrament Ill. 42 Mystical sense of the Old Testament II. 132 Mythology of the Heathen 11. 257, 258 © N. Name, acting in another’s ‘ I. 377 ? Name good, from the practice of reli- ἝΝ gion. Il. 28 Name of Christ, all to ‘be done in I. 377 Names, ancient ἧς ἱ Il. 345 “answerable to employments Il. 345 “« given by divine providence II. 345 “ use of : ; Hl. 3400 Nativity of Christ, solemnization of II. 434 « of Jesus 11. 439—443 ; 648—652 - Natural afflictions ; Ἐν 451 Nature human, dignity of : ΠΤ 434 Natures in Christ, union of . II, 4307 Necessity and chance identical IL ἘΞ Negligence, a cause of infidelity II. 166 Neighbour, love of : ἈΚ 256 ε “ arguments for I 286 τί ( directions for i 260 τ “ duty of I. 257 re *« obligations to I 262 ad ΕΣ practicable I. 265, 267 Nestorius, heresy of, concerning the ai two natures in Chtist ᾿ III. 251 Netser, branch, title attributed to the Messias Il. 3a Nice, council of 1Π. 20a Nicholas 1. Pope III. 60 ( the first Pontiff of Rome who excommunicated ᾿ secular potentates ΠῚ Tae Nicholas II. Pope . ΠῚ: 1955 Novatians, perfection and purity of I. ὋΝ O. Oath of the Pontiffs of Rome at their election : ΠῚ. 70 Oatus—abuse of ἡ I. 146, 162 “ conduce to the preservation of human society , Il. ὅδ « “directions concerning Stepan 164 “« dispensations for violating, by Popes III. 204 “ Heathens’ judgment respecting Ι. ἘΣ ( limitation of ; LL = “ nature of , lL. ἊΣ “¢ obligation of, on conscience Ι, Ὁ “preserve human society II. 519 “ religious worship in I. 163 “sacredness of “ὦ 1. , ΝΣ “ Scripture account of 1, 163 “« sin of abusing : Le i I 3 causes of ; . -INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Vou. Pace. Vou. Pace. Oaths. tash, disparagement of, to Opuscula Questiones Act. Moderat, ‘those who use them I. 170 April 1651 407 “«“ “ impertinence of, in dis- 4 Visionem fieri posse absque ; course : 7 171 specie, aut imagine sensi- “ © “incivility of Ἶ I. 171 bili, probabile est III. 407 «“ ‘leads to detrimental under- Oracles antiquity of II. 265 takings : 168 | Oral traditions of Popery III. 289 « « Jeads to unlawful practices I. 167 | Orationes II. 341 “¢ {( mischiefs of, on govern- “— Concio ad Clerum Ill. 386 ment and society I. 165 “ Oratio ad Academicos in “no temptation to - I. 172 Comitiis III. 459 “ = sources of I. 172 ( “ cum Grece Lingue Say: ἐς ( conceit I. 172 Cathedram ascende- eo ἘΞ humour BOE 172 _rit, A. D. 1660 Ill. 452 ae: “irreverence to God I. 1725 Ὁ τ “ ~ habita in Comitiis Ill. 489 Pa δ levity I. 172 " « habita in Lectura Ge- een ~ passion ie 172 ometrica Collegii oe ον profane boldness I. 172 Greshamensis, Lon- = S stupidity I. 172 dini, A. D. 1662 Ill. 464 Pee ὯΝ uncivil i 171 a “ ~~ quinto Nov. Anno Obedience, blind ; Ill. 293 1651, In Aula, 5. Obedience to Christ’s law, argument ' TT. Collegii Ill. 430 : of love to = {5 ~ Moderatoria in auspi- Christ 1. 405, 406 ciis termini, April Ξ " necessary I. 379 30, 1651 Ψ ἘΠ ὍΝ fs 7 universal II. 48 τ “ Preefatoria in Schola Obedience to God whence learned 11. 277— publica Mathemati- 279 ca, Mart. 14, 1664 III. 471 Obedience to governors of the church I. 585, 593, - « Prefatio cum oppone- 600, 608 ret die Cinerum, Obedience to the Pope Ill. 70 Feb. 21, 1653 Ill. 442 Objection made by Porphyry, con- “ “ Procancellarii Electi, cerning the time of Christ’s incar- A. D. 1675 ΠῚ. 481 nation Π. 353 - «“ Pro Lectore Human IIf. 448 Obligation of duty to God, from his μέ « Sarcasmica in Schola attributes : I, 412, 413 Greeca - 483 Obligations to God 2 ae 77 a “ — Vicecancellarii mune- Offending words , Ἐν} 140 re defuncti ae. ἫΝ Omniscience of God II. 4262) Order and discipline of the primitive Opportunities for action best taught churches ‘ 4 . . 228 by religion . ; Ὁ 6 Refer to “ Discipline.” Opportunity for advice. : I, 6 | Ordination of Prelates III. 235, 237 -“ Opus operatum” the II. 167 as priority of ΐ ᾿ Ill. 78 Opascule theologica Ill. 339) Oriental churches Ill, 195 Anime humane corpori- Original sin alienates from God lif. 43 bus non preexistunt ΠῚ. 365 6 captivity to Satan by II. 419 ad De Potestate Clavium Il, 374 ( condemnation through II. 227 + De Regimine oe Ill. 3054 ( debasement from I. 383 γέ De Sestertio ; 11. 494 a punishment of II. 56 «De Spirita Sancto . III. 3411 Orthodox the in the primitive churches III. _ 316 « De tribus symbolis Ill. 962. Otho IV. Pope Ill. ' 58 ee Epistola, 1651 Ill, 445 “ τὸ πλαδήνῃ in Henricum P. auimond, 1660 : ΠῚ. 526 ε Epitofne fidei et religionis Paganism ‘ Il. 316—319 Turcicea, a Mahumeto Pagans condition of the . Σ Il. 96 Kureischita, Arabum “ reception of divine grace by Propheta, prius in Arabia the ἦν CFR 95 deserta, postea a succes- « wantof faith in ἢ Christ o' IL 97 soribus per totum pene « without explicit a of Orientem diffuse Ill. 398 Christ I: 97 « Habitus humani acquisiti Pain and grief . ἢ. 305 non sunt revera diversi a Palls sent by the Pope Ill. 205 memoria hominis Ill. 407 Παντοκράτωρ, a title st τ ς. — In Comitiis, 1652, Cartesi- per to God 283, 284 ana hypothesis ‘de mate- Papal authority, extent of IIT, 66, 69 ria et motu haud satisfa- Papal sovereignty, extent of iL 8 οἷν preecipuis nature Papal succession total interruption . pheenominis : 414] οἵ the ἘΣ Υ ΠῚ. 281 588 . Vou. Pace. Papal Supremecy, arguments against the " Ill. 129 Paradise, lost by unbelief I, 42. 1.8 _ © the seat of... II. 479 TlapaxAnros, a title of the Holy Ghost Il. 556 Pardons by the Pope " 5 fig ML. gee Parents duty to Ἶ “ἘΠ, δι Particular absolutions among the Romanists . : é ἢ HI. 287 Paschal II. Pope niet 1 58 Passion ; cause of infidelity II. 168, 171 τ contrary to the Christian re- ligion ii Be 170 Passion of “Christ foretold 3 in the Old Testament : ᾿ Il. 128 «Infinite merit of II. 89, 90 Passover Jewish causes of its insti- tution . II. 46 Pastors of the church, duty of, to maintain peace and unity 282 ῬΑΤΙΕΝΟΕ, accessory to faith . τ . 