YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

SUPPLEMENT

GIBSON'S

PRESERVATIVE FROM POPERY

Smpnrtnnt f rrntioTs iiii fb fvnmisfi dTiiutrniitrsif.

VOL. I.
r.AKEOW 01^ THE POPE'S SUPREMACY.

LONDON:
PUBLISHED BX THE BRITISH SOCIETY EOE PKOMOTIXG THE
EELIGIOrS PBUfCIPLES OF THE EEFOEMATIO>".
S, EXETEB HALL, STEAXD.
IS41).

THE RIGHT HONOURABLE

HE^EAGE LORD FINCH.

BARON OF DAV ENTRY.

LORD UlGIl CHANCELLOR OF ENGLAND.

AXI> ONE OF

HI.* .MA.IESTYS MOST HONOURABLE PRIVA COUNCIL.

THOMAS BABRO\r,

THE .4CTH0R S FATHER.

HUMBLY PEDICATETH THIS

TRE.\T1SE

THE CONTENTS.

The Introduction 
The Suppositions upon which the Pope's Supremacy is grounded
The I. Supposition discussed, That Saint Peter had a Primacy
over the Apostles 
The II. That Saint Peter's Primacy with its Rights and Preroga
tives was not personal but derivable to his Suc
cessors 
The III. That Saint Peter was Bishop of Rome
The IV. That Saint Peter did continue Bishop of Rome after his
translation, and was so at his decease
The V. That the Bishops of Rome (according to God's institution
and by original right derived thence) should have
an Universal Supremacy and Jurisdiction over the
Christian Church ......
The VI. That in fact the Roman Bishops continually from Saint
Peter's time have enjoyed and exercised this Sove
reign Power 
The VII. That this Power is indefectible and unalterable .

ADVERTISEMENT.
The Editor need not here state the almost uniTersal opinion
that Barrow's work on the Supremaev is alike the most clear,
learned, and conclusive replv to Romish reasoning, and the
sarbfactorr defence of Protestant truth on this topic, which
has appeared in any language. It is a treasury of argnmeut,
illustration, and erudition.
The Editor hopes the present edition wiQ be found at least
equal to prerious repiints in accuracy, and far superior in the
feohties it presents for Terifting with ease, and without loss
of time, the numerous and important references to Fathers,
Historians, Cormcils, ,irc.
The Editor has patiently and minutely compared the
quotations of Barrow with the originals. In most instances
he has found them correct, in a majority he has added the
page, edition, and date.
To such consummate scholars as Mendham, €roode, Mait-
land, HartweU Home, and others that might be named, his
labours wiH naturally appear very common-place, both here and
in " Gibson's PreseTratrre," bnt to the ordinary scholar and
divine — to most of those who fed an interest and do something
in word or deed in the Bomish controversy, and to that
mifortanatelv numerons class of writers and speakers who take
all their references at second hand, his labours wiU prove very
valuable. It is intended to throw the " Unity of the Chtirch," a small
and important treatise by Barrow, usually appended to the
Pope's Supremacy, into a concluding volume of valuable tracts
on the Ec^isii Controversy.
October, l.f49.

THE PUBLISHER TO THE READER.

This excellent and elaborate Treatise of the Pope's Supre
macy, which I here present thee withal, the learned author
of it upon his death-bed gave me particular permission to
publish ; with this modest character of it, that " he hoped it
was indifferent perfect, though not altogether as he intended
it, if God had granted him longer Ufe." He designed indeed
to have transcribed it again, and to have filled up those many
spaces which were purposely left in it, for the further confir
mation and illustration of several things by more testimonies
and instances, which probably he had in his thoughts : and it
would certainly have added much to the beauty and perfection
of this work, had it pleased God that he had lived to finish it
to his mind and to have given it his last hand.
However, as it is, it is not only a just but an admirable dis
course upon this subject, which many others have handled
before, but he hath exhausted it ; insomuch that no argument
of raoment, nay, hardly any consideration properly belonging
to it, hath escaped his large and comprehensive mind. He
hath said enough to silence this controversy for ever, and to
deter all wise men, of both sides, from meddling any further
with it.
And I dare say that whoever shall carefully peruse this
treatise will find, that this point of the Pope's supremacy
(upon which Bellarmine hath the confidence to say " the whole
of Christianity depends,") is not only an indefensible, but an
impudent cause, as ever was undertaken by learned pens.
And nothing could have kept it so long from becoming ridicu
lous in the judgment of mankind, but its being so strongly
supported by a worldly interest. For there is not one tolerable
argument for it, and there are a thousand invincible reasons
against it. There is neither from Scripture, nor reason, nor
antiquity, any evidence of it ; the past and the present state
of Christendom, the histories and records of all ages, are a
perpetual demonstration against it : and there is no other

ground in the whole world for it, but that now of a long time
it hath been by the Pope's janizaries boldly asserted, and stiffly
contended for without reason. So that any one might with aa
much colour and evidence of truth maintam, that the Grand
Seignior is of right, and for many ages hath been acknowledged
sovereign of the whole world, as that the Bishop of Rome is
of right, and in all ages from the beginning of Christianity
hath been owned to be the Universal Monarch and Head of
the Christian Church.
To this Treatise of the Pope's Supremacy I have, for the
affinity of the argument, added by way of appendix another
discourse ofthe same author's concerning "The Unity ofthe
Church ;" which he so explains as quite to take away the
necessity of a visible head over the whole Church for the pre
servation of its unity, which is the only specious, but yet a veiy
remote pretence for the Pope's Supremacy : for if a visible
monarch of the Church were granted necessary, many things
more must be supposed (which neither yet are, nor ever can
be proved) to make the Bishop of Rome the man.
The testimonies relating to both parts, were very few of
them translated by the author ; which he certainly intended,
having left spaces for it, and is since done with great care by
two of his worthy and learned friends of his own college.
There is some difference, but not material, between the
method proposed at the end of the Introduction, as to the
number and order of the heads of the following discourse, and
the method in which they are prosecuted; which by reason the
several parts of the work were perused at several times, was
not observed till it was too late to rectify it : and therefore I
have here added the Contents, in which the heads are set
down according to the true order of them in the Treatise itsel£
¦Which is all the advertisement I thought necessary. J. TiLLOTSON.

TREATISE

OF THE

POPE'S SUPREMACY.

ISAAC BAKROW, D.D.,
LATE HASTEB Ot TBINITY COLLEGE IN CAKSBIDOE, ANO ONE 07
HI8 majesty's CHAPLAINS IN OBDIHABY.

CAJUsnTLLT KETISED AKS EDI-TEtJ
FOB THE BBinSH SOCIETY FOB PBOMOTING THB EELIGlOOS
PKINCIPLE8 OF THE KEFOBMATION,
BY
THE REV. JOHN GUMMING, D.D.

A
TREATISE

THE POPE'S SUPREiTACY.

INTRODUCTIO>'.
§ I. The Roman party doth much glory in unity and
certainty of doctrine, as things peculiar to them, and whicli no
other men have any means to attain : yet about divers matters
of notable consideration, in what they agree, or of what they
are certain, it is hard to descry.
They pretend it very needful that controversies should be
decided, and that they have a special knack of doing it : yet
do many controversies of great weight and consequence stick
on their hands unresolved, many points rest in great doubt and
debate among them.
The Kvpiai colai of the Eoman sect (concerning Doctrine,
Pnicti«», Laws and Customs of Discipline, Bites and Cere
monies) are of divers sorts, or built on divers grotmds.
1. Some established by (pretended) General Synods. 2. Some
founded on Decrees of Popes. 3. Some entertained as upon
tradition, custom, common agreement. 4. Some which their
eminent divines or schoolmen do commonly embrace. 5. Some
prevailing by the favour of the Roman Court, and its zealous
dependants. Hence it is very difficult to know wherein their religion con
sisteth : for those grotmds divers times seem to clash, and accord
ingly their divines (some bnilding on these, some on others)
di^gree. This being so in many points of importance, is so particu-
larlv in this.
For instance. The Head of their Church (as they call it") is,
one would think, a subject about which they shonld thoroughly
consent, and which they by this time shonld have cleared from
VOL. I. B

A TREATISE OF

all disputes ; so that (so far as their decisive faculty goeth) we
might be assured wherein his authority consisteth, andhowfar
it doth extend ; seeing the resolution of that point so nearly
toucheth the heart of religion, the faith and practice of all
Christians, the good of the Church, and peace of the world ;
seeing that no one question (perhaps not aU questions together)
hath created so many tragical disturbances in Christendom, as
that concerning the bounds of Papal authority.*
This disagreement of the Roman doctors about the nature
and extent of Papal authority is a shrewd prejudice against it.
If a man should sue for a piece of land, and his advocates (the
notablest could be had, and well paid) could not find where it
lieth, how it is butted and bounded, from whom it was con
veyed to him— one would be very apt to suspect his title. If
God had instituted such an office, it is highly probable, we
might satisfactorily know what the nature and use of it were :
the patents and charters for it would declare it.
Yet for resolution in this great case we are left to seek;
they not having either the will, or the courage, or the power
to determine it. This insuperable problem hath baffled all
their infalhble methods of deciding controversies ; their tradi
tions blundering, their synods clashing, their divines vrrangHng '
endlessly about what kind of thing the Pope is, and what
power he rightly may claim.
" There is," saith a great divine among them, " so much
controversy abont 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 impotency of the Pope's
power in judging and deciding controversies, or of his cause in
this matter ; that he cannot define a point so nearly concern
ing him, and which he so much desireth an agreement in;
that he cannot settle his own claim ont of doubt ; that all Ml
authority cannot secure itself from contest.
So indeed it is, that no spells can allay some spirits ; and
where interests are irrecondleable, opinions will be so.
Some points are so tough and so touchy, that nobody dare
• Agitur de sninma rei Chiistianae. Bell. Prsef. de Rom. Pont. [p. 275.
vol. 1. Pragae, 1 721.] Upon this one point the very sum aud snbstanceof
Christianity depends.
t Tanta est inter doctores controversia de plenitudine Eccleaasto
potestatis, et ad qua; se extendat, nt p^^ca sint in ea materia secnn.
— ^Aimaiu. de And. Eccl. cap. 3.

the pope's supremacy. 3
meddle with them, fearing that their resolution will fail of
success and submission. Hence even the anathematizing de-
finers of Trent (the boldest undertakers to decide controversies
that ever were) did waive 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 inci
dentally to enact, that any prince should be excommunicate,
and deprived of the dominion of any city or place, where he
should permit a duel to be fought ; the prelates of France, in
the Convention of Orders, a.d. 1595, did declare against that
decree, as infringing their king's authority.f
It was therefore advisedly done not to meddle with so tick-
Ush a point. But in the meantime their policy seemeth greater
than their charity ; which might have inclined them not to
leave the world in darkness and doubt, and unresolved in a
point of so main importance ; (as indeed they did in others of
no small consequence, disputed among their divines with obsti
nate 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.
§ II. There are among them those who ascribe to the Pope
an universal, absolute and boundless empire over all persons
indifferently, and in all matters ; conferred and settled on him
by Divine immutable sanction: so that all men of whatever
degree are obliged in conscience to beheve whatever he doth
authoritatively dictate, and to obey whatever he doth prescribe.
So that if princes themselves do refuse obedience to his will,
he may excommunicate them, cashier them, depose them,
extirpate them. If he chargeth us to hold no communion with
* — di avertire, Che non si venga mai per qual causa si sia aUa disputa
dell autorita di Papa.— Concil. Trid. lib. 2. p. 159.
t Hie articulus est contra authoritatem Regis, qui non potest privari suo
dominio temporali, respectu cujus nuUum superiorem recognoscit. — Bo-
cheU. lib. 5. tit. 20. cap. 45. This Article is against the authority of
the King; who cannot be deprived of his temporal dominion, wherein
he acknowledges no superior.
B 2

A tkeatise of

our prince, to renounce our allegiance to him, to abandon,
oppose and persecute him even to death, we may without
scruple, we must in duty obey. If he doth interdict whole
nations from the exercise of God's worship and service, they
must comply therein. So that, according to their conceits, he
is in effect Sovereign Lord of all the world ; and superior, even
in temporal or civil matters, unto all kings and princes.
It is notorious, that many canonists (if not most) and many
divines of that party do maintain this doctrine ; affirming
that all the power of Christ (the Lord of lords, and King of
kings, to whom all power in heaven and earth doth appertain)
is imparted to the Pope, as to his vicegerent.*
This is the doctrine which almost four hundred 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."t This is the doctrine which the leading theologue of their
sect, their Angelical Doctor, doth affirm, both directly, saying,
" that in the Pope is the top of both powers ;" and by plain
consequence, asserting, " that when any one is denounced
excommunicate for apostacy, his subjects are immediately
freed from his dominion, and their oath of allegiance to hiin.''f

* Prima sententia est, summum Pontificem jure divino habere plenissi.
mam potestatem in universum orbem terrarum, tam in rebus Ecclesiasticis
quam civilibus. Ita docent Aug. Triumphus, Alvarus Pelagiu.s, Panoimi-
tanus, Hostiensis, Silvester, et alii non pauci. Bell. 5. 1. [p. 498. vol. 1.
Pragse, 1721.] The first opinion is, that the Pope hath a most full power
over the whole worid, both in ecclesiastical and civil affairs. This is the
doctrine of Aug. Triumphus, &c. and of many others.
•f Scripsit egregiam summam de Potestate Ecclesise. Bell, de Script.
Anno 1301 . Error est, non credere Pontificem Rom. Universalis EcclesiE
Pastorem, Petri Successorem, et Christi Vicarium, supra temporalia et
spiritualia universalem non habere Primatum ; in quem quandoque nuiiti
labuntur, dictse potestatis ignoranti^ ; quee cum sit infinita, eo qnod
magnus est Sominus, ei magna virtus ejus, et magniiudinis ejus non est
finis, omnis creatus inteUectus in ejus perscrutatione invenitur deficere.
—Aug. Triumph, de Potest. Eccl. in prsef. ad P. Joh. XXII. TFol. Roms,
1584.] t Thomas in fine Secund. Sentent. dicit in Papa esse apicem utriasqne
Potestatis. Bell. 5. 1. [p. 498. vol. 1. Prag. 1727.]
Qunm quis per sententiam denunoatur propter Apostasiam excomnra-
nicatus, ipso facto ejus subditi a dominio, et juramento fidelitatis ejus
liberati sunt. Th. 2. Secund. qu. 12. art. 2. [fol. Venet. 1594 ]

the pope's supremacy. 5
This the same Thomas (or an author passing under his
name, in his book touching the nile of Princes), doth teach,
affirming, " that the Pope, as supreme king of all the world,
may impose taxes on all Christians, and destroy towns and
castles for the preservation of Christianity."*
This (,as Card. Zabarell nearly 300 years ago telleth us) is
the doctrine, which, for a long time, those who would please
Popes did persuade them, that " they could do all things, what
ever they pleased ; yea and things unlawful j and so could do
more than God."f
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;" J another
orator called him " king of kings, and monarch of the earth ;" §
another great prelate said of him, " that he had all power above
all powers both of heaven and earth." || And the same roused
up Pope Leo X. in these brave terms ; " Snatch up, therefore,
the two-edged sword of divine power, committed to thee ; and
enjoin, command and charge, that an universal peace and
alliance be made among Christians for at least ten years ; and to
that bind kings in the fetters of the great King, and constrain
nobles by the iron manacles of censures : for to thee is given
all power in heaven and in earth. "^
This is the doctrine which Baronius with a Roman con
fidence doth so often assert, and drive forward, saying, " that
there can be no doubt of it, but that the civil principality is

• S. Thomas (in lib. 3. de Regim. Princ. cap. 10. et 19.) [Venet. 1595.]
aflBrmat, summum Pontificem jure divino habere spiritualem et tempo-
ralem Potestatem, ut supremum totius mundi Regem, adeo ut etiam taleas
omnibus Christianis possit imponere, et civitates ac castra destruere pro
conservatione Christianitatis. Bell. 5. 5. [p. 503. vol. 1. Pragse, 1721.]
t Quee jiara sunt notanda, quia male considerata sunt per multos assen-
tatores, qui voluerunt placere Pontificibus, per multa retro tempora, et
usque ad hodiema suaserunt eis, quod omnia possent ; et sic quod facerent
quicquid liberet, etiam Ulicita, et sic plus quam Deus. — Zabar. de Schism.
t Orbis Princeps, Episc. Spal. Sess. 1 . p. 24.
^ Regum Rex, et Orbis terrarum Monarcho, Del Rio, Sess. 8. p. 87.
II Virum, in quo erat Potestas supra omnes Potestates, tam Coeli, quam
terrae. — Episc. Patrac. Sess. 10. p. 132.
IT Arripe ergo gladium Divinse Potestatis tibi creditum, bis acutum ; et
jube, impera, manda, ut Pax universalis et CoUigatio per decennium inter
Christianos ad minus fiat ; et Reges ad id in compedibus magni Regis liga,
et Nobiles in manicis ferreis Censurarum constringe : quoniam tibi data
est omnis Potestas in coelo et in terra. — Ibid. p. 133.

6 A treatise of
subject to the sacerdotal :"* and, "that God hath made the
pohtical government subject to the dominion of the spiritual
Church."t § III. From that doctrine the opinion in effect doth not
differ, which Bellarmine voucheth for the common opinion of
Catholics, " that by reason of the spiritual power the Pope at
least indirectly hath a supreme power even in temporal
matters."! 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, in
significant and illusive in regard to practice : it importing not,
if he hath in his keeping a sovereign power, upon what
account, or in what formality he doth employ it ; seeing that
every matter is easy referable to a spiritual account ; seeing
he is sole judge upon what account he doth act ; seeing expe
rience sheweth, that he will spiritualize all his interests, and
upon any occasion exercise that pretended authority ; seeing it
little mattereth, if he may strike princes, whether he doeth it
by a downright blow, or slantingly.
§ IV. That such an universal and absolute power hath
been claimed by divers Popes, successively for many ages, is
apparent from their most solemn declarations, and notoriojia
practices ; whereof (beginning from later times, and rising
upwards towards the source of this doctrine) we shall reSe-
sent some.
The Bull of Pope Sixtus "V. against the two sons of wrath,]:
Henry King of Navarre, and the Prince of Conde, beginneth
thus ; "The authority given to St. Peter and his successors
hy the immense power of the eternal King excels all the
powers of earthly kings and princes. It passes uncontrollable
* Politicum Principatum SacerdotaU esse subjectum nuUa potest esse
dubitatio. Ann. 57. § 32. [vol. 1. p. 453. Antv. 1612 ]
t Politicum Imperium subjecit Spiritualis Ecclesia dominio. Ib. « 33.
[ut supra.]
t Tertia sententia media, et Catholicorum communis, Pontificem ut
Fontificem non habere directe et immediate uUam temporalem potestatem,
sed solum spiritualem; tamen ratione spiritualis habere saltem mdirecte
potestatem quandam, eamque summam, in temporalibus.— Bell. 5. 1. [p.
4tf». vol. 1. Pragse. 1721.]
§ Ann. 1585.

the pope S SUPllEMACY. 7
sentence upon them all. And if it find auy of them resisting
God's ordinance, it takes more severe vengeance 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 accordingly he depriveth those princes of their kingdoms
and dominions, absolveth their subjects from their oath of
allegiance, and forbiddeth them to pay any obedience to them.
' ' By the authority of these presents, we do absolve and set
free all persons, as well jointly as severally, from any such
oath, and from aU duty whatsoever in regard of dominion,
fealty and obedience ; and do charge and forbid all and every
of them, that they do not dare to obey them, or any of their
admonitions, laws, and commands."
Pope Pius V. (one of their holiest Popes of the last stamp.f
who hardly hath escaped canonization until now) beginneth
his BuU against our Queen Elizabeth in these words ; *' He
that reigneth on high, to whom is given aU power in heaven
and in earth, hath committed the holy Catholic and Apostolic
Church, out of which there is no salvation, to one alone on
earth, viz. to Peter Prince of the Apostles, and to the Roman
pontiff, successor of Peter, to be governed with a plenitude of
power : this one he hath constituted prince over all nations,
and all kingdoms, that he might pluck up, destroy, dissipate,
ruinate, plant and build."|; And in the same Bull he declares,
• Ab immensa setemi Regis potentia B Petro ejlisque successoribus
tradita auctoritas omnes terrenorum Regum et Principum supereminet
potestates — Inconcussa profert in omnes judicia — ^Et siquos ordinationi
Dei resistentes invenit, severiore hos vindictS, ulciscitur, et, quamvis poten-
tiores, de solio dejiciens, veluti superbientis Luciferi ministros, ad infima
terrse deturbatos prostemit. —
Dominiis, Regnig, etc. nos illos Ulorumque posteros privamus in per-
petuum —
A Juramento hujusmodi, ac omni prorsus Dominii, Fidelitatis et Obse-
quii debito, Ulos omnes tam universe quam singulatim auctoritate priE-
sentium absolvimus et liberamus ; prsecipimusque et interdicimus eis
universis et singulis, ne illis eorumque monitis, legibus et mandatis audeant
obedire — Bulla Sixti V. Contra Hen. Navarr. R. etc.
t Ann. 1570.
t Pius V. — Quem mirura est in albo Sanctorum nondum relatum esse.
— Briet. Chr. Ann. 1572.
Regnans iu excelsis, cui data est omnis in coelo et in terra potestas,
unam Sanctam, Catholicam et Apostolicam Ecclesiam, extra quam nulla

8 A TEEATISE OF
that " he hereby deprives the Queen of her pretetided right to
the kingdom, and of all dominion, dignity and pnvilege what-
soever ; and absolve all the nobles, subjects and people of the
kingdom, and whoever else have sworn to her, from their oath,
and aU duty whatsoever, in regard of dominion, fidelity and
obedience.'' Pope Clement VI. did pretend to depose the Emperor
Lewis IV.*
Pope Clement V. in the great Synod of Vienna, declared
the Emperor subject to him, or standing obliged to him by a
proper oath of fealty.f
Pope Boniface VIII..J hath a decree extant in the canon-
law, running thus ; " "We declare, say, define, pronounce it to
be of necessity to salvation, for every human creature to be
subject to the Roman Pontiff." § The which subjection,
according to his intent, reacheth all matters; for he there
challengeth a double sword, and asserteth to himself jurisdic
tion over all temporal authorities : for, " one sword," || saith he,
" must be under another, and the temporal authority must be
subject to the spiritual power — whence if the earthly power
doth go astray, it mnst be judged hy the spiritual power."^
The which aphorisms he proveth by Scriptures admirably ex
pounded to that purpose.
This definition might pass for a rant of that boisterous Pope,
est Salus, uni soU in terris, videlicet Apostolorum Principi Petro, Petriqne
Snccessori Romano Pontifici, in potestatis "plenitudine tradidit gubeman-
dam : Hunc unum super omnes gentes et omnia regna Principem con
stituit, qui eveUat, destruat, dissipet, disperdat, plantet et tedificet.— P.
Pius V.in Bull, contra R. Eliz. (Cambd. Hist. Ann. 1570.) [Vid. Mag.
BuUar. vol. 2. p. 324. Luxemb. 1727.]
Ipsam prsetenso regni jure, nee non omni quocunque dominio, dignitate
privilegioque privamus ; et iterum proceres, subditos, &c. Ibid
» Ann. 1346.
t Ann. 1311. Apostolica auctoritate de fratrum nostrorum consilio
declaramus, ilia jnramenta praedicta fidelitatis exsistere et censeri debere.
— Clem. lib. 2. tit. 9. Vide Cone. Vienn. p. 909.
t Ann. 1294.
§ Subesse Romano Pontifici omni humanee creaturse declaramus, dici-
mus, definimus, et pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis.
Extrav. com. lib. 1. tit. 8. cap. 1. [Corp. juris canonici a Pithseo, vol. 2.
fol. Paris. 1695.]
II Oportet gladium esse sub gladio, et temporalem authoritatem spiritual!
subjici potestati. Ibid.
H Ergo si deviat terrena potestas, judicabitur a potestate spiritoalL
Ibid.

THE pope's supremacy. 9
(a man above measure ambitious and arrogant),* vented in his
passion against King Philip of France, if it had not the ad
vantage (of a greater than which no Papal decree is capable)
of being expressly confirmed by one of their General Councils :
for, "we," saith Pope Leo. X. in his bull read, and passed in
the Lateran Council, " do renew and approve that holy con
stitution, with approbation of the present holy Council."t
Accordingly Melch. Canus saith, that "the Lateran Council
did renew and approve that extravagant (indeed extravagant)
constitution :" J 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 invent that proposition,
but borrowed it from the school ; for Thomas Aquinas, in his
work against the Greeks, pretendeth to shew, that " it is of
necessity to salvation to be subject to the Roraan Pontiff." ||
The which scholastical aphorism Pope Boniface turned into
law, and applied to his purpose of exercising domination over
princes ; offering in virtue of it to deprive King Philip of his
kingdom. The Appendix to Mart. Pol. saith of Pope Boniface VIII.
" Regem se Regum, Mundi Monarcham, unicum in Spirituali
bus et Temporalibus Dominum promulgavit /' that "he openly
declared himself to be king of kings, monarch of the world,
and sole lord and governor both in spirituals and temporals."
Before him, Pope Innocent IV. ^ did hold and exeraplify the
same notion ; declaring the Emperor Frederick II. his vassal,
and denouncing in his General Council of Lyons a sentence of
deprivation against him in these terms :** " We having about
the foregoing and many other his wicked miscarriages had
* Vir super modum ambitiosus et arrogans. (Binius in vita Bonif.
VIII.) f Constitutionem ipsam, sacro prsesenti Concilio approbante, innovamus
et approbamus. Concil. Later. Sess. 11. p. 153. [Lab. vol. 14. Paris.
1671.] J Quam extravagantem renovavit et approbavit Concilium Lateranense
sub Leone X. Canus loc. 6. 4. [Lib. 6. cap. 4. p. 316. Colon. 1605.]
§ Hsec Bonifacius, cui assentiuntur omnes, ut nullus discrepet, nisi qui
dissidio ab Ecclesia excidit. Baron. Ann. 1053. § 14. [Vol. 11. Rom.
1605.] II Ostenditur etiam quod subesse Romano Pontifici sit de necessitate
salutis. (Thom. in opusc. contra Graecos.) If Ann. 1245.
•* Nos itaque super prsemissis, Sx. P. Innoc. IV. in Cone. Lugd. [Lab.
Vol. 11. pars 1. col. 640. Paris. 1671.]

10 A TBE-MISE OF
before a careful deliberation with our brethren and the holy
Council, seeing that we, althongh unworthy, do hold the place
of Jesus Christ on earth, and that it was said imto us m the
person of St. Peter the Apostie, whatever thon shalt bind on
earth — the said Prince (who hath rendered himself unworthy
of empire and kingdoms, and of all honour and dignity, and
who for his iniquities is cast away by God, that he should not
reign or command, being bound by his sins and cast away, and
deprrced by the Lord of all honour and dignity) do shew,
denounce, and accordingly by sentence deprive ; absolving aU
who are held bound by oath of allegiance from snch oath for
ever ; by apostolical authority firmly prohibiting, that no man
henceforth do obey or regard him as emperor or king ; and
decreeing, that whoever shall hereafter yield advice, or aid, or
favour to him as emperor or king, shall immediately lie xmda
the band of excommunication."*
Before him Pope Innocent III. Cthat true wonder of the
world and changer of the agejt did affirm the pontifical autho
rity so much to exceed the royal power, as the snn doth the
moon;:J; and appHeth to the former that of the Prophet Jerendah,
" Ecce, co'tistitui te super gentes et regna." " See, I have
set thee over the nations, and over the kingdoms, to root out,
and to puU down, and to destroy, and to throw down," &c.§
Of this power that Pope made experiment, by deposing the
Emperor Otho IV. ; "Whom," saith Nanclems, " as rebellions
to the Apostohcal See, he first did strike with an anathema ;
then him persevering in his obstinacy, did in a Conncil of
Prelates held at P.ome pronounce deposed from empire."]]
The which authority was avowed by that great ConncQimder
this Pope, (the which, according to the men of Trent, did
represent or constitute the Churchy, "j^ wherein it was ordained,.
that " K a temporal lord, being required and admonished by
• ilatt. Paris, (Ann, 1253.; saith, he deemed khigs Mancipia Papse.
t Verfe stupor mundi, et immutator gecoli. llatt. Par. Ann. 1217.
+ Ut quanta est inter Solem et Lunam, tanta inter PontiHces et Regs
difierentia cognoscatur. P. Innoc. III. in Decret. Greg. lib. 1. tit 33.
cap. 6. [foL Paris. 1512.]
§ Jer. i. 10.
j; Imperatorem — nt rebellem Sed: Apostolics et inobedientem anadie-
mate primum ; deinde in pertinacia peistverantem. in Concilio prasubni,
quod Roms turn Innocentius celebrabat, ab Imperio depositom porcossit,
et pronnnciavit. — NaucL Ann. 1212.
T Xeque enim per Lateranense Concilinm Ecclesia stata^t. Sec. — So.
Trid. Scii. 14. rap. 5. [p. 130. Paris, is.57.]

THE pope's SUPUEMACY. 11
the Church, should neglect to purge his territory from here
tical 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 subjects absolved from their fealty to him,
and expose the territory to be seized on by Catholics," &c.*
Before that. Pope Paschal II. deprived Henry IV. and ex
cited enemies to persecute him ; telling them, that they could
not " offer a more acceptable sacrifice to God, than by impugn
ing him, who endeavoured to take the kingdom from God's
Church."t Before him, Pope Urban II. (called Turban by some in his
age) did preach this doctrine, recommended to us in the decrees,
that " Subjects are by no authority constrained to pay the
fidelity which they have sworn to a Christian prince, who
opposeth God and his saints, or violateth their precepts."J
An instance whereof we have in his granting a privilege to the
Canons of Tours :§ " Which," saith he, " if any emperor,
king, prince, &c. shall wilfully attempt to thwart, let him be
deprived ofthe dignity of his honour and power."
But the great Apostle (if not author) of this confounding
doctrine was Pope Gregory VII. (a man of a bold spirit and
fiery temper, inured even before his entry on that see to bear
sway, and drive on daring projects ; possessed with resolution
to use the advantages of his place and time in pushing forward
the Papal interest to the utmost,) who did lift. up his voice
hke a trumpet, kindling wars and seditions thereby over
Christendom. His dictates and practices are well known, being
* Si vero Dominus temporalis requisitus et monitus — Cone. Later.
[ConcU. Lat. IV. can. 3. Labbe, vol. 11. p. 1. col. 148. Paris. J 671.] et
[In Decret. Greg. IX. lib. 5. tit. 7. cap. 13. Paris. 1512.] cap. 3. in Decret.
Greg. lib. 5. tit. 7. cap. 13.
t Ann. 1099. Nam in hac non tantum parte, sed ubique, cvlm poteris,
Henricum, Hsereticorum caput, et ejus fautores pro viribus persequaris.
Nullum profecto gratius Deo sacrificium, qu&m si eum impugnes, qui se
contra Deum erexit, qui Ecclesise regnum auferre conatur. P. Pasch. Ep.
7. ad Rob. Fland. Com. [ConcU. Lab. vol. 10. p. 629. Paris. 1671.]
I Ann. 1088. Fidelitatem enim quam Christiano Principi jurirunt,
Deo ejusque Sanctis adversanti, eorumque prascepta, nulla cohibentur
auctoritate persolvere. [Corpus Juris Canonici a Petro Pithseo et Francisco,
vol. 1. Paris. 1695.] Cans. 15. qu. 7. [6.] cap. 5.
^ Siquis Imperator, Rex, Princeps — contra banc Constitutionem venire
tentaverit — potestatis honorisque sui dignitate careat — P. Urb, II. Ep. 12.

12 A TREATISE OF
iterated in his own Epistles, and in the Roman Councils under
him, extant : yet it may be worth the while to hear him swag
ger 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 administration King Henry,
son of Henry sometime Emperor, who too boldly and rashly
hath laid hands on thy Church ; and I absolve all Christians
subject to the empire from that oath whereby they were wont
to plight their faith unto true kings : for it is right, that he
should be deprived of dignity, who doth endeavour to diminish
the majesty of the Church." -f
" Go to, therefore, most holy princes of the Apostles, and
what I said, by interposing your authority, confirm ; that all
men may now at length understand, if you can bind and loose
in heaven, that ye also can upon earth take away and give
empires, kingdoms, and whatsoever mortals can have : for if
you can judge things belonging unto God, what is to be deemed
concerning these inferior and profane things ? And if it is
your part to judge angels, who govern proud princes, what
becometh it you to do toward their servants ? Let kings now
and all secular princes learn by this man's example, what you
can do in heaven, and in what esteem you are with God ; and
let them henceforth fear to slight the commands of holy
Church : but put forth suddenly this judgment, that all may
understand, that not casually, but by your means this son of
iniquity doth fall from his kingdom." J
So did that Pope, not unadvisedly in heat or passion, but
out of settled judgment, upon cool deliberation, express him
self in his Synods at Rome.
• Vid. ejus dictataapud Bin. post Epist. lib. 2. Ep. 55. Ep. 4. 2.8. 21.
et passim. Ep. 1. 58. 2.5.12,13,18,32. 3.10. 4.1,2,3,7,22.
f Hac itaque fiducia fietus, pro dignitate et tutela Ecclesise suae Sanctse,
Omnipotentis Dei nomine, Patris, FUii, et Spiritus S. Henricum Regem,
Henrici quondam Imperatoris filium, qui audacter nimium et temerarie
in Ecclesiam tuam manus injecit, Imperatoris administratione Regiique
dejicio ; et Christianos omnes Imperio subjectos Juramento illo absolvo,
quo fidem veris Regibus prsestare consueverunt : dignum enim est, ut is
honore careat, qui majestatem Ecclesise imminuere causatur. Plat, in
Greg. VII. et tom. 7. Cone. Rom. 3. [p. 574. vol. 26. Paris. 1644.] apud
Bin. p. 484.
J Agite igitur, Apostolorum sanctissimi Principes, et quod dixi. — Plat.
in Greg. VII. [p. 178. Colon. 1593.] Cone. Rom. 7. apud Bin. tom. 7.
p. 491. [vol. 26. p. 59. Paris. 1644.]

THE pope's SUPllEMACY. l.'l
This Pope is indeed by many held the inventor and broacher
of this strange doctrine. And even those, who about his age
did oppose it, did express themselves of this mind ; calling it
" the novel tradition, schism, heresy of Hildebrand."*
" 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.""!"
" This only novelty (saith Sigebert) not to say heresy, had
not yet sprang up in the world, that the priests of himj 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 that shall oppose the king, may be
absolved from the crime of injustice and perjury. "§
Indeed certain it is, that this man did in most downright
strains hold the doctrine, and most sraartly apply it to
practice : yet did he disclaim the invention or introduction of
it ; professing that he followed the notions and examples of
his predecessors, divers of which he allegeth in defence of
his proceedings. " We, (saith he) holding the statutes of
our holy predecessors, do by apostolical authority absolve
those from their oath who are obUged by fealty or sacrament
to excomraunicate persons, and by all means prohibit that they
observe fealty to them."]|
• Quod ex noveUa traditione HUdebrandua. — Eccl. Leod. apud Bin.
tom. 7. p. 521. [vol. 26. Paris. 1644.]
t HUdebrandus P. author est hujus novelli Schismatis, et primus levavit
sacerdotalem lanceam contra diadema regni. Ib. p. 522. Qui primus se,
et suo exempio alios Pontifices, contra Imp. accinxit gladio belli. Ibid. p.
523. [Corp. Jur. Can. a Peteo Pithaeo et Francisco Cans. 15. q. 6. cap. 4.
vol. 1. Paris. 1695.]
t Job x.ixiv. 18, 30.
§ Hific sola Novitas, n^ dicam Heraesis, nondum in mundo emerserat,
ut Sacerdotes illius qui dicit Regi, Apostata, etqui regnare facit bypocritas
propter peccata populi, doceant populum, qubd malis Regibus nuUam
debeant subjectionem, et licet ei Sacramentum fidehtatis fecerint, nuUara
tamen fidelitatem debeant; nee perjuri dicantur, qui contra Regem
senserint; imb, qui Regi paruerit pro excommunicato habeatur ; qui
contra Regem fecerit, k noxa injustitise et perjurii absolvatur.— Sigeb.
Chron. Ann. 1088.
II Nos, sanctorum prsedecessorum statuta tenentes, eos qui excommuni-

14 A TREATISE OF
And SO it is, that (although for many successions before
Pope Hildebrand the Popes were not in condition or ¦ capacity
to take so much upon them ; there having been a row of
persons intruded into that see void of virtue, and of small
authority, most of them very beasts, who depended upon the
favour of princes for their admittance, confirmation, or support
in the place ; yet) we may find some Popes before him, who
had a great spice of those imperious conceits, and upon
occasion raade very bold with princes, assuming power over
them, and darting menaces against them. For,
Pope Leo IX. telleth us, that " Constantine M. did think
it very unbecoming, that they should be subject to an earthly
empire whom the Divine majesty had set over an heavenly:"*
and surely he was of his author's mind whom he alleged :
although "indeed this Pope may be supposed to speak this,
and other sayings to that purpose, by suggestion of Hilde-
brandjf by whom he was much governed.
Pope Stephanus VI. told the Emperor Basilius, that " he
ought to be subject vrith all veneration to the Roman Church." J
Pope John VIII. (or IX.) did pretend obedience due to
him from princes ; and in default thereof threatened to ex
comraunicate them.§
Pope Nicholas I. cast many imperious sayings and threats
at King Lotharius ; these among others : " We do therefore
by apostolical authority, under obtestation of the Divine judg'
ment, enjoin to thee, that in Treves and Cologne thou shouldst
not suffer any bishop to be chosen, before a report be made to
our apostleship." (Was not this satis pro imperio ?) And
again, " That being compelled thou mayest be able to repent,
know very soon that thou shalt be struck with the ecclesiastical
sword ; so that thou mayest be afraid any more to commit such
things in God's holy Church." ||
catis fidelitate aut sacramento constricti sunt, Apostolica auctoritate Jl
sacramento absolvimus, et n^ eis fidelitatem observent omnibus media
prohibemus. Greg. VII. Ep. 8. 21. Caus. 15. qu. 7. cap. 4. [vol. 1.
Paris. 1695.]
• Valde indignum fore arbitratus, terrene imperio subdi, quos Divina
Majestas preefecit ccelesti. P. Leo IX. Ep. 1. cap. 12.
t Plat, in vita Leon IX.
X Quis te seduxit, ut Pontificem CEcumenicum scommatibus lacesseres,
et S. Romanam Ecclesiam maledictisincesseres, cui cum omni veneratione
subditus esse debes .' Steph. VI. Ep. 1. Baron. Ann. 885. § 11.
§ Ann. 873. — cuncti venire per inobedientiam neglexistis. Joh. VIII.
Ep. 119. — deijiceps excoramunicamus omnes, &c. Ibid.
Ann. 858. Idciico Apostolica authoritate, sub Divini judicii obtes-

THE POPES SUPREMACY. 15
And this he suggesteth for right doctrine, that subjection
is not due to bad princes ; perverting the Apostle's words to
that purpose, '* Be subject to the king as excelling," that is,
saith he, "in virtues not in vices:"* whereas the Apostle
meaneth eminency in power.
Pope Gregory VII. doth also allege Pope Zachary, " Who,"
saith he, " did depose the king of the Franks, and did absolve
all the French from the oath of fidelity which they had taken
unto him, not so much for his iniquities, as because he was
unfit for such a power. "¦(•
This indeed was a notable act of jurisdiction, if Pope
Gregory's word may be taken for matter of fact ; but divers
maintain, that Pope Zachary did only concur vrith the re-
helhous deposers of King Chilperick by way of advice or
approbation, not by authority.
It was pretty briskly said of Pope Adrian I. " We do by
general decree constitute, that whatever king, or bishop, or
potentate, shall hereafter believe, 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
betrayer of the Catholic faith. "J
" Constitutions against the canons and decrees of the
Bishops of Rome, or against good manners, are of no
moment." §
Before that, Pope Gregory II. because the eastern Emperor
did cross the worship of images, did vrithdraw subjection from
him, and did thrust his authority out of Italy. " He," saith
tatione, injungimus tibi, ut in Trevirensi urbe et in Agrippina Colonia
nullum eligi patiaris, antequam relatum super hoc nostro Apostolatui
fiat. Grat, Dist. 63. cap. 4. Ut saltem compulsus resipiscere valeas,
noveris, te citissime, mucrone Ecclesiastico feriendum ; ita ut ulteriils
talia in S. Dei Ecclesia perpetrare formides. P. Nie. I. Ep. 64.
* Regi quasi praeceUenti, virtutibus scUicet, non vitiis subditi estote.
P. Nie. I. Epist. 4. append, p. 626.
t Alius item Rom. Pontifex, Zacharias scilicet, Regem Francorum, non
tam pro suis iniquitatibus, qu&ln pro eo quod tantse potestati erat inu
tilis, deposuit — omnesque Francigenas a juramento fidelitatis quod illi.
r — Decret. 2. part. Caus. 15. q. 6.
} Anno. 772. Generali decreto constituimus, ut exsecrandum Anathema
sit, et veluti prsevaricator Catholicse fidei semper apud Deum reus exsistat,
quicunque Regum, seu Episcoporum, vel Potentum, deinceps Romanorum
Pontificum Censuram in quocunque crediderit, vel permiserit violandam.
P. Had. I. Capit. apud Grat. Caus. 25. qu. 1. cap. 11.
§ Constitutiones contra canones et decreta Praesulum Romanorum, vel
bonos mores, nuUius sunt momenti. Distinct. 10. cap. 4.

IG A TREATISE OP
Baronius, " did effectually cause both the Romans and Italians
to recede from obedience to the Emperor."*
This was an act in truth of rebellion against the Emperor,
in pretence of jurisdiction over him ; for how otherwise could
he justify or colour the fact ? " So," as Baronius reflecteth^
" he did leave to posterity a worthy example," forsooth, " that
heretical princes should not be suffered to reign in the Churcb
of Christ, if, being warned, they were found pertinacious in
error."t And no wonder he then was so bold, seeing the Pope had
obtained so much respect in those parts of the world, that (as
he told the Emperor Leo Isaurus, " All the kingdoms of the
west did hold St. Peter as an earthly god :"J of which he
might be able to seduce some to uphold him in his rebellious
practices. This is the highest source, as I take it, to which this extra
vagant doctrine can be driven. For that single passage of
Pope Fehx III. though much ancienter, will not amount to it,
" It is certain, that iu causes relating to God, it is the safest
course for you, that, according to his institution, you en
deavour to submit the will of the king to the priests," &c.§
For while the Emperor did retain any considerable autho
rity in Italy, the Popes were better advised than to vent such
notions : and while they themselves did retain any measure of
pious or prudent modesty, they were not disposed to it. And
we may observe divers Popes near that time in word and
practice thwarting that practice. For instance.
Pope Gelasius, a vehement stickler for papal authority, doth
say to the Emperor Anastasius, "I, as being a Roman bom,
do love, worship, reverence thee as the Roman prince."]]

* Ann. 730. Tum Romanes turn Italos ab ejus obedientia recedere
penitus fecit. Baron. Ann. 730. § 40.
t Sic dignum posteris reliquit exemplum, nd in Ecclesia Christi regnare
sinerentur haeretici Principes, si ssepe moniti, in errore persistere obfctinato
animo invenirentur. Baron, ibid.
X Bv at Tvairai IBaaiKiiai Tfjg Svaeuig tag Srtdv i-iriyitov exouffi. Greg.
II. Ep. 1. Bin. tom. v. p. 508.
§ Certum est, rebus vestris hoc esse salutare, ut, cum de causis Dei
agitur, juxta ipsius constitutionem, Regiam voluntatem Sacerdotibus
Christi studeatis subdere, non prseferre, &c. P. Felix III. (Ann. 483.)
dist. 10. cap. 3. [Corp. Jur. Can. a Pith'jeo et Francisco, vol. I. dist.
10. cap. 3. p. 8. Paris. 1395.]
II Te, sicut Romanus natus, Romanum Principem amo, colo, suspicio,
P. Gelas. I. Epist. 8. (ad Anast. Imp.)

THE pope's supremacy. 17
And he saith, " that the prelates of rehgiou (knowing the
empire conferred on him by divine Providence) did obey his
laws."* And otherwise he discourseth, that " Christ had
distinguished by their proper acts and dignities the offices of
ecclesiastical and civil power,"-(- that one should not meddle
with the other ; so disclaiming temporal power due to himself,
being content to screw up his spiritual authority.
After him, as is well known. Pope Gregory I. (as became
a pious and good man) did avow the Emperor for " his lord,
by God's gift superior to aU men, to whom he was subject,
whom he in duty was bound to obey ;"J and supposed it a
high presumption for any one to "set himself above the
honour of the empire," § by assuming the title of Universal
Bishop. After him, Pope Agatho,]] in the acts ofthe sixth General
Council, doth call the Emperor Constantine Pogonatus " his
lord ;" doth avow " himself, together with all the presidents
of the churches, servants to the Emperor ;"^ doth say, that
his see and his Synod were subject to him, and did owe obe
dience to him.
Presently after him. Pope Leo II. 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 servants) of his royal nobleness."fi:
After him. Pope Constantine, (the immediate predecessor
of Pope Gregory II.) when the Emperor did command him to
* Cognocentes imperium tibi supema dispositione coUatum, legibus
tuia ipsi quoque parens religionis Antistites. [P. Gelas. I. Ep. 8. ad
Anastas. Imp.]
t Christus, dispensatione magnified temperans, sic actionibus propriis
dignitatibusqne distinctis ofiicia Potestatis utriusque discrevit, &c.
t Ad hoc potestas Dominorum meorum pietati coelitus data est super
omnes homines — Egoindignus famulus vester —
Ego quidem jussioni subjectus —
P. Greg. I. Ep. 2. 26.
§ Qui honori quoque Imperii vestri se per privatum vocabulum super-
ponit. Ep, 4. 32.
II Ann. 680.
i[ diiT-iroTat Kai TSKva. Act. Syn. VI. p. 53. v/ieig dovXoi tov
fiaaCKkiag. p. 304. rifitrkpa SovKt'ia. p. 32. ruv 'iKKKriaiCiv irpoiSpoi ol
SovXot TOV xpK^-ri-aviKbiTaTov vpiiiv KQaTovg. p. 94. SovXiKog vfiSiv Ka3'
riiiag Spovog. p. 64. svikev v-rraKoijg, fig o^uXofstv. p. 33, 34.
** TrpQiTOTVTTov iKKkrju'iag tbicvov. Act. Syn. VI. p. 303.
tt ') PaaiKiKri eiiyhua rdig iaxaroig iavriig SovXoig avyKar'tPaive.
Ibid. p. 304.
VOL. I. 0

18 A TREATISE or
come to Constantinople, " the most holy man," saith Anasta
sius in his life, " did obey the imperial commands.''*
Yea, Pope Gregory II. himself, before his defection, (when
perhaps the circumstances of time did not animate him
thereto), did, in his epistle to Leo Isaurus, acknowledge him
as the " Head of Christians, "f and himself consequently
subject to him.
This Gregory therefore may be reputed the father of that
doctrine, which, being fostered by his successors, was by Pope
Gregory VII. brought up to its robust pitch and stature,
I know. Pope Gregory VII. to countenance him, doth
allege Pope Innocent I.J excommunicating the Emperor Ar-
cadius for his proceedings against St. Chrysostom :§ and the
writers of St. Chrysostom's Ufe,]| with others of the like age
and credit, do back him therein. But seeing the historiang
who lived in St. Chrysostom's own time, and who write very
carefully about him, do not raention any such thing ; seeing
that, being 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, reported by those most
credible historians, in that case ; seeing that fact doth nowise
sort to the condition and way of those times ; that report
cannot be true, and it must be numbered among the many
fabulous narrations, devised by some wanton Greeks, to set
out the life of that excellent personage.
The same Pope doth also allege St. Gregory M. denouncing
excommunication and deprivation of honour, to all kings,
bishops, judges, &c.V who should violate the privilege granted
to the monastery of St. Medard. But this (as are many such
privileges) is a rank forgery, unworthily imposed on Pope
Gregory, (that prudent, meek, and holyman), much to his wrong
and disgrace; which I will not be at trouble to confute, having
• Ann. 709. Misit Imp. ad Constantinum P. saeram, per quam jmnit
eum ad Regiam ascendere urbem ; qui sanctiss. vir jussis imperialibnj
obtemperans.— Anast. in vit. P. Const.
¦)• oig jiaaiXdg kuI Ke^aXr/ tSiv XpiUTiavoiv. P. Greg. II. ad Leonem
la. Ep. l.(p.502.)
t Greg. VII. Ep. 8. 2. Baron. Ann. 407. § 23.
§ Georg. Alex. vit. Chrys. cap. 68. Anon. vit. Chrys. cap. 39.
II Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, Palladius.
f Siquis autem Regum, Antistitum, Judicum, vel quarumcunqne scca-
larium personarum, hujus Apostolicie auctoritatis, et nostrae praeceptionii
decreta violaverit, — cujuscunqne dignitati'i vel sublimitatis ait, honore mo
privetur.— Greg. M. post Epiat. 38. lib. 2.