290 ἐξ Christ the example of . I. 467 «Proceeds from faith . Il, 201 Patriarchs—authority of ἘΠῚ: 194 «Institution of II. 195 “¢ —- jurisdiction of Ill. 195 “ Order of not higher than Primates : Ill. 195 Paul and Peter ; III. 93—98 Peace—advancement of by Christ’s kingdom 11. 367, 368 Advantages CBs tics I. 311 “Among Christians inviolable TI. 212, 318 “ attainable Ε 4 Le 316 “ Convocation of Councils de- signed to promote E it. 212 “ Not tothe wicked. : i; 456 “ Sacraments promote Ill. 318 “ Synods conducive to Ill. 319 Peaceable behaviour I. 309 ‘“ a duties of - I. 309—314 “ “ inducements to I. 319 a tempers explained . I. 297 ( ἐς qualities of 1, 299-308 Pelagians—errors ofabout baptism II, 141 ‘¢ Perfection claimed by > 627 ‘¢ Purity, pretences of to 1. 627 Penance, commutation of Ill. 205 Pentecost teast of : MH; “486 ‘* observance of by the Jews Il, 138 “ Perdam Balylonis nomen” . Ill. 173 Perfection, appointment of > 2. 994 6 degrees of among crea- tures II, 304 ὦ notion thereof as applied to man : ; 140 ad Scriptural views of ἘΠῚ κ᾿, 140 Performances to be judged by their nature, and not by contingent events IT. 88 Perjury introdaced by rash or vain swearing , : A, 167 Persecution. . Il. 269, 270 Perseverance in religion ; II. 45 Persians, ingratitude punished by the I. 92 Personality ‘of the Holy Ghost Il. 547—549 Persons, respect of : sre BE 64 Perer, the Apostle, accomplishments of ; 3 Ξ HI. 79 “activity of Ill. 88 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Vo. Pace. ῬΕΤΕΒ, appeals not made to . _ Lae call of to the spostleship’ III. 8. . “ dignity of Ill. ΕΣ. “ eminency of * ΠῚ, 7a “ eulogies of, by the Fathers ΠΙ. 85, 114 } «faith of Il. 89 “ first among the Apostles Ill. Ἔ “ first in age Ἢ ., iL ΝΣ “ life of ‘ Ξ " . It ae “ never at Rome 7 III. 120, 121 “ not a Prelate TL. ae “nota Priest Ill. a “ not Bishop of Rome IIL. 119, 124 “personal qualities of Ὁ. Ill. "Ὁ “prerogatives of ΙΗ, 133 “primacy of : Ill. 133 © ~ g not derivable to any . successors . IL die “ qualifications of Ill. 89 “superiority of in power. Ill. 98 “ titles of, given by the Fathers III. 85, 111 « zealof . , III. 82, 88 “ Peter-pence” Ill. 205 PuILOSOPHERS, ancient— ; Ii. - 2a - absurd assertions of II. 265.ϑ ἐξ notions οὗ aboutreligion II. 179 “ obscurity of . . I1.3%8, 314 τι precepts of II. 518, 519 a vice not restrained by II. 519 “« virtue not promoted by II. Philosophers and Poets opinions of concerning the origin of man con- trasted with Scripture Philosophy and christianity, rine ison of Ξ 2 . I. 339, 340 Pisa, council of δ ἢ ᾿ Pius II. Pope Ill. Ἂ Pius IV. Pope, creed of III. 295 Pius V. Pope . : Ill. 56 Plants, the great power and wisdom “oy of God displayed by J Il. 233. Pleasantness of religion ‘ if ae Pleasure conquered by religton | ἢ ὦ 3 «true, in christian practice I. 1 “ vanity of . ae 504 Pliny, error of concerning the resur- rection II. 482 Plurality of gods among ‘the philoso- phers ‘eo . IL. 261, 262 Poemata 3 : ; > III. 497 « Ad D. D. Chr. Wrenn III. 534 “ Ad Johannem Tillotson, | cum Libro Lect . I. 534 « Augustiss, regi suo reditum gratniatur Britannia, An- 3 no 1660 _ . Ill. 520 “ Christus per mortem fuit sacrificium proprie expi- atorium pro peccatis, An- _ no 1652 500 “ Conscientia erronea obligat, Anno 1652 499 “ Creature non potest creare, . Anno 109... 497 “ Dantur forme substantizles Anno 1652 499 «“ Dantur rationes Boni et Mali geterne et indispinsabiles Anno 1651 , IJ. 498 I. 256—258 © 518 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. VoL. | Poemata Dantur substantiz incorpo- τ { ree natura sua Immorta- les. Anno 1651 III. De religione Turcica. AK- E®AANO, Anno 1658 III. De 5. Trinitate. Jul. 1670 III. Divinitas TOY AOTOY -constat ex initio Lvange- hi secundum Johannem III. Ill. Elegia. Anno 166% -Eligiz, in obitum dignis= simi. Domini Spenceri Bretton, illustrissimi Con- suis Angiorum Smyrne, Anno 165¥. Elegia ee | i Elegie. Anno 1660 1Π. Epicedium in ducem albe- marie. Anno 1670 III. Epigramma ; ; III. Epigrammata Anno 1661 III. Epitaphium, 1660 ἯΙ. Epithalamium R. Caroli, et R. Catharine, 1662 Ill. Hypothesis Cartesiana de materia et motu haud s1t- isfacit precipuis nature phenomenis. Anno 1653 1Π]. Illustrissimo Domino Geor- gio Monk, regis restitutori, regni liberatori, Anno 1660 IIT. In obitum ducisse Aarel. Anno 1670 In obitum Henrici ducis Glocestrensis et Mariz prin- ΠῚ. cipis Arausionensis 160 1Π. In Psalmos a reverendo D. decano Petroburgensi Ho- merico versu donatos, an- no 1674 Ἶ Ill. In victoriam navalem, anno Iter maritimum a portu Li- gustico ad Constantinopo- lim. Nov. 6. Anno 1657 Mundus neque fuit neque esse potuit ab AEterno, An- no 1069. F Obedientia Christi non tollit obedientiam Christianam, Anno 1652 ‘ Ratio secundi precepti in decalogo est immutabilis, Anno 1668 F Reverendo magistro, et ‘dig- nissimis sociis collegii ‘S. S. Trinitat, Cantabrigie, Anno 1655 ‘ Terram esse in mundicen- tro sitam nullis argumen- tis evincitur, Anno 1653 Poets, Ancient— d Il. Vou. Il. { Interpreters of pop- ular opinions ΘΗ͂ΙΣ Opinions of the, con- cerning the origin of man . ; Scriptures the, con- trasted with the writ- ings of . III, Ill, Pace. 498 δ11 533 529 530 519 524 591 530 027 527 527 501 523 531 524 522 528 506 497 500 529 502 501 252 261 ΤΠ, 256—253 II, 256—258 78 «Vor. Pace. PontirF Roman—the appeals to the III. 205 a ae power of the lll. 84 ad -authority of the, in Councils and Synods without foundation III. 213 { authority of to depose secular Potentates III. 54—59 behaviour of, accord- ing tocircumstances Lil. 203 character of the III. 138, 170 confirmation of a istrates by Ill. 278 confirmation of pre- : lates by ἱ Il. 234 departure of from the faith é : III. 282 election of the ΠῚ 136 gain of the, by the re- jection of the diocesan primacy III. 193 heresy taught by the i. ae ignorance of the Il. imposition of taxes rd - the : Ill. 279 increase of the powers of the 201 indulgences to sin by the 206 infallibility pretended ΠῚ of the ἔ 286 insolence in the titles given to the III. 84, 85 Janizaries of the Ul. 204 not a Judge of contro- versies : Ill. 276 not infallible Ill. 275 perverters of the doc- trine of Christ . Ill. 286 policy of the, concern~ ing the ecclesiastical Canons ' .ΠΙ ae power ascribed tothe III. 54 power of the, defecti- ble . : 281 power of the, over princes ΠῚ. 286 power of, to grant pri- vileges Ill. 282 power of, to impose taxes 55 power of, to ‘restore prelates 254 power of to summon General Councils II. 206 presidency of the, in General Councils II. 278 pretences of to su- preme Sovereignty III. 236 subject tothe Church III, 72 subjection of to™the Emperor Ill. 195, 196 subjects wickedly ab- solved from their sworn allegiance to civil authority, by the ΠῚ, supremacy of the, claimed in spiritual affairs : Synods called by the II. 23 590 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Vou. Pace. Vou. Pace, © Poets, Ancient—titles of the Ill. 50| Pores’ Supremacy—evils ofthe .° III. 168 «“ unskilled in divinity III. 276 “ “ forfeited totally Ill. 281 si usurpations of the II. 293 ες ς 6, growth-of the ὁ. Ill. ΠΝ Pontius Pilate character of II. 447, 448 a id imperiousness of ὶ Poor the, care of, evinces the Provi- the «st. ΠῚ, ΜΠ dence of God Il. 51 6 6 jurisdiction of the III. 129 “charity to I, 294, 2.5 5 «needless 171. ἋΣ νὰ Ἂν Δα Θε τλδὰν Ii 294 . ‘© not indefectible III. 279 ἐξ Ἐς reward οὐ. I, 295 te a termination of the III. 137 * protection of shows the su- % τ tradition universal 2 perintending benevolence against the III. 158 of God Ἶ é Il. 51 “ “c unalterable . lil. 2 Pores oF Rome— ae “ὦ * useless Ill... a Σ { Adrian I. III. .61 Popish doctrines concerning con- oo ἡ Agatho Hit. . 62)», science ‘ 2 TL ae a ac Boniface VIII. 11. 57] Popish remission of sins . ‘ Ill. 287 " " Bulls of the III. 56—67 | Porphyry—acknowledgment by, of

. JL ae a a Paschal 11. Mi) “a8 44 claimed by the Popes Ill. 56 “ i Pius 11. III. 269 Connected with the Pa- “ 6 Pius IV. Ill. 295 pacy ΠῚ. 199 $6 os Pins V. 111. Oh ἐξ Description of HI. » 199 « (Ὁ _ pretences of the III. 67) Pragmatical sanction III. 206 ( ss Simplicius 111, a: ‘63 Pragmaticalness, avoiding of ΑἹ: 237 “ « Sixtus V. 11. 4166] PravEr— 1. 53 ; ΠῈΣ 6 (ἐ Stephen VI. III. 60 og arguments for I. 6, 54—66 ‘6 “ Symmachus 11: 63 is attainment of Pe by. 1. 254, 255 « 66 Urban 11. ill. ° “38 ¥ benefits of 1. 456 “ ( Zachary lil, +60 * bulwark of piety hs 65 « { Zosimus I, Ill. 164 33 constancy in ΗΝ 59 Pores’ Supremacy—the $6 duty of L 53 “ 4 arguments against oh efficacy of I. 103, 117 the ΠῚ, 3 agp ¢ ejaculatory 7 Ἢ 59 ( “ causes of the 11. 196 " examples of I. 68 « a contrary to “the sé frequency of I. 64 Scripture of “ importunity in ἐξ 58 Truth” Ill. 152 δ incessantly i Ls 55 “ “= controversies re- a occasions for I, 55—57 specting the ΠΠ, 54, 68 id ( spirit of 1, 54 ὰ « corruption of man- if J urgency of I. 57 ners by the iI. 169 su 44 Vigilant attend- “ « disturbances from ance on I, 55 the UI. 160, 171 « _ indisposedness for I, 66—65 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Vou. Pace. "Paaven—love to God —— by + 65 meaning of 523 nature of 1 117 «offered in the name of Christ I. 383 s omission of 64 re 4 excuses for the I. 66 » opportunity for I. 57 "Ὁ" peace obtained hy o> I. 254 “ produces self-knowledge 1. 493 “ promotes love of our neigh- bour ’ : I. 270, 271 « public appointment of B 63 is removes discontent ~ I. 65 fe safeguard the, of a good con- science ἔ E 65 " seasons for I. 55, 60 τὸ spirit of - I. δ4 τς success of : I. 59 Prayer for all men : Il. 82 Prayer for Kings. ‘ ἘΠΕ 93 Prayer, the Lord’s Ill. 1—12 Predestination 3 : ; IL. 73 Predictions Ἶ IJ. 264, 584 - allowed by Porphyry Il. 265 τς antiquity of <>» Hy . 264 _ authority οὐ. 3 Il. 264 o correspondence of, with the Christian religion » Ie . 38t Prejudice, a cause of infidelity Il. 167, 171 Prelates, authority of é Ill. 157 « oath of : ‘ p 1. 70 Presidencies spiritual; erection of the, belongs to secular sover- eignty III. 213, 278 “translation of the, a prero- ες gative of supreme pow- er ὃ ΠῚ. 214, 279 Presidency of the ‘Pope ; ambiguity of the phrase , Ill. 215 ¥ deceptions flowing from it III. 215 δ unnecessary to general councils . 213 Presidents in ecclesiastical councils appointments of the, by Popes without authority III. 213, 215 Presignification of events IL. 264, 584 Priest does not import a Jewish sa- crifice d ‘ i 127 Priesthood, the I, 124 covenant for ‘a 125 ee excellence of ie 132 “ promise concerning I, 127 “ provision for required I, 129 a ss “ by equity I. 136 ᾿ς 4 «by reasons drawn from an- tichristi- an iniqui- ly > 139 “ “by reasons drawn from the history of chrisuan- - ity ἡ 138 “ “ “ by the good of the church 1. 134 591 Vor. Pace. Priesthood, provision for required by the honour of God I. 130 ms respect for . : i 129 a security for 3 I. 129 Priests, authority of among the Jews I. 137 condition in the world I. 138, 139 “ employment of . I. 137 «© inthe christian church =.‘ 125 “ love for, in the first ages of the church : I 138 «“ maintenance of . 1: 129 “ mentioned in Psalmexxxii: 16 I. 125 “order of in Scripture ‘ I. 132 «pastors of the christian church I, 138 « personal qualities of I. 135, 136 ‘« protection of I. 138, 139 “respect for ‘ ΐ . gE. 132 “ titles of , oe 130 Priests, Romish, exempt from secular ‘jurisdiction by the Popes f ΤΙ. 85 ¢ marriage of, forbidden III. 167 g pardon of sins by Ill. 287 7 reasons for the prohib- ition of the marriage of 167 simulated excuses for the celibacy of . Ill. 168 Primacies diocesan ‘ - Ill. + 194 Primacy, allegations for the Pontifical III. 100 Primacy in the church; diocesan Ill. 194 “four kinds of ε ll. 75 «οὔ James ; : Ill. 110 “ of John Ξ d Ill. 110 “ oforder . ‘ +> BL” a “ of Peter Il. 75, 100—111 “ of power : : ‘ If. 80 “ ofrepute . ‘ ; 1. One “ οὕ worth ‘ ‘ ‘ Il. 75 «“ personal : Ill. 100 «silence of the Scripture con- cerning the ἑ : IRs: . 