THE pope's SUPREM.VOY. 19
shewed St. Gregory to have been of another judgment and
temper, than to behave himself thus towards princes; and
seeing that task is abundantly discharged by that very learned
man, Monsieur 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
tliere was greatest reason, and great temptation for it ?
Why did not Pope Julius or Pope Liberius excommunicate
Constantius, the great favourer of the Arians, against whom
Athanasius, St. Hilary, and Lucifer Calar. do so earnestly
inveigh, calling him heretic, antichrist, and what not ? How
did Julian himself escape the censure of Pope Liberius ? Why
did not Pope Damasus thunder against Valens, that fierce
persecutor of CathoUcs ? Why did not Damasus censure the
Empress Justina, the patroness of Arianism ? Why did not
Pope Siricius censure Theodosius I. for that bloody fact, for
which St. Ambrose denied him the communion ? How was
it that Pope Leo I. (that stout and high Pope) had not the
heart to correct Theodosius Junior in this way, who was the
supporter of his adversary Dioscorus, and the obstinate pro
tector of the second Ephesine Council, which that Pope so
much detested ? Why did that Pope not rather compel that
Emperor to reason by censures, than supplicate him by tears ?
How did so many Popes connive at Theodoric, and other
princes professing Arianism, at their door ? Wherefore did
not Pope SimpUcius or Pope Felix thus pimish the Emperor
Zeno, the supplanter of the Synod of Chalcedon, for which
they had so much zeal? Why did neither Pope Felix, nor
Pope Gelasius, nor Pope Symmachus, nor Pope Hormisdaa,
excommunicate the Emperor Anastasius (yea, did not so
much. Pope Gelasius saith, as "touch his name"), for conn-
itenancing the Oriental bishops in their schism, and refractory
'non-compliance 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 excommunicate
• Epist. pars VII.
' \ Quid sibi vult autem, quod dixerit Imperator il nobis se in religionc
^damnatum, cilm super hac parte decessor mens non solum minimi nomen
'ejus attigerit— ? P. Gelas. I. Ep. 1. C 2

20 A TKEATIiZ Of
thee, O Emperor, but Acacius. If you mingle yonrself, yoo
are not excommunicated by us, but by yourself." And, "if
the Emperor pleaseth to join himself with those condemned,"
saith Pope Gelasius, " it cannot be imputed to us."*
Wherefore Baroninst doth ill, in affirming Pope .Symmachiu
to have anathematized Anastasius ; whereas that Pope plainly
denied that he had excommunicated 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 Bining ; egt
(which hath no sense,' or one contradictory to his former asser
tion) being put for -aego, which is good sense, and agreeable to
what he and the other Popes do affirm in relation to tLa
matter.^ Why do we not read that any Pope formally did exconunn-
nicate, thongh divers did zealoiisly contradict and oppose, tk
princes who did reject images ?
In fine, a noble bishop above 500 years aso did say, " I read
and read again the records of the Roman Kin^ and Empenns,
and I nowhere find that any of them before this was excom
municated or deprived of his kingdom by the Roman Poo-
tiff." '§
Snrely, therefore, the andent Popes did either not knew
their power, or were very negMgent of their duty.
Such have been the doctrine and behavionr of Popes k
j*eference to their power.
§ V. This doctrine of the Pope's universal power over ai
persons in aU matters may reasonably be supposed the senii-
ment of aU Popes continually for a long time, even for wsm
than 500 years unto this present day. For,
* No5 te non eicommunicaTimus, Imperator, sed Acacium. — S 2
misces, non a nobis, sed a teipso escommunicatus es. P. STmrnwh^t
Ep. 7. Si isti placet se miscere damnatis, nobis non potest impoaa.
P. Gelas. I. Ep.4. [Lab. voL 4. p. lUi. Paris. 167L]
T Baron. Ann. 503. ^ 17.
J Dids qnod, mecnm conspirante Senim. eicommnnicaverim te. Is2
quidem ego fnefc'O , sed rationaLilittr fectmc a dectssoribns mas snedife
subsequor. P. Svm. Epiit. 7. Xao. voL 4.Ep. 6. p. 12;'B. Paris. i'^Tl .
— Tou say that I excommunicated vou bv the joint oonseit' of the Saute-
This I deny : tut I undanltTily follovr vrhat was with good reason doK
by mv predecessors.
i Lego et relego Romanonim Regum et Imperatorum g:e=tsL etnusqisa*
invenio quenquam eorum ante hTii.c a Romano Pontifice excommuiiiiaflMj
vd regno privatum. Otho Prising. Cirin. lib. 6 . cap. 35. [P. :-'
BaaL 1569.]

THE Pope's supremacy. 21
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 iniquity, which tendeth
to work enormous wrongs and grievous mischiefs : whence, if
any Pope should- conceive it false, he were bound openly to
disclaim, to condemn, 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 Honorius)
charged upon Pope Leo II. " who did not, as it becarae the
apostolical authority, extinguish the flame of heretical doctrme
beginning, but did by neglecting cherish it."* In such a case
a Pope must not be silent ; for, " no small danger," said 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 silence doth suffer the Church to be polluted with
the gall of bitterness and root of impiety, he should nowise be
excusable before the Eternal Judge ;"f and, " Error," saith
Pope Felix III., "which is not resisted," by those eminent
in office, "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."^ But all Popes
since the time specified have either openly declared for this
doctrine, or have been silent, and so have avowed it by tacit
consent. 2. Any Pope disapproving that tenet 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 io their presence and audience ;
• Cum Honorio, qui flammam hoeretici dogmatis non, ut decuit Apos
tolicam authoritatem, incipientem extinxit, sed negligendo confovit. P.
Leo II. Ep. 2.
+ Non leve discrimen incumbit Pontificibus siluisse pro divinitatis cultu
quod congruit. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 8. (ad Anastas. Imp.)
{ Si verb nostro silentio pateremur ecclesiam felle amaritudinis et im-
pietatis radice pollui, qua ratione possemus apud seternum Judicem
excusare ? P. Paschal. II. Ep. 3. (ad Anselm. Cant.)
§ Error cui non resistitur, approbatur ; et Veritas quae minime defen-
satur, opprimitur. P. Felix III. Ep. 1. (ad Acatium.)
II Non caret scrupulo societatis occultse, qui evidenter facinori desinit
obviare. Id. ibid.
¦ II Si ea quae nobis corrigenda sunt tacemus, valde delinquimus. P.
Greg. I. Ep. 2. 37.

22 A TEEATISE OF
and have hugged that sort of men with especial favour, as
their most affectionate and sure friends ; they have suspected,
discountenanced, and frowned on those who have shewed dis
like of it.
Those men indeed who vouch this doctrine, may reasonably
be deemed to do it as accomplices with the Popes, on purpose
to gratify and curry favour with them, in hopes of obtaining
reward and preferment of them for it.*
3. The chief authors and most zealous abettors of these
notions (Popes, Synods, Doctors of the School), have con
tinually passed for most authentic masters of divinity, and
have retained greatest authority in the Church governed and
guided by the Pope.
4. The decrees containing them do stand in their canon-
law, and in their collections of Synods, without any caution or
mark of dislike ; which is a sufficient indication of their con
stant 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 persons
without exception : " Let no man," say they, " presume to
infringe this our will and command," &c.
6. Popes of all tempers and quahfications (even those who
have passed for the most wise and moderate among them) have
been ready to practise according to those principles, when
occasion did invite, and circumstances of things did permit,
interdicting princes, absolving subjects from their allegiance,
raising or encouraging insurrections ; as appeareth by their
transactions not long since against our princes, and those of
France ; which shews the very See imbued with those notions.
7. They do oblige all bishops most solemnly to avow this
doctrine, and to engage themselves to practise according to it.
For in the oath prescribed to all bishops they are required to
avow, that " they will observe the apostolical commands 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 St. Peter against every man;" J that "they will
* oil fiovov avTo. -Koiovtsiv, aXXa Kai avvevSoKovtst ToTg Tipdffaovai,
Rom. i. 32. They not only do the same, but have pleasure in them fli8t
do them.
t Mandata Apostolica totis viribus observabo, et ab aliis observari faciam.
[Decret. Greg. IX. lib. 2. tit. 24.] vel [De Consecratione Electi in
Episeopum Pontificale Romanum, pp. 59 — 61. Antverp. 1758.]
i Papatum Romanum et Regalia S. Petri adjutor eis ero ad retinendum
et defendendum contra omnem hominem. [Id.j

THE POPE S SlPRrMACY. 'J.i
to their power persecute imd impugn heretics, sdusmatics,
and rebels to the Pope or his sviecessors^'"* without any excep
tion; which was I suppose chieriy meant sgainst their own
prince, if occasion should be; top?therwith divers other points,
importing their acknowledgment and abetting the Pope's uni
versal domin.^tion.
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.)f And in the sixth Boman
Synod, mider Gregory VII.. there is an oath of hke tenor
exacted fiom the Bishop of Aqruleia ; perhaps occasionally,
which in pnrsn.snce of that example might be extended to all.
Aud that before that time such oaths were not imposed doth
appe.<ir from hence, that when Pope Paschal II. &d require
them from some great bishops (_the Bishop of Palermo, and
the Archbishop of Poland) ,J they did wonder and boggle at
it as an uncoutii novelty : nor doth the Pope in favour of his
demand aUege any ."mcient precedent, but only proposeth some
odd reasons lor it. ¦' You have agnified nnto me, most dear
brother, that the ICing and Ms nobles did exceedingly wonder.
that an oath with sudi a condition should be every where
ofifered yon by my commissioners, and that you should take
that oa^, wMch I had written, and they tendered to you."f
^ VI. All Romanists, in consjstence with their principles,
do seem obhged to hold this opinion eonceming the Pope's
nniversal power. For, seeing many of their standing masters
and jndges of controversies have so exprei-sly fiwm their chair
dedared and defined it ; all the row for many ages consenting
to it, and coimtenancing it ; not one of them having signified
any dissent or dislike of it : and considering that, if in any
tiang they may require or deserve behe^ it is in this point ;
fbr in what are they more skiUul and credible than about the
nature of their own office ? "' What (saith Bellarmine wisely),
may they be conceived to know better than the anthority of
* Hseneticc?. Sichismativ''D5- et rebc3ies eadem Domino nostro vel ?ucces-
scrihas pisedit-iis pro posse persf q'-iir e; inspngnabo. [Id.]
+ Grej. Decree lib. 2. tit. 24. oajp. 4. CondL Rom. TI. apodBin.
4?3. '
J Decret, Gree lih. 1. tit. 6. cap. 4.
I Si^rninoasti. frater djsrissime, Regvm et Rt-orii Majores adaiiratione
permou^?. qnod passim tihi ab Apocriaariis nostris tali condil30»e oblamm
fiierit., si sacramentum, qsod a nobis scriptum detul^snt, jurares. P.
Pasch. lI.EpisT. 6-

24 A TREATISE Of
their own See T " * Seeing it hath been approved by their most
great and famous Councils, which they hold universal, and
which their adored Synod of Trent doth aQege for sudi (the
Lateran under P. Innocent III., that of Lyons under P. Inno
cent IV., the other Lateran under P. Leo X.) : seeing it hath
been current among their divines of greatest vogue and
authority, the great masters of their school : seeing by so
large a consent and concurrence, during so long a time, it may
pretend (much better than divers other points of great im
portance) to be confirmed bv tradition, or prescription : why
should it not be admitted for a doctrine of the holy Roman
Church, the mother and mistress of aU Churches ? How can
they who disavow this notion be true sons of that mother, or
faithful scholars of that mistress ? How can they acknow
ledge any authority in their Church to be infallible, or certain,
or obUging to assent ?
How can they admit the Pope for authentic judge of con
troversies, or master of Christian doctrine, or in any point
credible, who hath in so great a matter erred so foully, and
seduced the Christian world ; whom they desert in a point of
so great consideration, and influence on practice ; whom they,
by virtue of their dissent from him in this opinion, may often
be obUged to oppose in his proceedings .'
How can they deny, that bad doctrines might creep in, and
obtain sway in the Church, by the interest of the Pope and
his chents ?
How can they charge noVelty or heterodoxy on those who
refuse some dictates of Popes, of papal Councils, of scholastic
divines, which stand upon no better grounds than those on
which this doctrine standeth ?
Why hath no Synod, of the many which have been held in
all parts of Christendom, clearly disclaimed this opinion ; bnt
all have let it slip, or have seemed by silence to approve of it ?
Yea, how can the concord and unity of that Church well
consist with a dissent from this doctrine ? For,
No man apprehending it false, seemeth capable with good
conscience to hold communion with those who profess it : for,
upon supposition of its falsehood, the Pope and his chief ad
herents are the teachers and abettors of the highest violation of
divine commands, and most enormous sins ; of usurpation,
tyranny, imposture, perjury, rebellion, murder, rapine, and
' Ipsis prscipue debet esse nota sua; Sedis authoritas. Bell, -t 3.

THE pope's stjpuemacy. 2.'<
all the villanies comphcated 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 mis
chief. For, if he that should teach adultery, incest, simony,
theft, murder, or the like crimes, to be lawful, would be a
heretic ; how much more would he be such, that should re
commend perjury, rebelhon, regicide, (things including wars,
confusions, slaughters, desolations, all sorts of injustice and
mischief), as duties ?
How then can any man safely hold communion vrith such
persons ? ilay we not say with Pope Symmachus, that " To
communicate with such, is to consent vrith them?"* vrith Pope
Gelasius, that " It is worse than ignorance of the truth to
communicate with the enemies of truth ?" and, that " He who
communicateth with such an heresy is worthily judged to be
removed from our society ?"t
§ VII. Yet so loose and slippery are the principles of the
party which is jumbled in adherence to the Pope, that divers
will not allow us to take this tenet of infinite power to be a
doctrine of their Church ; for divers in that communion do not
assent to it.
For there is a sort of heretics (as Bellarmine and Baronius
call them) sculking everywhere in the bosom of their Church,
all about Christendom, and in some places stalking with open
face, who restrain " the Pope's authority so far, as not to allow
him any power over sovereign princes in temporal affairs ;
much less any power of depriving them of their kingdoms and
principaUties."J ""They are all branded for heretics,! who take from the
Church of Rome and the see of St. Peter, one ofthe two swords,
* An communicare non est consentire cum talibus ? P. Sym. I. Ep. 7.
t Quasi non sit deterius, et non ignor^se veritatem, et tamen com-
munic^sse cum veritatis inimicis. P. Gelas. 1. Ep. 1. Cuicunque hseresi
communicans merito judicatxir k nostra societate removendus. Id. ibid.
Vid. Ep. 13. p. 642.
t Altera non tam sententia quamhaeresis duo docet : primo, Pontificem
ut Pontificem ex jure Divino nuUam habere temporalem potestatem, nee
posse ullo modo imperare Principibus secularibus, nedum eos regnis et
principatuprivare.— Bell. V. 1. [p. 498. vol. l.Pragae, 1721.]
§ Hieresis errore notantur omnes, qui ab Ecclesia Rom- cathedra
Petri e duobus alterum gladium auferunt, nee nisi spiritualem concedunt.
Baron. Ann. 1053. § 14. Hseresis Politicorum. Baron. Ann. 1073. § 13.

20 A TREATISE OF
and allow only the spiritual." This heresy Baronius hath
nominated the "heresy of the poUtics."
This heresy a great nation, otherwise stickmgto the Roman
communion, doth stifiSy maintain, not enduring the Pq»al
sovereignty over princes in temporals to be preached in it.
There were many persons, yea Synods, who did oppose
Pope Hildebrand in the birth of his doctrine, condemning it
for a pernicious novelty, and branding it with the name of
heresy ; as we before shewed.
Since the Hildebrandine age* there have been in every
nation (yea in Italy itself) divers historians, divines and
lawyers, who have in elaborate tracts maintained the royal
sovereignty against the pontifical.
This sort of heretics are now so mnch increased, that the
Hildebrandine doctrine is commonly exploded. Which by the
way sheweth, that the Roman party is no less than othera
subject to change its sentiments ; opinions among them gaining
and losing vogue, according to circumstances of time and con
tingencies of things.
§ 'VT^II. Neither are the adherents to the Roman Chnrch
more agreed concerning the extent of the Pope's authority
even in spiritual matters.
For, although the Popes themselves plainly do claim an ab
solute supremacy in them over the Church ; although the
stream of divines who do flourish in favour with them doth
run that way ; although, according to their principles (if they
had any principles clearly and certainly fixed), that might
seem to be the doctrine of their Church : yet is there among
them a numerous party, which doth not allow him snch a
supremacy, putting great restraints to his anthority ; (as we
shall presently shew.) And as the other party doth charge
this with heresy, so doth this return back the same impntatioa
on that.
§ IX. That their doctrine is in this matter so various and
uncertain, is no great wonder ; seeing interest is concerned in
the question, and principles are defective toward the resolntum
ofit. 1 . Contrary interests wfll not suffer the point to be decided,
nor indeed to be freely disputed on either l^d.
On one hand, the Pope wiU not aUow his prerogatives to he
discussed ; according to that Tnavim of the great Pope Iimo-
* Otto Prising. Sigebert. Abbas Ubsp. Occam, Marsilins Patav. Su.

THE pope's supremacy. 27
cent III. " ^Tien there is a question touching the privfleges
of the Apostolic see, we will not that others judge about
them."* Whence (as we before touched) the Pope did per
emptorily command his legates at Trent, in no case to permit
any dispute about his authority.
On the other hand, the French will not permit the supre
macy of their king- in temporals, or the pririleges of their
Church in spirituals, to be contested in their kingdom. Nor
we may suppose would any prince admit a decision prejudicial
to his authority and welfare subjecting and enslaving him to
the will of the Roman court. Nor (we may hope) would any
Church patiently comport with the irrecoverable oppression of
all its rights and liberties by a peremptory estabUshment 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 noto
riously clash.
§ X. Yea, even Popes themselves have shifted their pre
tences, and varied in style, according to the different circum
stances of time, and their variety of humours, designs, interests.
In time of prosperity and upon advantage, when they might
safely do it, any Pope almost woidd talk high, and assume
much to himself : bnt when they were low, or stood in fear of
powerftd contradiction, even the boldest Popes would speak
submissively or moderately. As for instance, Pope Leo I. after
the second Ephesine Synod, when he had to do with Theodo
sius II. did humbly supphcate, and whine pitifully; but after
the Synod of Chalcedon, having got the Emperor favourable,
and most of the bishops complacent to him, he ranted bravely.
And we may observe, that even Pope Gregory VII. who did;
swagger so boisterously against the Emperor Henry, was yet
calm and nuld ixx his contests with our WiUiam the Conqueror ;
who had a spirit good enough for him, and was far out of his
reach. And Popes of high spirit and bold face, (such as Leo I.
Gelasius I. Nicholas I. Gregory II. Gregory VII. Innocent
III. Boniface VIII. Julius II. Paul IV. Sixtus V. Paulus V.
• Cum super privilegiis sedis Apostolicse causa vertatur, nolumus de
ipsis per alios judicari. Gregor. Deer. lib. 2. tit. I. cap. 12. [Corp. Jur.
Canon. Joh. Gib. vol. 2. p. 13.]

28 A TREATISE OF
&c.) as they did ever aspire to screw Papal authority to the
highest peg ; so would they strain their language in commen
dation of their see as high as their times would bear. Bnt
other Popes, of meeker and modester disposition, (such as
JuUus I. Anastasius II. Gregory I. Leo II. Adrian VI. &c.)
were content to let things stand as they found them, or to
speak in the ordinary style of their times ; yet so, that few
have let their authority to go backward, or decUne.
We raay observe, that the pretences and language of Popes
have varied according to several periods, usually growing
higher as their state grew looser from danger of opposition or
control. In the first times, while the Emperors were Pagans, their
pretences were suited to their condition, and could not soar
high ; they were not then so mad as to pretend to any tem
poral power, and a pittance of spiritual eminency did content
them. When the empire was divided, they could sometimes be
more haughty and peremptory ; as being in the west, shrouded
under the wing of the Emperors there (who commonly did
affect to improve their authority, in competition to that of
other bishops), and at a distance from the reach of the Eastern
Emperor.* The cause of Athanasius having produced the Sardican
canons, concerning the revision of some causes by the Popes,
by colour of them they did hugely enlarge their authority,
and raise their style, especiaUy in the West, where they had
great advantages cf augmenting their power.
When the Western empire was fallen, their influence upon
that part of the empire which came under protection of the
Eastern Emperors rendering them able to do service or disser
vice to those Emperors, they, according to the state of times
and the need of them, did talk more big, or more tamely.
Pope Boniface III. having by compliance with the usurper
Phocas obtained a declaration from him concerning the head
ship of the Roman Church, did make a considerable step
forward towards the height of papal greatness.
Mter that Pope Gregory II. had withdrawn Italy from the
Oriental empire, and Rome had grown in a manner loose and
independent from other secular powers ; in the confusions of
the West, the Pope interposing to arbitrate between princes,
• P. Nich. ad Imp. Mich. p. 511 et 513.

tiie pope's supremacy. 29
trucking and bartering with them, as occasion served, for
mutual aid and countenance, did grow in power, and answer-
ably did advance his pretences, j
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, privfleges, and hberties of Churches ; and baring
got such interest everywhere, he might say what he pleased,
no clergyman daring to check or cross hira. Haring drawn
to himself the final decision of all causes, having got a finger
in disposal of all preferments, having by dispensations, ex
emptions, and grants of privfleges tied to him so many depen
dents, what might not he say or do ?
Pope Gregory VII. being a man of untameable spirit, and
taking advantage from the distractions and corruptions of his
times, did venture to pull a feather vrith the Emperor ; and
with success having mated him, did set up a peremptory claim
to sovereignty over all persons in all causes.
In his footsteps his successors have trodden, being ever
ready upon occasion to plead such a title, and to practise 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 deferring much regard to the
authority of Popes, and accommodating their conceits to the
dictates of them (or of persons depending on them), should
in their opinions vaiy about the nature and extent of Papal
authority ; it having never been fixed within certain bounds,
or having in several ages continued the same thing.
§ XI. Wherefore intending by God's help to discuss the
pretended authority of the Pope, and to shew that he by no
divine institution, and by no immutable right, hath any such
power as he doth claim, by reason of this perplexed variety of
opinions I do find it difiicult 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 tempo
rals, or to the civil sword, is so palpably vain, that it hardly
will bear a serious dispute, having nothing but impudence and
sophistry to countenance it ; seeing so many in the Roman
communion do reject it, and have substantially confuted it ;
seeing now most are ashamed of it, and very few, (even among

30 A TREATISE OF
those sects which have been its chief patrons) will own it ;
seeing Bellarmine* himself doth acknowledge it a novelty,
devised aboutL500 years agoJnSt^Beraard's time ;t seeing
the Popes themselves, wEaJever they think,~3are now scarce
speak out, and forbear upon sufficient provocation to practise
according to it : I shall spare the trouble of meddUng with it,
confining my discourse to the Pope's authority in ecclesiastical
affairs ; the pretence whereto I am persuaded to be no less
groundless, and no less noxious than the other to Christendom;
the which being overthrown, the other, as superstructed on it,
must also necessarily fall.
§ XIII. And here the doctrine which I shall contest
against, is that in which the cordial partisans of that see do
seem to consent ; which is most common and current, most
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 au
thentic Synods (whereby their religion is declared, and distin
guished from others) have asserted, or supposed ; which the
tenor of their discipline and practice doth hold forth ; which
their clergy by most solemn professions and engagements is
tied to avow ; which all the clients and confidants 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, or a prevaricator toward the Apostolic see.
§ XIV. Which doctrine is this, " That," in the words of
the Florentine Synod's definition, " the apostolical chair and
the Roman 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 Doctor of all Christians ; and that unto him in
St. Peter full power is comraitted to feed, and direct, and
govern the catholic Church under Christ ; according as is
contained in the acts of General Councils, and in the holy
Canons. "J
* Primi qui temporalem potestatem summo Pontifici ex Christi institu-
tione tribuunt, videntur esse Hugo de S. Victore, Bemardus, &c. Bell 5
5. [p. 504. vol. 1. Pragse, 1721.]
f The first that yield the Pope temporal power by Christ's institution,
seem to be Hugo, &c.
t 'En opiZofiiv rfiv ayiav airoaroXtKriv KaHSpav, &c. Concil. Flor.
defin. p. 854.

THE pope's supkemacy. 31
That, in the words of Pope Leo X. approved by the Late
ran Synod, " Christ, before his departure from the world,
did in solidity of the Rock, institute Peter and his successors
to be his lieutenants, to whom it is so necessary to obey, that
who doth not obey, must die the death."*
That to the Pope as sovereign monarch, by divine sanction
of the whole Church, do appertain royal prerogatives {Regalia
Petri, the royalties of Peter they are called in the oath pre
scribed to bishops.) . Such as these which follow.
To be superior to the whole Church, and to its represen
tative a General Synod of bishops. To convocate General
Synods at his pleasure ; all bishops being obUged to attend,
upon summons from him. To preside in Synods, so as to
suggest matter, promote, obstruct, overrule the debates in
them. To confirm or invalidate their determinations, giving
life to them by his assent, or subtracting it by his dissent.
To define points of doctrine, or to decide controversies authori
tatively ; so that none may presume to contest, or dissent
from his dictates. To enact, estabUsh, abrogate, suspend,
dispense with ecclesiastical laws and canons. To relax or
evacuate ecclesiastical censures by indulgence, pardon, &c.
To void promises, vows, oaths, obligations to laws by his dis
pensation. To be the fountain of all pastoral jurisdiction and
dignity.f To constitute, confirm, judge, censure, suspend,
depose, remove, restore, reconcile bishops. To confer ecclesi
astical dignities and benefices by paramount authority, in way
of provision, reservation, &c. To exempt colleges, monasteries,
&c. from jurisdiction of their bishops and ordinary superiors.
To judge all persons in all spiritual causes, by calling them to
his cognizance, or delegating judges for them ; with a final
and peremptory sentence. To receive appeals from all ecclesi
astical judicatories ; and to reverse their judgments, if he
findeth cause. To be himself unaccountable for any of his
doings, exempt from judgment, and liable to no reproof. To
erect, transfer, abohsh episcopal sees. To exact oaths of fealty
and obedience from the clergy. To found religious orders ;
or to raise a spiritual militia for propagation and defence of
• Christus — migraturus ex mundo ad Pati-em, in soliditate Petrie
Petrum ejtisque successores vicarios suos instituit, quibus ex libri Regum
testimonio ita obedire necesse est, ut qui non obedient, morte moriatur.
P. LeoX. in Cone. Later. Sess. 11. p. 151.
t Bell. 4.22.

32 A TREATISE OP
the Church. To summon aud commissionate soldiers by
crusade, &c. to fight against infidels, or persecute infidels.
Some of these are expressed, others in general terms couched
in those words of Pope Eugenius, telling the Greeks what they
must consent unto. " The Pope (said he) will have the pre
rogatives of his Church ; and he will have appeals to hira ;
and to feed all the Church of Christ, as shepherd ofthe sheep.
Beside these things, that he may have authority and power to
convoke General Synods, when need shall be ; and that all the
patriarchs do yield to his will."*
That the Pope doth claim, assume and exercise a sovereignty
over the Church endowed with such prerogatives, is sufficiently
visible in experience of fact, is apparent by the authorized
dictates in their canon law, and shall be distinctly proved by
competent allegations, when we shall examine the branches of
this pretended authority.
In the mean time it sufficeth to observe, that in effect all
clergymen do avow so much, who bond fide and without pre
varication do submit to take the oaths and engageraents pre
scribed to them of course by papal appointment. For this
surely, according to the Pope's meaning (by which their obli
gation is to be measured), is designed in the profession ordained
by Pope Pius IV. wherein -efvery beneficed clergyman is en
joined to say, " And I do promise and swear true obedience to
the Roman pontiff, the successor of St. Peter and the vicar of
Jesus Christ. "t Which profession was appointed in pur
suance of a sanction made by the Trent Councfl, that all such
persons " should vow and swear to abide in obedience to the
Roman Church ;"J 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.
* BfiXft rd Trpovofita Trig hKKXi]aiag aiirov, Kai SiXet t)^«tv T^v
tKKXrjTov, Kai iOiivuv Kai -irotfia'tv^iv -iraaav rj\v tKKXrjfsiav rov XpitSToi;
itimrtp TTOiiirjv riuv Trpof5a.TOJv. Ttpbg TOVTOtg, "tva 't)(y k^ovaiav Kai
d-Ovafiiv uv-^KpoTHV (Tvvodov o'lKOVjjLiviKriv, 'on dtrjfTtiE, Kai Travrag
Tovg narpiapxag v-Ki'iKtiv Tip ^sXfjfiaTL avrov. Cone. Flor. p. 846.
t — Romanoque Pontifici, B. Petri snccessori, ac Jesu Christi Vicario,
veram obedientiam spondee ac juro. BuU. Pii IV. super forma juram.
[Concil. Trid. apud buUas, p. 311. Romae, 1564.]
X Provisi de beneflciis — in Romanic Ecclesise obedientia se perniansuros
spondeant ac jurent. Cone. Trid. Sess. 24. cap. 12. [p. 283. Paris.
1837.]

THE I-OPe's SliPKEM.UY- 3,'?
But what that true obedience doth import, or how far tho
pannl authority iu Uie Pope's own sense, and according to the
puulic spirit of that Church, doth stretch, is more explicitly
signified in tho oath which all bishops at their consecration,
and all niotropoUtnus at thoir instalment, are required to take ;
tho which, as it is oxtaut in the Roman Pontifical,* set out
by order of Pope Clomont VIII. doth run in those terms.
" I, N. Elect ofthe Church of N.f from henceforward will
be faith/id and obedient fo St. Peter the Apostie, and to the
holy Roman Church, and to our Lord, tiie Lord N. Pope N.
and to his successors canonically coming in, I will neither
• Poutif. Rom Antwerp. Ann. 1626. p. 59. et p. 86. [Deci-et. Grog.
IX. lib. 2. tit. 21.]
t Ego N. Electus Ecclesita N. ab hac hora in antea Jidelis ot obediens
ero Ii. Petro .\postolo, Sanctceiitte Romana Kccle^tr, et Domino nostra.
Domino N. Papm X. s«f--iiue sticcessoHbrn canonici^ intrantibus. Non
ero in consilio, aut consensu, vel facto, ut ritamperdaut, aut membntmi
seu eapiautur mala captione; nut in cos mfuius quomodolibet ingerautur ;
vol ii\jurini aliquo) mferantur, quovis quipsito coloi-e. Consilium veri
quod miAi credituri smU, per se, aut Nuncios suos, sen literas, ad eorian
damnum, mo scieute netuiui pandam. Papatum Romanum et Regalia
Sancti Petri aifjutor eix ero ad dtfendendum el retiiiemlum, salvo meo
ordine, contra omnem hominetn. Legatum Apostolicee Sedis in eimdo et
nxieundo hoHOr{ficf' tractabo, et in suis necessilatibus adjuvabo. Juni,
honoros. privilosia. ot auctoritatem Sanctiv Romante Eoolesis', Domini
nostri Papto ct Suocessorum pnrilictorum, conservarc, dofondoro. augerc,
priiniovcxc curabo. Ninpie oro iu consilio, vol fiu-to, seu tractatu in
quibus contra ipsum Dominum nostrum, vol oandom Romanam Ecclesiam
aliqua sinistra vel prsejudicialia persouiu-um, juris, honoris, status et potes
tatis, eorum raacWneutur. Et si talia ;i quibuscunmie tmctari vel procu-
rari uovoro, impodiani hoc pro posse, et quanto citius potoro significabo
oidom Domino nostro, vol iUteri per quem possit ad ipsius notitiam
poTveiiire. Rognlas iNuictorum Patrum, decretji, ordiuationos. seu
dispositiones, n-sor\'ationes, provisiones et mondatsk Apostolica totis viribus
observabo, et faeiiun «b aliis observivri. Hivrotieos, Schismatiix>s et
Robolles eidem Doraino nostro vel successoribus prtedictis pro posse
l>orsequar ot impugnabo. Vocatus ad Synodum peniam, nisi prtrtiedifus
Jkerv coHonica /n-iT-petlHione. A^ioslolorum limina singulis friennii.')
persOHttUter per me ipsum risitabo, et Domino nostro ao successoribus
prtatatis rationem roddam de toto meo jiastonili officio ae de rebus omnibus
ad mea5 Ecclesim statum, ad cleri, ot populi disciplinam, auimarom
donique quffi meie fidei tradita sunt, salutem quovismodo pertineutibus,
et vicissim mandata .Apostolica humiliter rcoipiam et qutVm diligontissimo
exoquar. Quod si legitimo innwtlimonto dotentus fuero pnefivta omnia
ad implebo jiec cerium NiiHtinm ad hoc speciiilo mandatum habentem de
gremio mei C«pituli, aut alium in iligi\itate Eoelesiastiea consHtutum, sou
.liilis iiersonatum habentem ; aut. his mihi doficicutibus. per dia'cesimum
Sjuvnlotom ; et clem dolieionto omnino per oliquem olium I'rosbj-toruiu
VOL I. I)

34 .V TUEATISE OF
advise, consent, or do an-ything that may lose life or member,
or that their persons may be seised, or hands anyvrise laid
upon them, or any injuries offered to them under any pretence
whatsoever. The counsel wliich tliey shall eiifni,H me withal,
by themselves, their messengers, or letters I will not know
ingly reveal to any to their prejudice. I loill 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 mil honourably treat and
help in his necessities. The rights, honours, pririleges and
authority of the holy Roman Church, of our Lord the Pope
and his foresaid successors, I will endeavour to preserve,
defend, increase and advance. I wiU 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, I 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 ApostoUc decrees, ordinances or disposals, reservations,
prorisions and mandates I will observe with all my might, and
cause to be observed by others. Heretics, schismatics, and
rebels to our said Lord or his foresaid successors I will to my
?owers persecute and oppose. I will come to a Council when
am called, unless I be hindered by a canonical i7npedimpnt,
I -will by myself in person visit the threshold of the Apostkt
every three years ; and give an account to our Lord and his
foresaid successors of all my pastoral office, and of all things
anywise belonging to the state of my church, to the discipline
of ray clergy and people, and lastly to the salvation of souls
committed to my trust ; aud will in like manner humbly re
ceive and diligently excute the Apostolic commands. And if I be
detained by a lawful impediment, I will perform all the things
siccularem vel regularem spectatce probitatis et religionis de supradictis
omnibus plen^ instructum. De hujusmodi autom impedimento docebo
per legitimas probationes ad Sancta? Romance Ecclesiuj Cardinalem Pro-
poneutem in Congregatione Sacri Concilii per supradictum Nuntinm
transmittendas. Possessioncs verb nd mensam meam pertinentes non
vondnm, nee donabo neque impignorabo, nee de novo infeudabo vel
aliquo modo alienabo, etiam cum consensu Capituli Ecclesia; meu;, incon-
sulto Romano Pontifice. Et si ad aliquam alicnatiouem devenero, poeniis
in quadam super hoc edita coiistitutionc conlcntas eo ipso incurrere volo.
Sic Die Deus adjuvet et /ncc Sancta Dei Evangeliu. [Do consecnitiolif
. Electi in episeopum. Pontificale Romanum, pp. 59 — 61. Antvcrpire, 1758.]

THE pope's supremacy. 35
aforesaid by a certain messenger hereto specially impowered, a
member of my chapter, or some other in ecclesiastical dignity
or else haring a parsonage ; or in default of these, by a priest
of the diocese ; or in default of one of the clergy (of the
diocese) by some other secular or regular priest of approved
integrity and reUgion, fully instructed in aU things above
mentioned. And such impediment I wiU make out by lawful
proofs to be transmitted by the foresaid messenger to the
Cardinal proponent of the holy Roman Church in the congre
gation of the Sacred Council. The possessions belonging to
my table I wfll neither seU nor give away, nor mortgage, nor
grant anew in fee, nor anywise alienate, no not even vrith the
consent of the chapter of my church, without consulting the
Roman Pontiff. And if I shall make any alienation, I vrill
thereby incur the penalties contained in a certam constitution
put forth abont this matter. So help me God and these
holy Gospels of God."
Such is the oath prescribed to bishops, the which is worth
the most serious attention of all men, who would understand
how miserably slarish the condition of the clergy is in that
Church, and how inconsistent their obligation to the Pope is
with their duty to their prince.
And in perusing it we may note, that the clauses in a
different character are in the more ancient oath extant in the
Gregorian Decretals ; by which it appeareth how the Pope
doth more and more enlarge his power, and straiten the
bands of subjection to him. And it is very remarkable that
the new oath hath changed those words Regulas Sanctorum
Patrum into Regalia Sancti Petri, i. ei the Rules of the holy
Fathers into the Royalties of Saint Peter.*
§ XV. I know there are within the Roman communion
great store of dirines, who do contract the papal sovereignty
within a much narrower compass, reftising to him many of
those prerogatives, yea scarce allowing to him any of them.
There are those who affirm the Pope, in doctrine and disci
pline, subject to the Church, or to a General Synod represent
ing it. Which opinion thwarteth a proposition, in Bellar-
mine's opinion, " even almost an article of faith :" but to be
even with him, they do hold his proposition to be quite here
tical. " The Pope is simply and absolutely above the universal
Church — this proposition is almost an article of faith," saith
• Gregor. Decret. lib. 2. tit. 24. cap. 4.
D 2

36 A TREATISE OF
Bellarmine.* The Cardinal of Lorraine on the contrary,
" But I," saith he, " cannot deny but that I am a Frenchman,
and bred up in the Church of Paris, which teaches that the
Roman Pontiff is subject to a Council, and they who teach
the contrary, are there branded as heretics."f
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 heresy). { 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 con
stitutions of the Church ; that he may not infringe them, or
overrule against them, or dispense with them ; and that to
him attempting to do so obedience is not due.
There are those who maintain, that the Pope cannot subvert
or violate the rights and liberties of particular Churches,
settled in them agreeably to the ancient canons of the Church
universal. There are those who assert to General Councfls a power of
reforming the Church, vrithout 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
hig congregation ; and that he therefore hath but a very li
mited and subordinate power. §
There are consequently those who conceive the Pope noto
riously erring, or misdemeaning himself to the prejudice of the
Christian state, may be called to an account, may be judged,
may be corrected, may be discarded by a General Synod.
I Such notions have manifestly prevailed in a good part of
xhe Roman communion, and are maintained by most dirines
jn the French Church ; and they may be supposed everywhere
• Summus Pontifex simpliciter et absolute est supra Ecclesiam Uni-
versam — haec propositio est fere de fide.— Bell, de Cone. 2. 17. [p. !i6.
vol- 2. PragBB, 1721.]
f Ego vero negare non possum quin Gallus sim, et Parisiensis Ecclesite
alumnus, in qu& Rom. Pontificem subesse concilio tenetur, et qui docent
ibi eontrarium ii tanquam hseretici notantur. — Card. Loth, apud Laun.
Ep. 1. 1.
t Quae sententia videtur omnino erronea et hseresi proxima. — Bell. 4. 2.
[p. 446. vol. I. Pragffi, 1721.]
§ Bell, de Cone. 2 14.

THE pope's supke.macv. 37
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 cathoUc truths in great Synods, aud
by them to have been appUed to practice. For,
In the first great Synod of Pisa it was declared, that
Coundls may " reform the Church sufficiently both m head
and members ;"* and accordingly that Synod did assume to
judge two Popes (Gregory XII." and Benedict XIII.) con
tending for the papacy (whereof one was the true Pope), and
deposing them both, did substitute Alexander V. who (as
Antoninus reporteth), " according to the common opinion did
hold the seat of Peter."t
The Synod of Constance declared, that " the Synod law
fully assembled in the Holy Ghost, making a Greneral Council
representing the CathoUc Chnrch mflitant, hath immediately
power ftom Christ ; to which every one, of whatever state or
dignity he be, although it be papal, is bound to obey in those
things which belong to faith, and the extirpation of (the said)
schism, and the general reformation of the Church of God in
head and members." J
The which doctrine they notably put in practice, exercising
jurisdiction over Popes, and for errors, misdemeanors, or
contumacies discarding three (of whom it is hard if one were
not true Pope), and choosing another, who thereafter did pass
for a right Pope, and himseU' did confirm the acts of that
Councfl. (So that this semi-heresy hath at least the authority
of one Pope to countenance it.) " Our most holy Lord the
Pope said in answer thereunto, that he would maiutain and
observe aU and every of those things that were concfliarly
determined, concluded and decreed by the present Councfl in
matters of faith." §
The Synod of Basfl declared the same point, " That Coun
dls are superior to Popes, to be a truth of CathoUc faith,
• Ann. 1409. Cone. Pis. Sess. 16, 17. [Lab. vol. 11. p. 2102—2140.
Paris. 1671.]
f Qui anno xmo sedem Petri tenuit, secundum communem opinionem.
— ^Anton. de Condi. Pis. cap. 5. § 3.
,t Primo dedarat quod ipsa Sviiodus, &:c Sess 4 et 5. [Lab. vol. 12.
pp. 19, 22. Paris. 1671.]
§ Sanctiss. Dominus noster Papa dixit, respondendo ad prsedicta, quod
omnia et singula determinata, conclusa et decreta in mateiiis fidei per
prsEsens coucilinm condliariter, tenere et inviolabiliter observare volebat.
Cone. Const. Sess. 45. p. 1110. [Lab. vol 12. p. 258. Paris. 1671.]

38 A TUEATISE OF
which whoever doth stiffly oppose is to be accounted a
heretic."* " Nor," say they, " did any skflful man ever
doubt the Pope to be subject to the judgment of General
Synods in things concerning faith.f In virtue of which doc
trine, and by its irresistible authority, the Synod did sentence
and reject Pope Eugenius as criminal, heretical, and contu
macious -"J
These Synods, although reprobated by Popes§ in counter-
Synods, are yet by many Roman Catholic dirines retained in
great veneration ; and their doctrine is so current in the
famous Sorbonne, that (if we may beUeve the great Cardinal
of Lorraine) the contrary is there reputed heretical. ||
§ XVI. Yet notwithstanding these oppositions, the former
/opinion averring the Pope's absolute sovereignty, doth seem
(to be the genuine doctrine of the Roman Church, if it have
any. For those dirines by the Pope and his intimate confidants
are looked upon as a mongrel brood, or mutinous faction ;
which he by politic connivance doth only tolerate, because he
is not well able to correct or suppress them. He is afraid to
be riolent in reclaiming them to his sense, lest he spend his
artillery in vain, and lose all his power and interest with them.^
Nor indeed do those men seem to adhere 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 with regard to peace and quiet. They cannot
conveniently break with the Pope, because his interest is
twisted with their own, so as not easily to be disentangled.
For how can they heartily stick to the Pope, whenas their
opinion doth plainly imply him to be an usurper and a tyrant,
(claiming to himself, and exercising authority over the Church,
which doth not rightfully belong to him) ; to be a rebel and
* Veritas de potestate Concilii supra Papam — est Veritas fidei Catholicie
— cui pertinaciter repugnans est censendus hsereticus. — Cone. Bas. Sess.
33. (p. 95.) [Lab. vol. 12. p. 619. Paris. 1671.]
t Nee unquam aliquis peritorum dubitavit, summum Pontificem
in his qu8e fidem concemunt judicio eorundem generalium Synodorum
esse subjectum. — Cone. Bas. Sess. 45. (p. 117).
t Vigore cujus, ac iueffabili et inexpugnabili authoritate . — Sess. 38.
p. 101. [Ibid. p. 629.]
^ (Concil. Later. &c.)
II Ego vero negare non possum, &c.
H Nam adhuc videmus ab Ecclesia tolerari, qui eam sententiam se-
quuntur.— Bell. 4.2. [p. 446. vol. 1. Prag. 1721.]

THE POPES SIPUEMACY. ;i9
traitor against the Church, (invading and possessing the
sovereignty due to it ; for such questionless the Duke of Venice
would be, should he chaUenge and assume to himself such a
power over his commonwealth, as the Pope hath over Christ
endom) ; to be an impostor and seducer, pretending to infal-
Uble conduct, which he hath not.
How can they honestiy condenm those who (npon such
grounds) do shake off such yokes, reftising to comply with
the Pope, tin he correct his errors, tiU he desist from those
usurpations and impostures, till he restore to the Church its
rights and hberties ?
How are the doctriiies of those men consistent or congruous
to their practice ? For they call the Pope monarch of the
Church, and universal pastor of Christians, by God's ap
pointment, indefectibly ; yet wfll they not admit aU his laws,
and reject doctrines which he teacheth, particularly those
which most nearly touch him, concerning his own office and
authority. They profess themselves his loyal subjects, yet
pretend hberties which they wfll maintain against him. They
hold that aU are bound to entertain communion with him, yet
confess that he may be heretical, and seduce into error.
They give bim the name and shadow of a supremacy, but so
that they can void the substance and reaUty thereof.*
In fine, where should we seek for the doctrine of the Roman
Chnrch, but at Rome, or from Rome itself? where these
doctrines are heterodoxies.
§ XVII. We shaU not therefore have a distinct regard to
the opinion of these semi-Romanists ; nor consider them
otherwise, than to confirm that part of truth which they hold,
and to confute that part of error which they embrace ; aUow-
ing, at least in word and semblance, more power to the Pope,
than we can admit as dne to him. Onr discourse shaU be
levelled at him as such as he pretendeth himself to be, or as
assuming to himself the fore-mentioned powers and prero
gatives. § XVIII. Of such vast pretences we have reason to require
sufficient grotmds. 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 out
* Manifestum autem Schismatis argnmentum est, ciim quis se com-
monioni subtrahit Apostolicse sedis. — Balus. not. ad .\gobard. p. 112.
It is a manifest argument of schism, when auy man withdraws himself
from communion with the apostolic see.

40 A TBEATISE OF
a good title to it ; for " no man may take this (more than
pontifical) honour to himself, but he that is called by God, as
was Aaron."* "They are worthfly to be blamed, who tumnl-
tuously and disorderly fall upon curbing or restraining those
who by no law are subject to them."f
We cannot well be justified from a stupid easinesss, in ad
mitting such a Ueutenancy to our Lord, if we do not see
exhibited to us manifest and certain patents, assuring its com
mission to us. We should love the Church better, than to
yield up its liberty to the will of a pretender, upon slight or
no ground. Their boldly claiming such a power, their haring
sometime usurped such a power, will not excuse them or us.
Nor vrill precarious assumptions, or subtle distinctions, or
bUnd traditions, or loose conjectures, serve for probations m
such a case. J
§ XIX. Such demands they cannot whoUy baulk : 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 primacy over his brethren, all the Apostles and the
disciples of our Lord, importing all the authority which they ,
claim ; and that from him this primacy was devolved by suc
cession to the Bishops of Rome, by right indefectible for all
future ages.
Which plea of theirs doth involve these main suppositions.
1. That St. Peter by our Lord's donation or sanction had
conferred on him a primacy among the Apostles.
2. That this primacy did include a supremacy of power,
and dominion or jurisdiction over the Apostles.
3. That the rights and prerogatives of this supremacy were
not personal, but derivative to successors.
4. That St. Peter was Bishop of Rome properly.
5. That he continued till his death in possession of that
office. 6. That hence to the Bishops of Rome, as to St. Peter's
successors, an universal jurisdiction over the Christian Church
of right doth appertain.
7. That such a right of the Roman Bishop is indefectible,
and by no means can faU.
* Heb... 4.
t Jure culpandi sunt, qui turbid^ atque inordinate in eos coercendos
insiliunt, quinullS, sibi lege subjecti sunt. — Aug. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 17.
t Nemo sibi et professor et testis est. Tert. 5.1. adv. Marc. None
can be both a claimer and a witness for himself.

THE POPES StJPEEMAClf. 41
8. That in fact, upon these accompts, from St. Peter's time
in the primitive Church, and continually downward through
all ages, the Roman Bishops have enjoyed and exercised such
a sovereign power.
The truth and certainty of these propositions we shall in
order discuss ; so that it may competently appear, whether
those who disclaim these pretences are (as they are charged)
guilty of heresy and schism ; or they rather are liable to the
imputations of arrogancy and iniquity who do obtrude and urge
them.

A TREATISE

THE POPE'S SUPfiEMACY.

" Now the names of the twelve Apostles were these : the
first Simon, who is called Peter."* — Matt. x. 2.
Among the modern controversies there is scarce any of
greater consequence, than that about Universal Supremacy,
which the Bishop of Rome claimeth over the Christian
Church ; the assertion whereof on his side dependeth upon
divers suppositions, namely, these :
1 . That St. Peter, by onr Lord's appointment, had a pri
macy, implying a sovereignty of authority and jurisdiction
over the Apostles.
2. That the rights and prerogatives of this sovereignty
were not personal, but derivable, and transmitted to successors.
3. That St. Peter was properly Bishop of Rome, and died
in that office.
4. 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.
5. That in fact the said Bishops, continually from St.
Peter's time, have enjoyed and exercised this power.
6. That this power is indefectible ; such as by no means
can be forfeited or fail.
In order to the discussion and resolution of the first point,
I shall treat upon the primacy of St. Peter ; endeavouring to
shew what primacy he was capable of, or might enjoy ; what
he could not pretend to, nor did possess.
* TTpwrot; ^'ifiiiiv.

.1 TREATISE OF THE P0PE'¦^ SUPEEMACY. 43
The first supposition of those, who claim universal juris
diction to the Pope over the ('hurch, is, that St. Peter had a
primacy over the Apostles.
In order to the resolution of this point, we may consider
that there are several kinds of primacy, which may belong to
a person in respect of others : for there are —
1 . A primacy of worth or personal exceUency.
2. A primacy of reputation and esteem.
3. A primacy of order, or bare dignity and precedence.
4. A primacy of power or jurisdiction.
To each of these what title St. Peter might have, let us in
order examine.
I. As for the first of these, (a primacy of worth, or merit,
as some of the ancients caU 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 apostoUcal
office in an eminent manner, particularly that in quickness of
apprehension, in boldness of spirit, in readiness of speech, in
charity to onr Lord, and zeal for his serrice, in resolution,
actirity, and industry, he was transcendent, may seem to
appear by the tenor of the evangehcal and apostolical histories;
in the which we may observe him upon all occasions ready to
speak first, and to make himself the mouth (as the Fathers
speak) of the Apostles, in all deUberations nimble at propound
ing his adrice, in all undertakings forward to make the onset ;
being -irayraxoiJ ^tp/uoc, always hot and eager, always prompt
and rigorous, as St. Chrysostom often affirmeth concerning
him : these things are apparent in his demeanor, and it may
not be amiss to set dovm some instances.*
When our Lord, observing the different apprehensions men
had concerning him, asked the Aposties, "But whom say you
that I am ?"t up starteth he, TrpoTrjjc^ kuI irpoXafijidveTai, he
skippeth forth, and preventeth the rest, crying, " Thou art
• ' Ev-iripiaTpofog yap ati -irujg r]V avSipmTTog, KiKerTpm/iivog ov jitTp'tiag
lie T-rjv i-iri to Spaaat Kai liiriiv irpoSivii'iav. CyrilL in Joh. xxi. 15. He
was a very active and stirring man, exceedingly spurred on with much
promptness and alacrity in doing and speaking.
Tla-vTOXov evpiiTKeTat airo ttoSov opfidv. Chrys. in Joh. Or 12.
(13 24). , , ,,,,,., ....
Aid -navTiiiv Kai tv -naaiv tijv avTrjV t/iipaivti Jtp/iorqra. Unrys.
tom. 5 Orat. 59. [p. 436. vol. 3. Paris. 1835.]
t Matt- xvi. 16.