039 “ guecessive : Ill. 145 Primacy prelatical Σ . Ill 194 Primitive churchés, discipline of Ill. 228 a order of ‘ III. 228 “ orthodox the, in Ill. 316 dé unity of Η Ill. 333 Refer to “ Discipline.” Primative councils ‘ . iy 0 Princes, rule of ‘ ‘ lil 35 Private masses Γ ‘ Ill. 167 Privileges, not granted hy the Pope III. 278 «of the Apostles ‘ ΠῚ. 116 a of the Church : Ill. 218 Probability, degrees of according to Aristotle : tt. 45 Profanation of God's name bya wick- ed life 20 Profit— consistent with religion ΤΠ. 10 ot powerof .. : Il. 9 Prohibition of the Scriptures lil. 167 Promises of the gospel, conditional 1. 538 Prool, management of j . nice Proofs of the existence of God II. 232 “ belief of a future judgment II. 970 “« frame of the world IT, 232—242 “ human natnre IT. 243—252 “ supernatural effects Il. 263—270 592 INDEX OF — ECTS. “7 Vou. Pas. Vou. Pace. ~ Proofs of universal consent II. 252—263 | Θαϊείποιθ duty. οἴου μονα ¥. (294 Eeiiphecies concerning Christ II, 378, 379 | good effectsof . I “oem τ the sufferings a insures peace and tran- | of Christ UT. ey quility I. 235 Prophecy Il. 264 « is ornamental i. 236 Propitiatory sacrifice for the dead III. 167 a justice of 5, 235 Prosperity—attained by religion Lit, 27 εἶ loveliness of 1. 236 εἶ miseries of I. 449, 450 (( meaning of 6 I. 225 Prosperity of the wicked, not an ar- “ modesty in . L 235 | gument against divine Providence I. 484, 445 ee necessary to πῆ τον in Provipence—belief of, makes all con- our avocation 1. 237 ditions pleasant I. £19 ἐἐ personal advautages of I, 237 ve A: produces joy 1. 70 Ks preserves amity ‘and con- “J « source of mu- cord oy abit ; 235 : tual love i: 268 ‘ Sealey in wie a a 1 dependence on, the best preservative of gov- R. ernment ὲ 105 | Rash censure, evils of . be I. 218 —222 ν i destruction of Jerusalem, Rash Came: I. 162 not an argument Causes of ; I. 17 against f Il. 60 « Disparagement οἵ, to « objections to I, 111 those who use them I 170 ( special seen in events I. 109 ‘© Impertinence of, in dis- Refer to * Events.” J course : sal 171 Providence of God— He 2,93, “ Ineivility οὕ. iB 171 “ consideration of Il. 74 «Lead to detrimental un- as disbetief of produces cove- dertakings i 168 tousness if.) 16 “Lead to unlawfal- practi ( influence from consider ces ὃ i 167 ing . Il. 74 «΄ Mischiefs of on govern- ¥ in the government of the ment and society . ody 165 world ; iva “ No temptation to ki 172 a joy arising from ; I, 7 ἐ Sources of I 172 ὰ justice of God displayed in II. 74 “ Mf Conceit I 172 ( unsearchable Il, 406 Ἢ 2 Humour . I 172 “ vindicated by the belief of ( « Irreverence to ἦ a future judgment IT. 520, 521- God I 172 ( visible in societies Ih, 85] be “ Levity I 172 Provincia, Synops—appeals to Ill. 21 4 A Passion iy 172 ( is commencement a a Stupidity i. 172 of ΠῚ. 260 . Uncivil ‘ I, 171 Prudence, companion of faith II. 190 | Reading of the Scriptures forbidden III. 167 PunisHMENT—causes of Bm 166 Reason——abuse of in religion é .»~ ag ( consequences of My iectha «¢ And conscience II. 188 a degrees of hereafter 1. 529 “ Excellence of ge ebtnk & 160 a design of, Reformation I. 110 (ἐς Excellence of :the gospel 6 Influence of ἘΠῚ 6 £20 determined by ‘ II 188 “c δ for avoiding «¢ Exercise of makes every - vice Hs 520 part of creation useful Il, . 239 e ἢ “ pursuing « ~ Mischiefs arising from the [ : virtue II. 520 abuse of in religion ΤΠ. ἘΌΝ «of Sader 5 sin II. 56, 57 Use ok wo aely 160 ff of ingratitude by the ae “ in religion i; 169, re Persians . i 92 RevemPrion— II. « of Parent’s iniquities III. 23 application of. II. 112 Punishments,according to Damascene I. 117 ἰὼ Love of God in Il. 79 Purgation and sacrifices institution of II. 258 ¥ Mystery of 11. 99—106 Purgatory Romish, invention of the III, 167 a of the world Il. 77 “ Puton Christ,” explanation of a 398 4 Reasons of II. 99 ( results of . " II. 89—98 Q. Reflection, spon pine act of human εν Quick and dead,” the Herren illus- nature I, 482, 483 trated P II. 534 |“ Regalia Petri? lil, & Quietness : I. 223 Regeneration ΤΙ, 87 6 arguments for I. 226 as necessity ‘of II. 438 “benefits of the world 7). aan “ Wrou ght in us II. 625 “ — decorum of ἢ I. 4235 “ Rejoice evermore” : 472 « direction, for é a. “ 231 Rejoicing, grounds of 1, 473—475 «« discretion in ‘ I. © 236 in faith Kits . a INDEX OF SUBJECTS. . Vor. Pace, Rejoicing, in hope . I 478 in thankfulness for divine benefits | ᾿ 480 ™ in the contemplation of God’s attributes Z. 480 “in the duty of charity 2 478 «in the study of the word of God I, 450 “ in the survey ‘of the works of the Lord : 5.1 480 “ the fruit of piety I. 480 Relation of things Ξ il» 236 Relics among the Papists iil 286 Beligion— ὃ ἔς heirs advantages of B. 2,9; 83 “ Atheists “objections to Il. 174 “ Benefits attending « αἷς 533 a Civil — — edby . I. . 3 - Contempt of ‘ gh hy 145 “ Danger of despising I. 145 ὩΣ Delight in 2 Bight 1 “ Excellence of . I. 140 - Exercise of in every con- dition . 4- 1.532, 533 ng Honour in I. 91 “ Joy in ‘ - IL. 1, 465 “ Mischiefs from wantof Ι. 20 ' « peacefulness of wry. 3, 465 “performance of easy— “ “ From divine assistance I, 406 “ “ examples I. 393 4 = our own res— olutions I, 407 « Promises of this life wt. -< ° < : 17 « Successin. | 2 “ Supports government ΠῚ 34 sad Teaches humility I. 13 “ Tranquility in ae 65 * Veneration of . . 