44 A TKEATISE OF
the Christ, the Son of the Uring God."* The other Apostles
were not ignorant of the point ; for they at their conversion
did take Jesus for the Messiah, which (even according to
the common notion of the Jewst) did imply his being the Son
of God ; Nathanael (that is St. Bartholomew, as is supposed)
had in terms confessed it ; the whole company, upon seeing
our Lord walk on the sea, had avowed it ; St. Peter before
that, in the name of them all had said, " rjneig -KfiriaTevrnfia,
KOI e-yvioKafiev, " We have believed and have known, that thou
art the Christ, the Son ofthe Uring God."t They therefore
had the same faith, but he from a special alacrity of spirit,
and expedition in utterance, was more forward to declare it ;
/" He was more hot (saith St. Gregory Naz.) than the rest at
iacknowledging Christ."^
When our Saviour walked on the sea, who bnt he had the
faith and the courage to venture on the waters towards him ?||
When our Lord was apprehended by the soldiers, pre
sently up was his spirit, and out went his sword in defence of
him.^ When our Lord predicted, that upon his coming into trou
ble 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 I never be offended;" and, "Though I
should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee;"** such was
his natural courage and confidence.
When our Lord was discoursing about his pa^pn, he
suddenly must be advising in the case, and urgirfgnim to
spare himself ;ff upon which St. Chrysostom biddeth us to
" consider, not that his answer was unadrised, but that it
carae from a genuine and fervent affection."JJ
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. §§
* Licet caeteri Apostoli sciant, Petrus tamen respondet pro caeteris.
Ambr. in Luc. lib. 6. cap. 9.
t John i. 42, 46. Matth. xxvi. 63. John i. 50. Matth. xiv. 33.
t John vi. 69.
§ Qspfiorepog rStv oKXurv slg kirlyviixnv ^^ptffroi). Greg. Naz. Or. 34.
II Matth. xiv. 28. % John xviii. 10.
** Matth. xxvi. 33, 35. John xiii. 37. tt Matth. xvi. 22.
tt M)) ToiJTO h^€Tdffit}fi€v, 'on o.'irep'LtTKe'jrTog i) airoKpiaig' aW on
yvriaiov 5r69ou ijv Kai K'lovTog. Tom. 5. Or. 59. [p. 436. vol. S.Paris.
1835.] §^ liij tiSdg 0 Xiyu. Mark ix. 6. Luke ix. 33.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 45
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 implieth) did obtain the first sight of our Lord after
the resurrection; 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.f
At the convention of the Apostles and Elders about re-
solring the debate concerning observance of Mosaical institu
tions, he first rose up, and declared his sense. J
In the promulgation of the Gospel, and defence thereof
before the Jewish rulers, he did assume the conduct, and con
stantly took upon him to be the speaker ; the rest standing by
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. Chrysostom), and he was the mouth of all."§
That in affection to our Lord, and zeal for his service; St.
Peter had some advantage over the rest, that question,
" Simon Peter, dost thou love me more than these ?"|| may
seem to imply : (although the words irXEtov tovtoiv, may hear
other interpretations, whereby the seeming inridiousness of
the question according to that sense vrill be removed.) How
ever, that he had a singular zeal for promoting our Lord's
serrice, and propagation of the Gospel, therein outshining the
rest, seemeth manifest in the history ; and may be inferred
from the pecuUar regard our Lord apparently did shew to
him. Upon these premises we may well admit, that St. Peter had
* Luke xxiv. 12, 34. John xx. 3. Kai 'ort c^ip^n K.ri^q., dra Toig
SiolsKa. 1 Cor. xv. 5. " And that he appeared to Cephas, after that to
the twelve."
t Acts i. 15. t Acts XV. 7.
§ KOivrjv -jrpoefSdXXovTo iptovijv, Kai -Kavruv avrbg r)v rb UTopa.
[Jl yXwTTa tSiv 'Airo<TToXo)v iri-pog rjv, p. 436. vol. 3. Paris. 1835.]
Q Aug. in Joh. tract. 124. o paviKog kpaffrijg tov XpiffTov. Chrys.
tom. 5. Or. 24. an extreme lover of Christ.
Ssepe diximus nimii ardoris, amorisque quam maximi fuisse Petrum in
Dominum. Hier. in Matth. xvi. 22. — We have often said that Peter was
transported with too much heat, and extraordinary great love of our Lord.
Ipse enim Petrns in Apostolorum ordine primus, in Christi amore
promptissimus, saepe unus respondet pro omnibus. Aug. Serm. 13. de
verb. Dnm. in Matt. i. [p. 595. vol. 5. Paris. 1837.]— For Peter himself
being first in the order of the Apostles, and most prompt and forward in
the love of Christ, answered oftentimes alone for all the rest.

46 A TBEATISE OF
a primacy of worth ; or that in personal accomplishments he
was most eminent among the twelve Apostles; (althongh
afterward there did spring up one, who hardly in any of these
respects would yield to him ; who could confidently say,
"thai he did not come behind the very chief Apostles ;"* and
of whom St. Ambrose saith, "Neither was Paul inferior to
Peter— being well to be compared even with the first, and
second to none :"t and St. Chrysostom: " For what was greater
than Peter, and what equal to Paul ?"t) This is the primacy
which Eusebius attributeth to him, when he caUeth him, f' the
I excellent and great Apostle, who for his rirtue was the prolo-
icutor of all the rest."§ '¦•
II. As to a primacy of repute ; which St. Paul meaneth,:
when he speaketh of the ol SoKoUvTeQ, "those which had a
special reputation," of those " who seemed to be piUars ;"
of the vTTEp Xlav 'AttoittoXoi, " the supereminent Apostles ;"|
this advantage cannot be refused him ; being a necessary con
sequent of those eminent qualities resplendent in him, and of
the illustrious performances achieved by him, beyond the
rest. This may be inferred from that advantageous renown, which
he hath had propagated from the beginning to all posterity.
This at least those elogies of the Fathers (styling hiitf
the Chief, Prince, head of the Apostles) do signify.^ >
This also may be collected from his being so constantly
ranked in the first place, before the rest of his brethren.
III. 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 Trporiyopia or
privilege of speaking first (whether in propounding matters
for debate, or in delivering his advice) the conduct and
moderation of affairs ; that this was stated on him, may be
* 1 Cor. XV. 10. 2 Cor.xi. 23. 2 Cor. xi. 5. xii. 11.
+ Nee Paulus Inferior Petro — cum primo quoque facile conferendiis; et
nuUi secundus. Ambr. de Sp. S. lib. 2. cap. 12. [vol. 4. p. 254. Paris.
1661 ]
t Ti yap nirpou ptiZov ; tI St IlavXov iaov ; Chrys. tom. 5. Grat.
167. § Toj) Kaprepbv Kai psyav rHv 'AirodToXwv, tov dpeTrjg 'eviKa r&v
Xoiirittv aTcdvTwv -Trporjyopov. Eus. Hist. 2. 4. [Lib. 2. cap. 14. p. 46.
Oxon. 1845. vel Lib. 2. p. 63. lin. 40. Reading.]
Gal. ii. 2, 6. Gal. ii. 9. 2 Cor. xi. 5. xii. 11.
'0 'tTn^avidTaTOg riiv 'AiroaToXwv 'H'iTpog. Ath. disp. c. Arium,
p. 122.

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 47
questioned ; for that this were a kind of womanish privflege ;
and that it doth not seem to befit the gravity of such
persons, or their condition and circumstances to stand upon
ceremonies of respect ; for that also our Lord's rules do seem
to exclude all semblance of ambition, all kinds of inequaUty,
and distance between his Apostles; for that this practice
doth not seem constantly and thoroughly to agree to his being
endowed with this advantage; especially seeing aU that
practice which favoureth it, may fairly be assigned to other
causes ; for that also the Fathers' authority (if that be ob
jected, as a main argument of such a primacy) in points of
this nature, not bordering 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 imaginations
no less freely than other men.
But yet this primacy may be granted, as probable upon
divers accounts of use and convenience ; it might be useful to
preserve order, and to promote expedition, or to prevent con-
ftision, distraction, and dilatory obstruction in the manage
ment of things ; yea, to maintain concord, and to exclude that
ambition or affectation to be foremost, which is natural to men.
For seeing aU could not go, speak, or act first, all could
not guide affairs, it was expedient that one should be ready to
undertake it, knowing his cue : "See (saith St. Chrysostom,
noting on Acts u. 14, where St. Peter speaketh for the rest),
the concord of the Apostles ; they yield unto him the speech,
for they could not all speak ;"* and " One (saith St. Jerome)
is chosen among the twelve, that a head being appointed, an
occasion of schism might be removed."f
St. Cyprian hath a reason for it soraewhat more subtle and
mystical, supposing our Lord did confer on him a preference
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. Augustine) do commonly harp on the same
notion: I can discern Uttle solidity in this conceit, and as
Uttle harm. J
* ^KoTTai tS)V ' AirooToXuv T-fjV bjiovoiav, avToi vapa-j^upovaiv avrip
Trig Srifiriyopiag, ov yap iSii rrd-VTag^SiiyyeaBai. Chrys. in Act. ii. 14.
[vol. 9. Hom. 4. p. 44. Paris. 1837.]
t Inter 12 unus eligitur, ut capite constitute Schismatis tolleretur
occasio. Hier. in Jovin. i. cap. 14. [vol. 4. p. 168. Paris. 1706.]
t Cyp. Ep. 73. deunit- Eccl. &c. [Ep. 72. p. 115. Paris. 1836.] In typo
unitatis. — Aug. de Bapt. lib. 3. cap. 17. [vol. 9. p. 117. Paris. 1694.]

48 A TREATISE OF
However, supposing this primacy (at least in respect to the
Fathers, who generally seem to countenance it), divers probable
reasons may be assigned, why it should especially be con
ferred on St. Peter.
1. It is probable, that St. Peter was first in standing.
among the Apostles : I mean not that he was the first
disciple, or first converted to faith in Christ ;* but first called
to the ApostoUcal 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 ."f — He was one of the first beUevers at large ; he was
perhaps the first, that distinctly believed our Lord's dirinitys
he was probably the very first Apostle ; as the fittest persoo.
in our Lord's eye for that employment.]; " 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 pre<
ferred before 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 Apostolorum,ff that is (according to
frequent usage ofthe word Princeps in Latin) "the first ofthe
Apostles."Petrus — natur^ unus homo erat, gratiS, unus Christianus, abundantiore
gratia unus idemque primus Apostolus. Aug. in Joh. tract. 123. [124.]
[vol. 2. p. 822. Paris. 1694.] [vel p. 2470. vol. 3. Paris. 1836.]— 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
promptissimus, ssepe unus respondet pro omnibus. Aug de Verbis Dom.
sup. Matth. i. Serm. 13. [p. 595. vol. 5. Paris. 1837.]— For Peter himself
being the first in the order of the Apostles, the most forward in the low
of Christ, he alone ofttimes answers for all the rest.
* (IXporiAiiffi S'c Xlerpov Kai 'AvBpiav, Sion Kai irpiaroKXtiTOW
Theoph. in Matt. 10.)
t Luke vi. 14. Matth. iv. 18. Mark i. 16. Luke v. 3.
t VivwaKuiv Tig iv -rrpuiroig a^iog Tamadai, tJeXe^aro U'trpov
dpxriybv dvai — Epiph. haer. 51.
§ Primus credidit, et Apostolatfis est Princeps. Hil. in Matth. can.
[cap. 7. p- 642. Paris. 1693.]
II Quem primum Dominus elegit. Cypr. Ep. 71. [Ep. 70. ad Quintum,
p. 111. Paris. 1836.]
% '0 -irdvTtiiv Tuiv iia^tjTiHv npoKpiScig. Bas. de Judicio Dei, torn.
2. p. 268. [p. 308. vol. 2. Paris. 1839.]
** 'Avapxy tUv 'A-rrotrroXuiv. Modest, apud Phot. Cod. 275. Clem.
ad. Jac.
tt Hier. in Jovin. 1.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 49
So that as in divers churches (perhaps when time was, in
all) anciently priority in ordination did ground a right to pre
cedence, as it is in ours, with some exception ; so might St.
Peter upon this account of being first ordained Apostle, obtain
such a primacy.
2. St. Peter also might be the first in age : which among
persons otherwise equal is a fair ground of preference ; for he
was a married man ; and that before he was called, as is inti
mated in St. Luke ;* and may be inferred from hence, that
he would not have married after that he had left all, and de
voted himself to follow our Lord. 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."t
I know that Epiphanius affirmeth St. Andrew to have been
the elder brother ; but it doth not appear whether he saith it
from conjecture, or upon any other ground. And his autho
rity, although we should suppose it bottomed on tradition, is
not great, tradition itself in such matters being very slippery,
and often one tradition crossing another, f
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 foremost place,
.and thence by custom to possess it ; for qui sibi fidit. Dux
regit examen — ^it being in all action, as in walking, where
she that naturally is most rigorous and active doth go before
'"the rest.
They might induce others to a voluntary concession thereof;
for to those who indisputably do excel in good quaUties or
^bflities, honest and meek persons easily wiU yield precedence,
jspecially on occasions of public concernment ; wherein it is
jxpedient, that the best qualified persons should be first
'•'5een.§ Luke iv. 38. v. 7. Matth. xix. 27.
t Sed cur non Joarmes electus est virgo ? aetati delatum est, quia Petrus
.(Senior erat ; ne adhuc adolescens et pene puer progressise setatis homini-
Jus praeferretur.— Hier. in Jovin. 1. 14. [vol. 4. p. 168. Paris. 1706]
' t MiKpoTspov bvTog roS Usrpov Tip X?°^V ''^f vXiiciag. Epiph.
lasr. 51. [p. 440.] — Peter being the younger in age.
r ^ Abroi ¦n-apax'^poiJ'"^!' avnji, &c. Chrys. iu Act. 2. 11. [p. 44. vol. 9.
'aris. 1837.] — They yield unto him, &c.
VOL. I. E

50 A TREATISE OF
They probably might also move onr Lord himself to settle,
or at least to insinuate this order ; assigning the first place to
hira, whom he knew most willing to serve him, and most able
to lead on the rest in his serrice.
It is indeed observable, that upon all occasions our Lord sig
nified a particular respect to hira, 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 privileges, which he meant
to confer on them all ; him he did assume as spectator and
witness of his glorious transfiguration ;* him he picked out as
corapanion and attendant on him in his grievous agony ; his
feet he first washed ;f to him he did first discover himself after
his resurrection^ (as St. Paul implieth) ; and with him then
he did entertain most discourse, in especial manner recommend
ing to hira the pastoral care of his Church ; by which manner
of proceeding our Lord may seem to have constituted St. Peter
the first in order among the Apostles, or sufficiently to hare
hinted his mind for their direction, admonishing them by his
example to render unto him a special deference.
4. The Fathers commonly do attribute his priority to the
merit of his faith and confession, wherein he did outstrip hii
brethren. " He obtained supereminent glory by the confes
sion 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 others, he is usually
mentioned first ; which seemeth not done without careful de
sign, or special reason. ||
Upon such grounds it may be reasonable to allow St. Peter
a primacy of order ; such an one as the ringleader hath in a
dance, as the primipilar centurion had in the legion, or the
prince of the senate had there, in the Roman State : at least,
* Matth. xvi. 16. Matth. xvii. 1. Matth. xxvi. 37.
t John xiii. 6. 1 Cor. xv. 5. X John xxi.
§ Hil. in Matth. Can. 14. p. 566. ¦
Supereminentem beatse fidei suas confessione gloriam promeruit. — Hilar.
de Trin. lib. 6. p. 121. [cap. 37. p. 904. Paris. 1693.]
Ideo quia solus profitetur (amorem suum Joh. 21.) ex omnibus, omni
bus antefertur. — Ambros. iu Luc. cap. ult. [vol. 3. cap. 24. p. 233. Pali*.
1661.] II Matth. X. 2. Mark iii. 17. Luke vi. 14. Acts i. 13. John xxi. 2.

THE POPE 5 SUPREMACY. .51
as among earls, baronets, &c. and others co-ordinate in degree,
yet one hath a precedence of the rest.
IV. As to primacy, importing superiority in power, com
mand, or jurisdiction ; this by the Roman party is asserted to
St. Peter, but we have great reason to deny it, upon the fol
lowing considerations.
1 . For such a power (being of so great importance) it was
needful that a commission from God, its founder, should be
granted in downright and perspicuous terms ; that no man
concerned in duty grounded thereon, might have any doubt of
it, or excuse for boggling at it ;* it was necessary not only for
the Apostles to bind and warrant their obedience, but also for us,
because it is made the sole foundation of a like duty incumbent
on us ; which we cannot heartily discharge without being assured
of our obUgation thereto, by clear revelation, or promulgation
of God's wfll in the holy Scripture ; for it was of old a current
and ever wfll be a true rule, which St. Augustine in one case
'thus expresseth, "I do beUeve that also on this side there
would be most clear authority of the Divine oracles, if a man
could not be ignorant of it without damage of his salvation ;"f
and Lactantius thus, "Those things can have no foundation, or
¦firmness, which are not sustained by any oracle of God's
word." J
But apparently no such commission is extant in Scripture ;
the allegations for it being, as we shall hereafter shew, nowise
clear, nor probably expressive of any such authority granted
by God ; but, on the contrary, divers clearer testimonies are
producible derogating from it.
• 2. If so illustrious an office was instituted by our Sariour,
it is strange that nowhere in the evangelical or apostolical his-
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
fthis authority ?" (Luke xx. 2.) and the reasonableness of it our Lord did
' often avow, declaring that if by his doctrine and works he had not vouched
' the divinity of his authority, it had been no sin to disbelieve or reject him.
(John V. 31, 36.x. 25, 37. xv. 22, 24.)
t [Ubi enim de re obscurissimS, disputatur non adjuvantibus divinanim
jcripturarum certis clarisque documentis cohibere se debet humana prae-
umptio nil faciens in alteram partem declinando.] Credo etiam hinc di-
inorum eloquiorum clarissima authoritas esset, si homo sine dispendio
romissiE salutis ignorare non posset. — Aug. de pfecc. mer. et rem. 2. 36.
p. 283. vol. 10. Paris. 1838.]
t Nullum fundamentum, aut firmitatem posstmt habere, quse nullis di-
inarum vocum fulciuntur oraculis. — Lact. 7. 2.
E 2

52 A TRE.\TISE or
tory (wherein divers acts and passages of smaller moment are
recorded) there should be any express mention of that institu
tion ; there being not only much reason for such a report, but
many pat occasions for it. The time when St. Peter was
vested with that authority ; the raanner 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 occurrences relating to our faith and discipline, by the
holy evangeUsts ; no one of them, in all probability, could
have forborne punctually to relate a matter of so great conse
quence, as the settlement of a monarch 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 compli
ance wherewith the whole Church for ever must be account
able ;) 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 un
dertaken to write in order the things that were surely believed
araong Christians in his time ;"* of which things this, if any,
was one- of the most considerable.
3. 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 ?t Then, indeed, probably he began
to obtain all the primacy and pre-eminence he ever had;
but no such power doth appear then conferred on him, or
at any time in our Saviour's life ; at least, if it was, it was so
covertly and indiscernibly, that both he himself, and all the
Apostles must be ignorant thereof, who a Uttle before our
Lord's passion did more than once earnestly contest about su
periority. And it is observable, that whereas our Lord before
his passion did carefully teach and press on the Apostles the
chief duties, which they were to observe in their beharionr to
ward each other, the maintenance of peace, of charity, of
imity, of huraility toward one another ; yet of paying dne
respect and obedience to this superior he said nothing to
them.J The collation of that power could not well be at any time
before the celebration of our Lord's supper, because before
that time St. Peter was scarce an ecclesiastical person, at least
he was no priest, as the Convention of Trent' under a curse
* Lukei. 1. t Matth x. 1.
i Mark ix. 50. John xiii. 34. xv. 12. xvii. 21. xiii. 14.

THE pope's SUPllEMACY. 53
doth require us to beUeve ; for it were strange that an uncon-
secrated person, or one who was not so much as a priest,
should be endowed with so much spiritual power.*
After his resurrection, our Lord did give divers common
instructions, orders and commissions to his Apostles, but it
doth not appear that he did make any peculiar grant lo 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
eves, we shall afterward declare that to be invalid.i-
4. If St. Peter had been instituted sovereign of the Apostoli
cal senate, his office and state had been in nature and kind
very distinct from the common office of the other Apostles ; as
the office of a king from the office of any subject ; as an ordi
nary, standing, perpetual, successive ofiice from one that is
only extraordinary, transitory, temporary, personal and incom
municable; (to speak according to distinctions now in use, and
appUed to this case) ; whence probably, as it was expedient to
be, it would have been signified by some distinct narae, or
title, characterising it, and distinguishing it from others ; as
that of (Arch-apostle, Arch-pastor, High-priest, Sovereign ¦,
Pontiff, Pope, his Holiness, the Vicar of Christ, or the Uke ;
whereby it might have appeared that there was such an officer,
what the nature of his office was, what specialty of respect and
obedience was due to him : but no such name or title (upon
any occasion) was assumed by him, or was by the rest attri
buted to him, or in history is recorded concerning him, the
name of an Apostle being all that he took on him, or by others
was given to him.
I 5. There was, indeed, no office above that of an apostle
I known to the Apostles, or to the priraitive Church ; this (saith
' St. Chrysostom)J was " the greatest authority, and the top
I of authorities ; there was (saith he) none before an Apostle,
: * Si quis dixerit, iUis verbis. Hoc facite in meam commemorationem,
Christum non instituisse Apostolos Sacerdotes — anathema sit. Cone.
'Trid. Sess. 22. Can. 2. [p. 208. Paris. 1837.]— 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 evTEiXd/ievoig ToXg ' A-TrouToXotg. — .'icts i. 2. Johnxx. 21. Matth.
xxviii. 19. Luke xxiv. 49. Mark xvi. 15.
' t 'Ap^i) piy'iHT-q- Kopv^ri TtSv dpx<iv. — Chrys. tom. 8. p. 114. [p.
90. vol. 3 Paris. 1835.] 'ElStg v\p,riXbv KaBrjptvov rbv 'A-rrooToXov,
Kai oiikva npo Ueivov ovra, ovre dvwTtpov. Ibid. [Idem.] Tuv Si
'ATToffToXuiv iaog ovSe'ig ycyowJ'.— Chrys. tom. 5. Or. 33.^ Avroij
TOV TlavXov aKOVoapiv apiOpovvrog Tag dp^dg, Kai 'tv Tip irip))\o-

54 A TREATISE or
none superior, none equal to him;" this he asserteth of all the
Apostles; this he particularly appUeth to St. Paul; this he
demonstrateth from St. Paul himself, who purposely enumera
ting 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,
sorae pastors, and teachers ; and God hath set some in hig
Church,t first-Apostles, secondarily prophets; thirdly (teacheisj
TrpwTov ' ATTOCTroXouE, why not first a pope, an universal pastor,
an oecumenical judge, a vicar of Christ, a head of the catholic
Church ? Could St. Paul be so ignorant, could he be so neg
ligent, or so enrious, as to pass by, without any distinction,
the supreme officer, if such an one then had been ? As put a
case, that one should undertake to recite the officers in any
f state or republic, would he not do strangely if he should pre-
(termit the king, the duke, the consul, the major thereof!
would not any one, confiding in the skill, diUgence, and in
tegrity of such a relator, be induced from such an omission to
believe there was no such officer there? St. Chrysostom there-'
fore did hence very rationally infer, that the apostolical office
was the supreme in the Christian state, having no other superior
to it.
Saint 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.
6. Our Lord hiraself, at several times, declared against this
kind of primacy, instituting equality among his Apostles, pro
hibiting them to affect, to seek, to assume or admit a superio
rity of power, one above another.
" There was, (saith St. Luke, among the twelve, at the
participation of the holy supper), a strife among them, who
of them should be accounted the greatest," J 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
Tipip )j;Mpi(j) r^K ' A-iroaroXiKijv KaOiZovTog. — Chryst. tom. 8. ubi supra.
[p. 91. vol. 3- Paris. 1835.] — We have heard Paul himself reckoning
up powers or authorities, and placing the Apostolical in the
place. » Eph. iv- 11. t 1 Cor. xii. 28.
i Luke xxii. 14. Luke xxii. 24. Tig avriiv Soxei tivai piiluiv.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 55
be ; that he would have no monarchy, no exercise of any domi
nion or authority by one among them over the rest ; but that
notwithstanding any advantages one might have before the
other, (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 serrice to one
another. " The kings," said he, " of the Gentiles exercise
lordship over them ; and they that exercise authority over
them, are called benefactors, but ye shall not be so ; but he
that is greaterf among you let him be as the younger ; and
he that is leader, J as he that doth minister ;" that is, what
ever pririlege 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 supe
rior, but rather behave himself as an inferior : thus our Lord
did smother the debate, by removing from among them what
ever greatness any of them did affect or pretend to ; forbidding
that any of them should, Kvpieveiv, or £^oi<ftdf£ii',§ 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, Saint James and Saint John,
the sons of Zebedee) did afiect a pre-eminence over the rest, re
questing 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 (or
in thy kingdom," || as Saint Matthew hath it, that is, in that
new state, which they conceived our Lord was ready to intro
duce) ; which request doth not seem to import any great
matter of authority ; nor probably did they desire so much, as
our adversaries do give to Saint Peter ; yet our Lord doth not
only reject their suit, but generally declareth, that none of
• So doth St. Clemens interpret pUZuv, alluding to this place.
"Hrw ng TTtirrbg ^TU} SvvaTog yvwfftv i^inrtiv, riTiji (TO^bglv SiaKp'i-
ati Xoyiav, riTui yopybg tv ipyoig, ToaovTif paXXov rairtivoifipovtXv ofti-
\(i, 8<T(f) SoKtl paXXov pdZtiiv I'lvai- Kai jTjT-fTv rb KoivioiptXig irdaiv,
pri Tb 'tavTov. Clem, ad Corinth. I. p. 63. [1. 48.] apud Clem. Alex. Strom.
6. p. 466. [467.] — Let a man be faithful, let him be powerful in declaring
knowledge, let him be wise iu discovering reasons, let him be strenuous in
works, by so much the more ought he to be humble-minded, by how
much the more he seems to be greater than others ; and to seek the com
mon benefit of all, and not of himself.
b pt'iZmv, X 0 riyovptvog. ^ Luke xxii. 25, 26.
Mark x. 37. Matth. xx. 25.

56 A TREATISE OF
them were capable of such a preferment in his kingdom;
which therein dift'ered from worldly dominion, because in it
there was no room for such an ambition ; especially in that
state of things, wherein the Apostles were to be placed ; which
was a state of undergoing persecutions, not of enjoying dignity,
or exercising command ; all the preferment, which they reason
ably could aspire to, being to be dispensed in the future state
(whereof they were not aware) according to God's preparation,
in correspondence to the patience and industry any of them
should exert in God's service (upon which account Saint Chry
sostom saith, " it was a clear case, that Saint Paul shodd
obtain the preference."*
It was indeed (as our Lord intimateth) incongruous for
those who had forsaken all things for Christ, who had em
braced a condition of disgrace, who were designed by self-
denial, humiUty, neglect of temporal grandeur, wealth, and
honour ; by undergoing persecution, and undertaking con
formity to our Lord (being baptized with the baptism with
which he was baptized),-)^ to propagate the faith of a crucified
Master ; to seek, or take on thera authoritative dignity ; for
among them there could not well be any need of commanding ;
or being commanded ; it was more fit, that all of them should
conspire to serve and help one another, in promoting the com
mon design and service of their Lord, with mutual conde
scension and compliance ; which was the best way of recom
mending themselves 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 dominion : "Ye know (saith he), that the
princes of nations exercise dominion over thera, and they that
are great exercise authority upon them, but it shall not be so
araong you ; but whosoever will be great araong you, let him
be your rainister ; and whosoever vrill be first among you, let
him be your servant :" J °0e idv deXri, whoever among you hath
a mind to special grandeur and pre-eminence, let him under
stand, that there is none other to be attained, beside that
which resulteth from the humble performance of charitable
* lEvStiXov 'on rrjg dvuiTdrui d-noXavairai nprjg Kai rrpotSp'iag.
Chrys. tom. 5 Orat. 33.
t ToT-E ri 'smuTaaia i/v ov nprj, dXXd rrpovoia rHiv dpxoptviiiv, &e.
Chrys. in .\ct. i. 26. [p. 31. vol. 9. Paris. 1837.] Then the government
was not an honour, but a provident care of the governed, &c.
X Matth. XX. 20.

THE pope's supuemacv. 57
offices to his brethren ; the which whoever shall best dis
charge, 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 them
selves who should be the greatest ;"* and for satisfaction pre
sumed to inquire of our Lord about it ; when, as they surely
were very ignorant of Saint Peter's being their head, so there
was a fair occasion as could be of our Lord's instructing them
in that point, and enjoining their duty towards him ; but he
did not so, but rather taught him together with the rest not to
pretend to any such thing as preferment above the rest : " He
sitting down called the twelve, and said unto them. If any one
desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of
all;"-)- how could he (considering the occasion and circum
stances of that speech) in plainer terms establish equaUty. or
discountenance any claim to superiority among them ? Had
St. Peter then advanced such a plea, as they now affirm of
right belonging to him, would he not thereby have depressed
and debased hiraself to the lowest degree ?
To impress this rule our Lord then " calling a Uttle child,
did set him in the midst of them," J teUing them that " except
they were converted (from such ambitious pretences) and
became Uke little chfld reri (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
Uttle chfld" (not affecting, or assuming more than such an
innocent did) " should be greatest in the kingdom of heaven,"
in real worth and in the favour of God transcending the rest ;
so that St. Peter claiming superiority to himself would have
forfeited any title to eminency among Christians.
Again, as to the power, which is now ascribed to St. Peter,
by the party of his pretended successors, we may argue frora
another place, where our Saviour prohibiting his disciples to
resemble the Jewish Scribes and Pharisees in their ambitious
* Mark ix. 34. Luke ix. 46. Matth. xviii. 1.
t Mark ix. 35.
+ Kai ToXg rrtpi rrpwTtiojv ^iXovtiKoviTi yviopipoig ptrd drrXorriTog
TTjv lUoTrjTa TToptyyvd, Xtyiav we ra -KaiSia avTovg ytv'tuQai StXv,
clem- Alex. Str. 5. p- 409. — And to those familiar friends striving for
the pre-emmence, he commends equality together with simplicity, saying,
that they ought to become as little children.

58 A TREATISE OF
desires and practices, their affectations 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 established therein, to exclude such
differences of power ? whereby one doth in way of domination
impose his opinion or his will on others.
Ye are aU fellow-scholars, fellow-servants, and fellow-chil
dren of God 5 it therefore doth not becorae you to be any wise
imperious over one another ; but all of you humbly and
lovingly to conspire in learning and observing the precepts of
your coraraon Lord ; the doing which is backed with a pro
mise, and a threat suitable to the purpose : " He that exalteth
hiraself shall be abased, and he that will abase himself shall be
exalted ," the which sentences are to be interpreted according
to the intent of the rules foregoing.
If it be said, that such discourse doth impugn all ecclesiasti
cal jurisdiction, I answer, that indeed thereby is removed all
such haughty and harsh rule, which some have exercised over
Christians ; that aijBevTia (arbitrary power), that ilovoia
dvtvBvvog (absolute uncontrollable authority), that rvpawiicri
Trpnvojxia (tyrannical prerogative), of which the Fathers com
plain, that KaTUKvpieveiv tUv K\i]po)v (domineering over their
charges) which St. Peter forbiddeth. " We, (saith St. Chry
sostom) were designed to teach the Word, not to exercise
erapire or absolute sovereignty ; we do bear the rank of ad
visers exhorting to duty."f
A bishop (saith St. Jerome) differeth from a king, in that a
bishop presideth over those that are willing, the king against
their will,t (that is, the bishop'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,")" ovk dvayKaa-
* Matth. xxiii- 8. tig KaBtiyrirfig
t Chrys. in 1 Tim. iii. 1. in Eph. Or. 11. Isid. Pel. Ep. 4. 219. 2.
125. Greg. Naz. Or. 28. 1 Pet. v. 3. Ei£ SiSaaKaXiav Xoyou npoi-
Xtipiiy^riptv, OVK tig dpx^v, ovS't tig aOSrtvTiav avp^ovXuiv 70.1,01
iTTtxoptv TrapaivovvTivv. Chrys. in Eph. Or. 11.
X Ilie enim nolentibus prseest, hie volentibus. Hier. Ep. 3. ad Nepot.
— 'O pevTot tKovTi^v bifidXwv apxeiv, &c. Chrys. in Tit. 1. 7. [p. 800.
vol. 11. Paris. 1838.] — He ought to rule them so as they may he willing
to be rulod, &c.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 59
roic, dXX' iKovaiiog, 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 super
intend, the name of Bishop signifying to thee not dominion,
butduty."t At least those precepts of our Lord do exclude that power,
which is ascribed to St. Peter over the Apostles themselves,
the which indeed is greater, than in likelihood any Pharisee
did ever affect ; yea, in raany respects doth exceed any domi
nation which hath been claimed or usurped by the most abso
lute monarch upon earth ; for the power of St. Peter, in their
opinion was the same which now the Roman bishop doth chal
lenge to himself over the pastors and people of God's Church,
by virtue of succession to him (St. Peter's power being the
base of the Papal, and therefore not narrower than its super
structure) ; but what domination comparable to that hath ever
been used in the world ?
What Emperor did ever pretend to a rule so wide in extent
(in regard either to persons, or matters) or so absolute in
effect ?
Who ever, beside his HoUness, did usurp a command not
only over the external actions, but the most inward cogitations
of all mankind ; subjecting the very minds and consciences of
men to his dictates, his laws, his censures ?
Who ever thundered curses and damnations on all those
who should presume to dissent from his opinion, or to contest
his pleasure ?
Who ever claimed more absolute power, in making, abo
lishing, suspending laws, or imposing upon men what he
pleased, under obligation of conscience, and upon extremest
penalties ?
What prince ever used a style more imperious, than is that
which is usual in the Papal bulls ; X" I^et it be lawful for no
* 1 Pet. V. Sed contenti sint honore suo ; Patres se sciant esse non
dominos- — Hier. Ep. 62- (ad Theoph.) cap. 3. Amari parens, et episcopus
debet, non timeri. Ibid. cap. 1.
f Inde denique superintendis, sonans tibi Episcopi nomine non domi
nium, sed ofRcium. Bern, de Consid. 2. 6.
X Nulli hominum liceat banc paginam nostra? voluntatis et mandati in-
fringere, vel ei ausu temerario contraii-e.

60 A TREATISE. OF
man whatever to infringe this expression of our will and com
mand, or to go against it with bold rashness ?"
What Domitian raore coraraonly did adrait 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 Christendom
to hira.*
Who ever did exempt his clients and dependants in aU na
tions from subjection to civil laws, from undergoing common
burthens and taxes, from being judged or punished for their
misdemeanors and crimes ?
Who ever clairaed a power to dispose of all things one way
or other, either directly or indirectly ; to dispose even of
kingdoms, to judge sovereign princes, and to condemn them,
to depose them from their authority, absolving their subjects
from all allegiance to thera, and exposing their kingdoms to
rapine ?
To whora but a Pope were ever ascribed prerogatives like
those of judging all men, and himself being liable to no judg
raent, no account, no reproof or blame ; so that (as a Papal
canon assureth us) " Let a Pope be so bad, as by his negli
gence and raaladrainistration to carry with him innumerable
people to hell, yet no mortal raan whatever must presume here
to reprove his faults ; because he being to judge all men is
himself to be judged by no man, except he be caught swerving
from the faith ;" which is a case they will hardly suffer a man
to suppose possible. t
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 ?"J
Such power the Popes are wont to challenge, and when oc
casion serveth do not fail to execute, as successors of St. Peter;
to whom therefore consequently they ascribe it ;§ and some
tiraes in express terras ; as in that brave apostrophe of
Pope Gregory VII. (the spirit of which Pope hath pos-
* Sanctissimus Dominus noster. Cone. Trid. Sess. 22. cap. 11, te.
[Decretum super petitione concessionis calicis. p. 223. Paris. 1837.]
t Si Papa suEe, &c. Grat. dist. 40. cap. 6.
X Cone. Lat. sub Leone X. Sess. 1 1 . p. 133. (in Orat. Archiep. Patrac.)
§ Hac itaque iiducia fretus, &c. — Excommun. Henrici R. in Cone. Rom.
3- sub Greg. 7. apud Bin. tom. 7. p. 484.

THE POPES SUPREMACY. CI
sessed his successors generally) : " Go to therefore (said he,
directing his speech to St. Peter and St. Paul) most holy
Princes of the Apostles, and what I have said confirm by
your authority, that now at length all men may understand,
whether you can bind and loose ; that also you can take away
aud give on earth empires, kingdoms, and whatever mortal
men can have."*
Now if the assuming and exercising such powers be not that
KaraicuptEiiEtj', and icaTe^ovaidiieiv, that exalting oneself, that
being called Rabbi, Father, Master, which our Lord pro-
hibiteth, what is so? what then can those words signify?
what could our Lord mean ?
The authority therefore which they assign to St. Peter, and
assume to themselves from him, is voided by those declara
tions and precepts of our Lord ; the which it can hardly be
weU conceived that our Lord would have proposed, if he had
designed to constitute St. Peter in such a supremacy over his
disciples and Church.
7. Surveying particulars, we shall not find any peculiar ad
ministration committed to St. Peter, nor any pririlege con
ferred on him, which was not also granted to the other
Apostles. Was St. Peter an ambassador, a steward, a minister, a
ricar (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 re-
marketh) " granting an equal power to all the Apostles ;" and
" We (saith St. Paul) are ambassadors for Christ ; we pray
you in Christ's stead be reconcfled to God ;" and "so leta man
esteem us as the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mys
teries of God."f
Was St. Peter a rock on which the Church was to be
founded ? Be it so ; but no less were they all : J for the wall
of Jerusalera, which came down from heaven, had twelve foun
dations, on which were inscribed the names of the twelve Apos
tles of the Lamb : and " We (saith St. Paul) are all buflt upon
* Agite Apostolorum Sanctissimi Principes, &c. Plat, in Greg- VII.
[p. 178. Colon. 1593.]— In Concil. Rom. 6. apud Bin. p. 491.
t Et quamvis Apostolis omnibus post resurrectionem suam parem po
testatem tribuat et dicat, Sicut, &c. Cypr. de Un. Eccl. [cap. 2. p. 172.
Paris. 1836.]— 2 Cor. v. 20. 1 Cor. iv. 1. 2 Cor. vi. 4.
t Matth, xvi. 18. Apoc. xxi. 10, 14. Eph. ii. 20.

62 A TREATISE OF
the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, Christ himself
being the chief corner stone :" " Whence equaUy (saith St. Je
rome) the strength of the Church is settled upon them."*
Was St. Peter an architect of the spiritual house (as
himself caUeth the Church ?) so were also they : " For 1
(saith St. Paul) as a vrise master-buflder have laid the foun-
dation."-(- Were the keys of 'the Church (or of the kingdom of heaven)
committed to him ?J So also were they unto them ; they had
a power to open and shut it by effectual instruction and per
suasion, by dispensation of the sacraments, by exercise of dis
cipline, by exclusion of scandalous and heretical persons:
whatever faculty the keys did import, the Apostles did use il
in the foundation, guidance, and governraent 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 power given him of binding and loosing ef
fectually ?§ So had they, immediately granted by our Saviour,
in as full manner, and couched in the sarae terms : "If thou
shalt bind on earth, it shall be bound in heaven," |1 said our
Lord to him; and "Whatsoever things ye shall bind on
earth, they shall be bound in heaven,"^ said the same Divine
mouth to them.
Had he a pririlege to remit and retain sins ? it was then by
virtue of that common grant or promise ; " Whosesoever sins
ye remit, they shall be remitted; and whosesoever sins ye
retain, they are retained."**
Had he power and obligation to feed the sheep of Christ (afl
or some) ? so had they indefinitely and immediately ; so had
others by authority derived from them, who were not nominated
pastors,tt who had this charge laid on them : "Take heed Tinto
yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost
hath made you overseers, to feed the Church of God, which
* Ex uequo super eos Ecclesis fortitude soUdatur.— Hier. in Jovin.
1. 14.
t 1 Pet. ii. 5. 1 Cor. iii. 10. { Matth. .xvi. 19.
^ 'Om yt Kai roXg air' tKtivuiv to dpxitpaTiKov KardSiaSox'^v rrtptPt-
^Xr)p'tvoig d^iwpa, Tijv avTyjv -KpoaCivai tov Stcptlv Kai Xviiv Uov-
aiav TTurrtvoptv. Phot. Cod. 280. p. 1600.— Those, who by succession
from them (viz. the Apostles), were endowed with Episcopal authority,
we believe to have the same power of binding and loosing.
jl Matth. xvi. 19. % Matth. xviii. 18. *• John xx. 23.
tt Eph. iv. 11. Acts XX. 28.

THE pope's supremacy. G3
he hath purchased with his own blood ;" whom he doth him
self exhort, "Feed the flock of God which is among yon,
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 wfll have it),
it did appertam to their charge ; to teach was a common duty,
to lead and to rule were common functions ; St. Peter could
not, nor would not appropriate it to himself; it is his own ex
hortation, when he taketh most upon him, " Be mindful of the
commandment (or precept) of us the Apostles of the Lord and
Saviour."f Was his commission universal, or unUmited 1 so was theirs,
by the same immediate 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 aU nations, baptizing
them, and teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever
commanded you," and " Go ye into all the world, and preach
the Gospel to every creature."*
" They (as St. Chrysostom speaketh) were all in common
intrusted vrith the whole world, and had the care of all
nations." §
Was he furnished vrith extraordinary gifts, with special
graces, with continual directions and assistances for the dis
charge of the ApostoUcal 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 the power to perform all sorts of
miraculous works. Our Lord, before his departure, "breathed
into them, and said. Receive ye the Holy Ghost;" all of them
(saith St. Luke) " were fiUedjwith 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 abun
dantly partake of that character, which St. Paul respected,
when he did say, " The signs of an Apostle were wrought
among you in signs and wonders and mighty deeds."**
Did St. Peter represent the Church as receiring privfleges
• 1 Pet. V. 2. t 2 Pet. iii. 2.
t Matth. xxviii. 19. Mark xvi. 15. Luke xxiv. 47.
%TidvTtg KOivyT-qv o'lKovp'tvriv'tp-niiJTtvdkvTtg, Chrys. tom. 8. p. 115.
[p. 93. vol. 3. Paris. 1837.]— Tom. 5. Orat. 47. in 2 Cor. xi. 28. [p. 728.
c. vol. 10. Paris. 1837.]
II Luke xxiv. 49. John xvi. 13, 14, 26. Luke xxiv. 49. Mark x.
17. John XX. 22. Acts ii. 24.
H Acts XV. 28. ?» 2 Cor. xii. 11, 12.

64 A TREATISE OP
in its behalf; as the Fathers affirm?* so did they according to
the same Fathers ; " If therefore (saith St. Augustine, citing the
famous place, sicut me misit Pater) they did bear the person
of the Church, and this was said to thera as if it were said to
the Church itself, then the peace of the Church remitteth
sins."f What singular prerogative can be imagined appertaining to
St. Peter? what substantial advantage could he pretend to
beyond the other Apostles? Nothing surely doth appear;
whatever the patrons of his supremacy do claim for him, is-
precariously assumed, without any fair colour of proof; he for
it is beholden not to any testimony of holy Scripture, but to
the invention of Roman fancy. We may well infer vrith Cardi
nal Cusanus: "We know that Peter did not receive more
power from Christ than the other Apostles, for nothing was
said to Peter, which was not also said to the pthers ; therefore
(addeth he) we rightly say, that all the Apostles were equal to
Peter in power. "J
8. Whereas St. Peter himself did write two cathoUc Epis
tles : there doth not in them appear any intimation, any air or
favour of pretence to this arch-apostolical power. It is natural
for persons endowed with unquestionable authority (howso
ever otherwise prudent and modest), to discover a spice thereof
in the matter, or in the style of their writing ; their mind
conscious of such advantage, wfll suggest an authoritative way
of expression, especially when they earnestly exhort, or se
riously reprove, in which cases their very authority is a con
siderable motive to assent or compliance, and strongly doth
impress any other arguments, but no critic perusing those
Epistles would smell a Pope in them. The speech of St.
Peter, although pressing his doctrine with considerations of
this nature, hath no twang of such authority.
"The elders (saith he) which are among you, I exhort, who
also am an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and
also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed ;"§ by such
* Cui totius EcclesiiE figuram gerenti, &c. [Dominus ait super banc
Petram, &c.] Aug. Ep. 165. [p. 179. Ep. 53. vol. 2. Paris. 1836.]
+ Ergo si personam gerebaut Ecclesiaj, et sic eis hoc dictum est, tan
quam ipsi Ecclesise diceretur, pax Ecclesiae dimittit peccata, &c. Aug.
de Bapt.c. Don. 3. 18. [p. 211. vol. 9. Paris. 1836.]
X Scimus quod Petrus nihil plus potestatis & Christo recepit aliis Apos
tolis ; nihil enim dictum est ad Petrum, quod aliis etiam dictum non est.—
Ideo recte dicimus omnes Apostolos esse squales cum Petro in potestate.
—Card. Cus. de Cone. Cath. lib. 2. cap. 13. [p. 726. Basil. 1665.]
^ 1 Peter V. 1.

THE pope's supremacy. 65
excellent but common advantages of his person and office, he
presseth on the clergy his advices.
Had he been what they make him, he raight 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 pagina nostrce voluntatis et mandati,
which now is the papal style; when he speaketh highest,
it is in the common name ofthe Apostles, "Be mindful
(saith he) of the command (that is of the doctrine and pre
cepts) of us the Apostles of the Lord and Saviour."*
9. In the apostolical history, the proper place of exercising
this power, (" wherein,"' as St. Chrysostom saith, "we may see
the predictions of Christ, which he uttered in the Gospels,
reduced to act, and the truth of them shining in the things
themselves ;"t no footstep thereof doth appear.
We cannot there discern that St. Peter did assume any ex
traordinary authority, or that any deference by his brethren
was rendered to him as to their governor or judge. No in
stance there doth occur of his laying commands on any one
Apostle, or exercising any act of jurisdiction upon any one,
but rather to the contrary divers passages are observable,
which argue, that he pretended to no such thing, and that
others did not understand any such thing belonging to him.
His temper indeed and zeal commonly did prompt him to
be most forward in speaking and acting upon any emergency
for the propagation or maintenance of the Gospel, J and the
memory of the particular charge which our Lord departing
had lately put on him, strongly might instigate him thereto,
regard to his special gifts and sufficiency did incline the rest
wiUingly to yield that advantage to him, and perhaps because
• T^C 'tvToXng. 2 Pet. iii. 2.
t Kai yap Tdg -Kpoppfiatig, d.g iv ro'ig 'tvayyiXioig b Xpiorbg -irpoav-
a^tavii, Tavrag tig ipyov evravOd tirnv iStXv, Kai irr' avrurv rittv
irpaypdnav SiaXdprrovaav Trjv dXr)6tiav. Chrys. in Act. i. [p. 2. vol.
9. Paris. 1837.]
X 'Qe Otppbg, Kai tjg tpiriffTtvQtig irapd tov Xpttrrow rb -rroiftviov
I Kai brg TOv xopou irpwTog dei irpoTspog dpxtrai tov Xoyov. Chrys. in
Act. i. 15. [p. 27. vol. 9. Paris. 1837.]— As being a man hot and earnest,
and as entrusted with the ilock by Christ, and as the fore man of the com-
ipany, he ever begins to speak. — EiKorwE raCra iykvtTO Sid rriv dptTijv
I roS dvSpbg. In Act. i. 26. [Id. p. 31.]— Probably so it fell out by rea-
I son of the signal virtue of the man.
VOL. I. F

66 A treatise of
upon the considerations before touched, they did allow some
preference in order to him, but in other respects, as to the
main administration of things, he "is but one among the rest;"*
not taking upon him in his speech or beharionr beyond
others. All things are transacted by common agreement, and
in the narae of all concurring, no appeal in cases of difference
is made singly to him, no peremptory decision or decree is
made by hira : no orders are issued out by him alone, or in a
special way in ecclesiastical asserablies he acteth but as one
member ; in deliberations he doth only propound 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 justify his actions : yea,
sometimes he is moved by the rest, receiving orders and
employraent frora them ;t these things we may discern by
considering 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
before 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. J
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 accord
ingly : "they chose Stephen, &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," II 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 controversies? not so, but " they sent to the Apostles_aDd
' "Ertpog ngrSiv d-rr' tKtivov tov j^opoS. Chi-ys. de Sacerd. Or. 4.
t "Opa St avTOV ptTa KOivrjg rrdvTa -iroiuvvra yvoiprig- oiic'tv an-
QtvTiK&g, ovSi apxiKuig. Chrys. in Act. i. 16. [p. 28. vol. 9. Paris. 1837]
- — Behold him doing all things by common consent ; nothing authorita
tively, nor imperiously.
X Acts i. Actsi. 15, 21. Acts xxiii. 26. Kai tarrjaav Svo 
§ Acts vi. 2. — Ver. 5. Kai rjptfftv b Xoyog tvibmov rravrbg roij TrXq-
6nvg- Kai i^tXt^avTo ^rt^avov, &c.
II Acts XV. Vcvopivris aTairtiog, Kai avZrjTricnoig OVK bXiyiig.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 67
Elders at Jerusalem to inquire 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 passed," and that many had freely uttered their sense,
St. Peter rose up, with apostoUcal grarity declaring what
his reason and experience did suggest conducing to a re
solution 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,t alleging that revelation and backing it with reason
drawn from Scripture, vrith much authority pronounceth his
judgment; "Therefore," saith he, ," I judge (that is, saith
St. Chrysostom, I authoritatively say), that we trouble not
them, who from among the Gentiles are turned to God ; but
that we write unto them," &c. J And the result was, that ac
cording to the proposal of St. James, it was by general con
sent determined to send a decretal letter unto the Gentfle
Christians, containing a canon or adrice directive of their prac
tice in the case : " It then seemed good to (or was decreed
by) the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church to send"
— and the letter run thus, " The Apostles and Elders and
brethren to the brethren of the Gentfles."§ — Now in all this
action (in this leading precedent for the management of things
in ecclesiastical synods and consistories) where can the sharpest
sight descry any mark of distmction, or pre-eminence which
St. Peter had in respect to the other Apostles ? Did St. Peter
there anyvrise behave himself like his pretended successors
upon such occasions ? What authority did he claim or use
before that assembly, or in it, or after it ? did he summon or
convocate it ? No, they met upon common agreeraent : did
he preside therein? No, but rather St. James, " to whom,
(saith St. Chrysostom), as bishop of Jerusalem, the govern
ment was committed:" II Did he offer to curb or check any
* Acts XV. 2, 4, 6, 7. t Acts XV. 13, 14, 15.
X Alb tyw Kpivii). ver. 19. — Ti tan Kp'iviit 'tyta; dvri tov per' IJov-
; aiag Xiyia tovto tlvai. Chrys. [p. 280. vol. 9. Paris. 1837.]
§ Tort ISoKt ToXg, &c. ver. 22. — Td SoyjiaTa rd KtKpipiva v-irb riav
'A-iroaToXoiv, Kai Ttbv rrptaPvTtpuiv. Acts xvi. 4. — Kpivavreg r'lptXg
irrtiTTtiXaptr^. Acts xxi. 25.
{{ 'laKw/SoE b dStXipbg tov Kvpiov Trjv 'EKKXr/aiav TOTt ImiTKoirtvtv
iv dpx-g rijv tv 'ItpoaoX-vpoig, Kai ruiv «f 'lovSa'iiitv maTtvffdvrwv
^-irpoiiiXT-riKti rrdvTidv. Chrys. (tom. v. Or. 59.) — 'Ekeii/oe ydp t))/ ri)i'
F 2

68 A TREATISE OF
man, or to restrain him from his liberty of discourse there
No, " there was much disputation," every man frankly speak
ing his sense : did he more than use his freedom of speech
becoming an Apostle, in arguing the case and passing his
vote ? No, for in so exact a relation nothing more doth appear :
did he form the definitions, or pronounce the decree resulting?
No, St. James rather did that ; for (as an ancient author
saith) " Peter did make an oration, but St. James did enact
thelaw:"* was, besides his suffrage in the debate, any singular
approbation required from him, or did he by any buU confirm
the decrees ? No such matter ; these were devices of ambition
creeping on and growing up to the pitch where they now are.
In short, doth any thing correspondent to Papal pretences
appear assumed by St. Peter, or deferred to him ? If St.
Peter was such a man as they make him, how wanting then
was he to himself, how did he neglect the right and dignity of
his office,[in not taking more upon him, upon so Ulustrious an
occasion, the greatest he did ever meet with ? How defective
also were the ApostoUcal college, and the whole Church of
Jerusalem in point of duty and decency, yielding no more
deference to their sovereign, the vicar of their Lord? What
ever account may be framed of these defailances, the truth is,
that St. Peter then did know his own place, and duty better,
than men do know them now ; and the rest as well understood
how it became them to demean themselves ; St. Chrysostom's
reflections on those passages are very good, that indeed then
" there was then no fastuousness in the Church," and " the
souls of those primitive Christians were clear of vanity ;"f the
which dispositions did afterward spring up and grow rankly
to the great prejudice of religion, begetting those exorbitant
pretences, which w? now disprove.
Again, when St. Peter being warned from heaven thereto,
did receive Cornelius, a Gentile soldier, unto communion;
divers good Christians, who were ignorant of the warrantable-
ness of that proceeding (as others commonly were, and St.
Peter himself was, before he was informed by that special
dpxrjv lyKtxtipiapkvog  tv SvvaaTtiq. rjv. Chrys. in loc. [p. 281.
vol. 9. Paris. 1837.] — For he had the government committed to him—
he was empowered.
* IIsTpoE SripriyoptX, dXX' 'Ia/cw/3oE vopoSitrtX. Hesych apud Phot.
Cod. 275.
t O'vTiiig ovSt'ig Tvipog rjv 'tv ry 'EKKXritritf' o'vTwg Kaflapd. JoflC ').''
avrSiv ij ^vxv. Chrys. ibid. ^Idem]

THE pope's supremacy. 69
revelation) did not fear SiaKplviadai wpbg aiixdy, " to contest
with him" about it ;* not having any notion (as it seemeth) of
his supreme unaccountable authority (not to say of that infal-
libiUty, with which the Canonists and Jesuits have invested
him)t 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. J But if he had known his
power to be snch, as now they pretend it to be, he should have
done well to have asserted it, even out of good wiU and charity
to those good brethren ; correcting their error and checking
their misdemeanor ; shewing them what an enormous pre
sumption it was so to contend with their sovereign pastor and
judge. §
Farther, so far was St. Peter from assuming command over
his brethren, that he was upon occasion ready to obey their
orders ; as we may see by that passage, where upon the con
version of divers persons 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." II The Apostles sent him, that, had he been their
sovereign, would have been somewhat unseemly and presump
tuous ; for subjects are not wont to send their prince, or sol
diers their captain ; to be sent being a mark of inferiority, as
our Lord himself did teach ; " A servant (said he), is not
greater than his lord, nor he that is sent greater than he that
sent him."^ St. Luke therefore should at least have so ex
pressed this passage, that the Apostles might have seemed to
keep their distance, 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 Aposties of Rorae do style their Peter. The truth is,
then among Christians there was little standing nponpunctilios,
* Acts X. 28. Kai ipoi b 9tbg tStiKt.— Acts xi. 12. xi. 2.
.t Bell, de Pont. Rom.iv. 3, 4, &c. Acts xi. 18.
X "Oparb OLTV^ov Kai aKtvoSo^ov, — iipa -iriug drroXoytiTai, Kai ouK
d^ioX Tip Toil SiSauKoXov d^wpan Ktxpn^Sai. Chrys. — See how free
he is from pride and vain-glory ; see how he excuses himself, and thinks
himself not worthy to have the honour of a Master.
§ Ita ut Petrus quoque timens ne culparetur ab ipsis. — Iren. 3. 12. —
[15. p. 200.] N. In the matter at Antioch .St. Peter did comply with St.
James, and the Judaizers, which did not beseem such authority.
11 Acts viii. It. T John xiii 16.

70 A treatise of
private considerations and pretences to power then took small
place; each one was ready to comply with that which the most
did approve, the community did take upon it to 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 mercifiil, so
full of charity, as rather than to cause or foment any distur
bance, to recede, or go whither the multitude pleased, and do
what was commanded by it."*
10. In all relations, which occur in Scripture, about con
troversies incident of doctrine or practice, there is no appeal
made to St. Peter's judgment, or allegation of it as decisiTe,
no argument is built on his authority : dissent from his opi
nion, or disconformity to his practice, or disobedience to his
orders, are not mentioned as ground of reproof, as aggravation
'of any error, any misdemeanor, any disorder; 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 controversies among them : for then surely
' the raost clear, corapendious, and effectual way to confute any
error, or check any disorder, had been to allege the authority
of St. Peter against it ; who then could have withstood so
raighty a prejudice against his cause ? If now a question doth
arise about any point of doctrine, instantly the parties (at least
sorae of them, which hopeth to find most favour) hath re
course to the Pope to define it ; and his judgment, with those
who admit his pretences, proveth sufficiently decisive, or at
least greatly swayeth in prejudice to the opposite party. If
any heresy, or any opinion disagreeing from the current senti
ments 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 wfll instantly meddle to quash it, or to settle matters as
best standeth with its principles and interests ; such influence
* "F.ra^av avafSaivtiv IlavXov Kai Bapva^av. Acts xv. 2. xiii. 3.
Tie ovi- 'tv vpXv ytvvaXog ; T'lg tvarrXayxog ; rig -Trt-irXripiKpiipripiviis
dydvr\g ; tl-rrdrw, ti Si' tpi arding, Kai 'ipig, Kai axinpara, iKxnipHi.
diriipi ov 'lav fiovXriaBi, Kai ttoiw ra -irpodTaaaoptva virb tov rrXrfiovi.
Clem, ad Cor. p. 69. [1 Clement ad Corinth. 54. p. 129. Patrum Apostoli-
eorum Opera, Tubingae, 1847. J — ^Who among you is noble and generous?
who has bowels of compassion .' who is full of charity ? Let him say. If for
Diy sake there be sedition and strife, and divisions, 1 will depart andgo whither
you would have me, and do what shall be enjoined me by the multitude.

the pope s supubmacy. 71
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 rases : the Apostles did not send
heretics to be knocked down by his sentence, nor schismatics
to be scourged by his censure, but were fain to use the long
way of disputation, striving to convince thera by testimonies of
Scripture and rational discourse. If they did use authority,
it was their own ; which they " challenge as given to them by
Christ for edification,"* or upon account of more than ordinary
gifts aud graces of the Divine Spirit, conferred ou them by God.
St Peter nowhere doth appear intermeddUng as a judge or
governor paramount in such cases ; yea, where he doth himself
deal with heretics, and disorderly persons, confuting and re
proving them (as he dealeth with divers notoriously such), he
proceedeth not as a Pope decreeing, but as an Apostle warning,
arguing, and persuading against them.
11. It is particularly remarkable how St. Paul reproring the
factions, which were among Christians at Corinth, doth repre
sent the several parties saying, "I am of Paul, 1 am of
Apollos, I ara of Cephas, I am of Christ."f Now, supposing
the case then had been clear and certain (and if it were not so
then, how can it be so now?) that St. Peter was sovereign of
the Apostles, is it not wonderful, that any Christian should
prefer any Apostle, or - any preacher before him ? as if it were
now clear and generally acknowledged that the Pope is truly
what he pretendeth to be, would anybody stand in competition
with him, would any glory in a relation to any other rainister
before him ?
It is observable how St. Clemens reflecteth on this conten
tion : " You were (saith he) less culpable for that partiality ;
for ye did then incline to renowned Apostles, and to a man
approved by them ; but now," &c. J
If it be replied, that Christ himself did come into the com
parison ; I answer, that probably no man was so vain, as to
compare him with the rest, nor indeed could any there pretend
to have been baptized by him ( which was the ground of the
• 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.
t 1 Cor. i. 12. iii. 21.
X 'AXX' fj TTpoOKXitsig tKt'ivrj fiTTOva dpapTiav vpXv rrpoirijvtyKtv.
rrpoatKX'iQriTt ydp'ArroaToXoig ptpapTvprjp'ivoig, Kai dvSpi SiSoKipaa-
p'tvip -n-ap' avToXg. 'Nvvi St, &cc. Clem, ad Corint. p. 61. [1 Ep. ad
Corinth. 47. p. 121- Ed. ut supra-]

72 A treatise of
emulation in respect of the others), but those who said they
were of Christ, were the wise and peaceable sort, who by say
ing so decUned and disavowed faction; whose beharionr St.
Paul himself in his discourse commendeth and confirmeth,,
shevring that all indeed were of Christ, the Apostles being only
his ministers to work faith and rirtue in thera. "None (saith
St. Augustine) of those contentious persons were good, except
those who said, but I am of Christ."*
We may also here observe, that St. Paul in reflecting upon
these contentions had a fair occasion of intimating somewhat
concerning St. Peter's supremacy, and aggravating their blame-
able fondness, who compared others vrith bim.
12. The consideration of the Apostles proceeding in the
conversion of people, in the foundation of churches, and in
administration of their spiritual affairs, wfll exclude any pro
bability of St. Peter's jurisdiction over thera.
' They went about their business not by order or licence from
St. Peter, but according to special instinct and direction of
God's Spirit (being sent forth by the Holy Ghost ; going by re
velation), f or according to their ordinary prudence, and the
habitual vrisdom given unto thera ; by those aids, (without
troubling St. Peter or theraselves raore)J they founded socie
ties, they ordained pastors, they framed rules and orders re
quisite for the edification and good governraent of churchesj
reserving to themselves a kind of paramount inspection and
jurisdiction over them ; which in effect was only irarput^
i-iripeXeia,^ a paternal care over them, which they particularly
claimed to themselves upon account of spiritual parentage, for
that they had begotten them to Christ : "If (saith St. Paul
to the Corinthians) I ara not an Apostle to others, I am however
so to you ?" II Why so ? because he had converted them, and
could say, " As ray beloved sons I 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 withoutany
* 1 Cor. iii. 5. Falsum est qubd iUi boni erant, exceptis eis qui dice-
bant. Ego autem Christi.^Aug. Cont. Crescon. 1. 27. [p. 634. vol.9.
Paris. 1837.]
•f' 'EKTTtp^QtvTtg itrrb tov rrvtvp' ay. Acts xiii. 4, 2. xvi. 6, 9.
Gal. ii. 2. (car' d-jroKaXvipiv. 2 Pet. iii. 5.
X 1 Cor. vii. 17. xi. 34. xvi. 1. Tit. i. 5.
§ Isid. Pel. 1 Thess. ii. 7. 11. || 1 Cor. ix. 2. Acts xviii. 1.
II 1 Cor.iv. 14,15. Gal. iv. 19.

the pope's supremacy. 73
dependence, or regard to St. Peter, none such appearing, it
not being mentioned that they did ever consult his pleasure, or
render him an account of their proceedings; but it rather being
implied in the reports of their actions, that they proceeded ab
solutely, by virtue of their universal office and commission of
our Lord.
If it be alleged that St. Paul went to Jerusalem to St.
Peter ;* I answer that it was to visit him out of respect and
love ; or to confer with him for mutual edification and com
fort; or at most to obtain approbation from him and the other
Apostles, which might satisfy some doubters, but not to re
ceive his commands or authoritative instructions from him ; it
being, as we shall afterwards see, the design of St. Paul's dis
course to disavow any such dependence on any man whatever.
So doth St. Chrysostom note : "What (saith he) can be
more humble than this soul ? after so many and so great ex
ploits, having no need at all of Peter, or of his discourses, but
being in dignity equal to him (for I wfll now say no more) he
yet doth go up to hira, as to one greater and ancienter ; and a
sight alone of Peter, is the cause of his journey thither."
And " he went (saith he again) not to learn anything of hira,
nor to receive any correction from him, but for this only, that
he might see him, and honour him with his presence."f
And, indeed that there were 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 need
less, but inconvenient and troublesome. For,
13. If we consider the nature of the apostolical office, the
state of things at that time, and the manner of St. Peter's life;
in correspondence to those things, he wiU appear incapable, or
unfit to manage such a jurisdiction over the Apostles as they
assign him.
The nature of the apostolical ministry was such, that the
Apostles were not fixed in one place of residence, but were
* Gal. i. 18. 'laToprjaai.
t Ti TavTrjg TaTrtivofpovsiTTtpov ykvoir' dv rrjg ^vxijg ; ptrd toit-
aXiTa Kai Toiavra KaTopdiipara prjdiv Utrpov Stoptvog, prjSt Trjg
tKtivov ipiovfjg, dXX' 'uroTipog ibv avnp {rrXkov yap ovSivriput rtiag)
'opiog dvipxtrai iig rrpbg ptiZova, Kai rrpta^vrtpov Kai r^E drroSri-
p'lag avTip Trig tKtX yivsTai airiag r/ 'itrropia IleTpov povr). — ovx iig
paBrjUoptvog n Trap' avrov, ovS't ibg SlopBuxjiv nva St^dptvog, dXXd
Sid TOVTO povQV, u'lUTt iStXv avrbv Kai Ttpijirai rg Trapovaiq.. Chrys, in
Gal. i. 18. [p. 804. vol 10. Paris. 1837.]

74 A TREATISE OP
continually moring abont the world, or in procinctu, ready in
their gears to move whither Dirine suggestions did call them,
or fair occasion did invite them, for the propagation or further
ance of the Gospel."*
The state of things was not favourable to the Apostles, who
were discountenanced and disgraced, persecuted, and driven
frora one place to another ; (as our Lord foretold of them,)
Christians lay scattered about at distant places, so that oppor
tunities of despatch for conveyance of instructions from bim,
or of accounts to hira were not easily found. f
St- Thomas preaching in Parthia, St. Andrew in Scythia,
St. John in Asia, Simon Zelotes in Britain, f St. Paul in
many places ;§ other Apostles and apostolical raen in Arabia,
in jEthiopia, in India, in Spain, in Gaul, in Germany, in the
whole world,/ and in all the creation under heaven (as St,
Paul speaketh) II could not well maintain correspondence with
St. Peter, especially considering the manner of his life, which
was not settled in any one known place, but moveable and un
certain; for he continually roved over the wide world, preach
ing the Gospel, converting, confirming and comforting Chris
tian people, as occasion starting up did adduce ; how then
could he conveniently dispense all about his ruling and judging
influence? how in cases incident could direction be fetched
from him, or reference be raade to him by those subordinate
governors, who could not easily know where to come at him,
or whence to hear from him in any competent time ? To send
to him had been to shoot at rovers ; affairs, therefore, which
should depend on his resolution and orders, must have had
great stops ; he could but very lamely have executed such an
* 2 Cor. xi. 25. ''ErrtiSdv yap ijptXXov Trig otKovptvrjg Tijv sTrirpO'
7r/}v dvaStXairQai, ovk tSti (Tvp-jtt-jrXtxOai XoiTrbv aXX^XotE* ^ y^P
dv ptydXri tovto ry oiKnvptvy ykyovrj Zr)p'ia. Chrys. in Joh. xxi. 23.
[p 601. vol. 8. Paris. 1836.] — For seeing they were to take upon them the
inspection and superintendency of all the world, it behoved them not any
longer to be mixed or conjoined together, for this had been a great Joss
and hinderance to the world.
t 1 Cor. iv. 9. 2 Cor. iv. 8. vi. 4. xi. 25. Matth. xxiv. 9. Luke
x.xi. 12.
X Eus. 3. 1. Niceph. 2. 38, 39, 40. Tertull. adv. Jud. cap. 7.-
§ 'O rfiv o'iKovp'tvr}v OTaSifixrag, Kai Tip -rrtpi -rriartiac Spopif t'ov
Koapov piKpbv dn-ofrjvag. Bas. Seleuo. Or. 2. [Vid. p. 790. A. Basil.
vol. 1. Paris. 1839.] — He that run his race through the whole universe,
by his so eager running for the faith made the world as it were too narrow
for him.
II Col- i- 6, 23. Rom. x. 18.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY 75
office; so that his jurisdiction must have been rather an ex
treme inconvenience and encumbrance, then anywise beneficial
or useful to the Church.
" Gold and silver he had none,'' or a very small purse to main
tain dependants and officers to help him : (nuncios, legates
h latere, secretaries, auditors, &c.) Infinity of affairs would
have oppressed a poor helpless man ; and to bear such a bur
den as they lay on him no one could be sufficient.
14. It was indeed most requisite, that every Apostle should
have a complete, absolute, independent authority in managing
the concerns and duties of his office ; that he might not any
wise be obstructed in the discharge of them; not clogged with
a need to consult others, not hampered with orders from those
who were at distance and could not well descry what was fit
in every place to be done.
The direction of Him who had promised to be perpetually
present with them,* and by his Holy Spirit to guide, to instruct,
to admonish them upon all occasions, was abundantly sufficient;
they did not want any other conduct or aid beside that special
light and powerful influence of grace, which they received
from him ; the which kdvuxTEv avrovg, " did (as St. Paul
speaketh) render them sufficient ministers of the New Testa
ment. "f
Accordingly, their discourse and practice do thoroughly
savour of such an independence; nor in them is there any
appearance of that being true, which Bellarmine dictateth, that
" the Apostles depended on St. Peter, as on their head and
commander."J 16. Particularly the discourse and behaviour of St. Paul to
wards St. Peter doth evidence, that he did not acknowledge any
dependence on him, any subjection to him.
St. Paul doth often purposely assert to himself an inde
pendent and absolute power, inferior or subordinate to none
other, insisting thereon for the enforcement or necessary de
fence of his doctrine 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
raanner of his calli the characters and warrants of his office,
* Matth. xxviii. 20. John xvi. 13. xiv. 26.
t 2 Cor. iii. 5. Rom. xv. 15.
X — a quo illi tanquam a capite, et imperatore suo pendebaot. — Bell, de
Pont. i. 16. [p 316. n. 18. vol. 1. Pragje, 1721.J
§ 2 Cor. xii. 11. Rom. .\i. 13.

76 A TREATISE OF
the tenor of his proceedings in the discharge of it, the success
of his endeavours, the approbation and demeanour toward hira
of other Apostles.
As for his caU and commission to the apostolical office, he
maintaineth (as if he meant designedly to exclude those pre
tences, that other A-postles were only called in partem solidtu-
dinis with St. Peter) 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 imraediately or mediately from
men, or by the ministry of any man ; but immediately had
received the grant and charge thereof from our Lord ; as m-
deed the history plainly sheweth, in which our Lord telleth
him, that he did " constitute him an officer, and a chosen in
strument to him, to bear his name to the Gentiles.''t
Hence he so often is careful and cautious to express himself
an Apostle by the will and special grace, or favour and ap
pointment, and coraraand of God : and particularly telleth the
Romans, that " by Christ he had received grace, grace and
Apostleship. "J
For the warrant of his office, he doth not allege the allow
ance of St. Peter, or any other, but those special gifts and
graces which were conspicuous in him, and exerted in miracu
lous performances : " Truly (saith he) the signs of an Apostle
were wrought among you in all patience, in signs and wonders
and mighty deeds ;" and " I will not dare to speak of any of
those things, which Christ hath not wrought by me to make
the Gentiles obedient by word and deed, through mighty signs
and wonders, by the power ofthe Spirit of God."§
To the same purpose he allegeth his successful industry in
converting raen to the Gospel, " Am I not an Apostle ? (saith
he) are you not my work in the Lord ? If I am not an Apostle to
others, I am surely one to you ; for the seal of mine Apostle
ship are ye in the Lord." And, " by the grace of God I am what
I ara, and his grace which was on rae became not in vain, but
I laboured more abundantly than they all." ||
In the discharge of his office, he immediately (after that he
* Bel. i. 9, 14, 16. Ow/c drr' dvQpiiimjJV, ovSt Sl' dvOpw-rrov. Gal. i. 1.
t 'ClpoxtipiirairBai at v-irriptrriv, &c. Acts ix. 15. xxii. 21.
{ QtXrjpan 9eoiJ. 1 Cor. i. 1. 2 Cor. i. 1. Eph. i. 1. Colos. i. !•
2Tim. i. I.XapiTi. 1 Cor. xv. 10. Eph. iii. 7. 1 Tim. i. 12. 2 Tim.
i. 12. Kar' trriTayriv. 1 Tim. i. 1- Rom. i. 5.
4 2 Cor. xii. 12. Rom. xv. 18, 19. 1 Cor. ii 4.
II 1 Cor. ix. 1- 1 Cor, xv. 10. 2 Cor. .\i. 23.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 77
had received his call and charge from our Saviour) without
consulting or taking Ucence from any man, did vigorously ap
ply himself to the work. " Immediately (saith he) I conferred
not with flesh and blood, neither went I up to Jerusalem to
them, that before me were Apostles;"* so little did he take
himself to be accountable to any man.
In settling order and correcting irregularities in the Church
he professed to act merely by his own anthority, conferred on
him by our Lord : " Therefore (saith he) being absent I -vrxite
these things, that being present I may not use severity, ac
cording to the authority which the Lord hath given me for
edification, not for destruction."f
Such being the privfleges, which he did assert to himself
with all confidence, he did not receive for it any check from
other Apostles, but the chief of them, "knowing the grace
that was given unto him, gave unto him the right hand of fel
lowship :"J in token of their acknowledgment and aUowance
of his proceedings.
Upon these considerations (plainly signifying his absolute
independence in the reception and execution of his office), he
doth more than once affirm (and in a manner boast) himself
"to be inferior in nothing to the very chief Apostles ;''§ in
nothing, that is in nothing pertinent to the authority, or sub
stantial dignity of his place ; for as to his personal merit he
professeth himself " much less than the least of the Apostles,"||
but as to the anthentickness 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 ofthe chief, he could not but espe
cially mean him (,he did indeed, as St.. Chrysostom saith, in
tend to compare himself with St. Peter ;)** when he said in
nothing, he could not but design that which was most consi
derable, the authority of his place; which in the context he
did expressly mention. For whenft be objected to himself the
semblance of fondness or arrogance in speaking after that man-

* Gal. i. 16, 17. +2 Cor. xiii. 10. x. 8. X Gal. ii. 9.
§ 2 Cor. xii. 16, 17. 2 Cor. xii. 11. xi.5.
II 1 Cor. XV. 9. Eph. iii. 8. H 1 Cor- xv. 10. Eph. iii- 7.
** npoE Tovg rrtpi IHrpov -iroiovptvog t^v avyKpiaiv. 2 Cor. xi. 5.
M Kara rrpoSiopGojaiv. 2 Cor. xii. 11. i. 16, 17.

78 A TREATISE OF
ner, he declared that he did not speak rashly or vainly, but
upon serious consideration, and with full assurance, finding
it very needful or useful to raaintain his authority, or to
"magnify his office," as he otherwhere speaketh.*
If things had been, as now we are taught from the Roman
school, it is strange, that St. Paul should compare himself so
generally, not excepting St. Peter ; that he should express
(nor by the least touch intimate) no special consideration for
his, as" they tell us, ordinary pastor ; that he should not con
sider how liable such words were to be interpreted in deroga
tion to St. Peter's due prerogatives.f
But it is no wonder, that St. Paul in St. Peter's absence
should thus stand on his own legs, not seeming to mind, when
as in immediate transactions with hira he deraeaned himself as
his fellow, yielding to him no respect or deference as to his su
perior. For,
When St. Paul went to Jerusalem to have conference with
St. Peter and other Apostles, who were chief in repute, he pro
fesseth, that "they did not confer anything to him," J so as to
change his opinion, or divert him from his ordinary course of
practice, which was different from theirs; this was (it seemeth)
hardly proper or seemly for him to say, if St. Peter had been
his sovereign ; but he seemeth to say it on very purpose, to
exclude any prejudice that raight 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 maketh no matter to me, God re-
specteth no man's person." § The which might well be said of
persons greater in common esteem, but not so well of one who
was his superior in office ; to whose opinion and conduct, as
of his judge and pastor by God's appointment he did owe a
special regard,.
Again, St. Paul at Antioch, observing St. Peter out of fear||
and policy to act otherwise then becarae the simpUcity 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 unwar
rantable course of behaviour, did " withstand him to the face,'
did " openly reprove him before all, because he was blame-
• Rom. xi- 13. t BeU. de Pont, i- 11. X Gal. ii. 2.
^ Gal. ii- 6. || Gal. ii. 12, 13, 14-
f (Vid. P. Pelag. II. apud Bin. tom. 4. p- 308. in Epist. ad Eham.)

THE pope's supremacy. 79
able,"* did, as Pope Gelasius I. affirmeth (to excuse another
Pope misbehaving himself) worthfly confute him ; did (as St.
Augustine often doth affirm and urge, in proof that greatest
persons may sometimes err and fail) " correct him, rebuke
him, chide him."
Which behaviour of St. Paul doth not well consist with the
supposition, that St. Peter was his superior in office ; if that
had been, Porphyrins with good colour of reason might have
objected procacity to St. Paul in taxing his betters ;| for he
then indeed had shewed us no comraendable pattern of de
meanour toward our governors, in so boldly opposing St. Peter,
in so openly censuring him, in so smartly confuting him.
More unseemly also it had been to report the business as he
doth in writing to the Galatians ; for to divulge the miscar
riages of superiors, to rerive the memory of them, to register
them, and transmit them down to all posterity, to set forth
our clashing and contests vrith them, is hardly allowable ; if it
may consist with justice and honesty, it doth yet little savour
of grarity 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 becorae hira in cold blood to have repre
sented his carriage more respectfully, consulting the honour of
the Universal Pastor, whose reputation was Uke 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
* Gal. ii. 11, 14. Nunquid ideo aut illaejus sequenda sunt, quae merito
ejus co-apostolus ejus facta redarguit.— Gelas. I. de Anath. (apud Bin. tom.
3. p. 645.) Apostolo Paulo monstrante et corrigente. Aug. c. Crescon. i.
32. [p. 638. Paris. 1837.] ii. 32. Ep. 19. de Bip. c. Uon. ii. 1, 2. cor-
reptus. Cont. Don. ii. 1. objurgavit. Ep. 8.— qui de minore causa conver-
sataonis ambiguee Petro ipsi non pepercit. Tert. v. 3. (contr. Marc.)
— who for a smaller matter of doubtful conversation spared not Peter
himself. Cum laudeter etiam Pauli minimi Apostolorum sana ratio atque libertas,
quod Petrum Apostolorum primum adductum in hypocrisin, et non recta
via incedentem ad veritatem Evangelii fidenter improbans, in faciem illi
restitit, eumque coram omnibus coram objurgavit. Fac. Her. 8. 6. —
Whereas the sound reason and freedom even of Paul the least of the
Apostles, is commended, in that, when Peter the chief of the Apostles was
carried away with dissimulation, and walked not in a right way accordmg
to the truth of the Gospel, he boldly disliked, and withstood him to the
face, and reproved him openly before all.
t Hier. ad Aug. Ep. 11. in Prol. ad Gal.

80 A treatise of
or accuse their prelates ;"* and Pope Gregory would have
taught him another lesson, namely, that "the erils of their
superiors do so displease good subjects, that however they do
conceal them from others;" and "subjects are to be admo
nished, that they do not rashly judge the life of their supe
riors, if perhaps they see them do blameably," &c.f
It is plain, that St. Paul was more bold with St. Peter, than
any man now must be with the Pope ; for let the Pope cora
rait ever so great crimes, yet " no mortal, (saith the canon
law) presume to reprove his faults. "J
But if St. Peter were not in office superior to St Paul, but
his colleague, and equal in authority, although preceding him
in standing, repute and other advantages ; then St. Paul's free
proceeding toward him was not only warrantable, but whole
some, aud deserring for edification to be recited and recorded;
as implying an example how colleagues upon occasion should
with freedom and sincerity admonish their brethren of their
errors and faults ; St. Peter's carriage in patiently bearing that
correction also affording another good pattern of equanimity
in such cases; to which purpose St. Cyprian § (alleged and
approved by St. Augustine ||) doth apply this passage ; "For
(saith he) neither feteFwliom the Lord first chose, and upon
whom he built his Church, when Paul afterward contested
with him about circumcision, did insolently challenge, or arro
gantly 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 ; hut
he admitted the counsel of truth, and easily consented to the
lawful course, which St. Paul did maintain ; 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 brethren and colleagues, if they
* Non sunt consentiendi, sed reprobandi, qui prffllatos suos reprehen-
dunt, vel accusant. Pelag. II. Ep. 2.
t Bonis subditis sic praepositorum suorum mala displicent, ut tamen
haec ab aliis occultent Greg. M. Moral. 25. 15- — Admonendi sunt sub
diti, n6 praepositorum suorum vitam temere judicent, siquid eos fortasse
agere reprehensibiliter vident, &c. Greg. Past. part. 3- cap. 1. Admon. 5.
X Grat. dist 40. cap. 6.
§ Nam nee Petrus, quem primum Dominus elegit, &c. Cyp. Ep. 71.
(ad Quintum.) [p. 204. Lipsiie', 1838.] || Aug. de Bapt. c. Dom. 2. 2,

the pope s supremacy. 81
are true and lawful ;" this St^Cyprian speaketh upon sup
position that St. Peter and STTauT'were equals, or (as he
calleth them) c'olleagues and brethren, in rank co-ordinate ;
otherwise St. Cyprian would not have approved the action ;
for he often severely doth inveigh against inferiors taking upon
them to censure their superiors : "What tumour (saith he)
of pride, what arrogance of mind, what inflation of heart is it
to call our superiors and bishops to our cognizance ?"* St.
Cyprian therefore could not conceive St. Peter to be St. Paul's
governor, or superior in power ; he doth indeed plainly enough
in the forecited words signify that in his judgment St. Peter
had done insolently and arrogantly,-^ if he had assumed any
obedience from St. Paul. St. Augustine also doth in several
places of his writings make the Uke application of this passage.
The ancient writer, contemporary to St. Ambrose, and pass
ing nnder his name, doth argue in this manner : " Who dared
resist Peter the first Apostle, to whom the Lord did give the
keys of the kingdom of heaven, but another such an one ; who
in assurance of his election knowing himself to be not unequal
to him, might constantly disprove, what he had unadvisedly
done ?"t
It is indeed well knovm, that Origen, § and after him St.
Chrysostom and St. Jerome, and divers of the ancients beside,
did conceive that St. Paul did not seriously oppose or tax St.
Peter, but did only do it seemingly, upon confederacy vrith
him, for promoting a good design.
This interpretation however strained, and earnestly impugned
by St. Augustine, I vrill not discuss, but only shall observe, that
it being admitted doth rather strengthen than weaken our dis
course : for if St. Peter were St. Paul's governor, it maketh
St. Peter to have consented to an act in all appearance inde-
• * Cluis enim hie est superbire tumor, quse arrogantia animi, quae mentis
mflatio ad cognitionem suam praepositos et sacerdotes vocare ? — Cyp. Ep.
5=69. [Epist. 66. p. 176. Lipsiffi, 1838.]
? Aug. c. Don. deBap. 2. 1, 2- Ep. 19.
, X Nam quis eorum auderet Petro primo Ap03tolo,cui claves regni ccelo
rum Dominus dedit, resistere, nisi alius talis, qui fiducia electionis suae,
sciens se non imparem, constauter improbaret quod ilie sine consilio feoerat .'
Ambr. in Gal. 2- 9. — Paulus Petrum reprehendit, quod non auderet, nisi
senon impaaem sciret- ( Hieron. vel alius quis ad Gal. citatus h, Grat. Caus.
2. qu. 7. cap. 33.) — Paul reprehended Peter, which he would not have
'lared to do, had he not known himself to be equal to him.
§ S. Cyril, u. Jul. lib, 9. (p. 325.) Chrys. tom. 5. Or. 59. ovk drrb
livxrig. Aug. Ep. 11, &c.
VOL. I. . G

82 A treatise of
cent, irregular and scandalous ; and how can we imagine that
St. Peter would have complotted to the impairing his ownjust
authority in the eye of a great Church ? Doth not such a
condescension imply in him a disavowing of superiority 'over
St. Paul, or a conspiracy with hira to overthrow good order?
To which purpose we may observe, that St. Chry8ostom}f
in a large and very elaborate discourse, wherein he professeth
to endeavour an aggravation of the irregularity of St. Paulls
demeanour, if it were serious ; doth not lay the stress of that
aggravation upon St. Paul's opposing his lawful governor ;
but his only so treating a co-apostie of such eminency : neither
when to that end he designeth to reckon all the advantageSiof
St. Peter beyond St. Paul or any other Apostle, doth he men
tion this, which was chiefly material to his purpose, that he
was St. Paul's governor ;f which observations if we do carefiiUy
weigh, we can hardly imagine that St. Chrysostom had any
notion of St. Peter's supremacy, in relation tothe Apostles*
In fine, the drift of St. Paul, in reporting those passages
concerning himself, was not to disparage the other Apostlei,
nor merely to commend himself, but to fence the truth of his
doctrine, and maintain the liberty of his disciples against any
prejudice that might arise from any authority, that might be
pretended in any considerable respects superior to his, and
alleged against them ; to which purpose he declareth by aigii-
ments and matters of fact, that his authority was perfectly
apostolical, and equal to the greatest ; even to that of St. PetH
the prime Apostle, of St. John the beloved Disciple, of St.
James the Bishop of Jerusalem ; the judgment or practice of
whora, was no law to him, nor should be to them farther than
it did consist vrith that doctrine, which he by an independeM
authority, and by special revelation from Christ,J did preach
unto thera : he might (as St. Chrysostom noteth) have pre
tended "to some advantage over them," § in regard that he
* Chrys. tom. 5. Or. 59- Kai ydp av^w ti]v KaTTjyop'iav, Kai pi'iiova
-TTQIUI, &C. '
t 'Qg ovSiv poi oiptXog dv IleTpoj' t^v Karr/yopiav drromevanaiiivbv,
0 IlauXoE ^aivrjTai BapaaXkiog Kai drrtpiaKtrrTorg tov avvarrosTC^OV
Karrjyopiiv.—So that it is no advantage to me, if, when Peter has
confuted the charge, Paul appear to accuse his fellow Apostle boldly
and inconsiderately, [p. 438. vol. 3. Paris. 1835.]
X Gal. i. 12,
§ Kai ravT-g pidXiara rwv ' AiroaroXoiv irXtovtKTriaag, ntptffffoi'^'"'^
ydp avTiuv tKorriaaa, ipriaiv, dXXd riuig ov KaraaKtvaZti TovTO, aXl
dyaw^ Ta iaa ^spwj/. Chrys. in Gal. 1. 1 . [p. 782. vol. 10. Paris. 1837]

the pope's supremacy. 83
" had laboured more abundantly than them all," but he for-
beareth to do so, " being contented to obtain equal advan
tages." WeU, therefore, considering the disadvantage which this
passage bringeth to the JBiOajanjoretence 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. Augustine
himself, under favour, could not pass over without stumbling."*
It may also be considered, that St. Paulf particularly doth
assert to himself an independent authority over the Gentfles,
co-ordinate to that which St. Peter had over the Jews ; J the
which might engage him so earnestly to contest vrith St.
Peter, as by his practice seducing those, who belonged to his
charge ; the which also probably moved him thus to assert
his authority to the Galatians, as being Gentiles under his
care, and thence obUged especially to regard his authority.
" They (saith St Paul)§ knowing that I was entrusted with
the Gospel of uncircumcision, as Peter was entrusted with that
of circumcision,— gave unto me and Barnabas the righthand
of feUowship ;" the which words do clearly enough signify, ,
that he took himself, and that the other Apostles took him
to have under Christ an absolute charge, subordinate to no
man, over the Gentfles ; whence he claimeth to himself, as his
burthen, " the care of aU the chnrches ;"|| he therefore might
weU contest for their liberty, he might well insist upon his
authority among them.
Thus did St. Chrysostom understand the case : "for Christ
(saith he) committed the Jews to Peter, but set Paul over
the Gentiles ; and he (saith that great Father) further doth
shew himself to be equal to them in dignity, and compareth
himself not only to the others, but even to the ringleader,
shewing that each did enjoy equal dignity."^
• Baron. Ann. 51. % 32—34, 35, &c. * Rom. xi. 13.
X Plena authoritas Petro in Judaismi prsedicatione data dignoscitur, et
Pauli perfecta authoritas in prsedicatione Gentium invenitur. Ambros.—
There is discerned a fuU authority given to Peter of preachmg to the Jews,
and in Paul there is found a perfect power and authority of preaching to
the Gentiles.
§ Gal.i. 6, 7. ||2Cor. xi. 28.
T Toig pkv ovv 'lovSaiovg irrkrptipt Tip Tltrpip, TOig Si EXXtiat
TbvTIaiJXov irriarriatv b Xptarog. Chrys. t. 5. Or. 59. [p. 440. vol. 3.
Paris- 1835.]— AtiKViio-ii' avToXg bponpov ovra Xoirr'ov.Kai ov ToXg dX-
Xoig kavTbv, dXXd np Kopvipdiip avyKpivti, StiKvvg 'on Trjg avrfig tKaa-
Tog d-rreXavatv d^iag. Chrys. in Gal. ii.' 8. [p. 811. vol. 10. Paris. 1837.
G 2

84 a treatise op
It raay 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 nothmg
ofit. 16. If St. Peter had been appointed sovereign of the,
Church, it seemeth that it should have been requisite, that he
should have outlived all the Apostles, for then either the
Church must have wanted a head, or there must have been an
inextricable controversy about who that head was. St. Peter
died long before St. John (as all agree), and perhaps before
divers others of the Apostles. Now, after his departure, did
the Church want a head ? (then it might before and after
have none ; and our adversaries lose the main ground of their
pretence) did one of the Apostles become head ? (which of
thera was it, upon what ground did he assume the headship,
or who conferred it on him : whoever did acknowledge any
such thing, or where is there any report about it ?) was any
other person raade head ? (suppose the Bishop of Kome, who
only pretendeth thereto) then did St. John and other Apos
tles becorae subject to one in degree inferior to them ; then
what becometh of St. Paul's " first Apostles, secondly Pro
phets, thirdly Teachers?"* what do all the apostolical privi
leges 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 truckle under
the " Pastors and Teachers of Rome V'f
The Uke raay be said for St. James, if he (as the Roman
Church doth in its Liturgies suppose) were an Apostle, who in
many respects might claim the pre-eminence. Who, there
fore, in the Apostolical Constitutions, is preferred before Cle
ment, bishop of Rome.
1 7. Upon the same grounds on which a supremacy of
power is claimed to St. Peter, other Apostles might also chal
lenge a superiority therein over their brethren, but to suppose
such a difference of power among the rest is absonous, and
therefore the grounds are not vaUd upon which St. Peter's
supremacy is built.
I instance in St. James and St. John, who upon the same
probabilities had (after St. Peter) a preference to the other
Apostles. For to them our Saviour declared a special regard;
* 1 Cor. xii. 28. t Eph. iv. 11.

THE pope's supremacy. 85
to them the Apostles afterwards may seem to have yielded a
particular difference, they in merit and performance seem to
have surpassed ; they (after St. Peter and his brother) were
first called to the apostoUcal office ; they (as St. Peter) were
by our Lord new christened (as it were), and nominated Boa
nerges, by a name signifying the efficacy of their endeavour in
their Master's service ; they, together with St. Peter, were
assumed to behold the transfiguration ; they were culled out
to wait on our Lord in his agony ; they also with St. Peter
(others being excluded) were taken to attest our Lord's per
formance of that great miracle, of restoring the ruler's daugh
ter 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,"t 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 nearest touch our Lord,
being his cousin-germans, (which was esteemed by the
ancients a ground of preferment) as Hegesippus reporteth. J
Their industry and activity in propagation of the Gospel
was most eminently conspicuous.
To them it was peculiar that St. James did first suffer
for it,§ and St. John did longest persist in the faithful con
fession of it, whose writings in several kinds do remain as the
richest magazines of Christian doctrine, furnishing us vrith the
fullest testimonies concerning the dirinity of our Lord, with
special histories of his life, and with his dirinest discourses ;
with most lively incitements to piety and charity, vrith pro
phetical revelations concerning the state of the Church. He
therefore was one of the arvXoi, chief pillars and props of the
Christian profession, one ofthe inrepXiav 'AttoittoXoi, the super
lative Apostles. II
Accordingly in the roUs of the Apostles, and in reports
* Matth. iv. 21. Luke v. 10. Mark iii. 17. Matth. xvii. 1. 2 Pet. i.
16. Matth. xxvi. 37. Mark xiv. 33. Matth. xx. 20. Mark x. 35, 37.
t John xiii. 23. xxi. 7, 20. 1 Cor. xv. 7.
X Tovg Si drroXvOivrag -ifyriaaaOaL tStv ''EKKXr)(nuiv, cue dv St) pdprv-
pag bpov Kai drrb ytvovg bvrag rov TLvpiov. Hegesipp. apud Euseb. 3.
20. [p. 80. Oxon. 1845.] — They being dismissed and sent away to govern
the Churches, as being both witnesses, and also kinsmen of our Lord.
§ Acts xii. 2. II Gal. ii. 9. 2 Cor. xii. 11. xi. 5.

86 A treatise of
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 preferred by our Lord if " 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 Alex.) did not as being preferred by the
Lord hiraself, contest for honour, but did choose James the
Just, Bishop of Jerusalem (or as Ruffinus read,
of the Apostles)."
Hence, if by designation of Christ, by the concession ofthe
ApostoUcal college, by the prefulgency of his excellent worth
and merit, or upon any other ground St. Peter had the irpmia
or first place, the SEvrtpeia or next place in the same kind, by
like means, upon the same grounds seem to have belonged
unto them ; and if their advantage did imply difference not in
power but in order only (not authoritative superiority, hut
honorary precedence), then can no more be allowed or con
cluded due to him.
18. The Fathers both in express terms, and implicitly or
by consequence, do assert 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,
endowed 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."J:
* Mark iii. 17. Acts i. 13.
t Aafiuiv To'ivvv Tovg Kopvfa'iovg. Chrys. in Matth. xvii. 1. [p. 636.
vol. 7. Paris. 1836.] Taking therefore the chief and principal.— Aii ri
TovTOvg 7rapaXapl3dvsi povovg; 'oTi ovTOi tSv dXXiav rjuav VTrtp'txovrii,
Chrys. ib. Wherefore taketh he these only with him ? Because theie
were the chief and principal above the othsrs. — n6TpoE,KaiIaK(i)/3o£,«iii
'liadvvrig, o'l rrpb t&v dXXaiv Kai bvTtg Kai dpidpo-vptvoi  aiiri) f^v
r'l Xpia-roS rrporiprjaig. Greg. Naz. Or. 26. — U'tTpov ydp 0i)cri au
'IaKw/3oj/, Koi 'Iwdvvriv S)g dv Kai vrrb tov Kvpiov rrpoTinptlp'tvove
prj tmSiKaZtaBai So^rig, dXXd 'laKorPov rbv SiKaiov iiriciKOVW
'ItpoaoXvpiov iXiaBai. (Ruffinus reddit Apostolorum Episeopum,) Clem.
Alex, apud Euseb. 2. 1. [p. 33. Oxon. 1845.]
t Hoc erant utique et cseteri Apostoli quod fuit Petrus, pari consortio
praediti et honoris et potestatis. — Quamvis Apostolis omnibus post resur
rectionem suam parem potestatem tribuat, ac dicat, &c. Cyp. de Un.
Eccl. [cap. 2. p. 172. Paris. 1836.]

the pope's SUPllliMACY. 87
What can be more plain then that of St. Chrysostom, " St.
Paul sheweth, that each Apostle did enjoy equal dignity?"*
How again could St. Chrysostomf more clearly signify his
opinion, than when comparing St. Paul to St. Peter, he calleth
St. Paul, " laoTijxov avru, equal in honour to him, adding,
irXiov yap ovSev epH Tiwg, for I will not as yet say anything
more,"J as if he thonght 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
Imn-ifiovc aXXriXoig, " equal to one another in honour ?" §
Did not St. Jerome also sufficiently declare his mind in the
case, when he saith of the Apostles, that •' the strength ofthe
Church is equally settled upon them ?"||
Doth not Dionysius (the supposed Areopagite) call the
"decad of the Apostles co-ordinate with their foreman, St.
Peter ?"^ in conformity, I suppose, to the current judgment
of his age.
What can be more full than that of Isidore (whose words
shew how long this sense continued in the Church) : " The
other Apostles did receive an equal share of honour and
power, who also being dispersed in the whole world did preach
the Gospel, and to whom departing the Bishops did succeed,
who are constituted through the whole world in the sees of
the Apostles."**
* AtiKvvg, '6n rrjg avrrig 'enaaTog drr'tXavatv d^iag. Chrys. in Gal.
cap. 2. ver. 8. [vol. 10. p. 811. Paris. 1837.]
t Chrys. in Gal. 1. 8. J Vid. Tert. de Prcescr. cap. 20.
§ nlrpoE Kai 'lisidvvrjg iaonpoi dXX-h^oig, KaBb Kai 'ArroaToXoi Kai
Syioi paBrjTai. Act. Con. Eph. part. 1. p. 209. [Cone. Lab. vol. 2. Paris.
1671.] Peter and John were equal in honour 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 well that Peter is even in martyrdom
equalled to Paul ? "Bene qubd Petrus Paulo et in martyrio adsequatur. —
Tert. de Prses. 24.
II At dicis, super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia, licet id ipsum alio loco
super omnes Apostolos fiat, et ex aequo super eos Ecclesiae fortitudo soli-
detur. Hier. in Jovin. 1. 14. [p. 168. vol. 4. Paris. 1706.] — But you will
say, the Church is founded upon Peter, though the same thing in another
place is affirmed of aU the Apostles, and that, &c.
IT 'O TiSv p,aBr]Ti!>v KopvijiaXog, ptrd Trig bpoToyovg avnp Kai itpap-
XiKfig StKdSog. Dionys. de Eccl. Hier. cap. 5.
** Caeteri Apostoli cum Petro par consortium honoris et potestatis
acceperunt, qui etiam in toto orbe dispersi Evangelium prsedicaverunt,
quibusque decedentibus successerunt Episcopi, qui sunt constituti per
totum mundum in sedibus Apostolorum. — Isid. Hisp. de Off. 2. 5. [vol. 6.
p. 419. Roma, 1802.]

«B A TBEATISE OP
By consequence the Fathers do assert this equality, when
they affirm (as we before did shew) the ApostoUcal office to be
absolutely supreme ; when also they affirm (as afterward we
shall shew) all the Apostles' successors to be equal as such ;
and particularly that the Roman Bishop upon account of his
succeeding Saint Peter had no pre-eminence above his brethren;
for, wherever a bishop be, whether at Rome, or at Eugubinmi
at Constantinople, or at Rhegium, at Alexandria, or at Thanis,
he is of the same worth, and of the same priesthood : the force
of wealth, and lowness of poverty, doth not render a bishop
more high, or more low ; for that all of them are successors of
the Apostles.*
1 9. Neither is it to prudential esteem a despicable considera
tion, that the most ancient of the Fathers, haring occasion
sometimes largely to discourse of Saint Peter, do not mention
any such prerogatives belonging to him.f
20. The last argument which I shall use against this
primacy, shall be the insufficiency of those arguments and testi
monies, which they allege to warrant and prove it.
If this point be of so great consequence as they make it ;
if, as they would persuade us, the subsistence, order, unity
and peace of the Church, together with the salvation of Chris
tians, do depend on it ;J if, as they suppose, many great points
of truth do hang on this pin ; if it be, as they declare, a mam
article of faith, and not " only a simple error, but a pernicious
heresy to deny this primacy," § fthen it is requisite that a clear
revelation from God should be producible in favour of it (for
upon that ground only such points can firmly stand) then it is
most probable, that God (to prevent controversies, occasions of
doubt, and excuses of error about so grand a matter) would'
not have failed to have declared it so plainly, as might serve to
satisfy any reasonable man, and to convince any froward gain-
sayer>; but no such revelation doth appear ; for the places of
Scripture which they allege do not plainly express it, nor preg
nantly imply it, nor can it by fair consequence be inferred from
them : no man unprepossessed with affection to their side
• Ubicunque fuerit Episcopus, sive Romse sive Eugubii, &c. Hier.
ad Evagr. Ep. 85. [vol. 4. Ep. 101. p. 803. Paris. 1606.]
t Clem, ad Corinth. Iren. 3. 12. 3. I, 3.
X Agitur de summa rei Christianse, &c. BeU. prsef. ad lib. dePont. R.
§ Est enim revera non simplex error, sed pemiciosa hseresis negare B,
Petri primatum a Christo institutum.— BeU. de Pont. R. 1. 10. [p. 300.
vol. 1. Pragse, 1721.]