160 Religion | Christian—the -) dhe - 388 Attestation of by the “ Holy Ghost IL. + 393 - “Resurrection of Christ II. 392 “ Correspondence οἵ with ancient pre- dictions II. 128, 261 “ Directions of, for the government of life ‘ . By. 2s “ Divinity of Il. 310 “ Enemies of Il, 189 “ Excellence of I: 333 4 Experience of . If. 180 6 Joy in : Il. 115 “ Perfection of Il. 181, 339 “ leasantness of : | “ romises of Il. 341 “ Propagation of II. 394 “ Recommended to experience and rea- son elo. 188 “ Rites of ll. 41 ‘ Testimonies of God to ‘ . Mle) 878 4 Trahof . «. H. 310 593 Vou. Pace. Religious man, descriptions of. _I. 50 Reuiedy against discontent . 4 δῈΣ 430 “for bad company Il. 40 Remission of sins, Romish— Ill. 287 μὰ Doctrines of Ill. 287 τὲ Errors of Ill. 287 υρεπιαῆσρ.-. - é L 518 Delay of 518 a 4“ abuse of grace by I. 524 τς “ Danger in - : 525 9 Pleasure of I. 458 - Wrought in us Il. © 474 Reproach—braving of . : er’ 487 - Fear of ὃ II. 34 ἐξ Knowledge of ourselves enables us to bear it ᾿ 487 « Neglect of religion through ὃ ΠΣ. 34 Reproof—Persons who may use : 176 _ Rules tor ὃ I. 178—i81 “ Use of L 177 fe When proper : I. 179 Reputation—gained by religion I 4 ἐξ of others, without detrac- tion ἘΠ 38 { value of I. 33, 34 Residence of Prelates II. 121 Ἂ es translation of III. 122 Resolution—gained by religious wha tice - 46 " wantof . ‘ Li 267 ResotoTion, religious. I, 391 S, increase of, by the know- ledge of ourselves 490 a “ shortness of life 1, 509 ὡς necessity of Il. 32° " power of I. 527 “ want of, a cause of infi- delity i Rf | Respect of persons with God Il. 64—76 Restitution of Prelates—Examples of invalid III. 256, 257 τὰ not an act of jurisdic- tion 255 not in the pow er of the Pope 259 - pretended exam iples of ΠῚ. 256, 257 Resurrection of Christ— ; II. 481 Ψ actofdivinelove Il. 496 és assurance of our resurrection II, 481 Ψ attestation of, to the Christian religion Il, 392 @ ex pediency. of II. 494 “ representation of in baptism 11. 46 Resurrection of the body Il. 564, 715 “ called Regeneration II, 565 ΒΕ ΤΟΝ, divine— Ὰ ; I. 310 benefits of Il. 314 “ character of Il. 316 “ nature of : o he 578 “ necessity of Il. 313 a only ground of absolute belief in religion Ill. 157 Revenge, and love of enemies I. 465, 466 misery attending I. 311, 312 594 Vow. Pace. Reward, power of to excite virtue 1. 395, 396 Rewards and punishments, degrees of, herealier I, 529 Refer to ὡς Judgment.” Ricues—authority of : ‘ - 134 ἐς _ proper use of I 347 «vanity of 4 : 4 I. 349 “ Right hand of God,’ importof II. 502 “ Righteous overmuch,”” foolish perver- sion of he UE 48 plea assumed from Ἶ Il. 49 (( [1] Rights of Prelates : é > I. 54 Rites in the Christian religion, use- fulness of : ma.” a “Rock,” examination ‘of the title III. 6 Peter so called - τ ΠῚ: 85 Roman Prelate non-existent 1: 137 ἐξ εἶ when elected TTY, > 1438 Roman ceremonial mumery III. 168 RomanistTs, anathemas of the Ill, 2y4 Bs belief of in the pontifical power é Ill 65 & character of the Ill. 337, 338 « dissensions among the III. 198, 203 εἰ dissent of the . ΤῊ τ 6G 6 errors of the Ill. 168 66 glosses of the on the Holy Scriptures : “ἀμ τ Schismatics in Britain Ii. +337 without christian charity IIL. 293 ( without common bumanity III. 294 Romans v: 16—Bellarmin’s mistak- en interpretation of 3 : i, Sea Rome, pilgrimages to 1Π. 2u5 ‘Ramish absolution TT, +) 290 Romish anathemas ; ἘΝ TE, 204 Romish Court, Aciniing ημ antiquity of, vain Ill. 325 Romish religion, impious character I. 324 Royalties of. Peter : ; ; 111. 69 Rule of Faith eve "ἢ : SH. 80 Rule of Princes : II. 65 S. Sabhaoth, name of God ; ΤῊ; 283 Sabbath—the III. 26 “ among the Jews III. 28 “ end of iii, 24 ( institution of ᾿ Sabellius and Socinus agreement of, concerning the Holy Spirit. Il, 547 Sacrament of the Lord’ssupper— III. 46 { difference’ between, and the Jewish Passover itt. οὖν ( duty afier receiving of 111: 950 a frequency of receiving TIT... 30 ὦ preparation for itl. 9 Sacraments—abuse of the 111. 292 a“ celebration of in an un- known tongue Ii. « d67 ὡ “ Opus operatum” of Ill, “169 Sacraments of the Christian reli- gion—character of LI. . =i} « “Tnstitution of Ill. 41 “ Mysterious ail 42 Sacrifice, called by the Jews, « Ta- midh”’ 1. 60, 76 Sacrifice of Christ, sufficiency of Il. 410, 411 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Satrifices-—and purgation : Il. Expiatory . 3 δ Ὁ “ Institution of ΄. : if. “ Jewish, prefigurative of Christ’s death . ἘΝῚ ad Origin of . ὦ : II. 258 Sacrilege ‘ . ety ἡ 57522 Safety obtained by ‘religion ae Ι͂Ν a7 Saints, application of the name in the gospel ἜΝ 21 Mf Worship of, by Papists lil. ' 266% * ol ‘Contrary to Serip- ν᾿ tures ΠῚ. 286 Salvation, explanation οὔ. ee 77 Sanctification and. justification, sometimes equivalent terms in scripture. Il. “See Scepticism—mischiefs and unrea- sonableness of : IJ. 268, 269 _ Schism—persons guilty of . ‘Ill. 336 Schismatics : I. 590—592, 603 Scholar, calling of - L, 567 Scoffing at religion, folly of aoe: 36 Seriptures—the holy, benefits from the examples of ae 389 ee Causes of their prohibition IIJ. 167 ee Duty of attending to I. 406 τὸ Examples in, ee I, 389 Ἔ Hearing of : : I, 406 Ὁ Interpretation of ΑΜ 605 Only rule of faith : Ill. ΕΝ τ Practice of ; i. 406 τ Prohibition of by the Court of Rome . III. 167 ‘d Reading of, forbidden by the Romish Priests III. 167 a Styleof .. . : 11. 343 f Teaching of the, in an un- known tongue Seeking God . Self-commendation, when lawful I. Self-complacence : II Self-conceit : Ἶ F ἢ Self-con fidence 3 , ει II. Self-denial : é Σ ak Self-interest : ξ é . ΤΕ Self-love— 5 ΔΑ 1 i #6 destruction of ὶ Ἶ I. Self-praise ; ; : ae | Self-will : Il. Semi-Arians the, heresy concerning the Holy Ghost, of Seneca not free from ambition A, Separations in the Churches ΠΝ, Servants of Christ, Christians so cal- led : : ; } Shaddai, a name ‘of God ῆ Il. Shame insin .. ἷ ᾿ I. δε Sheol” interpretation Oe vt We εὐ ΙΝ Silence of the Canons concerning the Popes authority ‘ ; Simony, Popes guilty of IIL. Simplicius Pope ‘ i. aa sin—folly of : I, Guilt of : . F ae “ Heinousness of .. ; II. © miseryiol> Wy ao'h% ‘ . I¢ “original =. é j ‘ I, “ prevention of ν d . :- III. 289, 290 59 129 2 621 1 451 Solitude—fear of being thought ad- INDEX OF SUBJECTS. it | . re Vou. Pace. ΤΠ Sin—resistance of, beneficial to reli- Ὁ τος τς ρίοπ and virtue : St 45 =“. shame in ἢ ὸ Q Ι. 522 “ sources of ‘ ‘ ὩΣ. 906, 306 « wilful , : > GE. ἡ 458 Sincerity—attainment of . 