THE POPE S SUPRE.MACY. 89
would descry it in them ; without thwarting Saint Peter's
order, and " vyresting the Scriptures"* they cannot deduce it
from them. This by examining their allegations wiU appear.
I. They allege those words of our Sariour, uttered by him
upon occasion of Saint 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, Saint Peter is declared the founda
tion, that is, the sole supreme governor of the Church, f
To this I answer : —
1 . Those words do not clearly signify anything to their pur
pose; for they are metaphorical, and thence ambiguous or
capable of divers interpretations ; whence they cannot suffice
to ground so main a point of doctrine, or to warrant so huge
a pretence ; these ought to stand upon downright, erident,
and indubitable testimony.
It is pretty to observe how Bellarmine proposeth this testi
mony : " Of which words (saith he) the sense is plain and
obrious, that it be understood, that under two metaphors the
principate of the whole Church was promised ;"§ as if that
sense could be so plain and obvious, which is couched under
two metaphors, and those not very pat or clear in application
to their sense.
2. This is manifestly confirmed from that the Fathers and
divines, both ancient and modem, have much differed in expo
sition of these words.
(" Some (saith Abulensis) say that this rock is Peter— others^
say, aud better, that it is Christ — others say, and yet better,
that it is the confession which Peter maketh .")||
For some interpret " this rock" to be Christ himself, of
whom Saint Paul saith, "Other foundation can no man lay,
than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ."^
Saint Augustine telleth us in his Retractations, that he often
had expounded the words to this purpose, although he did not
absolutely reject that interpretation which made Saint Peter
* 2 Pet. iii. 16. t Matth. xvi. 18.
X S. Romana Ecclesia nullis Synodicis constitutis caeteris Ecclesiis prae-
lata est, sed Evangelica voce Domini et salvatoris nostri primatum obti-
nuit ; Tu 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.
§ Quorum verborum planus et obvius sensus est, ut inteUigatur sub
duabus metaphoris promissum Petro totius Ecclesiae principatum. — BeU.
de Pont. 1. 10. [p. 300. vol. 1. Pragse, 1721.]
II Tostat. in Matth. 16. qu. 67. f I Cor. iii. 11.

90 A TREATISE OF
the rock ; leaving it to the reader's choice, which is the most
probable.* Others (and those most eminent Fathers) do take the rock
to be Saint Peter's faith, or profession : " Upon the rock (saith
the prince of interpreters) that is upon the faith of his profes
sion ;" and again, " Christ said that he would build his
Church on Peter's confession;" and again, (he, or another
ancient writer under his name) " Upon this rock, he said not
upon Peter, for he did not bufld his Church upon the man,
but upon his faith."f
" Our Lord (saith Theodoret) did permit the first of the
Apostles, whose confession he did fix as a prop or foundation
ofthe Church, to be shaken ."{
(Whence Origen saith, that " every disciple of Christ is the
rock,"§ in virtue of his agreeraent vrith Peter in that holy con
fession.) This sense even Popes have embraced. ||
Others say, that as Saint Peter did not speak for himself,
but in the name of all the Apostles, and of all faithful people,
representing the pastors and people of the Church ; so cor-
* Scio me postea saepissime expouisse, ut super banc Petram intellige-
retur quem confessus est Petrus ; — harum autem duarum sententiarum q\is
sit probabilior eUgat Lector. — Aug. Retr. 1. 21. [p. 67. vol. 1. Paris.
1836.] Vid. Aug. in Joh. tr. 124. [p. 2470. vol. 3. Paris. 1836.] de verb.
Dom. in Matt. Serm. 13. [Serm. 76. p. 595. vol. 5. Paris. 1837.] Snper
banc, inquit, Petram quam confessus es, aedificabo Ecclesiam meam. Aug.
in Joh. tr. 124. et de verb. Dom. in Matt. Serm. 13. (tom. 10.) [Serm.
76. p. 595. vol. 5. Paris. 1837.] Super banc Petram, id est super me
aedificabo Ecclesiam meam. — Ans. in Matt. 16. 18.
t Ty Utrpi}  TOVTtari rrj rriaTti T^g bpoXoyidg, Chrys. in Matt.
16. 18. [vol. 7. p. 616. Paris. 1836.] -Trjv 'EKKXriaiav tipriaiv ki
Trjv bpoXoyiav oiKoSoprjattv r-qv iKtivov. Chrys. in Joh. 1. 50. [p. 138.
vol. 8. Paris. 1836.] — 'Etti Tavry Ty nirpif, owk tlrrtv irri np U'srpif
ovre ydp irri Tip dvBpiin-ip, dXX' irri ryv rrianv rriv iaVTOv 'EkkXi)-
aiav tpKoSopriat. Chrys. tom. v. Or. 163. — Super banc igitur confessionis
Petram Ecclesiae sediJScatio est. Hil. de Trin. 6.
t 'ArrooToXwv rbv rrpuirov, ov Trjv bpoXoyiav olov riva KprjwXSa, Kai
^tpiXtov Trig 'EKKXrjaiag Kartrrrj^t, awtxiiipiji^t aaXtvBtivat. — Theod.
Ep. 77. [vol. 3. p. 947. Paris. 1642.]
§ n'erpa ydp rrdg 6 Xpiarov paOrirrig, &c. — Grig, in Matt. 16. p. 275.
[vol. 3. p. 524. Paris. 1740.]
II In vera fide persistite, et vitam vestram in Petra Ecclesise, hoc est m
confessione B. Petri Apostolorum Principis solidate. Greg. M. Ep. 3. 33.—
Persist in the true faith, and estabUsh and fix your life upon the rock of
the Churcb, that is, upon the confession of blessed Peter the prince of the
Apostles. — Super ista confessione aedificabo Ecclesiam meam. — Felix HI.
Ep. 5. Vid. Nie. I. Ep. 2, 6. Joh. VIII. Ep. 76.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 91
respondently our Lord did declare, that he would bufld his
Church upon such faithful pastors and confessors.*
Others do indeed by the rock understand Saint Peter's per
son, but do not thereby expound to be meant his being supreme
governor of the Apostles, or of the whole Church.
The dirines, schoolmen and canonists of the Roman com
munion do not also agree in exposition of the words ; and
divers of the most learned among them do approve the inter
pretation of Saint Chrysostom.-f
Now then how can so great a point of doctrine be firmly
grounded on a place of so doubtful interpretation ? How can
any one be obUged to understand the words according to their
interpretation, which persons of so good sense, and so great
authority do understand otherwise ? With what modesty can
they pretend that meaning to be clear, which so perspicacious
eyes could not discern therein ? Why may not I excusably
agree with St. Chrysostom, or St. Augustine in understanding
the place ? May I not reasonably oppose their judgment to
the opinion of any modern doctors, deeming BeUarmine as fal-
Uble 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 erident that the Apostles themselves did not
understand those words of our Lord to signify any grant or pro
mise to St. Peter of supremacy over them ; for would they
have contended for the chief place, J if they had understood
whose it of right was by our Lord's own positive 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 vrill to make St. Peter riceroy ?|| 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 proraise
* Unus pro omnibus loquens, et Ecclesise voce respondens. Cypr. Ep.
55. [Ep. 59. p. 138. Lipsise, 1838.] — One speaking for aU, and answer
ing in the name of the Church. — Cui Ecclesite figuram gerenti Dominus
ait super banc— Aug. Ep. 165. [Ep. 53. p. 180. vol. 2. Paris. 1836.]—
To whom, representing the whole Church, our Lord saith, " Upon this
rock," &c. — Petrus ex persona omnium Apostolorum profitetur. Hier. in
loc. — Peter professes in the person of all the Apostles.
t Vid. Rigalt. in Cypr. Ep. 27. 40. 70. 71. 73. 69.
X Luke xxii. 14. § Mark ix, 34. || Matth. xviii. 1.

92 A TREATISE OF
fixed on St. Peter ?* Would St. Peter among the rest have
fretted at that idle overture, whereas he knew the place by our
Lord's immutable purpose and infallible declaration assured to
him ? And if none of the Apostles did understand the words
to imply this Roman sense, who can be obliged so to under
stand them ? Yea, who can vrisely, who can safely understand
them ? for surely they had common sense as well as any man
living now ; they had as much advantage as we can have to
know our Lord's meaning ; their ignorance therefore of this
sense being so apparent, is not only a just excuse for not admit
ting this interpretation, but a strong bar against it.
4. This interpretation, also, doth not well consist with our
Lord's answer to the contests, inquiries, and petitions of his
disciples concerning the point of superiority; for doth he not
(if the Roman expositions be good) seem upon those occasions
not only to dissemble his own word and promise, but to dis
avow them or thwart them ; can we conceive, that he would
in such a case of doubt forbear to resolve them, clearly to ui-
struct thera, 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 go
vernor; at least what assurance can there be that this meta
phor precisely doth import that sense; seeing in other respects,
upon as fair similitudes, he might be called so ?
St. Augustine saith, "that they were foundations, because
their authority doth support our weakness. "f
St. Jerome saith, " that they were foundations, because the
faith of the Church was first laid in them."J
St. Basil saith, " that St. Peter's soul was called the rock,
because it was firmly rooted in the faith, and did hold stiff
without giving way against the blows of temptation." §
* Matth. XX. 24. 'AKovaavrtg o'l StKa riyavdKTovv. " And when the
ten heard it, they were moved with indignation."
t Quare sunt fundamenta ApostoU et prophetae, quia eorum auctoritas
portat infirmitatem nostram. Aug, in Ps. 86. [p. 1315. Num.4, vol. 4.
Paris. 1835.]
t In iUis erant fundamenta, ibi primiim posita est fides Ecclesise. Hier.
in Ps. 86.
^ U'sTpa Si v^rjXri r) ^vx-q tov paKapiov TltTpov iivopaarai, ha
TO -rrayiug 'tvtppiZStaBai Ty rriaTti, Kai aTtfipiHg Kai dvivSoTug txtai
rrpbg rag ek rrtipaapHv 'trrayousvag rrXriydg. — Bas. in Is. 2. p. 869.
[p. 605. vol. 1. Paris. 1839.]

THE pope's supremacy. 93
Chrysologus saith, " that Peter had his name from a rock,
because he first merited to found the Church by firmness of
faith."* These are fair explications of the metaphor, without any
reference to St. Peter's government.
But however also admitting this, that being such a rock
doth imply government and pastoral charge ; yet do they
(notwithstanding these grants and suppositions) effect no
thing ; for tbey cannot prove the words spoken exclusively in
regard to other Apostles, or to import any thing singular to
him above or beside them : he might be a governing rock,
so might others be ; the Church might be buflt on him, so
it might be on other Apostles; he might be designed a gover
nor, 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 other Apostles in holy Scrip
ture are called foundations, and the Church is said to be built
on them.
" If (saith Origen, the father of interpreters) you think
the whole Church to be only built on Peter alone, what will
you say of John, the son of thunder, and of each of the
Apostles ?"f &c. largely to this purpose.
" Christ (as St. Jerome saith) was the rock, and he be
stowed on the Apostles, that they should be called rocks." J
And " You say (saith he again) that the Church is founded
on Peter, but the same in another place is done upon all the
Apostles." §
" The twelve Apostles (saith another ancient author) were
the immutable piUars of orthodoxy, the rock of the
Church." " The Chnrch (saith St. Basil) is buflt upon the founda
tion of the Prophets and Apostles, Peter also was one of the
* Petrus k petra nomen adeptus est, quia primus meruit Ecclesiam fidei
firmitate fundare. Chrysol. Serm. 53.
t Et Si irri rbv 'iva 'tKtXvov litTpov vop'iZtig vrrb tov Btov oiKoSoptXa-
Bai TTjv rrdaav iKKXria'iav povov, ri dv ipr)aaig rrtpi 'lordvvnv tov
Trig [ipovTrig wtoi;, 77 tKdoTov tu>v 'ArroaroXiov ; &c. Orig. in Matth.
16. p. 275. [vol. 3. Paris. 1740.]
X Eph. u. 20. Petra Christus est, qui donavit Apostolis, ut ipsi qnoque
Petrse vocentur. Hier. in Amos 9. 12.
§ Dicis super Petrum fundatur Ecclesia, licet id ipsum in alio loco super
omnes Apostolos fiat. — Hier in Jovin. 1. 14. [Opera, vol. 4. p. 168.
Paris. 1706.]

94 A TREATISE OF
mountains : upon which rock the Lord did promise to build
his Church."*
...St. Cyprianf in his disputes with Pope Stephen did more
than once allege this place, yet could he not take them in their
sense to signify exclusively ; for he did not acknowledge any
imparity of power among the Apostles or their successors.
He indeed plainly took these words to respect all the Apostles
and their successors, our Lord taking occasion to promise that
to one, which he intended to impart to all for themselves, and
successors : " Our Lord (saith he) ordering the honour of a
bishop, and the order of his Church, saith to Peter, I say to
thee, &c. hence through the turns of tiraes and successions,
the ordination of bishops, and the raanner of the Church
doth run on, that the Church should be settled upon the
bishops, and every act of the Church should be governed by
the same prelates."J As therefore he did conceive the Church
to be built not on the Pope singularly, but on all the bishops ;
so he thought our Lord did intend to build his Church not
upon St. Peter only, but on all his Apostles.
6. It is not said, that the Apostles, or the apostolical office
should be built on him; for that could not be, seeing the
Apostles were constituted, and the apostolical office was
founded before that promise ; the words only therefore can
import that according to sorae raeaning he was a rock, upon
which the Church, afterward to be collected, should be built;
he was "a rock of the Church to be built," § as Tertullian
speaketh ; the words therefore cannot signify any thing avail
able to their purpose, in relation to the Apostles.
7. If we take St. Peter himself for the rock, then (as 1
take it) the best meeming of the words doth import, that
our Lord designed St. Peter for a prime instrument, (the
* 'EKKXj/ffta — ipKoS6pt]Tai irri np BtptXitp Twv 'ArroaroXbiv Kai
UpotfyrjTbJv' 'iv TiSv optuiv ijv Kai b tltrpog, tip' r^g Kai rr'trpag STijy-
yt'iXaTo b Kvpiog oiKoSopriativ avTov rriv tKKXriaiav. BasU. in Isa. 2.
p. 869. [p. 604. vol. 1. Paris. 1839.]
t Cyp. Ep. 71 et 73.
J Dominus noster Episcopi honorem, et Ecclesise suse rationem dispo-
nens, dicit Petro, Ego tibi dico — Inde per temporum et successionum vices
Episcoporum ordinatio, et Ecclesiae ratio decurrit, ut Ecclesia super Epis
copos constituatur, et omnis actus Ecclesiae per eosdem priepositos guber-
netur. Cypr Ep. 27. et de Unit. Eccl. [Ep. 26. p. 42. Paris. 1649.
aut Ep. 33. Lipsi«, 1838.]
^ Latuit aliquid Petrum sedificandae Ecclesiae Petram dictum. —Tertull.
dePrsescr. cap. 22. [Opera, vol. 2. Wirceb. 1781.]

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 95
first mover, the most dfligent, and active at the begin
ning, the most constant, stiff and firm)* in the support
of his truth and propagation of his doctrine, or conver
sion of men to the belief of the Gospel, the which is called
building of the Church; according to that of St. Ambrose,
or some ancient homilist under his name, ^He is called
the rock, because he first did lay in the nations the founda
tions of faith :"f 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 Sariour's words)
" for the excellency of his faith did take on him the edifying
of the Church."J
Both he and they also might be so termed, for that upon their
testimonies concerning the life, death, and resurrection of
Christ the faith of Christians was grounded ; as also it stands
upon their conrincing discourses, their holy practice, their
miraculous performances, in all which St. Peter was most emi
nent, and in the beginning of Christianity displayed them to
the edification of the Church.
This interpretation plainly doth agree with matter of fact
and history, which is the best interpreter of right or pririlege
in such cases ; for we may reasonably understand our Sariour
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 TertulUan.§
But this sense doth not imply any superiority of power or
dignity granted to St. Peter above his brethren ; however it
may signify an advantage belonging to him and deserring es
pecial 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 Uberty of speech, and opened the entrance, and gave to them
as to a river carried with a huge stream to enter with great
* litTpog iv ' ArroaroXoig rrpiSrog 'tKripv%t rbv Xpiarov. Chrys. —
Peter first of aU the Apostles preached Christ.
t Petra dicitur ed quod primus in nationibus fidei fundamenta posuerit.
Ambr. de Sanctis Serm. 2.
X 'O Sid rr'iaTtiiig vrrtpoxvv W iavrbv T-fiv o'lKoSop-qv Trig iKKXr/aiag
St^dptvog. Bas. contra Eunom. lib. 2. Petra aedificandse Ecclesise. Ter
tull. de prsesc. c. 22.
§ Sic enim exitus docet. in ipso Ecclesia extructa est, id est per ipsum,
&c. Tert. de pudic. cap. 21. [Opera, vol. 2. Wirceb. 1781.]

96 A TREATISE OF
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 raay also be observed, that St. Peter before the speak
ing of those words by our Lord raay seem to have had a pri
macy, intimated by the EvangeUsts, when they report his call
to the apostolical ofiice ; and by his behaviour, when in this
confession, and before in the Uke, he undertook to be their
mouth and spokesman ; when " not being unmindful of his
place (saith St. Ambrose) he did act a primacy ; a primacy
(addeth that Father) of confession, not of honour ; of faith, not
of order ;"t his primacy therefore (such as he had) cannot
well be founded on this place, he being afore possessed of it,
and (as St Ambrose conceived) " exercising it at that time."
II. They allege the next words of our Lord, spoken in
sequel upon the same occasion, " To thee will I give the keys
ofthe kingdom of heaven," that is, say they, "the supreme
power over all the Church ;"J for he (say they) that hath the
keys is master of the house.
To this testimony we may apply divers of the same answers,
which were given to the forraer ; for
1 . These words are figurate, and therefore not clear enough
to prove their assertion.
2. They do admit, and have received various interpreta
tions. 3. It is erident, that the Apostles themselves did not under
stand these words as importing a supremacy over them, that
St. Peter himself did not apprehend this sense, that our Lord
upon occasion inriting to it did not take notice of his promise,
according thereto.
4. The words, " I vrill 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)
* Kav 'lti)dvvr]g, Kav 'laKw^og, Kav IlauXoE Kav aXXog buTicrovv
ptrd TavTa p'eya n rroibiv tpa'ivrirai, drrdvnuv ovTog rr'XtovtKTtl, o
rrpoiSorroirjaag avnSv r-y rrappriaig,, Kai Siavoi^ag Tr)v iiaoSov, sal Wc
avToXg KaBdrrtp rrorapip rroXXip iptpopivip ptvpan ptrd rroXXfig dSiias
irrtiatXBtiv, &c. Chrys. tom. v. Or. 59. [p. 436. vol. 3. Paris. 1835.]
t Loci non immemor sui primatum egit ; — primatum confessionis, non
honoris ; fidei, non ordinis. Ambr. de Incarn. cap. 4.
X Per claves datas Petro intelligimus summam potestatem in omnem
Ecclesiam. BeU. de Pont. 1. 3. [lib. 1. cap, 13. p. 312. vol. 1. Prags,
1721.]

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 97
to Peter, "I will give thee the keys, but he said not, I will
give them to thee alone ;"* nothing therefore can be concluded
from them to their purpose.
5. (JChe Fathers do affirm that aU the Apostles did receive
the same keysj
" 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 thera ? But if this, I vriU give thee the keys
ofthe kingdom of heaven, be common, how dso are not all the
things common, which were spoken before, or are added as
spoken to Peter ?"t
St. Jerome says in express words, that all '(the Apostles did
receive the keys ofthe kingdom of heaven.''^
"He (saith Optatus) did alone receive the keys of the
kingdom of heaven (which were) to be communicated to the
rest ;"§ that is (as Bigaltius well expoundeth those words)
" which Christ himself would also communicate to the rest."||
Theophylact: " Although it be spoken to Peter alone, I
vriU give thee, yet it is given to all the Apostles"ir
It is part of St. John's character in St. Chrysostom, "He
that hath the keys of the heavens."**
6. Indeed whatever (according to any tolerable exposition,
or according to the current expositions of the Fathers) those
keys of the kingdom of heaven do import (whether it be a
* Dixit Petro, dabo tibi claves, at non dixit, dabo tibi soU. — Rigalt. in
Epist. Firmil. [Ep. 75. p. 166. edit. Regalt. et pp. 148, 150. Paris. 1726.
vid. Baluiii notas in Ep. 75. p. 508. Paris. 1726.]
t *Apa Si Tip TiliTptp povip SiSovrai vrrb tov Kvpiov a'l KXtXStg Trig
ribv o-bpavwv ^aaiXtiag, Kai o-vStig 'irtpog nJSv paKap'itiiV avrdg Xri^t-
Tai; ti Si Koivov ian Kai rrpbg iripovg, rb Stuaio aoi Tag KXtiSag rrig
^aaiXt'iag TiHv ovpaviHv, rriag ovxi Kai rrdvra rdrt rrpotiprjptva, Kai rd
im^tpofitva org rrpbg Utrpov XtXtypsvaj Orig. in Matt. 16. p. 275.
[Opera, vol. 3. p. 615. Paris. 1740.]
X Quod Petro dicitur, Apostolis dicitur. Ambr. in Psalm, xxxviii.
What is said to Peter, is said to the Apostles. — Licet id ipsum in aUo loco
super omnes Apostolos fiat, et cuncti claves regni coelorum accipiant.
Hier. in Jov. I. 14. [vol. 4. p. 168. Paris. 1706.]— Though the same thing
in another place is done upon all the Apostles, and aU receive the keys of
the kingdom of heaven.
§ Claves regni coelorum communicandascaeteris solus accepit. Opt. lib. 7.
II Communicandas cseteris dixit, quas ipse Christus communicaturus
erat et cseteris. — Rigalt. in Cypr. de Un. Eccl.
% Et ydp Kai rrpbg Uirpov /lowov tlprirai rb Stasia trot, tiXXti Kai
rrdai ToXg 'ATroaroXoig S'tSoTai. Theoph. in loc.
** 'O Tcig KXtXg lyiuv nav ovpavwv. Chrys. in prsef. Evang. Joh.
[Hom 1. p. 2 vol. 8. Paris. 1836.]
VOL. I. H

98 A TREATISE OF
faculty of opening it by doctrine, of admitting into it by dis-
pensation of baptism, and absolution, of excluding from it by
ecclesiastical censure, or any such faculty signified by that
metaphorical expression),* it plainly did belong to dl the
Apostles, and was effectually conferred on them ; yea after
them upon all the pastors of the Church in their several pre
cincts and degrees ; who in all ages have claimed to them
selves the power of the keys ; to be (as the Councfl of Com-
peigne calleth all bishops) "clarigeri, the key-bearers ofthe
kingdom of heaven."t
So that in these words nothing singular was promised or
granted to St. Peter, 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 anticipatively 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 LJ
7. Indeed divers of the Fathers do conceive the words
spoken to St. Peter not as a single person, but as a represen
tative of the Church, or as standing in the room of each
pastor therein ; unto whom our Lord designed to impart the
power of the keys.
"All we bishops (saith St. Ambrose) have in St. Peter
received the keys of the kingdom of heaven."§
* Claves intelligit verbum Dei, EvangeUum Christi. — Rigalt. in Cyp.
Ep. 73. [Paris. 1726.]
t Episcopi  quos constat esse vicarios Christi, et clavigeros regni
ccelorum.— Cone. Compend. apud Bin. tom. 6. p. 361.
X Transivit quidem in Apostolos aUos vis istius potestatis,'sed non frustra
uni commendatur quod omnibus intimetur. Petio ergo singulariter hoe
creditur, quia cunctis Ecclesise rectoribus Petri forma proponitui. Leo I.
in Nat. Petri et Paul. Serm. 2. — The efficacy of this power passed indeed
upon all the Apostles ; yet was it not in vain, that what was intimated to
aU, was commended to one. Therefore this is committed singly to Peter,
because Peter's pattern and example is propounded to aU the governors
of the Church.
§ In B. Petro claves regni coelorum cuncti suscepimus sacerdotes.
Ambr. de dign. Sac. 1. Ecclesia quae fundatur in Christo, claves ab eo
regni coelorum accepit, [in Petro] id est potestatem ligandi solvendique
peccata. Aug. tract. 124. [p. 2470: vol. 3. Paris. 1836.] m Joh. vid.
tract. 50. — The Church which is founded upon Christ, received from him
the keys of the kingdom of heaven, i. e. the power of binding and loosing
sins. — In typo unitatis Petro Dominus dedit potestatem. — Aug. de Bapt. 3.
17. [p. 210. vol. 9. Paris. 1837.]— Our Lord gave the power to Peter,asa
type of unity. 'Ev rrpoaiarrip ToU Kopvipaiov Kai ToXg Xoirrolg TiSv ^a-
B-qnav -q roia-vrri i^ovaia SiSorai. 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 Ecclesise Catholicie personas

THE pope's supremacy. 99
8. These answers are confirmed by the words immediately
adjoined, eqiuvalent to 'these, and interpretative of them,
" And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in
heaven,"* — the which do import a power or privilege soon
after expressly, and in the very same words promised or granted
to all the Apostles, as also the same power in other words was
by our Lord conferred on them all after the resurrection.
If therefore the keys of the kingdom of heaven do import
supreme power, then each Apostle had supreme power.
9. If we should grant (that which nowise can be proved)
that something peculiarly belonging to St. Peter is implied in
those words, it can only be this, that he should be a prime
man in the work of preaching and propagating the Gospel,
and conveying the heavenly benefit of it to believers, which is
an opening of the kingdom of heaven ; according to what
TertulUan excellently saith of him : " So (saith he) the event
teacheth, the Church was built in him, that is, by him : he
did initiate the key ; see which. Ye men of Israel, hear these
words, Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you,
&c. He, in fine, in the baptism of Christ did unlock the en
trance to the kingdom of heaven, &c."f
1 0. 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 ?
1 1 . In fine, our Lord (as St. Luke relateth it) did say to
St. Peter, and probably to him first, "Fear not, from henceforth
thou shalt catch men;" J might it hence be inferred, that St.
Peter had a pecuUar or sole faculty of catching men ? why
inight it not by as good a consequence as this, whereby they
would appropriate to him this opening faculty ? Many such
instances might in like manner be used.
sustinet Petrus ; huic enim Ecclesise claves regni coelorum datae sunt, cum
Petro datse sunt. — Aug. de Ag. Chr. cap. 30. [p. 439. vol. 6. Paris. 1837.]
iil Ps. 108. [p. 1734. vol. 4. Paris. 1835.]— Not without cause does Peter
among the rest of the Apostles sustain the person of the CathoUc Church ;
tor to this Church are the keys of the kingdom of heaven given, when
they are given unto Peter.
• August, supr. — Matth. xviii. 18. John xx. 23.
t Sic enim exitus docet, in ipso Ecclesia extructa est, id est, per ipsum ;
ipse clavem imbuit ; vide quam, Viri Israelitseauribus mandate quae dico,
Jesum Nazerenum virum k Deo vobis destinatum, &c. Ipse denique
primus in Christi baptismo reseravit aditum coelestis regni, &c. Tert. de
pud. 21. [Tertul. Opera, vol. 2. Wirceb. 1781.] ,
t Luke V. 10. Matth. iv. 19.
H 2

100 A treatise op
III. They produce those words of our Sariour to St. Peter,
that is, in the Roman interpretation : " Be thou universal
governor of my Church.''
To this allegation I answer.
1 . From words which truly and properly might have been
said to any other Apostle, yea to any Christian pastor what
ever, nothing can be concluded to their purpose importmg a
peculiar duty or singular privilege of St. Peter.
2. From indefinite words a definite conclusion (especially m
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 succour whereof the words signifr
nothing to their purpose, so far are they from sufficiently as
suring so vast a pretence : for instance, when St. Paul doth
exhort the bishops at Ephesus, " to feed the Church of God,"
may it thence be collected, that each of them was an universal
governor of the whole Church, " which Christ had purchased
vrith his own blood ?"*
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 consigned to them, when
our Lord did inspire them, and soleranly commissionate them,'
saying, "As the Father did send me, so I send you ;"-f to which
coraraission, 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 former grant of apostle
ship,"! after his great offence of denying our Lord.
4. These words do not seera institutive or collative of power,
but rather only admonitive or exhortative to duty ; implyuig
no more, but the pressing a common duty, before incumbent
on St. Peter, upon a special occasion, in an advantageous sea
son, that he should effectually discharge the ofiice, which oui
Lord had committed to him.
Our Lord {,1 say) presently before his departure, when his
words were like to have a strong impression on St. Peter,
* Acts XX. 28.
t KtxtipoTovriTO piv ijSr) rrpbg rqv dtiav ' ArroaToXfiv bpim ro'iQ («¦
pot£ paBrjTaXg nirpog. Cyril, in loc. — Peter was ordained to the holy
Apostleship together vrith the rest of the Disciples.— John xx. 21.
X Aia Si TOii fdvai tov Xvpiov fSoaKt rd dpv'ia pov, avav'iinn'i
wffTrep Tig Trig V^V SoBtiarig drroaToXijg avnp ytvkaBai voiirai,
CyrU ib.

the pope's supremacy. 101
doth earnestly direct and warn him to express that special ar
dency of affection, which he observed in him, in an answerable
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 reUgion as ever he should find opportunity.*
5. The same office certainly did belong to all the Apostles,
who (as St. Jerome speaketh), "were the princes of our dis-
cipUne, and. chief tains of the Christian doctrine ;"t they at
their first vocation had a commission and command " to go
unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel, that were scattered
abroad like sheep not having a shepherd ;J they before our
Lord's ascension were enjoined " to teach all nations" § the
doctrines and precepts of Christ ; to receive them into th'e
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 ap
pear one, which was fed by the Apostles with unanimous
agreement." II
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 oecumenical 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
* Paulus Apostolus boni Pastoris implebat Officium, quando Christum
prsedicabat. Aug. in Joh. tr. 47. [p. 2147. vol. 3. Paris. 1836.]— Paul
fulfilled the office of a good pastor, when he preached Christ.
t Principes DiscipUnae nostrse, et Christiani Dogmatis duces. Hier. in
Jovin. 1. 14. [Vide Comment, in Isai. cap. 60. p. 453. vol. 3. Paris. 1704.]
X Matth. X. 6. ix. 36. § Matth. xxviii. 19, 20.
II Pastores sunt omnes, sed grex unus ostenditur, qui ab Apostolis om
nibus unanimi consensione pascatur. Cjrpr. de Un. Eccl. [cap. 4. p. 119.
Lipsise, 1839.]
1[ "ApxovTtg tiaiv vrrb tov Qtov x^iporovriBivrtg ot 'ATTOOToXof dp-
XOVTtg OVK iBvj] Kai rroXttg Sia^opovg XapjSdvovTtg, dX\d rrdvTtg
Koivri Triv oiKovpivrjv ipmaTtvBivTtg. Chrys. tom. 8. p. 115. [p. 93.
vol. 3. Paris. 1835.]

102 A TREATISE OF
and nations, and of the whole earth; who undertook the world
and governed the Churches ; on whom the whole world did
look, and on whose soul the cares 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."*
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 obUged to feed aU Christian
people every where ?
7. The words, indeed, are applicable to all ChristiaB
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 ;"t
fdr they are styled pastors ; they in terms as indefinite as those
in this text are exhorted " to feed the Chnrch 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 thera all to express their love and piety toward them
in this way, by feeding his sheep, and people.
"Which sheep (saith St. Arabrose), and which flock, not
only then St. Peter did receive, but also with him aU we priests
did receive it."§
* "O arvXog tSiv Kurd ryv oiKovpivriv 'EKKXriaiUv. Chrys. prsf.
comment, ad Joh. — Kai ydp Trig oiKovpivrig 'AiroiTroXof ^v. Chrys.
in 1 Cor. 9. 2. [p. 211. vol. 10. Paris. 1837.]— Outoe 6 oirs ot/ciac /iiSj,
dXXd Kat rroX'tiav Kai S-qpiav, Kai iBviav, Kai bXoKXijpov Trjg oiKOVphijs
tppovTiSa t-jciav. Chrys. in 2 Cor. 11. 28. [p. 728. vol. 10. Paris. 1837.]
T^E oiKovpivrig dvnXapjSdvtTO rrdarig, Kai SttKVJi'epva rdg kicXijjiaf.
Chrys. tom. 8. p. 115. [p. 93. vol.3. Paris. 1835.]— "H oiKovpivii
rrdaa rrpbg airbv tj^Xtrrtv, at ippovTiStg Tiav rravraxov Tqg yijg ebkXjj-
aiiov Trig iKtivov tpvxqg qv i^ri pri] pivai.— Chrys. tom. 5. Or. 59. '0
Mixa-qX TO Tiav 'lovSaiiav tBvog 'tvtxtipiaBr)- XlavXog Siyfiv,Kaiia-
XaTTav, Kai Trjv oiKOvptvriv, Kai Tijv ttoiKj/roi/. Chrys. tom. 8. p. 39.
[De laudibus sancti PauU, Hom. 2. p. 580. vol. 2. Paris. 1834.]
t Pastores multi sumus, unum tamen gregem, et oves Christi uni
versas pascimus. Cypr. Ep. 67- ad P. Steph. [Ep. 68. p. 188. Lipais,
1838.] X Acts XX. 28. — Suanto magis debent usque ad mortem pro verifate
certare, et usque ad sanguinem adversus peccatum, quibus oves ipsaspas-
cendas, hoc est docendas regendasque comraittit. Aug. in Joh. tr. 123.
[p. 2464. vol. 3. Paris. 1836.]— 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 soliim tunc B. suscepit Petrus, sedet
cum eo nos euscepimvis omnes. Ambr. de Sacerd. 2.

THE pope's supremacy, 103
" 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.
" When it is said to Peter (saith St. Augustine), it is said to
all, feed my sheep ."f
" And we (saith St. Basil) are taught this (obedience to su
periors) by Christ himself, constituting St. Peter pastor after
himself of the Church (for Peter, saith he, dost thou love me
more than these ? feed my sheep), and conferring to all pastors
and teachers continually afterward an equal power (of doing
so) ; whereof it is a sign that all do in like manner bind, and
do loose as he."J
St. Augustine compriseth all these considerations in those
words. §
How could these great masters more clearly express their
mind, that our Lord in those words to St. Peter did inculcate
a duty nowise peculiar to him, but equally together with him
belonging to all guides of the Church ; iu such manner, as
when a master doth press a duty on one servant, he doth
thereby admonish all his servants of the like duty ; whence
St. Augustine saith, that St. Peter in that case " did sustain
the person of the Church,"|l that which-was spoken to him,
* Td rrp6j3aTa, d np Uirpip, Kai Toig per' heXvov ivexeipiaev. Chrys.
de Sacerd. 1. [Lib. 2. p. 454. Paris. 1834.]
+ Ciim dicitur Petro, ad omnes dicitur, Pasce oves meas. Aug. de Agone
Christ. 30. [p. 439. vol. 6. Paris. 1837.]
X Kai TOVTOV Trap' avrov XpiaToij rraiStvbpeBa, 'U'tTpov rroipiva
ptB' eavrbv Trig iKKXrjaiag KaBiariavTog, IlsrpE, ydp frjo'i, ^iXtXg pe
rrXkov TOVTiav ; rroipaivt rd irp6[3ara pov Kai rrdai Srj ToXg ift^rig
Troi/tltri eai ^i^atr/caXotE rqv laqv rrapexovTog i^ovaiav Kai tovtov
atiptXov rb Stapeiv lirravTag bpoiuig, Kai Xveiv ijairtp iKtXvog. Bas.
Const. Mon. cap. 22. [p. 818. vol. 2. Paris. 1839.]
§ Et quidem fratres, quod pastor est, dedit et membris suis ; nam et
Petrus pastor, et Paulus pastor, et czeteri ApostoU pastores, et boni Epis
copi pastores. Aug in Job. tr. 47. [p. 2147. vol. 3. Paris. 1836.] — And
indeed, brethren, that which a pastor is, he gave also to his members, for
hoth Peter was a pastor, and Paul a pastor, and the rest of the Apostles
were pastors, and good bishops are pastors.
II Ut ergo Petrus quando ei dictum est, Tibi dabo claves, in figura per
sonam gestabat Ecclesise, sic et quando ei dictum est, Pasce oves meas,
Ecclesise quoque personam in iigura gestabat. Aug. in Ps. 108. [p. 1733.
B.C. vol. 4. Paris. 1835.] — Ou rrpbg 'itpiag Si tovto povov tlprirai,
dXXd Kai rrpbg 'tKaarov rjpiav rtav Kai piKpbv ijxrremaTevpiviav rroipviov.
Chrya. in Matt. xxiv. Or. 77. — This was not spoken tf> those priests only,
but to every one of us, who have the care even of a little flock committed
to us.

104 A TREATISE OF
belonging to all its members, especially to his brethren, the
clergy. " It 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 rational sheep."*
8. Hence it followeth, that the sheep, which our Saviour
biddeth St. Peter to feed, were not the Apostles, who were his
fellow-shepherds, designed to feed others, and needing not to
be fed by him ; but the coraraon believers or people of God,
which St. Peter himself doth caU " the flock of God ;" "Feed
(saith he to his fellow-elders) the flock of God, which is
among you;"f and St. Paul, "Take heed, therefore, unto
yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost
hath raade 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 raay interpret that saying of St. Chrysostom,
which is the most plausible argument they can allege for them,§
that our Lord in saying this, did commit to St. Peter a charge
(or presidency) over his brethren ; that is, he made him a
pastor^ of Christian __people, as he did others : at least, if
rrpoaraaia riav dleXipwv be referred to the Apostles, it must
not signify authority over them, but at most a primacy of
order among them ; for that St. Peter otherwise should feed
them, St. Chrysostom could hardly think, who presently after
saith, that " seeing the Apostles were to receive the adminis
tration of the whole world, they ought not afterward to con
verse with one another ; for that would surely have been a
great damage to the world." ||
10. But they, forsooth, must have St. Peter solely obhged
to feed all Christ's sheep ; so they do impose upon him a vast
and crabbed prorince ; a task very incomraodious, or rather
* AiSaaKaXoig Si yviaaig Sid Trig -riav rrpoKeipeviav et(r/3£|8)jKe Sf lupiaj,
lag OUK S.V iripiag tvaptarriaeitv np rrdvnav dpxirroip'ivi, ti /ii) T^E
Tiav XoyiKiav rrpopdnav tvpiaariag, Kai Trig ''E rb ti tlvai Siapovijs
TToioXvTO tppovr'iSa. Cyril, ibid.
t I Pet. V. 2. _ X Acts XX. 28.
§ 'Ey xtip'iZtrai Tijv rrpoaraa'iav riav dStX^iav. Chrys. in Joh. 21.
15. [p. 598. vol. 8. Paris. 183S,']—Trjv rrpoaraaiav ivtmiTTtiOri rHv
dStXtpuiv. in ver. 21.
II 'ErrtiSdv ydp 'tptXXov rfjg o'lKovp'tvrjg rrjv irriTporrriv dvaSiianBai^
OVK 'iSti avprrtrrXixBaiXoirrbv aXXjyXoiE' »} ydp dv ptydXi] rovrory
o'lKovpivy yiyovt Znp'ia, Ibid, V. 23. [Id. p. 601.]

THE pope's supremacy. io.*)
impossible for him to undergo : how could he in duty be
obliged, how could he in efiect be able to feed so many flocks
of Christian people scattered about in distant regions, through
aU nations under heaven ? — he, poor man, that had so few
helps, that had no officers or dependants, nor wealth to main
tain them, would have been much put to it to feed the sheep
in Britain and in Parthia ; unto infinite distraction of thoughts
such a charge must needs have engaged him.
But for this their great champion hath a fine expedient ;
" St. Peter (saith he) did feed Christ's whole flock, partly by
himself, partly by others ;"* so that it seemeth the other
Apostles were St. Peter's curates, or vicars and deputies : this
indeed were an easy way of feeding ; thus, although he had
slept all his time, he might have fed all the sheep under heaven ;
thus any man as well might have fed them. But this manner
of feeding is, I fear, a later invention, not known so soon in
the Church ; and it might then seem near as absurd to be a
shepherd as it is now (in his own account) to be a justman by
imputation ; that would be a kind of putative pastorage, as
this a putative righteousness. However, the Apostles, I dare
say, did not take themselves to be St. Peter's surrogates, but
challenged to themselves to be accounted "the ministers, the
stewards, the ambassadors of Christ himself ;"'f from whom
immediately they received their orders, in whose name they
acted, to whom they constantly refer their authority, without
taking the least notice of St. Peter, or intimating any depen
dence on him.
It was therefore enough for St. Peter that he had authority
restrained to no place, but might, as he found occasion, preach
the Gospel, convert, confirm, guide Christians every where to
truth and duty ; nor can our Saviour's words be forced to sig
nify more.
In fine, this (together vrith the precedent testimonies) must
uot be interpreted so as to thwart practice and history ; ac
cording to which it appeared, that St. Peter did not exercise
such a power, and therefore our Lord did not intend to confer
such an one upon him.
IV. Farther in confirmation of their doctrine they do draw
* Respondeo S. Petrum partim per se, partim per aUos universum Do
minicnm gregem ut sibi imperatum erat pavisse. — BeU. de Pont. R. 1. 16.
[p.3.16. n. ]B. vol. 1. PragSB, 1721.]
t 1 Cor. iv. 1. 2 Cor. v. 20. x. 8. Gal. i. 1. Tit. i. 3, &c.

106 A TREATISE OF
forth a whole shoal of testimonies,* containing divers preroga-
fives, as they call them, of St. Peter ; which do, as they sup
pose, imply this primacy ; so very sharp-sighted indeed they
are, that in every remarkable accident befalUng him, in every
action perforraed by him, or to him, or about him, they can
descry some argument, or shrewd insinuation of his pre-emi
nence ; especially being aided by the glosses of some fanciful
expositor. From the change of his narae, 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 bid
ding him to confirm his brethren ; from our Lord's ordering
him to pay the tribute for them both ; from our Lord's first
washing his feet, and his first appearing to him after the re
surrection ; from the prediction of his martyrdom ; from sick
persons being cured by his shadow; from his sentencmg
Ananias and Sapphira to death ; from his preaching to Cornelius;
from its being said that " he passed through all ;"f from his
being prayed for by the Church ; frora 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 arguing; is it not
egregious modesty for such a point to allege such proofs ?
what cause may not be countenanced by such rare fetches?
who would not suspect the weakness of that opinion, which is
fain to use such forces in its maintenance ? In fine, is it,
honest or conscionable dealing so to wrest, or play with the
holy Scripture, pretending to derive thence proofs, where there
is no show of consequence ?
To be even with them, I might assert the primacy to St.
John, and to that purpose might allege his prerogatives (which,
indeed, may seem greater than those of St. Peter), namely, that
he was the beloved disciple, that he leaned on our Lord's
breast, J that St. Peter, not presuming to ask our Lord a queS'
tion desired him to do it, as haring a more special confidence
with our Lord ; that St. John did higher serrice to the
Church and all posterity, by writing not only more epistles, but
also a most dirine Gospel, and a sublime prophecy concerning
the state of t'he Church ;§ that St. John did " outrun Peter,
* P. Leo IX. Ep. 1. — Ad ejusdem primatiis confirmationem, &£¦
BeU. 1. 17. [p. 319. vol. 1. Pragse, 1721.]
t Acts ix. 32. X John xiii. 24.
§ Infinita futurorum mysteria continentem. Hier. — Containing infinite
mysteries of future things.

THE pope's supremacy- 107
and came first to the sepulchre* (in which passage such acute
derisers would find out marvellous significancy), that St. John
was a virgin ; that he did outlive all the Apostles (and thence
was most fit to be universal pastor) ; that St. Jerome com
paring 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) that I may in
brief speech comprehend many things, and shew what priri
lege belongeth to John, — ^yea, virginity in John; by our Lord
a rirgin, his mother the virgin is commended to the virgin
disciple :"-t- thus I might by prerogatives and passages very
notable infer the superiority of St. John to St. Peter, in imita
tion of their reasoning; but I am afraid they would scarce be
at the trouble to answer me seriously, but would think it
enough to say I 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.
1 . That this order is not so strictly observed, as not to
admit sorae exceptions; for St. Paul saith, that "James,
Cephas and John knowing the grace given nnto him" J— so it
is commonly read in the ordinary copies, in the text of ancient
commentators, and in old translations ; and, " Whether Paul,
whether Apollo, whether Cephas," § saith St. Paul again ; and
" As the other Apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and
Cephas;" II and " PhUip (saith St. John) was of Bethsaida,
the city of Andrew and Peter ;"^ and Clemens Alex, in Euse
bius saith, that " the Lord after his resurrection delivered the
specialknowledgeto James the Just, and to John, and to Peter,"*
postponing St. Peter, as perhaps conceiving him to have less

* John XX. 4.
t Petrus Apostolus est, et Johannes Apostolus, maritus et Vu-go ; sed
Petrus Apostolus tantum, Johannes et Apostolus et EvangeUsta, et Pro
pheta, &c. Hier. in Jovin. 1. 14. [vol. 4. Ub. 1. Paris. 1706.]-Et ut
brevi sermone multa comprehendam, doceamque cujus privUegii sit Johan
nes, — imo in Johanne Vu-ginitas ; k Domino Virgine mater Virgo Virgin!
Discipulo commendatur. Hier. ibid. X Gal. ii. 9.
^ 1 Cor. iu. 22. || 1 Cor. ix. 5. f John i. 45.
** 'laKiafSip Tip SiKaiip Kai 'liadvvy Kai Xlerpip perd Triv dvdaraaiv
rrapiStaKt rfjv yvSiaiv b Kvpiog. Euseb. Hist. 2. 1. [p. 33. Oxon. 1845.]

108 A TREATISE OP
of subUrae revelations iraparted 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 I Peter, do appoint"* — so little ambitious or curious of
precedence are they represented.
2. But it being indeed so constant as not to seem casual, I
farther say, that position of names doth not argue difference
of degree, or superiority in power ; any sraall advantage of age,
standing, merit, or wealth serring to ground such precedence,
as coraraon experience doth shew.
3. We formerly did assign other sufficient and probable causes,
why St. Peter had this place. So that this is no cogent reason.
VI. Farther (and this, indeed, is far their most plausible
argumentation), they allege the titles and eulogies given to St.
Peter by the Fathers ; who call him e^ap^o" (the prince),
Kopvipaioi' (the ringleader), Ke(j>aXriv (the head),f rrpoeifiov
(the president), ap-xriybv (the captain), rrporiyopor (the prolo
cutor), rrpuiToardrriv (the foreman), TrpooraVi/v (the warden),
'tKKpiTov tOiv 'ArrooToXtov (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 every
hyperbolical flash or flourish'occurring in theFathersJ (it being
well known, that they in their encomiastic speeches, as orators
are wont, following the heat and gaiety of fancy, do sometimes
overlash), we should have the pattern of their greatest contro-
vertists to warrant us ; 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," &c.§ as Bishop Andrews|| sheweth ; and it is a
common shift of Cardinal Perron, whereof you may see divers
instances alleged by M. Bailee.^
* 'Eyii UavXog Kai iyut TleTpog SiaraaaoptBa. — Const. Apost. lih. 8.
cap. 33. [Concil. Lab. vol. 1. p. 498. Paris. 1671.]
t Chrys. tom. 5. Or. 59. Chrys. in Joh. 21. Cyr. u. Jul. 9. p. (p.
325.) Aug. Ep. 11. 19.
t The truth is, the best arguments of the Papists in other questions are
some flourishes of orators, speaking hyperbolically and heedlessly.
§ Per excessum loqui. Bell, de Miss. 2. 10. miniis proprie. 3. 4. be-
nigna expositione opus habere, de amiss, gr. 4. 12. miniis cautS. de purg.
1. 11. II Tort. Tort. p. 338.
IF DaU. de us. P. lib. l.cap. 6. p. 158. (et p. 314 )

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 109
Which observation is especially applicable to this case ; for
that eloquent men do never more exceed in their indulgence to
fancy, than in the demonstrative kind, in panegyrics, in their
commendations of persons : and I hope they will embrace this
way of reckoning for those expressions of Pope Leo, sounding
so exorbitantly, that St. Peter was by our Lord " assumed
into consortship of his indiridual unity ;" and that " nothing
did pass upon any from God the fountain of good things with
out the participation of Peter.*
2. tWe may observe, that such turgid eulogies of St. Peter
are not found in the more ancient Fathers ; for Clemens Ro
manus, Irenseus, Clemens Alex., Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian,
Firmilian — when they mention St. Peter, do speak more tem
perately and simply, according to the current notions and
traditions of the Church in their time ; using indeed fair terras
of respect, but not such high strains of courtship about hira.
But they are found in the later Fathers, who being men of wit
and eloquence, and afiecting in their discourses to vent those
faculties, did speak more out of their own invention and fancy.
Whence, according to a prudent estimation of things in such
a case, the silence of sparingness of the first sort is of more
consideration on the one hand : and we may rather suppose
those titles do not belong to St. Peter because the first do not
give them, than that they do, because the other are so liberal
in doing it.
Indeed if we consult the testimonies of this kind alleged by
the Romanists, who with their utmost diligence have raked
all ancient writings for them, it is strange that they cannot
find any very ancient ones ; that they can find so few plausible
ones ; that they are fain (to make up the number) to produce
so many, which eridently have no force or pertinency ; being
only commendations of his apostolical office, or of his personal
merits, without relation to others.
3. We say, that all those terms or titles, which they urge,
are ambiguous, and applicable to any sort of primacy, or pre-
eminency ; to that which we admit, no less than to that which
we refuse ; as by instances from good authors, and from
common use might easily be demonstrated ; so that from them
nothing can be inferred advantageous to their cause.
* Hunc enim in consortium individnse unitatis assumptum id quod ipse
erat voluit nominari. P. Leo I. Ep. 89. [Leo Mag. Opera, Epist. De
cret. 89. p. 160. Paris. 1662.] NihUabonorum fonte Deo in quenquam
sine Petri participatione transire. P. Leo de assumpt. sua. Serm. 3. [p. 3.
Paris. 1662.]