5 Il. 536 a“ practice of . « ΒΟ" . 536 Ὁ remembrances conducive to, future — 11. 535, 536 « «shortness Ι 316 Singularity—fear of ᾿ 45 ΤΙ. . neglect of religion = the dread of 45 Sitting of Jesus at the right hand ‘of God ; 5 II. 502 Sixtus V. Pope ‘ . Ill, 56 Slander and detraction, difference be- tween F : ‘ I. 193 ‘¢ consequences of : 1: 201 « folly of =" 186, 196 “ muschiefsof . ὁ To * 201) =°: patepeidt) =): . d ‘ I. 188 Sloth— ν . 1. 547, 552 - a cause of infidelity ὃ 110. 1.16] Society—advancement of, by the Christian religion 1.7; 08,27 as benefits of : iF 812 Societies—ad vantages of ; ων ὁ} Ὡ Atheists destroy Τ᾽ 175 “ being of God evinced by II]. 258 as destruction of 11 278 ἐξ love of Il. 258 4 preservation of, by the belief of a future judgment Il. 519 Socinians errors of, concerning bap- tism ἢ Ε 11 Socinus and Sabellius, agreement ‘of concerning the Holy Spirit . Il. 547 Solemnization of the nativity of Christ 11. 434—436 dicted to,a hindrance to religion IT. 42—46 “grateful to good men » I. 30, 31 “ love of " ‘ I, 30 Sotomon—the knowledge of ον." 98}ὋἊ89 os Son of God é ᾿ If. 633 Sour—the Il, ‘244 acceptations of the word, in Scripture ‘ 478 “ activity of ‘ I. 357 “ and body, union afi, Il. 431 “ carifig for : I. 61, 483 “ Creationof . ‘ II. 302 “ duty of caring for : I. 61, 483 “ excellence of . ὃ Il, 256 “ Heathen opinions of ‘ Il. 675 “ Immortality of I], 483, 497 “ Jewish account of . Il.* 476 « necessity of caring for I. 61, 483 “ operations of ; i. 256 “ state of, afier departure from earth Ἔ 8 “union of with the body om. 481] Soverrions— : ; Ill. 206 a absolution by, from pen- alty, of subordinate offi- ewe: ᾿ς Ill. 254 ss appellate ju risdiction from all inferior authorities LL. Vor. Pace. Soverriens—censure of lower magis- trates by ΠΙ. 245 ” choice of inferior officers by III. 234 6 cunfirmation of subordi- nale magistrates when elected to office by others III. 278 + convocation of ecclesias- tical and secular Coun- cils, Synods, or Assem- blies by . i. 2 S decision of all controver- sies and litigation by III. 273 sie erection of governments and presidencies by III. 278 τ exaltation of, supreme Ill. 277 exemption of, from allin- ferior jurisdiction Ill. 272 “ fountain the, of all power and rule ; ΠῚ. 298 9 grant by, of dispensations, exemptions, and pecu- liar privileges III. 278 g headship of supreme III. 277 ἐ imposition of taxes by UI. 279 οι infallibility of—which is essential to all ecclesi- astical supremacy Ill. 274 = investitare by of every inferior officer . 234 sa jurisdiction entire of lil. 232 a legislative authority of III. 219 - obedience due to the laws ‘and mandates of Ill. 227 μ presidency of in all As- semblies : . BL #4 a privileges of Ill. 206 " punishment of lower ma- gistrates by ΠῚ. 245 = restoration of subordinate officers. IJ. 254 a superiority of, over all their subjects d Il. 276 . supreme exaltation and headship of Ill. 277 Sovereignty, branches of 1. 245 me pretences to, by the Ro- man Pontiffs, vain ΠΙ. 245 Speaking evil : I. 174—185 Speeca—extent of I, 149 « goodness in not offending by nt. 140 ε irregularity of I. 143 “offences in ‘ a ἢ 144 « proper use of I. 149 Spirit fierce, a cause of infidelity lI 171 Spirit Holy—the Il. 92—95 assistance of . ll. v4 < name of Il. 542, 543 “ offices of ; Il, 93 Spirit, use of the appellation 1, Si3 Reter to “ laspiration.” Spirits—action of ; ; If. 140 “evil Α Il. 382, 390 « manner of action by . Dive Refer to “ Apparitions.” Spiritual gilts ; IT. 610, 611 “ governours, obedience to 1. 585, 593, 600 ( guides we ; RS Stephen VI. Pope v= ee 596 Vou. Pace. Stoics—dictates of the ‘ ᾿ I, 495 “« examples shown in their doc- trines ‘ . I. 393, 394 Stupidity, a cause of infidelity ‘ ΤΙ, Ὁ 167 Style of the Scriptures / B. oe Submission to the divine will ‘ a 406 Success in religion Β 2 τ, 9 Succession Papal Ε ‘ itt... . 281 Sufferings of Christ— Te ἡ 410 « advantages’ from the manner of . We Al. Ὁ 453 « argument for the love of enemies > Il. 459 ε correspondence οὕ with ancient prophecies II. 455 od gratitude for : iL. ao inconsistency of objec- tions to 11. 461, 462 ἐξ Philosophers’ nit tions to : Il. 461 ( representation of in the Lord’s Supper III. 47 6 time of : ; 1. 447 Sufficiency of the sacrifice of Christ II. 410 Sufferage of manking prowas the existence of God : ‘ Me - 261 SorenyaToRAL EFFECTS— WON τα 263, 584 Causesof II. 263 “c Enumera- tion of 11. 264—270 δ Proofs of II. 263, 584 εἰ “from di- vine in- terposi- tions II. 268, 585 “ ‘“ from ΠῚ mi- racles 11. 265, 584 τ “from pre- dictions of future events II. 264, 584 εἰ “from the exist- ence of God II. 263—271, 584 Support of affliction a Ss 3 Support of government, by suitable decent circum- Stances . ie 131 “ “ jbb by reli- gion I, 133 Suppositions upon which the Sh is founded, a nullity ᾿ J 117) 3% Supremacy of the Pope Ill. 2u6 Swearing profane—impertinence of in discourse I. 171 ( incivility of . I. 171 ( irreverence of J, 172 a“ Stupidity of 7 * 172 Refer to ‘* Oaths’’—and ‘* Rash Oaths,” Symmachus Pope » Il. 63 Synops—acts of III. 220 ancient . . ΠῚ, 224 “ and Enthusiasts compared III. 292 “ compared with Fanatics III. 292 “ confirmation of Bil,’ Gea εὖ ὦ decrees of . ᾿ . III. 220 “ doings of Ul. 233 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. .