110 A TREATISE OF
Cicero calleth Socrates, Prince of the Philosophers; and
Sulpitius, Prince of all Lawyers;* would it not be ridiculous
thence to infer, that Socrates was a sovereign governor of the
philosophers, or Sulpitius of the lawyers? The same great
speaker calleth Pompey prince ofthe city, in all men's judgment;!
doth he mean that he did exercise jurisdiction over the city?
TertuUus calleth St. Paul irpturotrrctrTj)', " a ringleader of the
sect ofthe Nazarenes ;"J and St. Basil calleth Eustathius
Sebastenus, "foreman of the sect ofthe Pneumatomachi;"§ did
TertuUus mean, that St. Paul had universal jurisdiction over
Christians ; or St. Basil, that Eustathius was sovereign of those
heretics ?
So neither did Prince of the Apostles, 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 under
standing them we should observe that rule of Tertullian. ||
4. Accordingly the Fathers sometimes do explain those i
eulogies signifying them to import the special gifts and rirtues
of St. Peter, wherein he did excel ; so Eusebius calleth St. I
Peter 'Uhe most excellent and great Apostle, who for his
virtue was prolocutor of the rest.)'ir
5. This answer is thoroughly confirmed from hence ; that
even those who give those titles to St. Peter, do yet expressly
affirm other Apostles in power and dignity equal to him.
Who doth give higher elogies to him than St. Chrysostom?
yet doth he assert all the Apostles to be supreme, and equal in
dignity ; and particularly he doth often affirm St. Paul to
be laoTiixov, equal in honour to St. Peter, as we before shewed.
• Cic. de Nat. D. lib. 2. Cic. de clar. Orat.
t Quem omnium judicio longe principem esse civitatis videbat.— Prind-
pem orbis terrae virum. — Cic. pro domo sua. t Acts xxiv. 5.
§ Upia-oaraTrig Trig riav rrvtvpoToudxiav a'lpiatiag. Bas. Ep. U,
[Ep. 263. p. 588. vol. 3. Paris. 1839.]
II Malo te ad sensum rei quam ad sonum vocabuU exerceas. Tert. ad.
Prax. cap. 3. I had rather you would apply yourself to the sense of the
thing, than to the sound of the word.
Ou ydp ai Xe^eig ryv fvaiv rrapaipovvrai' dXXd paXXov i? ^"i«£
Tdg Xk^tig tig iavTTjv 'iXKovaa ptTal3dXXti., Athan. Orat. 3. adv. Arr.
(p. 373.) — For words do not take away the nature of things, but the na
ture rather changes the words, and draws them to itself.
IT Eus. Hist. 2. 14. [p. 46. Oxon. 1845.]

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. Ill
The like we declared of St. Jerome, St. Cyril, &c. And as
for St. Cyprian, who did allow a primacy to St. Peter, nothing
can be more erident than that he took the other Apostles to
be " equal to him in power and honour."
The like we may conceive of St. Augustine, who having care
fully perused those writings of St. C3rprian, and frequently
alleging them, doth never contradict that his sentiment.
Even Pope Gregory hiraself acknowledgeth St. Peter not
to have been properly the head, but only " the first member
of the universal Church, aU being members of the Church
under one head."*
6. If Pope Leo I. or any other ancient Pope, do seem to
mean farther, we may reasonably except against their opinion,
as being singular, and proceeding from partial affection to
their see ; such affection haring 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 vrith the like titles, equalling those of
St. Peter, and not well consistent vrith them, according to that
rigour of sense, which our adversaries affia to the commenda
tions of St. Peter.
The epistle of Clemens Rom . to St. Jamegf (an apocryphal but
ancient writing) caUeth St. James, our Lord's brother, " The
Bishop of Bishops;" the Clementine Recognitions call him, "the
Prince of Bishops ;" Rufinus in his translation of Eusebius,
" the Bishop of the Apostles ;" J St. Chrysostom saith of him,
" that he did preside over all the Jewish beUevers ;"§ Hesy-
chius Presbyter of Jerusalem, caUeth him|| " the chief Captain
of the New Jerusalem, the Captain of Priests, the Prince of
the Apostles, top among ihe heads," &c.
The same Hesychius calleth St. Andrew, " the first-bom of
* Certe Petrus Apostolus primum membrum S. et universalis Ecclesiae —
sub uno capite omnes membra sunt Ecclesise. Greg. 1. Epist. 4. 38.
t KXij/tjjE 'laKibPqi  imaKorriav imaKorrip. — Jacobum Episcoporum
Principem Sacerdotum Princeps orabat. Clem. Rec. 1. 68.^ — Apostolo
rum Episcopus. Ruf. Euseb. 2. 1.
} It is Ukely that Rufinus did call him so by mistaking that in the
ApostoUcal Constitutions : "Yw'.p tov imaKorrov iipSiv 'laKia^ov. Apost.
Const. 8. 10.
§ Tiav t? 'lovSaiiav martvadvnav rrpotiarriKti irdvnav. Chrys. tom. 5.
Or. 59.
II Toj' Trjg viag 'ItpovaaX-qp dpxiarpdrriyov, nav itpiiav r)yripova,
nav ' ArroaToXiav t'ov e^apxov, rbv iv KepaXaXg Kopv^ijv, &c. Hesych
Presb. apud Phot. Cod. 275. [p. 1525.]

112 A TREATISE OP
the Apostolical choir, the first settled pillar of the Church, the
Peter before Peter, the foundation of the foundation, the first-
fruits ofthe beginning,"* &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,"-j- &c.
But as occasion of speaking about St. Paul was raore fre
quent, so the eulogies of hira are raore copious, J and indeed so
high as not to yield to those of St. Peter.
" He was (saith Chrysostom) the ringleader and guardian of
the choir of all the saints." §
" He was the tongue, the teacher, the Apostle of the world,
He had the whole world put into his hands, and took care thereof,
and had committed to him all men dwelling upon earth." ||
" He was the light ofthe Churches, the foundation of faith,
the pillar and ground of truth."
" He had the patronage of the world committed into his
hands."^ " He was better than all raen, greater than the Apostles,
and surpassing thera all."**
* '0 TOV xopov nav ' ArroaroXiav rrpiaroTOKog, b rrpiaTorrayrjg TrJQ k-
KXi]aiag arvXog, 6 rrpb Uerpov JltTpog, b toU dtpeXiov depiXiog, o riji
"PXiJE o-rrapxri. — Hesych. apud Phot. Cod. 269.
t 'O arvXog riav Kard rijv oiKovpivriv iKKXrjatiav, b rdg kXeTc ixitiv
Tiav ovpaviav, &c. Chrys. in Joh. 1. 1. [p. 2. vol. 8. Paris. 1836.]
X [To see the extravagant eulogies pronounced on St. Paul by Chrysos. '
tom, which no doubt shew that in the eloquent Father's judgment he had
no superior among the Apostles, the reader may peruse Chrysostom'j
seven homiUes, De Laudibus Pauli, vol. 2. Paris. 1834.]
§ 'O nav dy'iiav %opoS KopvfaXog, Kai rrpoardrrig. Chrys. in Rom.
16. 24. [p. 834. vol. 9. Paris. 1837.] — "O rrjg okovpevrig 'ATroirroXos.
Chrys. in 1 Cor. 9. 2. [p. 211. vol. 10. Paris. 1837.]
^" [I 'H yXtiJrra Trjg oiKovpevrjg, to ipiSg riav iKKXriaiiov, b ^ipeXiogrrjg
rriartiag, b arvXog Kai iSpa'itapa Trie dXriBeiag. — Trjv oiKOvpevriv liira-
aav tyKtxtipiap'tvog. — He bad the whole habitable world committed
to his charge. — T^f oiKovpkvrig SiSdaKaXog tav rovg rijv yriv o'lKOVV-
rag lirravTag irriTparrtig. — He was the teacher of the world, and had
aU the inhabitants of the earth committed to his trust.
II Trjv Trig o'lKovptvqg rrpoaraaiav iyKtxtipiap'tvog. in Jud. Or. 6.
TjJE OiKovpivrig Tijv rrpoaraa'iav imSi^aaBat. in 1 Cor. Or. 22.— Oi
Ttjv oiKovpkvrjv lirraaav tig x^Xpag avrov iptpiav tBrjKtv b Sitog', tom. 7.
p. 2. Did not God put into his hands the whole world. — '0 rrdariQ oik""-
pivrig Kpariiaag in 2. Tim. 2. 1. [p. 731. vol. 11. Paris. 1838.] He
had the charge of the whole world.
** nivTiav dvBpiarruiv Kptirnav. de Sacerd. 4. Tie ovv aTrai/roii' ni'-
Bpiarruiv dptiviav ; rig Si 'irtpog, dXX' f/ b aKr)vorroidg 'tKtXvog, b r^goi-
Kovpivrjg SiSdaKaXog  ft to'ivvv ptiZova nav ' AnoarbXiav Xap^ava
aTtipavov, nav Si ' ArroaroXiav 'iaog ovStig ykyovtv, oiirOE Si kclkhvu'v

THE POPES SUPREMACY. 113
"Nothing was more bright, nothing more illustrious than
he."* " None was greater than he, yea, none equal to him."f
Pope Gregory I. saith of St. Paul, that he "was made head
of the nations, because he obtained the principate of the whole
Church."t These characters of St. Paul I leave them to interpret and
reconcile with those of St, Peter.
8. That the Fathers by calUng St. Peter prince, chieftain,
&c. of the Apostles, do not mean authority over them, may be
argued from their joining St. Paul vrith him in the same appella
tions, who yet surely could have no jurisdiction over them, and
having any would destroy the pretended ecclesiastical monarchy.
St. CyrU caUeth them together " patrons or presidents of
the Chnrch." §
St. Augustine (or St. Ambrose or Maximus) caUeth them
" Princes of the Churches." ||
The Popes Agatho and Adrian (ui their General Synods)
call them " the rmg-leading Apostles."^
The Popes Nicholas I. and Gregory VII. &c. call them
" Princes ofthe Apostles."**
ptiZiav, tvSriXov b7t r^g dviardna drroXavaeTai nprjg Kai rrpoeSpiag.
Tom. 5. Orat. 33. — ^Who then was better than aU 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 tho
Apostles, and yet he greater than they, it is manifest that he shaU enjoy
the highest honour and pre-eminence.
* IlavXov XaurrpoTtpov ovS'ev fjv, ovSk rrepupav'earepov. Tom. 5.
Or. 47.
t OvSeig Sk tKtivov ptiZiav, AXX' ovSe iaog iari. Tom. 6. Or. 9. Ou-
St'ig navXov Iaog rjv. 2 Tim. 3. 15. [p. 767. vol. 11. Paris. 1838.]—
'O rrdvaoipog, 6 tOiv tKKXriaiiav apiarog dpxir'tKnav. Theod. Ep. 146. —
The most vrise, and best architect or chief buUder of the churches. —
0 paKdgtog 'ArroaroXog, b nav rrarepiav -irarrip. Just. M. resp. ad
Orthod. Qu. 119.— The blessed Apostle, the Father ofthe Fathers.
X Caput effectus est Nationum, quia obtinuit totius Ecclesiae principa
tum. Greg. M. in 1 Reg. Ub. 4. Videsis. — Paulus Apostolorum Princeps.
Epist Spalat. in Lat. Syn. sub P. Jul. II. Sess. 1. p. 25.
§ Usrpog Kai IlaSXoE, ot Trig tKKXrja'iag irpoanarai. CyriU. Cat. 6.
[cap. 15. p. 96. Paris. 1720.]
II Ecclesiarum Principes. Aug. de Sanct. 27. [pp. 1758 — 1791. vol. 5.
Pai-is. 1837.]
If Kopv^aiot 'ArroaroXiav. P. Agatho. in 6 Syn. Act. 4. p. 35. P.
Adrian, in 7 Syn. Act. 2. p. 554.— [Agathonis Epist. ad Const. Lab. vol
6. ConcU. Constant. 3. Act. 4. p. 632. Paris. 1671. et Adrian. Cone. Nie.
2. Act. 2. Lab. vol. 7. p. 101. Ed. ut supra.]
** Nicol. I. Ep, 7. Plat, in Greg. VII. &c. [Agite igitur Apostolorum
sanctissimi principes. Plat, in Greg. VII. p. 178. Colon. 1593.]
VOL. I. 1

114 A TREATISE OF
St Ambrose, or St. Augustine, or St. MaxirausTaur. (choose
you which), doth thus speak of them : " Blessed Peter and
Paul are most eminent among all the Apostles, excelling the
rest by a kind of peculiar prerogative : but whether of these
two be preferred before the other, is uncertain, for I count
them to be equal in merit, because they are equal in suffer
ing, &c."*
To all this discourse I shall only add, that if any of the
Apostles or apostolical men raight claim a presidency or au
thoritative headship over the rest, St. James seemeth to have
the best title thereto: for " Jerusalem was the mother of all
Churches,"f the fountain ofthe Christian law and doctrine, the
see of our Lord himself, the chief pastor. J
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 special manner our Lord's
vicar or successor. For " He (saith Epiphanius) did first
receive the episcopal chair, and to him our Lord first did
entrust his own throne upon earth." |1
He accordingly did first exercise the authority of presiding
and moderating in the first ecclesiastical Synod, as St. Chiy-
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 conform ; for it
is said there, that " before certain came from James he did eat
with the Gentiles, but when they were come, he withdrew."**
* Beati Petrus et Paulus eminent inter Universes Apostolos, et peci.
liari qutidam praerogativa prseceUunt ; verum inter ipsos quis cui prsepo.
natur incertum est, puto enim illos aequales esse meritis, quia sequales sunt
passione, &c. Ambr. Serm. 66. Aug.de Sanct. 27. Max. Taur. Serm. 54.
t Hse voces Ecclesiae, ex qua habuit omnis Ecclesia initium. Iren. 3.
12. — These are the words of the Church, from whence every Church had
its beginning.
X Is. ii. 3. Luke xiv. 47. — Ecclesia in Hierusalem fundata totius Orbis
Ecclesias seminavit. Hieron. in Is. 2. — The Church founded in Jerusalem
was the seminary of the Churches throughout the whole world. — Theod. 5.
9. Vid. Tert. de Proescr. cap. 20.
§ "EjTttra w^Bri 'laKiafStp, ipoi SoKtX np dStXipip avrov- aiiTbtyug
avrov Xkyerai KtxtiporovriKtvai, Kai irriaKorrov iv 'ItpoaoXvpoi^ rrt-
TToi^Ktvai rrpiaTov. Chrys. in 1 Cor. Or. 11. [vide p. 90. vol. 7. Paris. 1836.]
II 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.
— XlpHiTog o'iiTog tiXrift rriv KaB'tSpav rqg imaKorrrig, ip rrtrrinnva
Kvpiog rbv Srpbvov avToiJ irri Trig y^E rrptanp. Epiph. hser. 78.
11 Gal. ii. 9. •• Gal.ii. 12.

THE POPES SUPREMACY. 115
Hence in the ApostoUcal Constitutions, in the prayer pre
scribed for the Church, and for aU 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 pray for our Bishop James with all his parishes ;
let us pray for our Bishop Clemens and all his parishes ; let us
pray for Evodius and all his parishes."*
Hereto consenteth the tradition of those ancient writers
aforecited, who call St. James, " the Bishop of Bishops, the
Bishop of the Apostles," &c.
III. I proceed to examine the next supposition of the Church
monarchists, which is, that St. Peter's primacy, with its
rights and prerogatives, was not personal, but derivable to
successors ; against which succession I do assert, that ad
mitting a primacy of St. Peter, of what kind or to what purpose
soever, we yet have reason to deem it merely personal, and
not (according to its grounds, and its design) communicable
to any successors, nor indeed in effect conveyed to any such.
It is a rule in the canon law, that " a personal pririlege doth
follow the person, and is extinguished with the person ;"f
and such we affirm that of St. Peter : for
1 . His primacy was grounded upon personal acts (such as
his cheerful foUowing of Christ, his faithful confessing of
Christ, his resolute adherence to Christ, his embracing special
revelations from God), or npon personal graces (his great
faith, his special love to our Lord, his singular zeal for Christ's
serrice), or npon personal gifts and endowments (his courage,
resolution, actirity, forwardness in apprehension, and in speech),
the which advantages are not transient, and consequently a
pre-eminency built on them is not in its nature such.
2. AU the pretence of primacy granted 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 accompUshed in St. Peter's personal actings,
which therefore it is unreasonable to extend farther. J
* 'Yirlp rrdarig imaKorrrig Trig "'ro -rov ovpavbv riav bpBoTopovvnav
rov Xoyov Trig irrjg dXriBtiag SeriBtafiev' Kai vrrip tov imaKorrov
Ti/jiiav 'laKia^ov, Kai Twv rrapouciiav avrov StriBtapiev vrrip riav ima-
Korrov iipmv KXrjptvrog, &c. Const. Ap. 8. 10.
t PrivUegium personate personam sequitur, et cum persona extinguitur.
Reg. Juris, 7. in Sexto. { Matth. xvi. 17. John xxi. 15, 16, 17.
I 2

116 A TREATISE OF
Our Lord promised to Simon son of Jonas, to build his
Church on him ; accordingly in eminent manner the Church
was founded upon his ministry, or by his first preaching, testi
mony, performances.*
Our Lord promised to give him the keys of the heavenly
kingdom ; this power St. Peter signally did execute in con
verting Christians, and receiving them by baptism into the
Church, by conferring the Holy Ghost, and the Uke adminis
trations. Our Lord charged Simon son of Jonas to feed his sheep ;f
this he performed by preaching, writing, guiding and governing
Christians, as he found opportunity ; wherefore if any thmg
was couched under those promises or orders, singularly perti
nent to St. Peter; for the same reason that they were singular,
they were personal : for.
These things being, in a conspicuous manner accomphshed
in St. Peter's person, the sense of those words is exhausted;
there may not, with any probability, there cannot with any
assurance be any raore grounded on them ; whatever more is
inferred, must be by precarious assumption ; and justly we
may cast at those who shall infer it that expostulation of Ter
tullian, " What art thou, who dost overturn and change the
manifest intention of our Lord, personally conferring this on
Peter ?"$
3. Particularly the grand promise to St. Peter of founding
the Church on him cannot reach beyond his person ; because
there can be no other foundations of a society than such
as are first laid ; the successors of those, who first didj
erect a society, and establish it, are themselves but super
structures. 4. The Apostolical ofSce as such was personal and tempo
rary ; and therefore according to its nature and design not
successive or communicable to others in perpetual descendence
from them.
It was, as such, in all respects extraordinary, conferred
in a special manner, designed for special purposes, dis
charged by special aids, endowed with special pririleges, as was
needful for the propagation of Christianity, and foundmg of
Churches. * Matth. xvi. 17. t John xxi. 15.
X Quails ea evertens atque commutaus manifestam Domini intentionem
personaliter hoc Petro couferentem ? TertuU. de pud. 21.

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 117
To that oflfice it was requisite, that the person should have
an immediate designation and commission from God ; such as
St. Paul so often doth insist upon for asserting his title to the
office : " Paul an Apostle, not from men, or by man" — " 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 imme
diately as the twelve, or by erident consequence as St. Paul ;
thus St. Peter impUed, at the choice of Matthias, " Wherefore
of those men which have companied with us — must one be
ordained to be a vritness vrith us of the resurrection ;" and, "Am
I not (saith St. Paul) an Apostle, have I not seen the Lord ?"J
According to that of Ananias, "The God of our Fathers hath
chosen thee that thou shouldest know his vrill, and see that
Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth ; for thou
shalt bear witness unto aU 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 aU patience (or perseveringly)
in signs and wonders, and mighty deeds. 1|
It was also in St. Chrysostom's opinion, proper to an
Apostle, that he shonld be able, according to his discretion, in
a certain and conspicuous manner to impart spiritual gifts ;
as St. Peter and St. John did at Samaria ; which to do, ac
cording to that Father, was " the peculiar gift and pririlege of
the Apostles."l[
It was also a privilege of an Apostle, by virtue of his com
mission from Christ, " to instruct all nations" in the doctrine
and law of Christ : he had right and warrant to exercise his func
tion every where ; " his charge was universal and indefinite ;
* Gal. i. 1. oil Sl dvBpiarriav, iSiov riav 'ArroaroXiav. Chrys. Ibid.
[p. 782. vol. 10. Paris. 1837.]
t Acts i. 21. X 1 Cor. ix. I. xv. 8. § Acts xxu. 14.
II 2 Cor. xu. 12. Rom. xv. 18.
% TovTO ydp rb Siapov poviav Tiav SiaSeKa — rovro ydp riv nav
'ArroaroXiav i^aiptrov. Chrysost. in Act. 8. 18. [p. 154. vol. 9. Paris.
1837.] De solis Apostolis legitur, quorum vicem tenent Episcopi, quod
per mands impositionem Spiritum S. 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.

118 A TREATISE OP
the whole world was his province ;"* he was not affixed to one
place, nor could be excluded from any ; he was (as St. Cyril
calleth him) " an oecumenical judge, and an instructor of all
the sub-celestial world. "f
Apostles also did govern in an absolute manner, accordmg
to discretion, as being guided by infalUble assistance, to the
which they might upon occasion appeal, and affirm, " It 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 rirtue of the same
Dirine assistance, "according to the authority which the
Lord had given them for ediBcation ;" as we see practised by
St. Paul.
In fine, the ' ' Apostleship was (as St. Chrysostom telleth
us) a business fraught vrith ten thousand good things ; both
greater than all pririleges of grace, and comprehensive of
them."§ Now such an office, consisting of so many extraordinary
privileges and miraculous powers, which were requisite for the
foundation of the Church, and the diffusion of Christianity,
against the manifold difficulties and disadvantages, which ;t
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
hiraself. Neither did the Apostles pretend to communicate it, they
did indeed appoint standing pastors and teachers in each
Church ; they did assume fellow-labourers or assistants in the
work of preaching and governance, but they did not constitute
Apostles equal to themselves in authority, privileges, or gifts.
For " who knoweth not (saith St. Augustine) that principate of
Apostleship to be preferred before any episcopacy ?" || and "the
* 'ErretS^ iptXXov rrjg oiKovp'evrjg rrjv 'tmrporr^v kmSe^amai,—
Chrys. iu Joh. 21. [p. 601. vol. 8. Paris. 1836.]
+ Kptrai oiKoii/nEX/tKoi,Kai Trjg vip' -r/Xiip KaBriyrjTai. Cyrill. yXa^. m
Gen. 7. _ X Acts xv. 28. _
^ Trjv drroaroXqv, rrpaypa pvpiiov dyaBiav y'epov, tSiv jjapnT/tarwf
drrdvnav Kai peXZov, Kai rrtpitKTiKov. Chrys. in Rom. 1. Or. l.tom. 8.
p. 114. [p. 467. vol. 9. Paris. 1837.]
II Quis nescit iUum Apostolatfls principatum cuilibet Episcopatui pri-

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 119
bishops (saith Bellarmine) have no part of the true apostoli
cal authority."*
Wherefore, St. Peter, who had no other office mentioned in
Scripture, or known to antiquity, beside that of an Apostle,
could not have properly aud adequately any successor to his
office, but it naturally did expire with his person, as did that
of the other Apostles.
5. Accordingly, whereas the other Apostles, as such, had no
successors, the apostolical office not being propagated; the
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 pririleges 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 Honorius as sound in his
private judgment ? why is not every Pope inspired ? why is
not every papal epistle to be reputed canonical ? why are not
all Popes endowed vrith power of doing miracles ? why doth
not the Pope by a sermon convert thousands ? (why, indeed,
do Popes never preach) why doth not he cure men by his
shadow (he is, say they, himself his shadow) : what ground is
there of distinguishing the pririleges, so that he shall have
sorae, and 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 assail that objection we
may consider that whereas the apostolical office virtually did
contain the functions of teaching and ruUng God's people,
the which for preservation of Christian doctrine and edifica
tion of the Church, were requisite to be continued perpetually
in ordinary standing offices, these indeed were derived frora the
Apostles; but not properly in way of succession, as by univocal
propagation, but by ordination, imparting all the power need
ful for such offices : which therefore were exercised by persons
during the Apostles' lives concurrently, or in subordination to
them ; even as a dictator of Rome might create inferior magis
trates, who derived from him, but not as his successors ; for
ferendum? Aug. de Bapt. c. Don. 2. 1. [vol.9, p. 97. Paris. 1694.]
Episcopi nuUam habent partem verae ApostoUcse auctoritatis. Bell. 4. 25.
[p. 497. n. 41. vol. 1. Pragffi, 1721.]
• The Apostles themselves do make the Apostolate a distinct office from
pastors and teachers, which are the standing offices in the Church. Eph. iv.
11. 1 Cor. xii. 28

120 A TREATISE OF
(as Bellarmine himself telleth us) " there can be no proper
succession but in repect of one preceding, but Apostles and
Bishops were together in the Church."*
(The Fathers therefore so in a large sense caU aU bishops
successors of the Apostles, not meaning that any one of them
did succeed into the whole apostoUcal office, but that each did
receive his power from some one (immediately or mediately)
whom some Apostle did constitute bishop, vesting him with
authority to feed the particular flock committed to him in way
of ordinary charge ;) according to the sayings of that aposto
lical person, Clemens Rom. " The Apostles preaching m
regions and cities did constitute their first converts, haring
approved them by the Spirit, for bishops and deacons of those
who should afterwards beUeve; and having constituted the
foresaid (bishops and deacons), they withal gave them further
charge, that if they should die, other approved men succes
sively should receive their office :"f thus did the bishops
supply the room of the Apostles, each in guiding his particu
lar charge, all of them together by mutual aid conspiring to
govern the whole body ofthe Church.
8. In which regard it may be said that not one single
bishop, but all bishops together through the whole Church do
succeed St. Peter, or any other Apostle ; so that all of them
in union together have an universal sovereign authority, com
mensurate to an Apostle.
9.. This is the notion, which St. Cyprian doth so much in
sist upon, affirming that the bishops do succeed St. Peter, and
the other Apostles, "by ricarious ordination;" that "the
bishops are Apostles ;" that there is but " one chair by the
Lord's word buHt upon one Peter; one undirided bishopric,
diffused in the peaceful numerosity of many bishops, whereof
each bishop doth hold his share ; one fiock whom the Apostles
by unanimous agreement did feed, and which afterward the
* Non succeditur proprie nisi praecedenti, at simul fiierunt in Ecclesia
ApostoU et Episcopi.— BeU. de Pont. R. 4. 25. [p. 497. vol. 1. Pragse, 1721.]
t Kara x<ipaE Kai rroXtig Kripvaaovreg KaBiaravov rag arrapxaS
avTiav, SoKipdaavTtg np rrvevpan, tig imaKorrovg Kai StaKOvovg riav
ptXXovnav maTt-utiv. Clem, ad Corinth. 1. p. 54. [p. 112. Patrum
ApostoUcorum Opera, Tubingae, 1847.]— KoriffDjtraj' roifi rrpotipripi-
yovg, Kai ptra^v 'tmvop-fiv StSiaKaaiv, 'orriag idv K0ipri9iaaiv,SialHmirai
tTtpoi StSoKipaap'tvoi dvSptg Tqv XeiTOVpytdv airiav. Ibid. p. 57.
[Id. p. 116.] — Singulis pastoribus portio gregis adscripts est, quam regat
unusquisque et gubemet.— Cypr. Ep. 55. [Ep. 59. sect. 20. p. 144. Leip-
site, 1838.]

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 121
bishops do feed ; having a portion thereof allotted to each,
which he should govern."*
So the Synod of Carthage with St. Cyprian.f
So also St. Chrysostom saith, that "the sheep of Christ
were committed by him to Peter and to those after him,"J
that is, in his raeaning, to all bishops.
10. Such, and no other power St. Peter might devolve on
any bishop ordained by him in any Church, which he did con
stitute or inspect ; as in that of Antioch, of Alexandria, of
Babylon, of Rome.
The Uke did the other Apostles communicate, who had the
same power with St. Peter in founding and settling Churches j
whose successors of this kind were equal to those of the same
kind, whom St. Peter did constitute; enjoying in their several
precincts an equal part of the apostolical power ; as St. Cy
prian often doth assert. §
11. It is in consequence observable, that in those Churches,
whereof the Apostles themselves were never accounted bishops,
yet the bishops are caUed successors of the Apostles ; which
\cannot othervrise be understood, than according to the sense
which we have proposed ; that is, because they succeeded those
who were constituted by the Apostles ; according to those say-
pgs of Irenseus and TertulUan : " We can number those, who
'were instituted bishops by the Apostles and their successors ;
and, all the Churches do shew those, whom being by the
• Praepositos, qui Apostolis vicarict ordinatione succedunt. — Ep, 69.
[Ep. 66. p. 176. Lipsiae, 1838.] 42. 75.— Apostolos, id est, Episcopos et
praepositos Dominus elegit. Ep. 65. [Ep. 3. p. 5. Lipsiae, 1838.] — Ca
thedra una super Petrum Domini voce fundata. Ep. 40. [Idem. Ep. 43.
p. 85.] et Ep. 73. et de unit. Eccl. — Episcopatus unus, Episcoporum
multorum concordi numerositate difiiisus. Ep. 52. [Ep. 55. p. 116.
lipsiae, 1838.] — Episcopatus unus, cujus a singulis in soUdum pars tenetur.
De unit. Eccl, [p. 120. Lipsiae, 1838.] — Et pastores sunt omnes, sed grex
unus ostenditur, qru ab ApostoUs omnibus unanimi consensione pascatur.
De unit. Eccl. [p. 119. Lipsiae, 1838.] — Nam etsi pastores multi sumus,
unum teuuen gregem pascimus, et oves universas, &c. Ep. 67. — For
though we are many pastors, yet vre feed one flock, and aU the sheep, &c.
t Manifesta est sententia Domini nostri Jesu Christi Apostolos suos mit-
tentis, et ipsis soUs potestatem h, patre sibi datam permittentis quibus nos
successimus, e^dem potestate Ecclesiam Domini gubemantes. — The mind
and meaning of our Lord Jesus Christ is manifest in sending his Apostles,
and aUowing the power given him of the Father to them alone, whose suc
cessors we are, governing the Church of God hy the same power.
X Td rrpoliara — d np IliTpip Kai ToXg per iKtXvov ivtxtipiae.
Chrys. de Sacerd. 1. [lib, 2. p. 454. vol. 1. Paris. 1834.]
§ Hier. ad Evagr.

122 A TREATISE OP
Apostles constituted in the episcopal office they have as con-
tinners of the apostolical seed."*
So although St. Peter was never reckoned Bishop of Alex
andria, yet because it is reported that he placed St. Mark there,
the Bishop of Alexandria is said to succeed the Apostles.f
And because St. John did abide at Ephesus, inspecting that
Church, and " appointing bishops there," the bishops of that
see did "refer their origin to him." J
So many bishops did claim from St. Paul.
So St. Cyprian and FirraUian do assert themselves, " suc
cessors of the Apostles," who yet perhaps never were at Car
thage or Csesarea.^
So the Church of Constantinople is often in the acts of the
sixth General Council, called " this great ApostoUc Church,"
being such Churches, as those of whom Tertullian saith, that
" although they do not produce any of the Apostles, or aposto
lical men for their author, yet conspiring in the same faith,
are no less, for the consanguinity of doctrine, reputed apostoli-
cal." II
Yea, hence St. Jerorae doth assert a parity of merit and
dignity sacerdotal to all bishops, because (saith he) " all of
them are successors to the Apostles,"^ having aU a like power
by their ordination conferred on them.
12. Whereas our adversaries do pretend, that indeed the
other Apostles had an extraordinary charge as legates of Christ,
which had no succession, but was extinct in their persons ; but
* Habemus annumerare eos, qui ab Apostolis instituti sunt Episcopi,
et successores eorum usque ad nos. Iren. 3. 3. [Genev. 1570.] — Proinde
utique et caeteree exhibent, quos ab ApostoUs in Episcopatum constitutos
ApostoUci seminis traduces habent. Tert. de Praes. 32.
t TirapTog drrb nav 'ArroaroXiav nriv Tiav avToBi XeiTOVpyiav kXij-
poirat IlpT/toE. Eus. hist. 4. 1. — Primus is the fourth from the Apostles
who was the bishop of that place, or obtained the ministry there.
X "Oirou piv imaKorrovg Karaarriaiav, 'orrov Si 'oXag iKKXriaiag dppo- '
aiav, &c. Clem. Alex, apud Euseb. 3. 23. [p. 82. Oxon. 1845. vel p.
113. V. 5. Cantab. 1720.] Ordo Episcoporum ad originem recensus in
Johannem stabit autorem. Tert. in Marc. 4. 5. Tert. de praescr. 32.
§ Unitatem k Domino et per Apostolos nobis successoribus tradiiam.
Cypr. Ep. 42. [Ep. 45. p. 91. Leipsiae, 1838.]— Adversarii nostri qui
ApostoUs successimus. Firmil. in Cypr. Ep. 75. [Idem. p. 238.]
II — Ab Uiis Ecclesiis, quae Uc6t nuUum ex Apostolis, vel Apostolicis
auctorem suum proferant, ut multo posteriores, quae denique quotidie in-
stituuntur, tamen in eadem iide conspirantes, non miniis Apostolicie de-
putantur, pro consanguinitate doctrinae. Tertul. de Praescr. 32.
H Hier. ad Evagr. [vol. 4. pars 2. Ep. 101. aUas 85. Paris. 1706.]

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 123
that St. Peter had a peculiar charge, as ordinary pastor of the
whole Church which surriveth*.
To this it is enough to rejoin that it is a mere figment, de-
rised for a shift, and affirmed precariously, haring no ground
either in holy Scripture, or in ancient tradition, there being
no such distinction in the sacred or ecclesiastical writings : no
mention occurring there of any office which he did assume, or
which was attributed to him, distinct from that extraordinary
one of an Apostle ; and all the pastoral charge imaginable
being ascribed by the ancients to all the Apostles in regard to
the whole Church, as hath been sufficiently declared.
13. In fine, if any such conveyance of power (of power so
great, so momentous, so mightily concerning the perpetual
state of the Church, and of each person therein) had been
made; it had been (for general direction and satisfaction, for
voiding all doubt and debate about it, for stifling these pre
tended heresies and schisms ) very requisite, that it should have
been expressed in some authentic record, that a particular law
should have been extant concerning it, that all posterity should
be warned to yield the submission grounded thereon.
Indeed a matter of so great consequence to the being and
welfare of the Church could scarce have escaped 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
ofthe new Jerusalem, and. in all the original monuments con
cerning it, there should be such a dead sUence concerning the
succession of its chief magistrate.
Wherefore no such thing appearing we may reasonably con
clude no such thing to have been, and that our adversaries'
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, Augustine, Cyril, Jerome, Theodoret, &c^ ixi
their exposition of the places alleged by the Romanists for the
primacy of St. Peter, should declare that primacy to havfe
*BeU. 4. 25, &c.

124 A TREATISE OF
been derived and settied on St. Peter's successor ; a point of
that moment, if they had been aware of it, they could not but
have touched as a most useful application and direction for duty.
IV. They affirm that St. Peter was Bishop of Rome, con
cerning which assertion we say, that it may with great reason
be denied, and that it cannot anywise be assured, as will appear
by the follovring considerations.
1. St. Peter's being Bishop of Rome would confound the
offices which God made distinct : for " God did appoint first
apostles, then prophets, then pastors and teachers ;"* where
fore St. Peter after he was an Apostle, could not well become
a bishop, it would be such an irregularity, as if a bishop should
be made a deacon.
2. The offices of an Apostle and of a Bishop are not in their
nature well consistent, for the Apostleship is an extraordinary
office, charged with instruction and government of the whole
world ; and calling for an answerable care (" the Apostles being
rulers (as St. Chysostom saith), ordained by God, rulers not
taking several nations and cities, but all of them in common
entrusted vrith the whole world ;")t but episcopacy is an or
dinary 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;"J
now he that hath such a general care, can hardly discharge
such a particular office ; and he that is 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 burthen incum
bent on the meanest of them, the which we may see described
in St. Chrysostom's discourses concerning the priesthood.
Baronius saith of St. Peter, that " 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 estabUsh beUevers ;"§
• ^I Cor. xU. 28. Eph. iv. 11.
t "Apxovreg e'laiv vrrb tov &eov X£'poroj'j)96»'T£C ot 'AjroiTToXof
dpxovTtg oiiK iBvri Kai -rrbXeig Siafopovg Xap^dvovTtg, dXXd rravTte
Koivy Tyv oiKovpevriv ip-maTtvBivTtg. Chrys. tom. 8. p. 115.
X Oi KaBriptvot Kai -rrtpi 'iva Torrov riaxoXripevoi. Chrys. in Eph. 4. 11.
[p. 95. vol. 11. Paris. 1838]
§ Non erat ejus ofiBcii in uno loco consistere, sed quantum homini li-
cuisset universum peragrare orbem, et nondum credentes ad fidem perdu-
cere, credentes verb iu fide penitus stabilire. Baron. Ann. 58. sec, 51-
[p. 536. vol. 1. Antverpiie, 1610.]

THE pope's supremacy. 125
if so, how could he be bishop of Rome, which was an office
inconsistent vrith 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.
4. Wherefore it is not Ukely, that St. Peter, being sensible
of that superior charge belonging to him, which did exact a
more extensive care, would vouchsafe to undertake an inferior
charge. We cannot conceive, that St. Peter did affect the name of
a bishop, as now men do, aUured 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 involring all power, and
enabling him in any particular place to execute all kinds of
ecclesiastical administrations : there was no reason, that an
Apostle (or universal bishop) should become a particular
bishop. 5. Also St. Peter's general charge of converting and in
specting the Jews, dispersed over the world ("his Apostleship,"
as St. Paul calleth it, "ofthe circumcision")* 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 :f he was too skilful a
fisherman to cast his net there, where there were no fish.
6. If we consider St. Peter's Ufe, we may well deem him
incapable of this office ; which he could not conveniently dis
charge : for it, as history doth represent it, and may be col
lected from divers circumstances of it, was very unsettled ; he
went much about the world, and therefore could seldom reside
at Rome. • Gal. n. 8. drroaroXq rrtpiTOprig.
t Acts xviii. 2. Sueton. in Claud. 25. in Tib. 36.

126 a TREATISE OF
Many have argued him to have never been at Rome ; which
opinion I shall not avow, as bearing a more ciril respect to
ancient testimonies and traditions ; although many false and
fabulous relations of that kind having crept into history and
common vogue 55* many doubtful reports having passed con
cerning him ; many notorious forgeries haring 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 anything touching hira, which is grounded only
upon human tradition ; so that the forger of his Epistle to St.
James might well induce him saying, " If while I do yet
survive, men dare to feign such things of me, how much more
will they dare to do so after my decease V'f
But at least the discourse of those men have erinced that it
is hard to assign the time when he was at Rome ; and that he
could never long abide there. For,
The time which old tradition assigneth of his going to
Rome, is rejected by divers learned men, even of the Roman
party.J He was often in other places; sometiraes at Jerusalem,
soraetimes at Antioch, soraetimes at Babylon, sometimes at
Corinth, § sometimes probably at each of those places unto
which he directeth his catholic epistles ; among which Epipha
nius 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
Galatians, that to the Ephesians, that to the Philippians, that
to the Colossians, and the second to Timothy) doth never men
tion him, sending any salutation to hira, or from him.
Particularly St. Peter was not there, when St. Paul men
tioning Tychicns, Onesimus, Aristarchus, Marcus, and Justus,
addeth " these alone ray fellow-workers unto the kingdom of
God, who have been a comfort unto me."^
• Eus. 3. 3.
t Et Si ipov in rrtpiovrog TOiavra ToXpiaaiv Kara-^evSeaQdi, itoaif
ye pdXXov ptr ipi rroitXv ot per ipi ToXp-qaovai ; Petr. ad Jacob.
X Seal, in Euseb. p. 189. Onuph. apud BeU. 2. 6. Vales, in Eus.
2. 16.
§ Acts xi. 2. XV. 7. Gal. i. 18. ii. 9. Gal. u. 11. 1 Pet. v. 13.
ICor.i. 12. Euseb. u. 25. 2 Pet. iii. 2. 1 Pet. i. 1.
II nlrpoE jroXXaKiE Uovrov Kai 'RiBvv'iav irreaKtipaTO, Epiph-
baer. 27. If Coloss. iv. 11.

THE pope's supremacy. 127
He was not there, when St. Paul' said, "At my first defence
no man stood with me, but all men forsook me."*
He was not there immediately before St. Paul's death
(when "the time of his departure was at hand")t when he
telleth Timothy, that " aU the brethren did salute him,"J and
naming divers of them, he omitteth Peter. '
Which things being considered, it is not probable that St.
Peter would assume the episcopal chair of Rome, he being
little capable to reside there, and for that other needful affairs
would have forced him to leave so great a Church destitute of
their pastor.
7. It was needless that he should be bishop, for that by
rirtue of his apostleship (involving all the power of inferior
degrees) he might, whenever he should be at Rome, exercise
episcopal functions and authority. What need a sovereign
prince to be raade a justice of peace ?
8. Had he done so, he raust 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 in
terdicting offences of kin to it (it being I think then not so
known as nominally to be censured), and culpable upon the
same ground ; and by the sayings of Fathers condemning prac
tices approaching to it.§
Even later Synods in more corrupt times, and in the declen
sion of good order, yet did prohibit this practice. ||
* 2 Tim. iv. 16. t 2 Tim. iv. 6. X 2 Tim. iv. 21.
§ Cone. Nie. Can. 16. Cone. Ant. Can. 3. Cone. Sard. Can. 11,, 12.
Cone. TruU. Can. 80. — OXSag dvayvovg rag ypail>dg, r/XtKov iari Srj
iyKXripa KaTaXiprrdvtiv 'ErriaKorrov T-fjv 'EKKXqaiav, Kai dptXtXv riav
ToS 6605 rrotpviiav. — Athan. Apol. 1 . — Having read the Scriptures, you
know how great au offence it is for a bishop to forsake his Church, and to
neglect the flocks of God. — Oportet enim Episcopos curis secularibus ex
pedites curam suorum agere populorum, nee Ecclesiis suis abesse diutiiis.
P. Paschal II. Ep. 22. — For bishops ought to be disentangled from secu
lar cares, and to take charge of their people, and not to be long absent
from their churches.
II Prsecipimus ne conductitiis ministris Ecclesiae committantur, et una-
quaeque Ecclesia. cui facultas suppetit, proprium habeat Sacerdotem.
Cone. Lat. 2. (sub Innoc. II.) Can. 10. [Lab. vol. 10. Cone. Lat. 2. can.
10. p. 1005. Paris. 1671.] — We enjoin that Churches be not com
mitted to hired ministers, but that every Church, that is of ability,
have its proper priest — Ciim igitur Ecclesia vel Ecclesiasticum ministe
rinm committi debuerit, talis ad hoc persona quseratur, quae residere in
loco, et curam ejus per seipsum valet exercere ; quod si aUter fuerit actum,
et qui receperit, quod contra Sanctos Canones accepit, amittat. Cone.
Lat. 3. (sub Alexandro III.) cap. 13. — Therefore when a Church or the

128 A TREATISE OF
Epiphanius therefore did weU infer, that it was needful the
Aposties should constitute bishops resident at Rome : " It was
(saith he) possible that the Apostles Peter and Paul yet sur
viving 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 estabUshing them, so as to con
demn his practice.
10. It was against rule that any bishop should desert one
church and transfer himself to another;t and indeed against
reason, such a relation and endearment being contracted be
tween a bishop and his church, which cannot well be dis
solved. But St. Peter is by ecclesiastical historians reported (and
by Romanists admitted) to have been bishop of Antioch for
seven years together.J
He therefore did ill to relinquish that Church, " that most
ancient and truly apostolic Church of Antioch (as the Constan
tinopolitan Fathers called it), and to place his see at Rome.§
This practice was esteemed bad, and of very mischievous
consequence ; earnestly reproved as heinously criminal by
great Fathers, severely condemned by divers Synods.
Particularly a transmigration from a lesser and poorer to a
greater and more wealthy bishopric (which is the present case)
ecclesiastical ministry be to be committed to any man, let such a person be
found out for this purpose, who can reside upon the place, and discharge
the cure by himself : but if it prove otherwise, then let bim who has re
ceived, lose that which he has taken contrary to the holy canons.
* nX-qv dXXd Kai ovrtag -qSvvaTO in rrtpiovnav Tiav ' ArrouToXbiv,
ipripi St Tiav -rrtpi 'nirpov Kai JlavXov, 'EmaKorrovg dXXovg KaB'wra-
aBai, Std to TOvg 'ArroaroXovg rroXXaKig irri rdg dXXag rrarp'tSag
Trjv rroptiav ariXXtaBai, Sid rb Kqpvypa tov Xpiarov' pq Sivatsdat
Si Trjv Tiav 'Viapaiiav rroXiv dvtv 'EmaKorrov tivai. Epiph. hser. 27.
t Apost. Can. 14.
X Tov peydXov XltTpov ^povov -q ' Avnoxitav ptyaXbrroXig l^fit.
Theodor. Ep. 86 — The great city of the Antiochians hath the throne of
the great St. Peter.
§ Trjv -irpta^vraTqv Kai ovnag ' ArroaroXiKqv 'EKKXqaiav. Theod.
5. 6.

THE POPE S SDPREMACY. 129
was checked by them as rankly savouring of selfish ambition
or avarice.
The Synod of Alexandria (in Athanasius) in its epistle to
all catholic bishops doth say, " that Eusebius by passing from
Berytus to Nicomedia had annuUed his episcopacy, making it
an adultery,"* worse than that which is committed by mar
riage upon divorce : " Eusebius (say they) did not consider the
Apostle's admonition. Art thon bound to a vrife, do not seek to
be loosed ; for if it be said of a woman, how much more of a
church; ofthe same bishopric; to which one being tied, ought
not to seek another, that he may not be found also an adul
terer, according to the holy Scripture V'f 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 Sy
nodical letter, extant in the same apology of Athanasius,
condemning " translations from lesser cities unto greater dio
ceses."! The same practice is forbidden by the Synods of Nice I. of
Chalcedon, of Antioch, of Sardica, of Aries I. &c.§
In the Synod under Mennas, it was laid to the charge of
Anthimus, that haring been Bishop of Trebisond, he had
" adulterously snatched the See of Constantinople, against all
ecclesiastical laws and canons." ||
Yea, great Popes of Rome (little considering how peccant
therein their predecessor Pope Peter was), Pope JuUus and Pope
Damasus did greatly tax this practice ; whereof the latter in his
Synod at Rome did excommunicate all those who should com
mit it.^
* 'AKvpiaaag aiirriv. Athanas. Apol. 2. p. 726.
t Ob avvopiav rb rrapdyyeXpa, StStaai yvvaiKi, pq ZqrtiXvaiv ei Si
67ri yvvaiKbg rb pqrbv, rroaip pdXXov irri 'EKKXqaiag Ib rrjg abrqg
EmaKorrrig, V o avvStBe'ig dXXriv ovk oipeiXti ZqrtXv, 'iva pq Kai poixbg
rrapd rdig dtiaig evpiaKtrai ypatjiaXg. Syn. Alex, apud Athan. p. 727.
X Tdg ptraBkaeig drrb piKpiav rrbXtiav tig peiZovag rrapoiKiag. Ibid.
p. 765.
§ Syn. Nie. Can. 15. Syn. Chalc. Can. 5. Syn. Ant. Can. 21. Syn.
Sard. Can. 1. Syn. Arel. Can. 22. Grat. Caus. 8. qu. 1. cap. 4.
11  qSvvqBq /iot%tKbiE rbv rqaSt Tqg rroXeiag dpxiepariKbv ii^ap.
rraaai Sipovov rrapd -irdvrag Tovg 'EKKXtjaiaariKOvg ^tapovg Kai xavo-
vag. Cone, sub Menu. p. 9.
_ T P. Jul. I. apud Athan. iu Apol. 2. p. 744. — To«e ^i drrb 'EKKXqaiiav
tig trspag 'EKKXqaiag ptTtXBovrag dxpi Toaoiirov drrb Trig qperkpag
Koiviaviag dXXorptoi)£ exopev, dxpi ov rrpbg avrdg irraviXBiaai rdg
rroXeig, iv dig rrpiarov ixeipOTovqBriaav. Theod. 5. 11. — Those that
pass from their own churches to other churches, we esteem so long excom-
VOL. I. K

130 A TREATISE OF
In like manner Pope Leo I.*
These laws were so indispensable, that in respect to them,
Constantine M. who much loved and honoured Eusebius (ac
knowledging him in the common judgment of the world de
serving to be bishop of the whole Church), did not like, that he
should accept the bishopric of Antioch, to which he was in-
rited; and commended his waring it, as an act not only
" consonant to the ecclesiastical canons, but acceptable to God,
and agreeable to apostolical tradition.""!- ^f* Uttle aware was the
good emperor of St. Peter being translated from Antioch to
Rome. In regard to the same law, Gregory Nazianzen (a person of
so great worth, and who had deserved so highly of the Church
at Constantinople), could not be permitted to retain his bishop
ric of that church, to which he had been called from that small
one of Sasiraa : " The Synod (saith Sozoraen), observing the
ancient laws and the ecclesiastical rule, did receive his bishop
ric, from him being willingly offered, nowise regarding the great
merits of the person ;"J the which Synod surely would have
excluded St. Peter from the bishopric of Rome t and it is ob
servable that Pope Damasus did approve and exhort those
Fathers to that proceeding. §
"^e may indeed observe, that Pope Pelagius II. did excuse
the translations of bishops by the exaraple of St. Peter : " For
whoever dareth to say (argueth he) that St. Peter the Prince
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 suie despect^, administra.
tionem loci celebrioris ambierit, et ad majorem se plebem quacunque occa-
sione transtulerit, non soliam a Cathedra quidem pellatur aliena, sed
carebit et propria, &c. P. Leo I. Ep. 84. o. 4. — If any bishop, despising the
meanness of his city, seeks for tbe administration of amore eminent place,
and upon any occasion whatsoever transfers himself to a greater people,
he shall not only be driven out of another's see, but also lose his own, &c.
t Eus. de Vit. Const. 3. 61.
X 'AXX' 'opiag -q avvoSog Kai rovg rrarpiovg vopovg, Kai rrjv kfiXqut-
aariK-qv rd^iv ijivXarTovaa, 6 SiSioKt Trap' tKovTog drreiXqipf, /tijJw
aiStaBtXaa riav tov dvSpbg rrXtoveKTqudnav. Sozom. 7. 7. [Cantab.
1720.] § lUud praeterea commoueo dUectiouem vestram, ne patiamini aliquem
contra statuta majorum nosti'orum de civitate aUa ad aliam transdudi et
deserere plebem sibi commissam, &c. P. Damasi Epist. apud Holsten.
p. 41. et R Marc. 5. 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 com
mitted to his charge, &c.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 131
of the Apostles did not act well, when he changed his see from
Antioch to Rome ?"*
But I think it more advisable to excuse St. Peter from being
author of a practice, judged so irregular, by denying the mat
ter of fact laid to his charge.
II. It was anciently deemed a very irregular thing, " con
trary (saith St. Cyprian) to the ecclesiastical disposition, con-
traiy to the evangeUcal law, contrary to the unity of cathoUc
institution."t A symbol (saith another ancient writer) of dis
sension, and disagreeable to ecclesiastical law;" J which, there
fore, was condemned by the Synod of Nice, by Pope CorneUus,
by Pope Innocent I. and others, that two bishops should pre
side together in one city.§
This was condemned with good reason; for this on the
Church's part would be a kind of spiritual polygamy ; this
would render a church a monster vrith two heads ; this would
destroy the end of episcopacy, which is unity and prevention
of schisms. II
But if St. Peter was Bishop of Rome, this irregularity was
comnritted; for the same authority upon which St. Peter's
episcopacy of Rome is built, doth also reckon St. Paul bishop
ofthe same; the same writers do make both founders and
planters of the Roman Church, and the sarae call both Bishops
of it ; wherefore if episcopacy be taken in a strict and proper
sense, agreeable to this controversy, that rule must needs be
infringed thereby.
Ireneeus saith that "the Roman Church was founded and con
stituted by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul :"^
Dionysius of Corinth caUeth it " the plantation of Peter and
Paul ;"** Epiphanius saith, that " Peter and Paul were first at
* Quis enim unquam audet dicere S. Petrum Apostolorum principem
non bene egisse, quando mutavit sedem de Antiochia in Romam ? Pelag.
II. Ep. 1.
t Contra Ecclesiasticam dispositionem, contra EvangeUcam legem,
contra Institutionis Catholicae unitatem.— Cypr. Ep. 44. (ut et Ep. 46,
52, 55, 58.)
t "0 Sixovoiag a-v pPoXov ian Kai 'EKKXqaiaariKov deapov aXXorpiov.
Soz, 4. 15.
% Syn. Nie. Can. 8. CorneUus apud Euseb. 6. 43. Cyp. Ep. 46.
P. Innocentius, apud Sozom. 8. 26. Opt. I. Cathedra una.
II Inremedium Schismatis. Hier.
IF — k gloriosissimis duobus Apostolis Petro et Paulo Romse fundata, et
constituta Ecclesia. Iren. 3. 3. 3. 1. [Genev. 1570.]
** Tqv drrb nirpov Kot IlauXou ipvreiav. — Dionys. Corinth, apud
Euseb. 2. 25. K -2

132 A TREATISE OP
Rome both Apostles and bishops;"* so Eusebius implieth,
saying that " Pope Alexander derived a succession in the fifth
place from Peter and Paul."f
Wherefore both of them were Roman bishops, or neither of
them : in reason and rule neither of them may be called so in
a strict and proper sense ; but in a larger and improper sense
both might be so styled.
Indeed, that St. Paul was in some acception Bishop of
Rome (that is, had a supreme superintendence, or inspection
ofit), is reasonable to affirm ; because he did for a good time
reside there, and during that residence could not but have the
chief place, could be subject to no other. " He (saith St.
Luke) did abide two whole years in his own hired house, and
received all that entered in unto him, preaching the kingdom
of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord
Jesus Christ with all confidence, no man forbidding him."J
It may be inquired, if St. Peter was Bishop of Rome, how
he did become such ? Did our Lord appoint him such ; did
the Apostles all or any constitute him ; did the people elect
him ; did he put himself into it ? Of none of these things there
is any appearance, nor any probability. Non constat.
V. They affirm, that St. Peter did continue Bishop of Eome
after his translation, and was so at his decease.
Against which assertions we may consider.
1. Ecclesiastical writers do affirm, that St. Peter (either
alone, or together with St. Paul) did constitute other bishops;
wherefore St. Peter was never bishop, or did not contmue
bishop there.
Irenseus saith, that " the Apostles founding and rearing that
church, delivered the episcopal office into the hands of Linus;"§
if so, how did they retain it iu their own hands or persons?
could they give, and have ?
Tertullian saith, that " Peter did ordain Clement." |
In the Apostolical Constitutions (a very ancient book, and

* 'Ev '7iapy ytyovaai rrpStToi U'trpog Kai IlaiiXoE ' Arroarokoi airm
Kai 'ErriaKorroi. Epiph. Hair. 27.
t niprrrqv drrb IHrpou Bai IlavXov Kardyiav StaSoxVV. Eua. 4. 1.
X Acts xxviii. 30.
\ QtpfXiiaaavTtg oiiv Kai oiKoSopqaavrtg ot paKapioi ' ArroaroXoi rrfV
'EKKXqaiav, Aivip rqg 'EmaKorrrig XtiTovpyiav ivtxiipioi"- Iren. apud
Euseb. 5. 6.
II Romanorum Ecclesiae Clementem a Petro ordinatum edit. Tert, de
Priescr. 32.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 133
setting forth the most ancient traditions of the Chnrch), the
Apostles ordering prayers to be made for all bishops, and
naming the principal, do reckon, not St. Peter, but Clement :
" Let us pray for our Bishop James, for our Bishop Clemens,
for our Bishop Evodius," &c.*
These reports are consistent, and reconciled by that which
the ApostoUcal Constitutions afifirm ; that " Linus was first
ordained Bishop of the Roman Church by Paul ; but Clemens
after the death of Linus by Peter iu the second place."t
Others between Linus and Clemens do interpose Cletus or
Anacletus (some taking these for one, others for two persons),
which doth not alter the case. J
Now hence we may infer, both that St. Peter was never
bishop ; and, upon supposition that he was, that he did not
continue so. For,
2. If he had ever been bishop, he conld not weU lay down
his office, or subrogate another, either to preside with him,
or to succeed him ; according to the ancient rules of discipline,
and that which passed for right in the primitivcjChurch.
This practice Pope Innocent I. condemned, as irregular and
never known before his time : " We (saith he in his epistle to
the clergy and people of Constantinople) never have known
these things to have been adventured by our fathers, but rather
to have been hindered ; for that none hath power given him to
ordain another into the place of one living :"§ he did not (it
seems) consider, that St. Peter had used such a power.
Accordingly the Synod of Antioch (to secure the tradition
and practice of the Church, which began by some to be in
fringed) did raake this sanction that " it should not be lawful
* Ex quibus electum magnum plebique probatum,
Hac CathedrS, Petrus qua sederat ipse, locatum
Maxima Roma Linum primum considere jussit.
Tert. in Marc. 3. 9.
t Tq£ Si 'Piapaiiav 'EKKXqaiag A ivog piv b KXavSiag rrpiarog vrrb
Ua-uXov, KXqpqg Se ptrd rbv Aivov Srdvarov vrr' ipov UtTpov Stvrt-
pog KtxtipoTovqTai. Const. Apost. 7. 46.
t Euseb. 3. 4, 13. Aug. Ep. 165. Epiph. Haer. 27. Opt. 2. TertuU.
poem m Marc. 3. 9. Phot. Cod. 112. (p. 290.) N. Eusebius (3.2.) saith,
" that Linus did sit Bishop after the martyrdom of St. Peter, but this is
not so probable, as that which the author of the Constitutions doth aifirm,
which reconcileth tbe dissonancies of writers."
§ Oir^^ ydp rriarroTe rrapd riav rrar'tpiav ravra rtroXpqaBai iyvia-
Kaptv dXXd /tnXXov KtKiaXvaBai, np pqSevl eig rorrov ZUvrog X"po-
Tovtiv dXXov SqSoaOai i^ovaiav. P. Inn. I. apud Soz. 8. 26.

134 A TREATISE OF
for any bishop to constitute another in his room to succeed
him ; although it were at the point of death."*
3. But supposing St. Peter were bishop once, yet by con
stituting Linus, or Clemens in his place, he ceased tq be so, and
divested himself of that place ; for it had been a great irregu
larity for him to continue 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
martyr) there cannot after the first be any second; whoever is
after one, who ought to be sole bishop, he is not now second,
but none."f
Upon this ground, when the Emperor Constantius would
have procured Felix to sit bishop of Rome together with Pope
Liberius, at his return from banishment (after his compliance
with the Arians), the people of Rome would not admit it, ex
claiming " One God, one Christ, one Bishop "X and whereas
Felix soon after that died, the historian remarketh it as "a
special providence of God that Peter's throne might not suffer
infamy ; being governed under two prelates ;"§ he never con
sidered, that St. Peter and St. Paul, St, Peter and Linus had
thus governed that same Church.
Upon this account St. Augustine, being assumed by Valerius
with him to be bishop of Hippo, did afterward discern and
acknowledge his error. ||
In fine, to obriate this practice, so raany canons of Councils
(both general and particular) were made, which we before did
raention. 4. In sura, when St. Peter did ordain others (as story
doth accord in affirming), either he did retain the episcopacy,
and then (beside need, reason, and rule) there were concur-
• 'EmaKbmp pfj i^eXva, dvB' tavrov KaBiaraaBai 'ertpov, KcLv Trepi
T-g TtXtvry tov ^iov Tvyxdvy. Syn. Ant. Can. 23.
t Ciim post primum secundus esse non possit ; quisquis post unum,
qui solus esse debeat,non jam secundus iUe, sed nullus est. Cypr. Ep. 62.
[Ep. 55. p. 108. Leipsise, 1838.]
t Theod. hist. 2. 17.
^ Tavry rrq to'v Qtov SwiKriaavTog iaart rbv Uirpov Spwor /iij
doo^tiv vrrb Svo qyepoaiv 'iQvvoptvov.
II Adhuc in corpore posito beatte memoriae patre et Episcopo meo sene
Valerio Episcopus ordinatus sum, et sedi cum Ulo, quod concilio Niceno
prohibitum fuisse nesciebam, nee ipse sciebat. Aug. Ep. 110.— While
my father aud bishop of blessed memory, old Valerius, was yet Uring, I
was ordained bishop, and held the see with him : which I knew not, nor
did he know, to be forbidden by the CouncU of Nice.

THE pope's SUPllEMACY. 135
rently divers bishops of Rome at one time ; or he did quite
relinquish and finally divorce himself from the office, so that
he did not die Bishop of Rome, the which overturneth the
main ground of the Romish pretence. Or will they say, that
St. Peter, haring laid aside the oflfice for a time, did afterward
before his death resume it ? Then what became of Linus, of
Cletus, of Clemens ?* were they dispossessed of their place, or
deposed from their function ? would St. Peter succeed them
in it? This in BeUarmine's own judgment had been plainly
intolerable.f 5. To avoid all which diflficulties in the case, and perplexities
in story, it is reasonable to understand those of the ancients,
who caU Peter bishop of Rome, and Rome the place, the
chair, the see of Peter, as meaning that he was bishop or
superintendent of that Chnrch, in a large sense ; because he
did found the Church by converting men to the Christian
faith ; because he did erect the chair by ordaining the first
bishops ; because he did in virtue both of his apostolical
office, and his special parental relation to that Church main
tain a particular inspection over it, when he was there : which
notion is not new, for of old Rufinus 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, coidd 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 Uring, vis. that they might take the epis
copal charge, but he fidfUled the office of the apostleship." J
* Ipse sublimavit sedem, in qua etiam quiescere, et praesentem vitam
finire dignatus est. Greg. I. Ep. 6. 37. Innoc. I. Ep. 21. P. Nie. I, Ep.
9. p. 509. Grat. caus. 8. q. 1. cap. 1. — He advanced that see, wherein he
vouchsafed both to set up his rest, and also to end this present life. —
BeU 2. 12. § At verb.
t Petrum Apostolum successisse in Episcopatu Antiocheno alicui ex dis-
oipuUs, quod est plen^ intolerandum. BeU. 2. 6. [p. 345. vol. 1. PragEE,
1728.] X Quidam enim requirunt quo modo, cum Linus et Cletus in urbe Roma
ante Clementem hunc fuerint Episcopi, ipse Clemens ad Jacobum scribens,
sibi dicat k Petro, docendi Cathedram traditam ; cujus rei banc accepimus
esse rationem, quod Linus et Cletus fiierunt quidem ante Clementem
Episcopi in urbe Roma, sed superstite Petro ; videlicet ut UU Episcopatiis
cui'am gererent, ipse verb Apostolatiis impleret officium. Rufiu. in prsef.
ad Clem. Recogn.

136 A TREATISE OP
6. This notion may be confirmed by divers observations.
It is observable that the most ancient writers, firing nearest
the fountains of tradition, do not expressly style St. Peter
Bishop of Rome,* but only say, that he did found that Church,
instituting and ordaining bishops there ; as the other Apostles
did in the churches which they settled ; so that the bishops
there in a large sense did succeed hira, as deriving their power
frora his ordination, and supplying his room in the instruction
and governance of that great Church. Yea their words, if we
well raark them, do exclude the Apostles from the episcopacy.
Which words the later writers (who did not foresee the con
sequence, nor what an exorbitant superstructure would he
raised on that slender bottom, and who were willing to comply
with the Roman Bishops, aifecting by all means to reckon St.
Peter 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. f
7. It is also observable, that in the recensions of the Eoman
bishops, soraetimes the Apostles are reckoned in, sometimes
excluded. So Eusebius calleth Clemens the third bishop of Rome, yet
before him he reckoneth Linus and Anacletus.J
And of Alexander he saith, that " he deduced his succession
in the fifth place from Peter and Paul,"§ that is excluding
the Apostles.
And Hyginus is thus accounted sometiraes the eighth, some
times the ninth bishop of Rome.H
The same difference in reckoning may be observed in other
churches ; for instance, although St. Peter is caUed no less
bishop of Antioch, than of Rome, by the ancients, yet
Eusebius saith, that "Evodius was first bishop of Antioch;"
and another " bids the Antiocheans remember Evodius, who
was first entrusted with the presidency over them by the
Apostles."^ • Const. Apost. 7. 46. Iren. 3. 3. TertuU.
t Fundantes igitnr, et instruentes beati ApostoU Ecclesiam Lino Epis
copatum administrandae Ecclesiae tradiderunt. Iren. 3. 3. — The blessed
Apostles therefore founding and instructing the Church delivered the
episcopal power of ordering and governing the Church to Linus.
X Eus. 3. 4,13, 15. Iren. 3. 3.
^ niprrrqv drrb Ylirpov Kai IlavXov Kardyiav SiaSoxqv. Eus. 4. 1,
II Iren. 1.28. 2.3, 4. Euseb. 4. 10.
1 ' AvTwxiiav iKKXqaiag rrpiarog irriaKorrog EvoSiog Ixpij/uarifft. Eus.
Chron. p. 7. Hist. 3. 22. — Mvqpovtvtri EvoSiov, 'bg rrpHrov inx"-

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 137
Other instances may be seen in the notes of Cotellerius upon
the Apostolical Constitutions, where he maketh this general ob
servation. " It is a usual custom with the Apostles, according to their
power ordinary, or extraordinary, episcopal or apostolical, to
prefix,"* &c. but it was needless to suppose these two powers,
when one was suflScient, it rirtually containing the other.
This is an argument that the ancients were not assured in
opinion, that the Apostles were bishops ; or that they did not
esteem them bishops in the same notion with others.
8. It is observable, that divers churches did take denomina
tion from the Apostles, and were called " apostolical thrones,
or chairs,"t not because the Apostles themselves did sit bishops
there, but because they did exercise their apostleship, in teach
ing ; and in constituting bishops there, who (as TertulUan saith)
" did propagate the apostoUcal seed." J
So was Ephesus esteemed, because St. Paul did found it, and
ordained Timothy there ; and because St. John did govern and
appoint bishops there. §
So was Smyrna accounted, because " Polycarpus was settled
there by the Apostles, or by St. John."||
ptaBq vrrb riav 'ArroaroXiav vperepav rrpoaraaiav. Pseud. Ignat. ad
Ant. — Euseb. counteth Annianus the first bishop of Alexandria. 3. 21.
• Celebris mos est Apostolos pro potestate eorum ordinaria vel extra-
ordinaria, EpiscopaU vel ApostoUca, indicuUs antistitum prsefigere, aut ex
us eximere. CoteU. Not. p. 299.
t ApostoUcte Ecclesiae. Tert. de Praescr. 32.— 'A?rocr7-oXiKoi 5p6voi.
Soz. 1.17.
X 2Tim. i. 6. In Canonicis autem Scripturis Ecclesiarum Catholica-
rum quamplurium auctoritatem sequatur, inter quas sane iUae sunt, quae
ApostoUcas sedes habere, et Epistolas accipere meruenmt. Aug. de doctr.
Ch. 2. 8. [p. 47. vol. 3. Paris. 1836.]— Let him follow the authority of
those many CathoUc Churches in the Canonical Scriptures, among which
surely are those which bad the honour to have apostolical sees, and to
receive Epistles from the Apostles. — Proinde utique et caeterae exhibent
quos ab Apostolis in Episcopatum constitutos ApostoUci seminis traduces
habent. TertuU de prascr. 32.
% Sed et quae est Ephesi Ecclesia k Paulo quidem fundata, Joanne
autem permanente apud eos usque ad Trajani tempora, &c. Iren. 3. 3. —
And also the Church of Ephesus, which was founded by St. Paul, St. John
continuing with them tiU the time of Trajan, &c — Ordo Episcoporum ad
originem recensus in Johannem stabit auctorem. Tertull. in Marc. 4. 5.
— T^E Si 'Eipkaov TtpoBtog piv ii-rrb IlavXov, 'liadvvqg Si vrr' ipov
'Iiadvvov. Apost. Const. 7. 46.
II Ab ApostoUs in ea quae est Smyrnis Ecclesia constitutus Episcopus.
Iren. 3. 3. Smyrnaeorum Ecclesia habeas Polycarpum ab Joanne conlo-

138 A TREATISE OF
So Cyril, bishop of Jerusalem, " had a controversy about
metropoUtical rights with Acacius bishop of Caesarea, as pre
siding in an apostolical see."*
So Alexandria was deemed, because St. Mark was supposed
by the appointment of St. Peter to sit there.
So were Corinth, Thessalonica, Philippi, 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.f
So Constantinople did assume the title of an Apostolical
Church, probably because, according to tradition, St. Andrew
did found that Church, although Pope Leo I. would not allow
it that appellation. J
Upon the same account might Rome at first be called an
Apostolical see ; although afterward the Roman bishops did
rather pretend to that denomination, upon account of St.
Peter being bishop there ; and the like may be said of An
tioch. §
9. It is observable, that the authors of the Apostolical Con
stitutions, reciting the first bishops constituted in several
churches, doth not reckon any of the Apostles ; particularly
not Peter, or Paul, or John.||
10. Again, any Apostle wherever he did reside by rirtue of
his apostoUcal office, without any other designation or assump
tion of a more special power, was qualified to preside there,
exercising a superintendency comprehensive of all episcopal
functions ; so that it was needless that he should take upon
himself the character or style of a bishop.
catum. TertuU. de Praes. 32. Euseb. 3. 36. — Tr;E Kard ^pvpvav 'EkkXii-
aiag rrpbg Tiav avTorrTiav, Kai vrrqptriav tov Kvpiov rrjv 'tmaKorrrjV
iyKexeipiaptvog, Euseb. 3. 36.
* Iltpi pqTporroXiTiKiiiV SiKaiiav Sittpkptro rrpbg 'Akcikiov tov Kat.
aaptiag, lag 'ArroaToXiKoH Spovou r/you^si/OE. Sozom. 4. 25
t TertuU de Prses. 36.
X ' ArroaToXiKov tovtov Sipovov KaraippovtXg. Syn. Chalc. Act. 10.
p. 379. et p. 284. Thou despisest this apostoUcal throne.— 'E^'^rni
rrpiarov irriaKorrov rbv SrtXov S.Tdxw Karaarqaag, iv iKKXqaii^ riv
tKtXat rrpiaTog ovTog irr-qKaTO. Niceph. 2. 39. — Forasmuch as having ap
pointed holy Stachys the first bishop, in the Church which he first settled
there. — Non dedignetur regiam civitatem, quam apostolicam non potest
facere sedem. P. Leo I. Ep. 54. Let him not disdain the royal city,
which he cannot make an apostoUc see.
^ Memento quia apostolicam sedem regis,— Greg. M. Ep. 4. 37.—
Remember you nile an apostolic see.
II Const. Apost. 7. 46.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 139
This (beside the tenor of ancient doctrine) doth appear from
the demeanour of St. John, who never was reckoned Bishop
of Ephesus, nor could be without displacing Timothy, who
by St. Paul was constituted bishop there, or succeeding in his
room : yet he abiding at Ephesus, did there discharge the ofiice
of a metropoUtan, " governing the churches, and in the adja
cent chnrches constituting bishops, there forming whole
churches, otherwise aUotting to the clergy persons designed
by the Spirit."*
Such functions might St. Peter execute in the parts of
Rome or Antioch, without being a bishop, and as the bishops
of Asia did (saith Tertullian) " refer their original to St. John,
so might the bishops of Italy, upon the Uke ground, refer
their original to St. Peter."f
It is observable, that whereas St. Peter is affirmed to have
been Bishop of Antioch seven years before his access to Rome,
that is within the compass of St. Luke's story; yet he passeth
over a matter of so great moment, as St. Jerome observeth X
I cannot grant, that if St. Lnke had thought Peter sove
reign of the Church, and his episcopacy of a place a matter of
such consequence he would have slipped it over, being so ob
vious a thing, and coming in the way of his story.
He, therefore, I conceive was no bishop of Antioch, although
a bishop at Antioch. §
11. If, in objection to some of these discourses, it be alleged,
that St. Jaraes our Lord's near kinsman, although he was an
Apostle, was made bishop of Jerusalem ; and that for the like
reason St. Peter might assume the bishopric of Rome :
* 'Arrb roii dyiov TipoBtov pkxP'- "'''' "''' 'T'<^K07roi 'tykvovTO-
TavTtg iv 'E^kaip xtipoTovqBqaav. Syn. Chal. Act. 11. 2 Tim. 1. 6_
From holy Timothy tiU now there have been seven and twenty bishops
and aU ordained at Ephesus. — Johanne autem permanente apud eos, &c'
Iren. 3. 3.— Toe avroBi SitXrrtv 'EKKXqa'iag  ;-oto« p'lv imaKo
rrovg Karaar-iiaiav oirou Se 'oXag 'EKKXqaiag, dppoaiav 'orrov Si KXqpip
'iva yt rivtx KXqpiaaiav riav vrrb ToU rrvtvparog aqpaivoptviav. Eus.
hist. 3. 23.
t Ordo Episcoporum ad originem recensus in Joannem stabit auctorem.
TertuU. m Marc. 4. 5.
J Ann. Chr. 39. Baron. § 8. Acts ix. 32. Acts xi. 20. Denique
primum Episeopum Antiochense Ecclesiffi Petrum fuisse accepimus, et
Romam exinde translatum, quod Lucas penitus omisit. Hier. in Gal. 2. —
Lastly, 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.— Rex Etruriae, et Rex in Etruria.

140 A TREATISE or
I answer.
1 . It is not certain, that St. James the bishop of Jerusalem
was an Apostle (meaning an Apostle of the primary rank) ;
for Eusebius (the greatest antiquary of the old times) doth
reckon him "one of the seventy disciples."*
So doth the author of the Apostolical Constitutions in di
vers places suppose. f
Hegesippus (that most ancient historian) was of the same
mind, who saith, that '' there were many of this name, and
that this James did undertake the Church with the
Apostles."t Of the same opinion was Epiphanius, who saith that St.
James was the son of Joseph by another wife.§
The whole Greek Church doth suppose the same, keeping
three distinct solemnities for hira, and the two Apostles of the
sarae narae.
Gregory Nyssen, St. Jerome, and divers 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.||
Salraasius (after his confident manner) saith, " it is certain,
that he was not one of the twelve :"^ I raay at least say, it is
not certain that he was, and, consequently, the objection is
grounded on an uncertainty.
2. Granting that St. James was one of the Apostles (as
some of the ancients seem to think, calling him an Apostle ;**
and as divers modern divines conceive, grounding chiefly upon
these words of St. Paul: ''But other 'of the Apostles saw I
none, save James the Lord's brother,"f f and taking Apostles
there in the strictest sense), I answer :
• EiE Si Kai o'vTOg tS>v ipepopkviav ToU aiarfipog pa^qTuiv, dXXd p-rfv
Kai dStXif>iav qv. Eus. 1. 12.
t Apost. Const. 6. 12. 6. 14. 2. 55. 7. 46, &c. 'H/tEtE ot SiaStKaiipa
np '\aKial3ip. 6. 1 2. We the twelve Apostles together with James.
J AiaSkxerai Si rijv iKKXqaiav ptrd riav 'ArroaroXiav 6 dStXif)!)! roil
Kvpiov 'laKiafiog. Euseb. 2. 23.
§ Epiph. Hffir. 78.
II Grot, in Jac. 1. 1. Hamm. dissert; Ignat. 4. 3. Vales, iu Euseb. 1.
12. Blondel. in Epist. Clem, ad Jacob.
IT Certum est non fuisse unum ex duodecim. Wal. Mess. p. 20.
** Hierosolymitanam, quam primus Apostolus Jacobus Episcopatu suo
rexit. Aug. c. Cresc. 2. 37. [p. 674. vol. 9. Paris. 1837.] -The Church
of Jerusalem, which James the Apostle first governed by his episcopal
power. tt Gal. i. 19.

THE pope's supremacy. 141
That the case was peculiar, and there doth appear a special
reason, why one of the Apostles should be designed to make a
constant residence at Jerusalem, and consequently to preside
there like a bishop. For Jerusalem was the metropolis, the
fountain, the centre of the Christian religion, where it had
birth, where was greatest matter and occasion of propagating
the Gospel, most people disposed to embrace it resorting thither,
where the Church was very numerous, consisting as St. Luke
(or St. James in him) doth intimate, " of divers myriads of
beUering Jews ;"* whence it might seem expedient, that a per
son of greatest authority should be fixed there for the confirm
ing and improving that Church, together vrith the propagation
of reUgion among the people, which resorted thither ; the
which might induce the Apostles to settle St. James there,
both for discharging the ofiice of an Apostle, and the supply
ing the room of a bishop there.
Accordingly to him (saith Eusebius) " the episcopal throne
was committed by the Apostles;" or "our Lord (saith Epi
phanius) did entrust him with his own throne."f
But there was no need of fixing an Apostle at other places;
nor doth it appear that any was so fixed ; especiaUy St. Peter
was incapable of such an employment, requiring settlement
and constant attendance, who beside his general apostleship,
had a peculiar apostleship of the dispersed Jews committed to
him ; who therefore was much engaged in travel for propaga
tion of the faith, and edifying his converts everywhere.
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 noticed) St. Jaraes was
called by some ancient writers, " the bishop of bishops, the
prince of bishops," &c. because he was the first bishop, of the
first see, and mother church; the Apostles being excluded from
the comparison.
Upon these considerations we have great reason to refuse the
assertion or scandal cast on St. Peter, that he took on hira to be
bishop of Rome, in a strict sense, as it is understood in this
controversy. V. A farther assertion is this, superstructed by consequence
on the former, that the bishops of Rome (according to God's
institution and by original right derived thence), should have
* Acts xxi. 20.
t ip rrpbg nav drroaroXiav b Trjg 'EmaKorrrjg iyKtxtipiaro Sipovog.
Eus. 2. 23. — ip rrtrriarevKt Kvpiog rbv Sipovov aiToi. Epiph. haer. 78.

142 A TREATISE OP
an universal supremacy and jurisdiction (containing the privi
leges and prerogatives formerly described), over the Christian
Church. This assertion to be very uncertain, yea, to be most false, I
shall by divers considerations erince.
1 . If any of the former suppositions be uncertain, or false,
this assertion, standing on those legs, must partake of those
defects, and answerably be dubious, or false. If either Peter
was not monarch of the Apostles, or if his pririleges were not
successive, or if he were not properly bishop of Rome at his
decease, then farewell the Romish claim ; if any of those
things be dubious, it doth totter ; if any of them prove false,
then down it faileth.
But that each of them is false, hath, I conceive, been suffi
ciently declared ; that all of them are uncertain, hath at least
been raade evident.
The structure, therefore, cannot be firm, which relyeth on
such props.
2. Even admitting all those suppositions, the inference from
them is not assuredly valid. For St. Peter might have an
universal jurisdiction, he might derive it by succession, he
raight be bishop of Rome ; yet no such authority might hence
accrue to the Roman bishop, his successor in that see.
For that universal jurisdiction might be derived into another
channel ; and the bishop of Rome might in other respects be
successor to hira, without being so in this.
As for instance in the Roman Empire, before any rule of
succession was established therein, the emperor was sovereign
governor, and he might die consul of Rome, haring assumed
that place to himself; yet, when he died, the supreme autho
rity did not lapse into the hands of the consul, who succeeded
him, but into the hands ofthe senate, and people : his consular
authority only going to his successor in that office. So might
St. Peter's universal power be transferred unto the ecclesiastical
college of bishops, and of the Church ; his episcopal inferior
authority over the singular -Kapoida or prorince of Rome,
being transmitted to his followers in that chair.
3. That in truth it was thus, and that aU 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 ; affirming the Church to have received from. our
Lord a sovereign power.
"This (saith St. Cyprian) is that one Church, which holdeth

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 143
and possesseth all the power of its Spouse and Lord, in this
we preside; for the honour and unity of this we fight,"*
saith he in his epistle to Jubaianus, wherein he doth impugn
the proceedings of Pope Stephanus : the which sentence St.
Augustine appropriateth to himself, speaking it absolutely,
without citing St. Cyprian.f To this authority of the Church
St. Basil would have all that confess the faith of Christ to sub
mit : " To which end we exceedingly need your assistance,
that they who confess the apostolic faith, would renounce the
schisms which they have derised, and submit themselves
henceforth to the authority of the Church."J
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 administration of ecclesiastical
affairs concerning the pubUc 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 ;|| ac
cording to that of St. Cyprian to Pope Stephanus himself :^
" Therefore, 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 shall attempt to make
heresy, and to tear or waste the fiock 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,
• Hsec est una quae tenet et possidet omnem sponsi sui et Domini
potestatem, in hac praesidemus, pro honore ejus et unitate pugnamus.—
Cypr. Ep. 73. [72.] [Paris. 1836.]
+ Aug. de Bapt. c. Don. 4. 1.
X 'E0' arrtp Kai pdXiOTa Trig rrap' vpiav xpqZoptv fioqBeiag, i'la-rt TOvg
Tqv 'ArroOToXiK-qv bpoXoyovvTag rriaTiv, drrtp irrtvoqaav axiapara
SmXiaavTag, vrroTayrjvai tov Xoirrov T-g avBevTif Trjg 'EKKXqaiag.
Bas. Epist. 69. [Ep. 92. p. 266. vol.3. Paris. 1839.]
§ 1 Tim. ui. 5, 15. Acts xx. 28. Eph. iv. 12.
II CoUegium Sacerdotum. Cypr. Ep. 67. 52. [Ep. 68. p. 188. Leipsia>,
1838.] 'Y-irip rrdaqg 'EmaKorrrjg Trjg vrrb t'ov ovpavbv. Apost. Const.
8. 10.
IT Idcirco enim, frater charissime,copiosum corpus est Sacerdotum, con-
cordiae mutuae glutino atque unitatis vinculo copulatum, ut siquis ex Col-
legio nostro hajresin facere, et gregem Christi lacerare et vastare tenta
verit, subveniant caeteri, et quasi pastores utiles et misericordes oves Domini
in gregem colUgant. Cypr. Ep. 67- [Ep. 66. Paris. 1836 ]
** Cui rei nostrum est consulere, et subvenire, frater charissime, qui
divmam clementiam cogitantes, et gubemandae Ecclesiae Uhram tenentes,
&c. Ibid. [Idem.]

144 A TREATISE OF
who bearing in mind the Divine clemency, and holding the
scales of the Church government," &c.
So even the Roman clergy did acknowledge : "For we ought
aU of us to watch for the body of the whole Church whose
merabers are digested through several prorinces."*
" Like the Trinity, whose power is one and undivided, there
is one priesthood among divers bishops."f
So in the Apostolical Constitutions, the Apoptles tell the
bishops, that an universal episcopacy is intrusted to them.J
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 afibrding to them alone the power
given him of the Father ; in whose room we succeeded, govern
ing the Church of God with the same power."§
" Christ our Lord and our God going to the Father, com
mended his Spouse to us."|l
A very ancient instance of which administration is the pro
ceeding against Paulus Samosatenus ; when " the pastors of
the churches, sorae from one place, some from another, did
assemble together against him as a pest of Christ's fiock, all of
them hastening to Antioch ;"^ where they deposed, extermi
nated, and deprived him of communion, warning the whole
Church to reject and disavow him.
" Seeing the pastoral charge is common to us all, who
bear the episcopal office, although thou sittest in a higher and
more eminent place."**
* Omnes enim nos decet pro corpore totius Ecclesise, cujus per varias
quasque provincias membra digesta sunt, excubare. Cler. Rora. apud
Cypr. Ep. 30. [Ep. 36. p. 73. Leipsis, 1838.]
t Ad Trinitatis iustar, cujus una est atque individua potestas, unum
esse per diversos Antistites Sacerdotium. P. Symmachus ad .Slonium
Arelat. X Eig imarqpiypov vpiav, Tiav Tqv KaBokov 'EmaKom^v rremartv-
p'tviav. Const. Apost. 6. 14.
$ Manifesta est sententia Domini nostri Jesu Christi Apostolos suos
mittentis, et ipsis solis potestatem a Petro sibi datam permittentis, quibus
nos successimus, e^dem potestate Ecclesiam Domini gubemantes. Conc-
Carth. apud Cypr. p. 405. [p. 278. sect. 79. clarus a Mascula. Pars 2.
Tractatus. Leipsiae, 1838.]
II Christus Dominus et Deus noster ad Patrem proficiscens, sponsam
suam nobis commendavit. — Ibid. p. 404. [Id. p. 275. sect. 49.]
% Ot XoiTTOt Tiav 'EKKXqaiSiv rroipeveg aXXot dXXoBtv tag irri Xvpewva
Tqg rov XpiaTov rroipvqg avvitaav, ot rrdvreg irri Tqv 'Avrioxn^v
arrtvaavTtg. Eus. 7. 27. [Cantab. 1720.]
** Ciim communis sit omnibus nobis, qui fungimur Episcopatus officio,
quamvis ipse in eo praemineas celsiore fastigio, specula pastoialis. — Aug.
ad Bonif contra duas Epist. Pelag. 1. I.

THE pope's supremacy. 145
" 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 all."*
Hence St. Chrysostom said of Eustathius his bishop : " For
he was weU instructed and taught by the grace of the Holy
Spirit, that a president or bishop of a Chnrch ought not to
take care of that Church alone, wherewith he is entrusted by
the Holy Ghost, but also of the whole Church dispersed
throughout the world."f
They consequently did repute schism, or ecclesiastical re-
beUion to consist in a departure from the consent of the body
ofthe priesthood,} as St. Cyprian in divers places doth express
it in his epistles to Pope Stephen and others.
They deem all bishops to partake ofthe apostolical authority,
accorffing 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 ; according to that of St. Cyprian : " For heresies
are sprung up, and schisms grown from no other ground nor
root but this, because God's priest was not obeyed, nor was
there one priest or bishop for a time in the Church, nor a
judge thonght 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. |{
* Hujus ergo rei gratis, vobis et nobis sancta commissa est Ecclesia, ut
pro omnibus ^boremus, et cunctis opem ferre non negUgamus, — P. Joh.
I. Ep.l. (ad Zachar.) apud Bin. tom. 3. p. 812.
t Kat ydp riv rrtrraiStvpkvog KaXiag rrapd Tqg tov rrvtvpuTog x^P«-
Tog, '6ti Tqg 'EKKXqaiag rrpotaTiaTa ovk iKelvqg fiovqg KqSeaBai Sti Trjg
Tapd TOV rrvtvpaTog iyxtipiaBtiaqg avnp, dXXd Kai rrdaqg Kard Tqv
oiKovptvqv xeipkvqg. Chrys. tom. 5. Or. 93. [p. 724. vol. 2. 1834.]
t A corpore nostri, et Sacerdotii consensione discesserit. — Cypr. Ep.
67. [Ep. 68. p. 186. Leipsiae, 1838.]— Qui se ab Ecclesise vincvjo, atque
k Sacerdotum CoUegio aeparat. — Cypr. Ep. 52.
§ AiiTog as 6 Kipiog drrb Tiav KpiTiav Trig 7Vg ^'T' Tqv rrpoeSpiav
[caBkSpav] tUv 'ArroaToXiav ficTkBqKtv. BasU. Epist. 56. [Ep. 197.
p. 417. vol. 3. Paris. 1839.]
II Neque enim aUunde haereses obortae sunt, aut nata sunt schismata,
qnam inde quod Sacerdoti Dei non obtemperetur, nee unus in Ecclesia ad
tempus Sacerdos, et ad tempus Judex vice Christi cogitatur. Cypr. Ep.
55. [Ep. 59. p. 136. Leipsiae, 1838.]— Episcopus personam habet Christi
et vicarius Domini est. Ambr. in 1 Cor. xi. — The bishop sustains the per
son of Christ, and is the vicar of our Lord.
VOL. I, h

146 A TREATISE OF
They conceive that our Saviour did promise to St. Peter the
keys in behalf of the Church, and as representing it,*
They suppose the combination of bishops in peaceable con
sent, and mutual aid, to be the rock on which the Church is
built. They allege the authority granted to St. Peter as a ground
of claim to the same in all bishops jointly, and in each bishop
singly, according to his rata pars, or allotted proportion.
"Which raay easily be understood by the words of our
Lord, when he says to blessed Peter, whose place 'the bishops
supply, whatsoever,"f &c.
" I have the sword of Constantine in my hands, you of
Peter," said our great King Edgar.}
They do therefore in this regard take themselves all to be
successors of St. Peter, that his power is derived to them all,
and that the whole episcopal order " is the chair by the Lord's
voice founded on St. Peter :" thus St. Cyprian in divers
places (before touched) discourseth ; and thus Firmilian from
the keys granted to St. Peter inferreth, disputing against the
Roman bishop : " 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. "§
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 accounted successor of St. Peter i the
apostolical power, which in extent was universal, being in some
sense, in reference to them, not quite extinct, but transmitted
by succession ; yet the bishops of apostolical Churches did
never claim, nor allowedly exercise apostolical jurisdiction,
beyond their own precincts ; according to those words of St,
Jerome, " Tell me, what doth Palestine belong to the Bishop
of Alexandria?" II
* Cypr. Ep. 27.
t duod ex verbis Domini facilfe intelUgi potest, quibus B. Petro, cujus
vicem Episcopi gerunt, ait Quodcunque, &c. — Capit. CaroU M. Lib. 5.
cap. 163.
X Ego Constantini, vos Petri gladium habetis in manibus.
§ Potestas ergo remittendorum peccatorum Apostolis data est, et Eccle-
sus quas iUi a Christo missi constituerunt, et Episcopis qui eis ordinatione
vicaria succedunt. FirmU. apud Cypr. Ep. 75. [p. 238. Lipsise, 1838 J
II Responde mihi ad Alexandrinum Epiocopum Palsestina quid pertinet .
Hier. ad Pammach. Ep. 61. 15.

THE pope's supremacy. 147
This sheweth the inconsequence of their discourse ; for iu
like manner the Pope might be successor to St. Peter, and St.
Peter's universal power might.be successive, yet the Pope have
no singular claim thereto, beyond the bounds of his particular
Church. 5. So again, for instance, St. James (whom the Roman
Church, in her Liturgies, doth avow for an Apostle), was
Bishop of Jerusalem more unquestionably than St. Peter was
Bishop of Rome ; Jerusalem also was the root, and the mother
of all Churches,* (as the Fathers of the second General Synod,
in their letter to Pope Damasus himself, and the occidental
Bishops did caU it, forgetting the singular pretence of Rome to
that title.)
Yet the bishops of Jerusalem, successors of St. James, did
not thence claim I know not what kind of extensive jurisdiction ;
yea, notwithstanding their succession they did not so much as
obtain a metropoUtical authority in Palestine, which did belong
to Csesarea (having been assigned thereto, in conformity to the
civil government), and was by special provision reserved
thereto in the Synod of Nice ;f whence St. Jerome did not
stick to affirm, that the Bishop of Jerusalem was subject to
the Bishop of Csesarea ; for speaking to John bishop of
Jerusalem, who for compurgation of himself from errors im
puted 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 metropoUtan,"} that is
to the bishop of Csesarea.
By which instance we may discern, what Uttle 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
validly than others ?
6. St. Peter probably fere that he came at Rorae did found
divers other Churches, § whereof he was paramount bishop, or
did retain a special superintendency over them ; particularly
* T^E ^i pqTpbg drraaiav riav 'EKKXqaiiav, Tqg iv 'ItpoaoXvpoig.
Theodor. 5. 9. — Mater Christiani nominis. Imper. Just, ad P. Hormisd.
apud Bin. tom. 3. p. 794. — The mother ofthe Christian name.
t Ty pqTporroXeLaiaZopevov Toij oiKtiov d^iiaparog. Cone. Nie. Can. 7.
—Ibi decemitur, ut Palestin-* metropoUs Csesarea sit. Hier. Ep. 61. 15.
—It is there decreed that Caesarea should be the metropolis of Palestine.
t Maluisti occupatis auribus molestias facere, qu&m debitum metropo-
litauo tuo honoremreddere. Hier. ad Pammach. Ep. 61. 15.
§ Hier. ad Galat. 2. P. Pelag. II. Ep. 1.
L 2

148 A TREATISE OF
"Antioch was anciently caUed 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 St. Peter in his universal pastorship as weU as his
younger brother of Rorae? why should Evodius ordained by
St. Peter at Antioch, yield to Clemens afterward by him
ordained at Rorae?
Antioch was the first-born of Gentile Churches, where the
narae of Christians was first heard ; Antioch was (as the
Constantinopolitan Fathers called it) " the most ancient and
truly apostolical Church."f
Antioch by virtue of St. Peter's sitting there, or peculiar
relation to it, was (according to their own conceits) the princi
pal see.}
Why therefore should St. Peter be so unkind to it, as not
only to relinquish it, but to debase it ; not only transferring
his see from it, but divesting it of the privilege, which it had
got?§ Why should he prefer before it the city of Rome, the
mystical Babylon, " the mother of abominations of the earth,"||
the throne of Satan's empire, the place which did then most
persecute the Christian faith, and was drunk with the blood of
the saints ?^
7. The ground of this preference was, say they, St. Peter's
vrill ; and they have reason to say so, for otherwise if St.
Peter had died intestate, the elder son of Antioch would have
had best right to all his goods and dignities.**
But how doth that will appear ? in what tables was it
written ? in what registers is it extant? in whose presence did
he nuncupate it ? it is nowhere to be seen or heard of.
• QpovovTqg 'Avnoxkiav ptyaXorr6Xtiag,Tbv tov dyiov UtTpov. Sjn.
Chalced. Act. 7. p. 364. t Acts. xi. 26.
X nptaf^VTarq Kai 'ovnag ' ArroaroXiKq 'EKKXqaia. Theod. 5. 9.
^ Ubi Imperator, ibi Roma. — Where the Emperor is, there is Rome,
11 Apoc. xvii. 5.
"l Apoc. xvu. 6. Sic et Babylon apud Joannem nostrum Romanse
urbis figura est, proinde et magnEe et regno superbse, et sanctorum debel-
latricis. TertuU. adv. Jud. cap. 9. — So also Babylon in our St. John ia
a type of the city of Rome, and therefore of a great, royal, and proud city,
and a subduer of the saints.
** BeU. 2.12. — Potuisset Petrus nuUam sedem particularem sibi unquam
eligere, sicut fecit primis quinque annis. Ibid. [p. 351. vol. 1. Pragae,
1721.] — Peter might bave chosen to himself no particular city, as he did
the first five years.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 149
Neither do they otherwise know of it, than by reasoning it
out; and in effect they say only that it was fit he shonld will
it, but they may be mistaken in their divinations ; and perhaps
notwithstanding them St. Peter might wUl as well to his former
see of Antioch, as to his latter of Rome.
8. Indeed Bellarmine sometimes positively and briskly
enough doth affirm, that " God did command St. Peter to fix
his seat 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 other
where : " It is not improbable that our Lord gave an express
command, that Peter should so fix his see at Rome, that the
bishop of Rome should absolutely succeed him."f
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 improbable that if God had comraanded
it, there would have been some assurance of a command so very
important. 9. Antioch hath at least a fair plea for a share in St. Peter's
prerogatives ; for it did ever hold the repute of an apostolical
Church, and upon that score some deference was paid to it ;
why so, if St. Peter did carry his see with all its prerogatives
to another place ? But if he carried with him only part of
his prerogative, learing some part behind at Antioch, how
much then I pray did he leave there ? Why did he diride
unequally, or leave less than half ? if perchance 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 ; haring a
nearer relation to him than he (although his successor in one
charge), or upon other equitable grounds.
For instance, St. John, or any other Apostle, who did sur-
rive 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,
* Jubente Domino. 2. 1 . — Deus ipse jussit Romae figi Apostolicam
Petri sedem. 4.4.
t Nou est improbabUe Dominum etiam aperte jussisse, ut sedem suam
Petrus ita figeret Romae, ut Romanus Episcopus absolute ei succederet.
BeU. 2. 12. § Et quoniam. [p. 352. u. 17. vol. 1. Pragae, 1721.]

150 A TREATISE OP
a neglect of his special affection, a disparagement of the apos
toUcal office for him to be subjected to any other ; neither
could any other pretend to the like gifts for management of
that great charge.
1 1 . The bishop of Jerusalem might with much reason have
put in his claim thereto, as being successor of our Lord him
self, who unquestionably was the High-priest of our profession,
and Archbishop of all onr souls ; whose see was the mother of
all Churches ; wherein St. Peter himself did at first reside, ex
ercising his ricarship : if our Lord, upon special accounts out
of course, had put the sovereignty into St. Peter's hands, yet
after his decease it raight be fit, that it should return into its
proper channel,
This may seem to have been the judgment of the times,
when the author of the Apostolical Constitutions did write, who
reporteth the Apostles to have ordered prayers to be made first
for James, then for Clement, then for Evodius.
12. Equity would rather have required, that one should by
coraraon consent and election of the whole Church be placed
in St. Peter's roora, 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 m that
succession, so it was reasonable that all of them should concur
in designation of a person thereto ; it is not reasonable to
suppose that either God would institute, or St. Peter by will
should derise a course of proceeding in such a case, so unequal
and unsatisfactory.
If therefore the Church considering this equity of the case,
together vrith the expediency of afiairs in relation to its good,
should undertake to choose for itself another monarch (the
bishop of another see, who should seem fitter for the place), to
succeed into the prerogatives of St. Peter, that person would
have a fairer title to that office than the Pope ; for such a
person would have a real title, grounded on some reason of
the case ; whereas the Pope's pretence doth only stand upon a
positive institution, whereof he cannot exhibit any certificate :
this was the mind of a great man among themselves ; who
saith, " that 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."*
* Quod si per possibile Trevirensis eUgeretur pro Capite Ecclesiis. Ha
bet enim Ecclesia potestatem liberam sibi de Capite providendi.— Card,
Cus. de Cone. Cath. 2. 13.

THE POPES SUPREMACY. 151
Bellarmine himself confesseth, " That if St. Peter (as he
jnight have done if he had pleased) should have chosen no
particular see, as he did not for the first five years, then after
Peter's death, neither the bishop of Rome, nor of Antioch
had succeeded, but he whom the Church should have chosen
for itself"* Now if the Church upon that supposition would
have had such a right, it is not probable, that St. Peter by his
fact would have deprived it thereof, or wilUngly done any thing
in prejudice of it, there being apparently so much equity,
¦that (he 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 aU 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 Roman bishop, we may thence discern not
only the improbabiUty, but iniquity of this pretence : how
was he then chosen ? was it by a General Synod of bishops,
pr by delegates from aU parts of Christendom, whereby the
common interest in him might appear ; and whereby the whole
world might be satisfied that one was elected fit for that high
oifice ? No ; he was chosen, as usuaUy then other particular
bishops were, by the clergy and people of Rome ; none of the
world being conscious of the proceeding, or bearing any share
therein. Now was it equal that such 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 such a charge, importing advancement
above all pastors, and being entrusted with the welfare of all
* Nam potuisset Petrus nuUam sedem particularem sibi unquam eUgere,
sicut fecit primis quinque annis, et tunc moriente Petro, non Episcopus
Romanus, neque Antiochenus successisset sed is quem Ecclesia sibi elegis-
set. BeU. 2. 12. [p. 351. n. 16. vol. 1. Pragae, 1721.]
t NuUa ratio sinit, ut inter Episcopos habeantur, qui nee a Clericis
sunt electi, nee a plebibns expetiti, nee a comprovinciaUbus Episcopis
cum MetropoUtani judicio consecrati. P. Leo I. Ep. 92. — No reason wUl
admit, that they should be esteemed bishops, who are neither chosen by
the clergy, nor desired by the people, nor consecrated by the bishops of
the same province, with the consent of the Metropolitan. — NuUus invitis
detur Episcopus : Cleri, plebis, et ordinis consensus requiratur. — P. Celeat.
I. 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.

152 A TREATISE OP
souls in Christendom, would 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, bri
bery, or partiality, would be managed by popular faction and
tumults. It was observed generally of snch elections by Narianzen,
that " prelacies were not got rather by rirtue than by naughti
ness ; and that episcopal thrones did not rather belong to the
more worthy than to the more powerful."*
And declaring his mind or vrish that elections of bishops
should " rest only or chiefly in the best men ; not in the weal
thiest and mightiest ; or in the impetuousness and unreason
ableness of the people, and araong them in those who are
most easily bought and bribed ;"f whereby he intimateth the
coraraon practice, and subjoineth : " but now I can hardly
avoid thinking, that the popular (or civil) governances are better
ordered than ours, which are reputed to have Divine grace at
tending them."
And that the Roman elections in that time were come into
that course, we raay see by the relation and refiectiona of an
honest pagan historian concerning the election of Pope Dama
sus (contemporary of Gregory Nazianzen) : " Damasus (saith
he) and Ursinus, above huraan raeasure burning with desire to
snatch the episcopal see, did with dirided parties most fiercely
conflict ;"} in which conflict upon one day in the very church
1 30 persons were slain ; § so| did that great Pope get into the
chair ; " thus (as the historian reflecteth) the wealth and pomp
of the place naturally did provoke arabition,"!| by all means to
seek it, and did cause fierce contentions to arise in the choice ;
whence coraraonly, wise and raodest persons being excluded
from any capacity thereof, any ambitious and cunning man,
who had the art or the luck to please the multitude wonld by
* Ou ydp E? dptTrjg fjaXXov q KaKovpyiag -q rrpoeSpia, oiiSi rSiv
d'iiiarkpiav pdXXov, fj SvvaTiaTtpiav ct ^pbvoi. Naz, Orat. 20. p. 335.
t 'E0' otE iSei Tiig rroiavrag rrpojioXdg KtXaBai povoig, ij 'on
pdXiara  dXXti p-q ToXg tvrropiardToig Tt Kai SwanaraTOig, ij ^opy
Sqpov Kai uXoyiq., Kai TOVTiav avTiav pakiara roXg ehiavoraToig' vvv
Si KivSvvtvia Tag Sqpoa'tag dpxdg tvTaKTiarkpag vrroXap^dvtiv r&v
qptr'tptav, alg q At'ia x^ptg im^qpiZtTai. Greg. Naz. Or. 19. p. 211.
X Damasus et Ursinus supra humanum modum ad rapiendam Episco
palem sedem ardentes scissis studiis acerrimfe conflictabantur. Am. Mar-
ceU. lib. 27. ^ Sozom. 6. 23.
II Neque ego ab uno ostentationem rerum considerans urbanarum, hujus
rei cupidos, &c. Id. Ibid.