- he: ἣν ᾿ ἕ γοι,...: Pac Ἃ Synops—examples of the proceed- co ings of ᾿ “ general, the first called by Constantine III. “ordinances of, without. the ae Pope’s consent : ΠῚ, «“ proceedings of, against the _ will of the Pope “ provincial “ ratification by Popes of the acts, tnd canons, and de- crees of ; .. « Βοιηϊδῃ “Rules respecting, not extant before the reign of Con- — stantine » ~ ea ἐδ Talents, improvement of . 1. Talmudists, declaration of, respecting the seven things constituted before the world : ; ες “ Tamidh,” among the Jews aye ee Taste, the Il. Taxes, imposition of, by the Pope, unlawful ν lil “Teach us to number our days,” Psalm xc: eat inate of I, Temperance ee | Peg Temptation, import of in the Holy Scriptures. ° III. 9, 10 Tertullian e" Σ Ill. THANKSGIVING— I. 69, Ss 6 a delightful privilege i “ a just obligation 3 a a natural disposi- tion : ε acceptable toGod I. “ acknowledgment of favours received 1. 66 causes of I. 77—80 ce due to God I. 77—80 ec duty of ~~. . i 6 frequency of . 1, ( from a hearty recep- tion of the Lord’s blessings * 6 from a consideration of the benefits re- ceived by us oni hs δ, oe from attention to the advantages derived ~ from the divine goodness . τ from esteem for the Lord’s unmerited benevolence εν AS 6 from the endeavour to requite the mercy I. & from veneration and love to the glorious Benefactor. I. εὐ habitual readiness fot Τὰ δ Objects of—ad versity I. . Pe benefits past and present I. INDEX OF Vou. Pace. Tuanxseivine—Objects of corporeal mereies I. 90 “ ¢ daily sup- plies 1. 86, 87 “ a divine regard I. 90 +6 us eternal life. I, 87 “ ἐ extraor- _ dinary _conso- lations [ 86 [ { prosper- ity I 87 % " public mercies 1 87 “6 ἂν spiritual endow- ments 1. 90 66 { tempo- tral good I. 90 sa opportunities for I. 84 practice of among the Gentiles I. 76 6 profitable to man I. 92 “ punctuality in I. 82 signification of I. 70 Ni times for I. 80, 84, 85 “ vigilancein . I. 83 Os\npa ro, ἃ Mame assigned to . God . ‘ oy (lee 544 Time, improvement οὐ. aye 514 Time of Christ’s sufferings . > hh. 1,407 Tithes in ancient wept quantity of é . II. ἡ 259 Titles of God II, 283—288 Titles of the Church ᾿ III. 312 Titles of the Roman Pontiff ΤΩ... 20 Titles todominion . : ; II. 418 Tongue—the Ξ : : I. 140 Circumspection i in use of” I. 141 “ Excellence of not offend- , ing with I 140 “ Government of I 142 δ Judgment necessary to the 9 rule of ; εν 1, 142 “ Mischiefs of Le 144 “ Offences by it I. 144 τς Proper use of I. 142 Tradition— ; ὃ . » ths 360 “ Agreement of, respecting the creation ofthe world II. 261 a“ Authority οὐ. . II. 260 “ Contradictory : . 2. 260 “ Corruption of II. 259, 260 φ Disowns the Pope’s su- premacy 134 “ Sources of the corruption of... . : II. 259 ὰ Trath of ; : . I. 260 μ Uncertainty of ; II. 260 a Universal. ν᾿ - Il. 590 TRapitions—oral ὁ. : . ΠῚ, 289 S Romish ; ι » “IIL. 167 “ Universal, against the Pope’s supremacy " ‘Ul. 134 Tranquility in religion ὦ 1, 25, 26 Translation of Bishops ; III. 122 Transubstantiation Ill. 167 Vou. Ll. 79 SUBJECTS. yi Vou. Pace. Transubstantiation absurdity of proved by Christ’s ascen- ; eosin ὁ. 5 II. 4510 Trent, Council of— ; Ill. 54, 245 - character of , . It sae ἕξ injunctions of, concerning the Pope’s supremacy Ill. 67 Tricks of the Roman Pontifts and Priests, to purloin money from their superstitious vassals Ill. 204 Trinity, the ever-blessed ow «aaa Trust in God expressed in Scripture by action in his Holy name i ε 980 Truth, the “ἜΝ ‘ ι Li; ΣΝ δ᾿ attainment of, by faith Il. 194 ἢ delight in ‘ : I, 1 “ excellence of 1,1 ite τ love of ; ‘ ᾿ II. 169 ‘* obstructions 11. 183, 184 a plainness of εἰ TL. 4A a power of : II. 195 “ want of love ἴο, ἃ cause of infidelity 3 ‘ II. 169 τ ways of, 7 ’ I. 44, 47 Types the IL. 132, 133 Tyran exemplified inthe a Papal infallibility , Ill. 166 υ. Ubiquitaries German, confuted from Christ’s ascension , . II. 510 Unbelief Ι ‘ Ἂ : I~ ae Refer to “ Infidelity.” Unction, or chrism annexed by an- cient Christians to Baptism Ill, 44 Union with Christ, aceount of, in Scripture Ἶ 398 Unity oF Gor—proved from the Harmony intheworld Il. 261 ts the suffrage of all man- kind : I. « 261 Unity of the Church—external polity of se Government for the " In the Constantinopolitan Creed a preservation of the 6 primitive “ Universal Bishop” Universal Canons Universal Consent woe a declares a common inclina- - tion . I. 254 “ exhibits a convincing rea- son ; ere “ includes one great ‘source of instruction II. 254, 584 “ proves the existence of God Il, 252—262, 582 δ unfolds natural light Il, 254 Universal power claimed by the Court of Rome ν ul 63 Universal Redemption ‘ ll. TG Universal sovereignty rate by the Papal Pontifis 56 Urban 11. Pope ; Ul. “58 Use popular not an argument ἈΓΊΔΥ tice, or Right, or Truth ar 41 997 598 Vou. Page. Usurpations over Conscience by the Priests of “ Babylon the Great” III. 293 oa Vain-glory Il. 7—9 Valentinus and his followers, hearing . of concerning Christ’s conception Il. 436 Veneration of images and relics Ill. 158 Vice compared with virtue d ἢ 533 Virgin Mary gave birth to the Sa- viour é 3 II, 439 we worship of . sh, ee: 7443 Virtue and vice compared ‘ 1: 933 Viriue, instances of ; Ἢ SIE. 248 4p practice of ; : ΤΙ 947 Visions, authority of Shy ΤΠ. ἘΠ 266 δ᾿ reality of ms ay... 268 Volkelius, error of Fespevmne the cre- ation of the world 303 Vows, Popish dispensations for the violation of - III. 204 Vows Romish, imposition of Tih... 367 Walking after Christ 398 Walking sure 4 44 εἰ credit of ἐν despatch of Walking with God Want of Charity among Romanists War, mischiefs of : : Washings, among the Jews Watching duty of ; Ways and paths ΐ , Ways of Wisdom Wealth, tricks to pilfer it by Roman 1. :. I. r. 4 explication of I. 44 me fairness of I. 48 ἐν free from danger I. 47 us honour of i 49 ' justification of is 52 ω meaning of ἐξ 44 x methods of {. 30 pleasantness of I. 48 εἰ results of I. 51 “9 reward of a: 02 τι safety of ΠΝ 47 εἶ security of I. 44, 50 ( stedfastness of Ι: 46 τ sureness of I. 45 id troubles avoided by I. 50 a upon firm ground . ΠΣ 45 ag uprightness of I, 44 I, IIT, I ΠῚ, I. I, I. Priests Σ΄. Ill. 204 Wicked life, a profanati on of God’s name ; II. 20 Will, freedom of the ; i 407 «“ perverseness of, a cause of infidelity : ii. /. 168 6 resignation of, learned from Christ’s μετ 375, 406 ( self II. 2 Will of God, with regard to our duty I. 412, a Wispou ; and righteousness of God I. attainment of : I a attended by hope πον" ( attracts the favour of God I. ᾿ 540 2) Worldly-mindedness 91 Worldly things, β certainty of ; I. 2 INDEX OF SUBJECTS. Vou. Pace. Wispon ; aanptees dexterity in action I. 4 consequencesof ὁ. 1, 1 m delectable as, i. 1 es detects error. a 1: 1 i discovers our relative cir- ' cumstances Ξ i. 7 ἣν healthful to the soul ᾿ 4 κί imparts self-knowledge 1. 4 τ in the practice of Christian duty iH, 48 . in the profession of religion II. 49 ied life according to brings content and delight I, 1 a like light or 1 6“ makes us acquainted with : true religion ; i. 7 pleasantness of et 7 τ preserves decorum and or- der 1. Zs prevents discouragement 1. 2 nf reveals truth ξ ἐπ 1 secures a good conscience I. 3 " secures human respect τὶ 4 oy supports in adversity Ti 3 . teaches the right value of objects : may | 5 τ ways of 1: 1 ἐ( Wise-as Serpents” ; Matthew x: 16; : import of II 49 Withdrawment from the a “abo- minations”’ IT. τ Ὁ Words, ambiguity of Ill. 200 Words and things often of like sig- nification in Scripture III. 14, 15 . use of by writers II, 229, 230 Words, not offending by an evidence of virtue P 140 Works, future rewards, according to : a. 529 Wortp—the “IL, 235, 236 ( Contempt of, from Christ’s sufferings 459 ms creation “of, declares the divine Providence ΤΙ. δ0 as deluge of, from infidelity II. 176 τ existence of God proved by ; 4 Tl. | 2an ς frame of II 235, 236 τ harmony of, declares the divine Providence II. 51 “ ‘¢ proves the unity of God Ὰ 202 τ Manner of the creation of - : II. 305, 306 “ Naturalists, testimony of, concerning : Il. 235, 236 ¢ Opinions of Philosophers concerning . IL, 298—300 sé proof of God's existence II. 232 a providence of God declar- ed by ΤΠ, 51 ( reasons for the creation δέχ of : : IT. 305, 306 ( subservient to man’s use II, 236—239 66 testimony of Naturalists concerning II. 235, 236 I, 498 459 overvalue of a source of discontent INDEX OF SUBJECTS. » 599 Vou. Pace. Vor, Pace. Worship of Angels, and saints con- Writings of the Fathers ΠΕ. i535 trary to the Scriptures : III, 200 Worsuir or Gop— I. 62 = τ performance of Ἰ, 164 Υ. % periods for to be ob- Youth, seasonableness of, for religionI. 531 served . ay. .26 ‘ Ἦν public Ξ ΤΠ: 1 7 = solemn times for Il. 30 i Sart of Images and Relics Ill. 286 Zabarell Cardinal : Il. 55 orship of the Virgin Mary . Il. 443) Zachary, Pope Ill. 60 Ὁ idolatry of among the Zeal blind, a cause of infidelity IL. ΤΟΤΕ Romanists . IM. 286} Zosimus I. Pope . OL ee ἽΝ THE END. ΠΤ ΤΥ, ΑΝ ΤΥ ΡΟ κι mee .--ΡΎ, ν ὙΦ mr ; ¥. : - ‘ial 2 + “= “ὡς: te οιὰ ἐν ᾿ "1 PRINTEOINU.S A. DATE DUE GAYLORD ote ee a tet” ἀντ, rae, ΣΝ | i Ι ΤΩ ἱ | jie hy Hl i Ww fi nt ΝΙΝ STEHT ri «εὐ { ᾿ Ἱ ΓΗ f seh} ih thie Hah τις τσ eee a ene ee τ΄ .- -ο--- ee .-- ο--ο-ς--ο--. -.-.ε.---- rT ith. “it hi | i il 4 it i a mee re. 0 = ae καθ ha | Hill, ney ee ee -- enn ae ae ae - ee A a ne ee ot te ety Oe ὡς σ΄ PLE tim Ἢ [] ͵ Hit ie ae : Ι ἡ He ii eee ee —— fc" alae SS — —— απὸ “en: — ee ie i ae I "ταὶ ae — wom. "“... a ΞΞ ὩῷὸΣ om -- —.- — “Se ᾿ — “Φ. Sl — = — νυ,“ —~ - = =~ eres -- - " = --- Ψ».- = -- -ῷ..- -- a —- =— — a -- eo — ---. — << -- = δ — on — = = ΞΞ - - — = x ——— ἂν. a — = So 5 eS ---.-'..--- «Ὁ --.-. —= —_—Ss— ΘΝ... ὄ.δ..Ἅὅ = a eS 4}.--.ὕ.. -- — - RN ta a — ΞΞ Sone ot oe Spe as = “Ὁ... ----- — er τ. - - Ὁ -ς a — = Ὁ. “Ὁ. Ὁ : a --ὦ et 9 mene —— =. ---οαδθο νυ ραν να - = ey —— — ey — © gee -- -. — —_— ———_———— ~ S| — —F eee eee = —— υδοινυ ανα,.....« — — SSS -.ὄ.Ξ: —_ _————— — — 5.-----.-.- -- ΞΞΩΙ “-.3:..-.-- - —- ιν... οὕ... τος » «8... ὦ —— ee “- Ὁ. πτ-ςς --ἰ-- --- -- ὦ" — —_—_————_—- :: “-- as —= — —— a ee - eee + a — O_O το τα τ Ae “ΕΞ, ———— 0- = ee ee ey — ——_—>$s§ — -- =e eS ee ϑεουθιθναδινεθαναιάπαιαμαναν — - “--- — SaaS ΞΙΞΞ OOS = = σα ’ς΄ ᾳο΄ δ.» «ὦ — πο ῇ«Φασυνοδννννος —— ~ α - ones - es me =e ee = ° : ἡ στ — — ee -.». . προ’ πῇ ῇ - - ---- _— - = Ce ἃ Τρωξι οὕς — — — — eee ee eee ΟΣ πον -- a ne — «Ὁ στον ο = - i NS -- αι -- -----.- — "«.----τἰὐἶίο *. ~> ΄ = = a — _— — προ ΡΦΖ Ν Sa — SSS SSS et τ δ Fs — ——— | «τ΄ Ὸὼὸ - = ω- ae — -- ὡ- --- -π - πα «ἀχὸ : η - -,ΖοΟο -Ξ — — ee ἡ. — = — «ἢ _— ee -π τ ῆρφΦπ͵ιο ve we . _—— ———- -α — ane eh art Ὁ τ». -- See ee ——= a — a Kon = .ΞΞΞ - — -... all - “ oF — -~ - — — = = . —=— < = πω ὡς — -- ΞΞ . Ξ. πο = = a —- — - - eee ee ee a ow —————————— «π᾿ — - τ να See ποτ NY Gunns «ὐὐπασϑοοόο΄ᾳοᾳἔοΨΘΦφ.«“«“«“««“««“«“«ᾳ«««“““ᾳ«΄ᾳ««ᾳ«««««“«““«“«“-««“«““«“«“«“«ᾳ««“«“««“«΄“«ψ«««««“«ρ«ᾳ--«-«-««ᾳ«-““«--“ᾳ“ᾳ.------««“- “ ᾳ«“«-“-“««ᾳ« πᾳ. --“΄«- ES | P a = — — ἀπο νυν ae er ne ee τοτοορπρπππΠ π΄’ -“----- ————— — — —— το ——— π΄ - — ~<—— -_ — — ng -ῶ σον ν᾽ 4 — —— -------- - ““.Ξ3.-.- — = — .ΞΞ:-:-:--..-..- -:ς:ΞΞΞΞ-.. ιν «δα = ---- —— ———— | --ῷ ee - ---.- —_— eee — “-... Ξ — δον eee πο — —— _—- ςΣ «αν. = .- — ar ΞΙ- “πα - = — ΦΞΞ — --- ΞΞΞ — Ξε τ.- -Ξ — = — _—- = — -Ξ — ΞΞ - ΤῺΞΞ — a = — ——— — — ΦΞΞΞ — — — — — — ri ne sun Η i ΠῚ ha ἢ] ᾿ eee —— —_———_— se το “ο΄ τς ——— ταν «πα [ I ——— —— -“- | i Hl | ee ———— = οἷς —— - Ὁ ee > - =~ τ -- ———— a ΚΞ. ΨΚ... Π i i ‘ ‘ iH ἢ ἱ ῃ . tte ἢ > Hike i! Hi iN Sil ΠΣ bail ih ΠΠΠ Re Φῶς --,νττὦὖ, - “-ν-.-.όὕὮὐ.΄. ὃς «ὦ. -- φ-..---ο “ποτ σοος.. “-τοὐὺ-ς-ο- ee a -- «αἰ τὸν τω σ' ἡ} ΠῚ ΠῚ — ~~ eo ——-——= «.--᾿ - SS ee ee Pe eee eee ee NF ee SC Gece = — -eeeeeess «c= -=e woe Υ iit ts ΤΠ | j _—, --- “- -- ἡ fi ! ς᾽. ἡ “5 ....«. .-«...ἥὕὄ .... « ee we ee a ΨᾳΨπμ - SPEC) eae ee A ae AE SA ET TEES A RATE RY eG em ΡΣ Sees eee eee