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 153
violence obtain it ; which was a goodly way of constituting a
sovereign to the Church.
Thus it went within three ages after our Lord, and after
wards in the declensions of Christian simpUcity and integrity
matters were not like to be mended ; but did indeed rather
grow worse ; as beside the reports and complaints of historians,*
how that commonly by ambitious prensations, by simoniacal
corruptions, by poUtical bandj'ings, 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 hor
ribly flagitious.f
If it be said, that the election of a Pope in old times was
wont to be approved by the consent of aU bishops in the world,
according to the testimony of St. Cyprian ; who saith of Cor-
• Damasus II. — Pontificatum per vim occupat, nuUo cleri popuUque
consensu ; Adeo enim inoleverat hie mos, ut jam cuique ambitioso Uceret
Petri sedem invadere. Plat. (p. 314.) [p. 168. Colon, 1593.] — Damasus II.
invades the Popedom by force, without any consent of the clergy and
people ; for so was it now grown into custom, that any ambitious man
might invade Peter's see.
t Eo enim tum Pontificatus devenerat, ut qui plus largitione et ambitione,
noa dico sanctitate vitie et doctrin^ valeret, is tantummodb dignitatis gra
dum bonis oppressis et rejectis obtineret ; quem morem utinam aUquando
non rednuissent nostra tempora. Plat, in Sylv. 3. [p. 166. Ed. ut supra.]
— For the business of the Papacy was come to that pass, that whoever by
bribery and ambition, I say not, by holiness of Ufe and learning, got the
start of others, he alone obtained that degree of dignity, good meu in
the meantime being depressed aud rejected ; which custom I would to God
our times had not retained.
Cum jam eo devenissent Ecclesiastici, ut non coacti ut antea, sed sponte
et largitionibus Pontificium munus obirent. Plat, in Steph. 6. [p. 146. ut
supra.] Baron. Ann. 112. § 8. — Whenas now ecclesiastical persons are
come to that pass, that they execute the Papal office, not being compelled
nnto it, as heretofore, but of their own accord, and by bribing for it.
Videbat enim Imperator eo Ucentiae factiosum quemque et potentem,
quamvis ignobUem devenisse, ut cormptis sufiragiis tantam dignitatem
consequeretur, &c. Plat, in Clem. 2. (p. 313.) [p. 167. ut supra.]— For
the Emperor saw, tliat every factious and powerful person, though base
and ignoble, was gi-own to that height of licentiousness, that he obtained
so ^eat dignity by corruption and buying of suffrages.
Omne Papale negotium manus agunt : quem dabis mihi de tota maxima
Urbe, qui te in Papam receperit, pretio seu spe pretii non interveniente .'
Bern, de Consid. 4. 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 ?

1 54 A TREATISE OF
neUus, that " he was known by the testimony of his fellow-
bishops, whose whole nuraber through aU the world did with
peaceful unanimity consent."*
I answer, that this consent was not in the election, or ante
cedently to it : that it was only by letters or messages declaring
the election, according to that of St. Cyprian ;f that it was not
anywise peculiar to the Roman bishop, but such as was yielded
to all CathoUc bishops, each of whom was to be approved, as
St. Cyprian saith, "by the testimony and judgment of bis col
leagues ;"} that it was in order only to the maintaining fra
ternal communion and correspondence, signifying that such a
bishop was duly elected by his clergy and people, was rightly
ordained by his neighbour bishops, did profess the catholic
faith, and was therefore qualified for coraraunion with his
brethren : such a consent to the election of any bishop of old
was given (especially upon occasion, and when any question
concerning the right of a bishop did intervene), whereof now in
the election of a Pope no footstep doth remain.
We may also note, that the election of Cornelius§ being con
tested, he did more soleranly acquaint all the bishops of the
world with his case, and so did obtain their approbation, in a
way more than ordinary.
1 3. If God had designed this derivation of universal sove-
' reignty, it is probable, that he would have prescribed some
certain, standing, irarautable way of election ; and imparted
the right to certain persons, and not left it at such 'uncertainty
to the chances of time, so that the manner of election
\ hath often chapged, 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 pontifis, accord-
" Co-Episcoporum testimonio, quorum numerus universus per totum
mundum concordi unanimitate consentit. — Cypr. Ep. 52. [Ep. 55. p. 107.
Leipsiae, 1838.] — Ciim Fabiani locus, id est c m locus Petri, et gradus
CathedrfB sacerdotalis vacaret, quo occupato de Dei voluntate, atque om
nium nostrum consensione. Ibid. — When Fabianus's place (i. e.) when
the place of Peter, and the degree of the sacerdotal chair was vacant;
which being obtained by the will of God, and aU our consents.
t Satis erat ut tu te Episeopum factum literis nunciares, &c. Cypr. Ep.
42. [Ep. 45. p. 91. Leipsiae, 1838.]— It was enough that you declared
by letters that you were made bishop.
X Episcopo semel facto, et coUegarum ac plebis testimonio et judicio
comprobato. — Cypr. Ep. 41. [Ep. 44. p. 89. Lipsise, 1838.]
4 Euseb.

THE POPES SUPREMACY. 155
ing as the necessity, and the expediency of the Church re
quired."* Of old it was (as other elections) managed by nomination
of the clergy, and suffrage of the people.
Afterwards the emperors did assume to themselves the no
mination, or approbation of them.
" For then nothing was done by the clergy in the choice of
the Pope, imless the emperor had approved his election."f
"But he, seeing the prince's consent was required, sent
messengers with letters, to intreat Mauritius, that he would
not suffer the election made by the clergy and people of Rome
in that case to be vaUd."}
" Leo VIII. being tired out with the inconstancy of the Ro
mans, transferred the whole power and authority of choosing the
Pope from the clergy and people of Rome, to the emperor." §
At some tiraes the clergy had no hand in the election ; but
Popes were intruded by powerful raen or women at their
pleasure. ||
Afterwards the cardinals (that is, some of the chief Roman
clergy) did appropriate the election to themselves ; by the
decree of Pope Nicholas II., in his Lateran Synod. ^
Sometimes (out of course) general Synods did assume the
choice to themselves : as at Constance, Pisa, and Rasil.
14. From the premises to conclude the Pope's title to St.
Peter's authority, it is requisite to shew the power demised by
him to be according to God's institution and intent, immutable,
and indefectible : for power built upon the like, but far more
certain principles hath in course of times, and by worldly
* Et licet diversis temporibus diversi modi super Electione Romanorum
Pontificum observati sunt, prout necessitas, et utUitas Ecclesiae exposce-
bat.— Cone. Bas. Sess. 37. p. 98. Vid. Grat. dist. 63. per tot.
t NU enim tum a clero in eUgendo Pontifice actum erat, nisi ejus elec-
tionem Imperator approbasset. Plat, in Pelag. II. [p. 80. Colon. 1593.]
t Is autem, cum Principis consensus requireretur, nuncios cum Uteris
miserat, qui Mauritium obseerarent, ni pateretur electionem cleri et populi
Romani ea in re vabre. Plat, in Greg. M. Vid. Grat. dist. 63. [p. 82.
Ed. ut supra.]
^ Cone. tom. 7. p, 182. Leo VIII. — Romanorum inconstantiam per-
taesus auctoritatem omnem eligendi Pontificis a Clero, Populoque Romano
ad Imperatorem transtuUt. Plat, in Leo VIII. (p. 291.) [p. 155. ut supra.]
II Nusquam Cleri ehgentis, vel postea consentientis aliqua raentio.
Baron. Ann. 112. § 8. Ann. 131. j 1. There was nowhere any mention
of the clergy electing, or afterward consenting,
11 Grat. dist. 23. cap. 1. Plat, in Nie. II. [p. 171. ut supra.]

156 A TREATISE OF
changes been quite lost, or conveyed into other channels 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 constituted universal sove
reign of mankind ; and into that power his eldest son of right
did succeed ; and so it of right should have been continually
propagated. Yet soon did that power fail, or was diverted into other
courses ; the world being cantonized into several dominions ;
so that the heir at law among all the descendants of Adam
cannot so easily be found, as " 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
raight succeed him, yet by revolutions of things, by several de
faults and incapacities in himself, by divers obstructions inci
dent, 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 cUpped,
raight be transplanted, might utterly decay and fail ; to such
fatalities other powers are subject ; nor can that ofthe Pope be
exempt from them, as otherwise we shall more largely declare.
15. Indeed, that God did intend his Church should per
petually subsist united in any one political frame of govern
raent, is a principle, which they do assume, and build upon,
but can nowise prove. Nor indeed is it true. For,
If the unity of the Church designed and instituted by God
were only an unity of faith, of charity, of peace, of fraternal
communion and correspondence between particular sodetiea
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 it is pretended) hath often failed, there having been
for long spaces of time no Roman bishops at all, upon several
accounts, which is a sign that the Church may subsist with
out it.
As, 1. When Rome was desolated by the Goths, Vandals,
and Lombards.
* Propria perdit qui indebita concupiscit. P. Leo I. Ep. 54.

THE POPES SUPREMACY. 157
2. In times when the Romans would not suffer Popes to
live with then.*
3. In case of discontinuance from Rome, when the Popes
(so calUng themselves) did for above seventy years abide in
France, when they indeed, not being chosen by the Roman
people, nor exercising pastoral care over them, were only titu
lar, not real bishops of Rome (they were Popes of Arignon,
not of Rome, and successors of God knows who, not of St.
Peter) ; no more than one continually living in England can be
bbhop of Jerusalem .f
4. In times of many long schisms (22 schisms) when either
there was no true Pope, or which in effect was the same, no
one certain one.}
5. When Popes were intruded by riolence, whom Baronius
himself positively 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 papal authority did
pretend to create ?§
6. When elections had a flaw in them, were uncanonical
and so null.
7. When Popes were simonically chosen, who by their own
rules and laws are no true Popes, being heretics, heresiarchs.||
The which was done for long courses of time very com
monly, and in a manner constantly.^
8. When Popes have been deposed, (as some by the empe
rors, others by General Councils) in which case, according to
papal principles, the successors were Ulegal, for the Pope being
sovereign, he could not be judged or deposed, and his suc
cessor is an usurper.
• Vid. Bern. Ep. 242, 243. t BeU. 4.' 4.
X — Inopem me eopia fecit. § Baron, ad Ann. 112. § 8.
II P. Greg. VII. Ep. 3. 7. P. Jul. in Cone. Lat. Sess. 5. p. 57. Non
solum hujusmodi electio vel assumptio eo ipso nuUa existat, &c. Vid.
sup. § 12. — Such an election or assumption, let it not only be upon that
account void and null.
H Vide quseso quantum isti degeneraverint a majoribus suis ; IUi enim
utpote viri sanctissimi dignitatem ultrb oblatam contemnebant, orationi et
doctrins Christiante vacantes ; hi vero largitione et ambitione Pontifica
tum quaerentes, et adepti, postbabito divino cultu, &c. Plat, in Serg. 3.
(p. 279.) [p. 149. Colon. 1593.] Vid  in Bened. IV. p. 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 themselves whoUy to prayer and the doctrine of Christ ; but these
by bribery and ambition seek and obtain the Papacy.

158 A TRE.VTISE OF
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 de-
failance of right continued to posterity.*
And probably, therefore, there is now no true Pope.
For (upon violent intrusion, or simoniacal choice, or any
usurpation) the cardinals, bishops, &c. which the Pope createth
are not truly such, and consequently their votes not good in
the choice of another Pope, and so successively.
These considerations may suffice to declare the inconse
quence of their discourses, even admitting their assertions,
which yet are so false, or so apparently uncertain.
I shall in the next place level ray arguments directly against
their raain conclusion itself.
I. My first arguraent against this pretence shall be, that it
is destitute of any good warrant, either from divine or human
testimony, and so is groundless. As will appear by the follow
ing considerations.
1 .{ If God had designed the bishop of Rome to be for the
perpetual course of tiraes sovereign monarch of his Church,
it may reasonably be supposed that he would expressly have
declared his mind in the case, it being a point of greatest im
portance of all that concern the administration of his kingdom
in the world.f ) Princes do not use to send their riceroys
unfurnished with patents clearly signifying their commission,
that no man, out of ignorance or doubt concerning that point,
excusably may refuse compliance ; and in all equity promulga
tion is requisite to the establishment of any law, or exacting
obedience. But in all the pandects of Divine revelation the
bishop of Rome is not so much as once mentioned, either by
name or by character, or by probable intimation ; they cannot
hook him in otherwise, than by straining hard and framing a
long chain of consequences, each of which is too subtle for to
constrain any man's persuasion: they have indeed found the
Pope in the first chapter of Genesis ; for (if we believe Pope
• Plat in Joh. 10. (p. 275.) [p. 147. Ed. ut supra.] Pontifices ipsi a
Petri vestigiis discesserant. — The Popes had swerved irom the examples
of Peter. — Possessor malae fidei ullo tempore non praescribit. Reg. Jur. 2.
in Sexto. — He that has no right to the thing he possesses, cannot pre
scribe or plead any length of time to make his possession lawful.
t Nee vero simile sit, ut rem tam necessariam ad Ecclesiae unitatem
continendam Christus Dominus Apostolis suis non revel^rit. Melch. Can.
6. 8. — Neither is it likely that our Lord Christ would not have revealed to
his Apostles a thing so necessary for preserving tbe unity of the Church.

THE pope's supremacy. 159
Innocent III.) he is one of the two great luminaries there,
and he is as plainly there as anywhere else in the Bible.*
Wherefore if upon this account we should reject this pre
tence, we might do it justly ; and for so doing we have the
allowance of.,thea]Oicifint.Fathers ; for they did not hold any
man obUged 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 de
duced by clear and certain inference ; this their manner of
disputing vrith 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. Augustine) about Christ, or about his
Church, or about any other thing which concerneth our faith
and Ufe, I will not say we, who are nowise comparable to hira,
who said Although we ; but even as he going on did add, If
an angel from heaven should tell you beside what you have
received in the legal and evangeUcal Scriptures, let him be
anathema :"f in which words we have St. Augustine's warrant
not only to refuse, but to detest this doctrine, which being
nowhere extant in law or gospel, is yet obtruded on us as
nearly relating both to Christ and his Church ; as greatly
concerning both our faith and practice.
2. To enforce this argument, we may consider that the
Evangelists do speak about the propagation, settlement, and
continuance of our Lord's kingdom ; that the Apostles do
often treat about the state of the Church, and its edification,
order, peace, imity ; about the distinction of its ofiicers and
members ; about the quahfications, duties, graces, pririleges of
* Ad firmamentum igitur coeU, hoc est universalis Ecclesias, fecit Deus
duo magna luminaria, id est duas instituit dignitates, qua; sunt Pontificalis
auctoritas, et regalis potestas; sed Ula quae praeest diebus, id est spirituaU-
bus, major est ; quae verb camaUbus, minor, &c. Innoc. III. in Decret.
Greg. Ub. 1. tit. 33. cap. 6. [Paris. 1512.] — For the firmament therefore
of heaven (i. e.) of the universal Church, God made two great Ughts, (i. e. )
he ordained two dignities or powers, which are the Pontifical authority,
and the Elegal power ; but that which rules the days, (i. e. ) spiritual mat
ters, is the greater, but that which governs carnal things, is the lesser, &c.
t Proinde sive de Christo, sive de ejus Ecclesia, sive de quacunque
alia re, quae pertinet ad fidem vitamque nostram, non dicam Nos nequa-
quam comparandi ei qui dixit, Ucet si nos, sed omnino quod sequutus
adjecit, si Angelus de coelo vobis annunciaverit, praeterquam quod in
Scripturis LegaUbus ac Evangelicis accepistis, anathema sit. Aug. contr.
Petil. 3. 6. [p. 478. vol, 9. Paris. 1837.]

160 A TREATISE OP
spiritual governors and guides ; about prevention and remedy
of heresies, schisms, disorders ; upon any of which occasions
how is it possible that the mention of such a spiritual monarch
(who was to have a main influence on each of those particu
lars) should wholly escape them, if they had known such an
one instituted by God ?
In the Levitical law all things concerning the high-priest ;
not only his designation, succession, consecration, duty, power,
maintenance, privileges ; but even his garments, marriage,
mourning, &c. 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 adminis
tration of his office, and know what observance to require ?
3. Whereas also the Scripture doth inculcate duties of all
sorts, and not forget frequently to press duties of respect and
obedience toward particular governors of the Church ; is it
not strange that it never should bestow one precept, whereby
we might be instructed and admonished to pay our duty to the
universal pastor ? especially considering that God who directed
the pens of the Apostles, and who intended that their writings
should continue for the perpetual instruction of Christians,
did foresee, how requisite such a precept would be to secure
that duty ; for if but one such precept did appear, it would do
the business, and void all contestation about it.
4. They who so carefully do exhort to honour and obey the
temporal sovereignty, how carae 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, accom
modating them by analogy and inference to themselves ?t
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 nothing
so much as obedience to the apostolical see.
* Exod xxviii. 1,4. Levit. xxi.
t P. Nie. I. Ep. 10. P. Leo IX. Ep. 1. P. Greg. VII. Ep. 1. 22.

THE pope's supremacy. 161
6. Oue might have expected something of that nature from
St. Paul hiraself, who did write so largely to the Romans, and
so often from Rome ; that at least some word, or some inti
mation should have dropped fi-om him concerning these huge
rights and pririleges of this see, and of the regard due to it.
Particularly then, when he professedly doth enumerate the
ofSces, instituted by God, for standing use and perpetual
duration ; "for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of
the ministry, for the edifying 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 ;f yet giveth them no advantage above
others ; as St. Chrysostom observeth on those words : " for
obedience to the faith among all nations, among whom also
are ye ; this (saith St. Chrysostom) he saith to depress their
conceit, to void their haughtiness of mind, and to teach them
(to deem others equal in dignity vrith them.")}
When he writeth to that Church (which was some time
after St. Peter had settled the Popedora)§ he doth only style
them icXijrot &yim (caUed saints) and ayarrqTol Qeoii (beloved of
God), which are common 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 aU men," but their commands
had not (it seemeth) come anywhere.
He wrote divers epistles from Rome, wherein he resolveth
many cases debated, yet never doth urge the authority of the
Roman Church for any point, which now is so ponderous an
argument. 7. But however, seeing the Scripture is so strangely reserved,
how cometh it to pass that tradition is also so defective, and
staunch in so grand a case ? We have in divers of the Fathers,
(particularly in TertulUan, in St. BasU, in St. JeromeU), cata-
* Eph. iii. 11, 12, 13. 1 Cor. xu. 28. Quarum laudum et gloriae de-
generem fuisse, maximum crimen est. CI. Rom. ad Cypr. Ep. 31. — To
degenerate from which praise and glory, is an exceeding great crime.
t Rom. i. 8.
X OiS'tv rrXtov avToXg SiSiaat riav Xoirriav iBviav. — TavTa Si rroiel
KaQaipSiv avTtav rb ippovqua, Kai Ktviav ro iftvaqpa Trjg Siavoiag, Kai
liSaiTKiav avTO-ig Tqv rrpbg dXXovg iaoTipiav. [p. 471. Rom. 1. 5. vol. 9.
Paris. 1837.]
§ (Vid. Chrys. Theo. Hier.) Baron. Ann. 58. ^ 46, &c. Rom. i. 7, 8.
Rom. xvi. 19.
II TertuU. de Cor. Mil. 3. BasU. de Sp. S. 27. Hier. adv. Lucif. 4.
VOL. I. M

162 A TREATISE OF
logues of traditional doctrines and observances, which they
recite to assert tradition iu some cases supplemental to Scrip
ture ; 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 f
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 sUp over, with
out careful reporting, and reflecting upon 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 aU the
notable occurrences he knew concerning them, vrith favourable
advantage. 9. Whereas this doctrine is pretended to be a point of
faith, of vast consequence to the subsistence of the Church and
to the salvation of men, it is somewhat strange, that it should
not be inserted into any one ancient suramary of things to be
believed (of which suraraaries divers remain, some composed
by public consent, others by persons of eminency in the
Church)* nor by fair and forcible consequence should be de-
ducible frora auy article in thera ; especially considering, 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 synodi-
cally defining this point, together vrith other points no less
new and unlieard 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 fsiith f
10. It is much that this point of faith should not be de
Uvered in any of those ancient expositions of the Creed (made
by St. Augustine, Ruffin, &c.) which enlarge it to necessary
points of doctrine, connected with the articles therein, especially
* Const. Apost. 7. 41 (a fuU Creed, at Baptism.)
t Cone. Lat. 4. Cap. 5. Ann. 1215.

THE pope's supremacy. 163
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 Dirinity composed by St. Augustine,
Lactantius, &c. it should not be treated on : the world is now
changed ; for the Catechism of Trent doth not overlook , so
material a point ; and it would pass for a lame body of
theology, which should omit to treat on this subject.
1 1. It is more wonderful, that this point should never be
defined, in downright and full terms, by any ancient Synod ;
it being so notoriously in those old times opposed by divers,
who dissented in opinion, and discorded in practice from the
Pope ; it being also a point of that consequence, that such a
solemn declaration of it would have much conduced to the
ruin of aU particular errors and schisms, which were main
tained then in opposition to the Church.
12. Indeed had this point been allowed by the main body
of orthodox bishops, the Pope could not have been so drowsy
or stupid, as not to have solicited for such a definition thereof;
nor would the bishops have been backward in compliance
thereto ; it being, in our adversaries' conceit, so compendious
and effechial a way of suppressing aU heretics, schisms, and
disorders; (although indeed later experience hath shewed it
no less available to stifle truth, justice, and piety) : the Popes
after Luther were better advised, and so were the bishops ad
hering to his opinions.
13. Whereas also it is most apparent, that many persons
disclaimed this authority, not regarding either the doctrines or
decrees of the Popes ; it is wonderful, that such men should
not be reckoned in the large catalogues of heretics ; wherein
errors of less obrious consideration, and of far less importance
did place men ; if BpijAanius, Theodoret, Leontius, &c. were
so negligent, or unconcerned, yet St. Augustine, Philastrius —
western men, should not have overlooked this sort of desperate
heretics : Aerius for questioning the dignity of bishops is set
among the heretics, but who got that name for disavowing the
Pope's supremacy, among the many who did it ? (It is but
lately, that such as we have heen thrust in among heretics.)
14. Whereas no point avowed by Christians could be so apt
to raise offence and jealousy in Pagans against our religion as
this, which setteth up a power of so vast extent, and huge
mfluence; whereas no novelty could be more surprising or
startling, than the erection of an universal empire over the
M 2

164 A treatise of
consciences and reUgious practices of men ; whereas also this
doctrine could not but be very conspicuous and glaring in
ordinary practice ; it is prodigious, that aU Pagans should not
loudly exclaim against it.
It is strange, that Pagan historians (such as Marcellinus,
who often speaketh of Popes, and blameth them for their
luxurious way of Uring, and pompous garb :* as Zozimus, who
' bore a great spite at Christianity ; as aU the writers of the
imperial history before Constantine) should not report it, as a
very strange pretence newly started up.
It is wonderful, that the eager adversaries of our reUgion
(such as Celsus, Porphyry, Hierocles, JuUan himself) should
not particularly level their discourse against it, as a most
scandalous position and dangerous pretence, threatening the
government of the empire.
It is admirable, that the emperors themselves, inflamed
with emulation and suspicion of such an authority (the which
hath been so terrible even to Christian princes), should not in
their edicts expressly decry and impugn it ; that indeed every
one of thera should not with extreraest riolence implacably
strive to extirpate it.
In consequence of these things it may also seem strange,
that none ofthe advocates of our faith (Justin, Origen, Ter
tullian, Arnobius, Cyril, Augustine) should be put to defend it,
or so much as forced to raention 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 re
presentations concerning Christianity would have appeared
not to deal fairly, or to have been very inconsiderate,f when
they profess for their coraraon belief assertions repugnant to
that doctrine ; as when Tertullian saith, }" We reverence the
* — Procedantque vehiculis insidentes, circumspecte vestiti, epulas
curantes profusas, adeo ut eorum convivia Regales superent raensas, Mar-
cell, lib. 27. p. 338. — They travel sitting in chariots, curiously apparelled,
procuring profuse dainties, insomuch as their meals exceed the feasts of
kings. f Sentiunt enim Deum esse solum, in cujus solius potestate sunt, a quo
sunt secundi, post quem primi, ante omnes et super omnes Decs. Quidni ?
cum super omnes homines, qui utique vivunt, et mortuis antistant. Tert,
Apolog. i;. 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.
i Colimus Imperatorem ut hominem a Deo secundum, et solo Deo
minorem. Tertull. ad Scap. 2.

THE pope's supremacy. 165
emperor as a man second to God, and less only than God ;"
when Optatus affirmeth,* "that above the emperor there is
none beside God who made the emperor;" and, f " 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 man." When St. Chrysos
tom asserteth,} " the emperor to be the crown and head of all
men upon earth ;" and saith, that " even apostles, evangeUsts,
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 aU others by incom
parable differences," &c. When even Popes talk at this rate;
as Pope Gregory I.|| calUng the emperor his " Lord, and Lord
of all," telUng the emperor that his corapetitor, by assuming the
title of universal bishop " did set himself above the honour
of his imperial majesty;" which he supposeth a piece of great
absurdity and arrogance ; and even Pope Gregory 11.^ doth
caU that emperor (against whom he afterward rebelled) " the
head of Christians." Whereas indeed if the Pope be monarch
ofthe Church, endowed with the regalities which they now
ascribe to him, it is plain enough that he is not inferior to any
man Uving, in real power and dignity : wherefore the modern
* Cum super Imperatorem non sit nisi solus Deus qui fecit Impera
torem. Opt. Ub. 3.
t — Dum se Donatus super Imperatorem extoUit, jam quasi hominum
excesserat modum, ut se ut Deum, non hominem aestimaret. Id. ibid.
X BaaiXeiig ydp Kopv^q Kai KtipaX^ Tiav irri Trig yqg ianv drrdvnav
Chrys dvSp. 2. p. 463. — K^v 'AiroffroXoc yg, Kq.v EvayytXiaT-qg, Kq.v
Ilpo^qrqg, Kq.v banaovv, gee. Chrys. in Rom. 13. 1. [p. 752. vol. 9.
Paris. 1837.] — Ob ydp ioTiv b vj3piaBtig bpbnpbv Tiva ex<av irri Trig
7TC, PaaiXtvg yap — Chrys. supra. — For he that is thus wronged has
not his equal upon earth, for he is king, &c.
§ Tqg piv iv dvBpiarroig tiKXt'iag Tb dvoirarov Kai davyKp'iToig Sia-
^opaXg Tiav d'Xkiav drrdvTiav dvtaTqxbg Kai vrrepKt'iptvov, vptXg, ia
^iXoxpiaroi ^aaiXeXg, Kai KXqpog vpXv i^a'iptTog Tt Kai rrpemav irapd
Qeoii Trig ivovaqg avTtp Kard rrdvnav vrrepoxqg. Cyril, ad Theod. in
Cone. Eph. part. 1. cap. 3. p. 20.
U P. Greg. M. Ep. 2. 62. — Quia Sereniss. Domine ex iUo jam tempore
Dominus mens fuisti, quando adhuc Dominus omnium non eras. — Ego
quidem jussioni subjectus. — Ibid. Ad hoc enim potestas Dominorum
meorum pietati cosUtus data est super omnes homines. Sec. Ibid. Ego
indlgnus famulus vester. Ib. — Qui honori quoque Imperii vestri se per
privatum vocabulum superponit. P. Greg. I. Ep. 4. 32.
f 'Qg PaaiXtvg Kai Ktil>aXq tUv XpianavUv. P. Greg. II. in Epist. 1.
ad Leon. Isaur. apud Bin. torn. 5. p. 502. — As king and head of Chris
tians.

166 A TREATISE OF
doctors of Rome are far more sincere or considerate in thehf
heraldry, then 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
f sacred offices ofthe Church ; for in the very canon of their mass,
\ the Pope (together with the bishop of the diocese, one of his
' ministers) is set before all Christian princes ; every 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.f
Now it is abundantly " declared by Papal definition, as
a point necessary to salvation, that every huraan creature
(neither king nor Cesar excepted) is subject to the Roman
high-priest."} Now the mystery is discovered, why Popes, when summoned
by emperors, declined to go in person to General Synods ; be
cause " it was not tolerable, that the emperor (who sometime
would be present in Synods) should sit above the Pope ;"^ as
in the pride of his heart he might perhaps offer to do. I
cannot forbear to note what an ill conceit Bellarmine had of
Pope Leo I. and other Popes, that they did forbear coming at
Synods out of this rillanous pride and haughtiness.)
15. One would admire, that Constantine, if he had smelt
this doctrine, or any thing like it in Christianity, should be so
* — Una cum famulo tuo Papa nostro N. et Antistite nostro N. et Rege
nostro N. et omnibus orthodoxis, &c.— Together with thy servant our
Pope N. and our Bishop N. and our King N. and aU orthodox, &c.
t Fiat autem oratio pro dignitate Regia post orationem factam pro
Papa, quia potestas suprema Sacerdotalis excedit Regiam antiquitate, dig
nitate, et utUitate, &c. Gab. Biel in Can. mis. — Let prayer be made for
the King after prayer made for the Pope, because the supreme sacerdotal
power exceeds the kingly in antiquity, dignity, and utility, &c. — [The fifth
Lateran, 11th session (Lab. vol. 14. Paris. 1671.) Melchior Canus
(Loc. Theol. lib. 6. cap. 4. p, 316. Colon. 1605), and Baronius, anno
i053, 14 sect. 11 vol. Romae, 1605), approve of this.]
X Subesse Romano Pontifici omni Immanae creaturae declaramus, dici
mus, definimus, et pronunciamus omnino esse de necessitate salutis. P.
Bonif. VIII. in Extrav. com. lib. 1. tit. 8. [Corp. Jur. Can. iPithao,
vol. 2. cap. 1. Paris. 1695.]
§ At quamvis utcunque tolerabUe sit, ut Principes seculares in Conciho
sedeant ante aUos Episcopos, tamen nullo modo convenit, ut ante ipsum
summum Pontificem, &c. BeU. de Cone. 1. 19. [p. 24. n. 5. vol. 2.
Praga;, 1721.]

THE pope's SUPUEMACY. 167
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 vrith so much in
dulgence foster and cherish Popes, being their so dangerous
riv^s 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 vrith gifts,
had enlarged it with benefits ;"* he 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. Bel
larmine (in his Apology against King James) saith, " that
the Pope was {vellet, nollet,) constrained to be subject to the
emperors, because his power was not known to them;"f it
was well it was not : but how could it be concealed from them,
if it were a doctrine commonly avowed by Christians ; it is
hard keeping so practical a doctrine from breaking forth into
light. But to leave this consideration.
Farthermore, we have divers ancient writings, the special
nature, matter, scope whereof did require, or greatly invite
giring attestation to this power, if such an one had been known
and allowed in those tiraes ; which yet do afford no counte
nance, bnt rather much prejudice thereto.
16. The ApostoUcal Canons, and the Constitutions of Cle
ment, which describe the state of the Church, vrith its laws,
customs, and practices current in the times of those who com
piled them (which times are not certain, bnt ancient, and the
less andent the more it is to our purpose),} wherein especiaUy
the ranks, duties, and privileges of aU ecclesiastical persons
are declared, or prescribed, do not yet touch the prerogatives
of this universal head, or the special respects due to him, nor
mention any laws or constitutions framed by him : which is
no less strange than that there should be a body of laws, or
description of the state of any kingdom, wherein nothing
should be said concerning the king, or the royal authority. It
is not so in our modern Canon Law, wherein the Pope doth
* Quapropter attendat dementia vestra, quantus fuerit erga sedis Apos
tolicse reverentiam antecessorum vestrorum, piorum duntaxat Imperato
rum— amor, et stadium ; quaUter eam diversis privilegiis extulerint, donis
ditaverint, beneflciis ampliaverint ; quaUter eam Uteris suis honoraverint,
ejusvotis annuerint, &c. P. Kich. I. Epist. 8. ad Mich. Imp.
t Apol. BeU. p. 202. X Const. Apost. 8. 4, &c.

168 A TREATISE OF
make utramque paginam ; we read little beside his authority,
and decrees made by it.
The ApostoUcal 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 shonld do nothing
considerable (or extraordinary) without his adrice ; as also
that each one (of those head bishops) should only meddle
with those affairs, which concerned his own precinct, and the
places under it :"'* also " that no such primate shonld do any
thing without the opinion of all, that so there may be con
cord." Now what place could be more opportune to mention
the Pope's sovereign power? How coidd the canonist, with
out strange neglect, pass it over ? Doth he not indeed
exclude it, assigning the supreme disposal (without further
resort) of aU things to the arbitration of the whole body
of pastors, and placing the maintenance of concord in that

course

?

17- So also the old writer, nnder the name of Dionysius
the Areopagite,f treating in several places abont the degrees
of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, was monstrously overseen in
omiting the sovereign thereof. In the fifth chapter of his Ec
clesiastical Hierarchy he professeth carefuUy 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 DemophUus 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 in advising that monk to
gentleness and observance towards his superiors, he thns
speaketh : " Let passion and reason be governed by yon ; bnt
you by the holy deacons, and these by the priests, and the
priests by the bishops, and the bishops by the Apostles, or by
* Tore: 'ErriGKorrovg tKaaTov iBvovg eiSkvai xpq T-bv iv avroig rpu-
TOV, Kai qytXaBai av'bv big Kt^aXrjv, Kai pqSkv tl rrpdrreiv rreptrrirv
dvtv Tqg tKtivov yviapqg- tKtXva Si pova rrpdrrtiv tKaarov, 'iaa rj
avTOTo rrapoiKig. imfSaXXti, Kai Toig vrr' avTqv xi^pm^ dXXd pijci
tKEivog dvtv rijc rrdvnav yvwpqg rroit'iTia n' ovrot ydp bpovota iarat.
Apost. Can. 34.
t 'H ^tia Tiav 'lepapxiav Td^ig rrpiaTq pkv ia-iTiav Sreorr-iKuv ralemy,
aKpordrq Si Kai iaxdTq r} av-q- Kai ydp tig avTqv drroreXiirat rat
arrorrXqpovTai rrdaa -q£ Ka9' qpdg 'upapxiag ciaxbapqaig. Dionys. de
Hier. Eccl. cap. 5.
X 'Errticrj Tag 'itpa-ixdg -d'itig Kai drrorrXqpiaatig, Svvdptig rt avrin
Kai eiepytiag tlpqcaptv lag qpXv iipiKTov. De EccL Hier. cap. 5.

THE pope's supremacy. 169
¦their successors, (that is, saith Maximus, those which we now
caU patriarchs), 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 hira;"* why not in this case, let him be cor
rected by the Pope, his superior ? but he knew none of an
order superior to the Apostles' successors.
18. Likewise, Ignatius in raany epistles frequently describeth
the several ranks of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, extolleth their
dignity and authority to the highest pitch, mightily urgeth
tbe respect due to them.^et never doth he so much as raention
or touch this sovereign degree, wherein the raajesty of the
clergy did chiefiy shine.;-
In his very Epistle to the Romans he doth not yield any
deference to their bishop, nor indeed doth so much as take
notice of him ; is it not strange he should so little mind the
sovereign of the Church ? or was it, for a sly reason, because
bemg bishop of Antioch, he had a pique to his brother Jacob,
who had supplanted him and got away his birthright ?
The counterfeiter therefore of Ignatius did weU personate
him, when he saith, that " in the Church there is nothing
greater than a bishop ;"f and that " a bishop is beyond all rule
and authority ;"} for in the time of Ignatius there was no do
mineering Pope over all bishops.
1 9. We have some letters of Popes, (though not many ; for
Popes were not then very scribacions, or not so pragmatical ;
jrhence 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 forraer do not assume, nor the latter
ascribe any such power ; the Popes do not express theraselves
* A-iirbg piv ovv imBvpiq, Kai Sivpip Kai Xoyip Td Kar' d^iav dfopiZf
aoi oi ot ^eXoi Xttrovpyoi- Kai TOVTOig ot 'itptXg' 'ttpdpxai Si ToXg
itptvar Kai ToXg 'ttpdpxatg ot 'ATrocrroXot Kat ot Tiav * ArroaToXitiv StdSo-
Xot. Kai ftTTOv Tig Kai iv ixeivoig toU -rrpoaqKOVTog drroaipaXtiq, rrapd
riav bpoTayOiv dy'iiav irravopBiaBqatrai. Dionys. Ar. Ep. 8. — 'Atto-
iTToXiav Si SiaSoxovg Tobg vvv rraTpidpxag qyovpai tlvai. Max.
Schol. ib.
t OvTt Qtoii Tig KpeiTTiav, ri rraparrX-qaiog iv rrdai ToXg ovaiv, ovSi
Si iv 'EKKXqaia 'ETrto-KOTrou n ptXtov. Pseud. Ignat. ad Smyr,
t Tiydp ianv 'ErriaKorrog, dXX' q rrdaqg, dpxqg Kai e^ovaiag trrt-
KHva, &c. Id. ad TraU.

170 A TREATISE OF
like sovereigns, nor the bishops address themselves Uke sub
jects ; but they treat one another in a farailiar way like brethren
and equals : this is so true, that it is a good raark of a spurious
epistle (whereof we have good store, derised by colloguing
knaves, and fathered on the first Popes) when any of them
talketh in an iraperious strain, or arrogateth such a power to
himself. 20. Clemens bishop of Rome in the apostoUcal times, unto
the Church of Corinth, then engaged in discords and factions,
wherein the clergy was much affronted ( divers presbyters, who
had well and worthily behaved themselves, were ejected from
their office, in a seditious raanner), did write a very large
epistle ;* wherein like a good bishop, and charitable Christian
brother, he doth earnestly, by raanifold inducements, persuade
them to charity and peace ; but nowhere doth he speak im
periously Uke their prince. In such a case one would think,
if ever, for quashing such disorders and quelling so perverse
folks,f who spumed the clergy, it had been decent, it had been
expedient, to employ his authority, and to speak like himself,
challenging obedience, upon duty to him, and at their peril :
how would a modern Pope have ranted in such a case ; how
thundering a bull would he have dispatched against such out
rageous contemners of the ecclesiastical order? how often
would he have spoken of the apostolic see and its authority ?
we should infallibly have heard him swagger in his wonted
style : " Whoever shall presume to cross our will, let him
know that he shall incur the indignation of Almighty God,
and his blessed Apostles Peter and Paul :"} but our Popes, it
seemeth, have more wit, or better mettle than Pope Clemens;
that good Pope did not know his own strength, or had not the
heart to use it.
21. Among the epistles of St. Cyprian there are divers
epistles of him to several Popes (to Cornelius, to Lucius, to
Stephanus), § in the which, although written with great kind-
* 'Opiapev ydp 'on iviovg vpeXg peTqydytre KaXiog rroXtrevoptvovg
tK Trig dpiprrTiag avToXg TtTipqptvqg Xeirovpyiag. Clem, ad Corinth.
Ep. 1. p. 58. Jun. — For we see that you bave removed some, who behaved
themselves weU in their oflSce, out of their ministry blamelessly discharged
by them. — ^raaiaZtiv rrpbg Toig rrpta(3vTkpovg.
t npoaiarra rrpoarreTrj Kai avBdSq. p. 2.
X Si quis voluntati nostrae contraire praesumpserit, indignationem om
nipotentis Dei, ac Beatorum Petri et Pauli Apostoli se noverit incursu-
rum : — in such terms usually the Pope's bulls do end.
§ Cyp. Ep, 41, 42, 43, 45, 47, 49, 54, 55, 57, 58, 67, 72.

THE pope's supremacy. 171
ness and respect, yet no impartial eye can discern any special
regard to them, as to his superiors in power, or pastors in doc
trine, or judges of practice ;* he reporteth matters to them, he
conferreth about points with all freedom ; he speaketh his sense
and giveth his advice without any restraint or awe ; he
spareth not upon occasions to reprove their practices and to
reject their opinions ; he in his addresses to them and dis
courses of them styleth them brethren and colleagues ;f and
he 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 concerning the de
cease of the good man my colleague; Fabianus ;" upon which
words Rigaltius had cause to remark, " How like an equal
and feUow-citizen doth the bishop of Carthage mention the
bishop of Rome, even to the Roman clergy ?"} but would not
any man now be deemed rude and saucy, who should talk in
that style of the Pope ?
, Pope Cornelius also to St. Cyprian hath some epistles, §
wherein no glimpse doth appear of any superiority assumed by
him. But of St. Cyprian's judgment and demeanour toward
Popes we shall have occasion to speak more largely, in a way
more positively opposite to the Roman pretences.
Eusebius citeth divers long passages out of an epistle of
Cornelius to Fabius, bishop of Antioch, against Novatus;|l
wherein no mark of supremacy doth appear ; although the
magnitude and flourishing state of the Roman Church is
described, for aggravation of Novatus's schism and ambition.
Pope JuUus 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 sovereign anthority, they flatly denying and
impugning it ; questioning his proceedings as singular, sup
posing him subject to the laws of the Church no less than any
other bishop ; and downrightly affirming each of theraselves
* Et quauquam sciam frater charissime pro mutua dilectione, quam
debemus et exhibemus invicem nobis, florentissimo iUic clero tecum prse-
sidenti, &c. Ep. 55. [Ep. 59. p. 148. Leipsiae, 1838.]— And althongh I
know, most dear brother, out of the mutual love and respect, which we
owe aud yield one to another, &c.
t Chm de excessu boni viri CoUegae mei, rumor apud nos incertus
esset CoUegae cbarissimi.— Cypr. Ep. 4. [Ep. 9. p. 17. Leipsiae, 1838,]
J Quam ex aequo, et civilis mentio Episcopi Romani ab Episcopo Car-
thaguiis apud Clerum .' Rigalt. Ibid.
§ Cypr. Ep. 46. 48. |1 Euseb. 6. 43.

172 A treatise of
to be his equal; about which point he thought good not to con
tend with them, but waring pretences to superiority, he justi
fieth his actions by reasons, grounded on the merit of the cause,
such as any other bishop might aUege : but this epistle I shall
have raore particular occasion to discuss.
Pope Liberius hath an epistle toSt. Athanasius, whereinhe not
only (for his direction and satisfaction) doth inquire his opinion
about the point ; but professeth, in compliment perchance.
that he shall obediently follow it : " Write (saith he) whether
you do think as we do and just so about the true faith ; that I
may be undoubtedly assured about what you think good to
coraraand me ;"* was not that spoken indeed like a courteous
sovereign, and an accomplished judge in raatters of faith?
The sarae Pope in the head of the Western, doth write to a
knot of Eastern bishops, whora they call " their belovedbretbren
and fellow-ministers ;"f and in a brotherly strain, not like an
emperor. In the tirae of Daraasus, successor to Liberius, St, Basil
hath divers epistles to the Western bishops, wherein having re
presented and bewailed the wretched state of the Eastern
Churches, then overborne with heretics, and unsettled by fac
tions, he craveth their charity, their prayers, " their sympathy,
their comfort, their brotherly aid;"} by affording to the or
thodox and sound party the countenance of their communion,
by joining with them in contention for truth and peace ; for
that the coraraunion of so great Churches would be of mighty
weight to support and strengthen their cause ; giring 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
imraediately subject to the eastern eraperor ; for, " If (saith
he) very many of you do concur unaniraously in the same
opinion, it is raanifest, that the multitude of consenters will
* rpdij/ov, ei o'iiTia ippoveXg KaBb Kai qptXg, Kai ra Iaa iv dXqBivy
rr'iarei' 'iva Kayb} rrtrroiBiag tp dStaKpirotg rrtpi iav d^ioXg KtXtveiv pot.
Liber, ad Ath, tom. 1. p. 243.
t Socr. 4. 12.
t Ep. 61. 69. 70. 74. 182. — "Y'pdg rrapaKoXovptv avprraBqaai qpiiv
rdig Siaipkatai. Ep. 61. [Ep. 90. p. 260, vol.3. Paris. 1839.]— Einoii);
rrapapvBiov dydrrqg, tiTig KOiviavia rrvtvpaTog, elTiva arrXdyxva Kai
o'lKTippOL, KivqBqTe rrpbg Tqv dvriXq^iv qpiav. Ibid. [Id.]— We be
seech you to have a fellow-feeUng of our distractions. — If there be any
comfort of love, any fellowship of the Spirit, any bowels and mercies, be
ye moved with pity and commiseration to help us.

the pope's supremacy. 173
make the doctrine to be received without contradiction ;"* and,
"I know (saith he again, f writing to Athanasius about these
matters) but one way of redress to our Churches, the con-
sphing with us of the Western bishops ;" the which being ob
tained, " would probably yield some advantage to the public,
the secular power revering the credibility of the multitude,
and the people all about foUowing them without repugnance:"}
and, " You (saith he to the Western bishops) the farther you
dweU from them, the more credible you will be to the
people."! This, indeed, was according to the ancient rule and practice
in such cases, that any Church being oppressed with error, or
distracted with contentions, should from the bishops of other
Churches receive aid to the removal of those inconveniences.
That it was the rule doth appear from what we have before
spoken ; and of the practice there be many instances ; for so
did St. Cyprian send two of his clergy to Rome to compose the
schism there, moved by Novatian against Cornelius; || so was
* AoTt x^ipi^ -i-oig E'C yovv KXiBeiai, avyKivqBqria if' ripXv rd dStX-
0ucd vpiav arrXdyxva, rrpoxvBqna Sdxpva avprraBt'iag. Ep. 69. [Ep.
92. p. 264. ut supra.] — 'EmfioqadpeBa Tqv vptrkpav dydrrqv tig rrjv
iiVT'i\qil/iv qpiav Kai avprrdBtiav. Ep. 70. [Ep. 243. p. 539. ut supra.] —
'EXBtXv Tivdg rrap' vpiav tig irrioKe^iv Kai rrapapvBlav Tiav SXt/3o/*l-
vutv. Ibid. — Vid. Ep. 74. (ft piv SiopBoXvTO, tivai KoiviavtKovg, &c,) —
'Edv Si Kai avpij)iaviag rrXtioveg bpov Td avTd SoypaTtaqTt, SijXov 'on
rb «rX^6oe tvv Soypanadvnav dvavTippqrov -rrdai T-fjv rrapaSoxrjv
KaraaKevdaei toxi Soyparog. Ep. 74. (Ep. 293.) [Ep. 263. p. 586. vol.
et ed. ut supra.]
t  Miav imyvovg bSbv jioqBtiag raXg KaB' -qpdg 'EKKXqa'iaig, T-qv
rrapd riav SvTiKtav 'EmaKomav avprrvoiav. — Ep. 48. [Ep. 66. p. 227.
ut supra.]
X Tdxa dv n y'evoiTO ToXg KOivoXg bfeXog, Tiav Te KpaTovvnav Tb
d^iomarov toU rrXqBovg Svaiarrovp'tviav, Kai Tiav kKaaTaxoiJ XaHiv
aKoXoBovvTiav aiiToXg dvavnppiinag. Ibid. [Id.]
§ 'Y/i£tg Si 'baov paKpdv abTiav dmaKiapkvoi TvyxdvtTt, TiaovTOV -rrXkov
napd ToXgXadig d^iomaTov ixere. Ep. 74. [Ep. 263. p. 536. vol. 3. ut
supra.] II Quod servis Dei, et maxime Sacerdotibus jnstis et paciiicis congree-
bat, frater charissime, miseramus nuper coUegas nostros Caldonium et
Fortunatum, ut non tantum persuasione literarum nostrarum, sed prae-
sentia sua, et consiUo omnium vestrum eniterentur, quantum possent, et
elaborarent, ut ad CathoUc® Ecclesiae unitatem scissi corporis membra
componerent. — Cyp. Ep. 42. ad Cornel. Pallad. — As it became the ser
vants of God, especiaUy righteous and peaceable priests, most dear bro
ther, we lately sent our coUeagues, Caldonius and Fortunatus, that they
might, not only by the persuasion of our letters, but also by their pre
sence, and the advice of you aU, endeavour to their utmost and strive to
reduce the members of that divided body to the unity of the CathoUc
Church.

174 A TREATISE OF
St. Chrysostom called to Ephesus (although out of his juris
diction) to settle things there ; so (to omit divers instances oc
curring in history) St. BasU himself was called by the Church
of Iconium to risit it, and to give it a bishop; although it did
not belong to his ordinary inspection; and he doth tell
the bishops of the coasts,* that they should have done well
in sending some to visit and assist his Churches in their dis
tresses. But now how, I pray, cometh it to pass, that in such a case
he should not have a special recourse to the Pope ? but in so
many addresses should only wrap him up in a community?
why should he not humbly petition him to exert his sovereign
authority for the relief of the Eastern Churches, laying his
charge, and inflicting censures on the dissenters ? why should
he lay all the stress of his hopes on the consent of the Western
bishops ? why doth he not say a word of the dominion resi
dent in them over all the Church ? These things are inconceiv
able, if he did take the Pope to be the man our adversaries say
he is.
But St. Basil had other notions;f for, indeed, being so wise
and good a man, if he had taken the Pope for his sovereign, he
would not have taxed hira 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 : (oc
casioned 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, I am in
doubt —for I am apt to say that of Diomedes, you ought not
to request, for he is a haughty man ; for in truth observance
doth render men of proud raanners more contemptuous than
otherwise they are.} For if the Lord be propitious to us, what
other addition do we need ? but if the anger of God continue,
* AvTq KaXeX Kai -qpdg tig 'err'iaKt-^iv, wore avT-y Sovvai 'EiriffKOTroi'.
Bas. Ep. 8. [Ep. 238. p. 333. vol.3, Paris. 1839.]— TrapaXiiirai. 'Ako-
XovBov qv rrapd Tqg vptrkpag dydrrqg Kai Tiav yvqaiiav Tiv&g drro-
ariXXeaBai avvtxiag, tig irriaKtTpiv -qpiav Toiv KaTarrovovptviav. Ep. 77.
[Ep. 203, p. 435, ut supra.]
t Vid. Epist. 272, 273, 321, 325, 349.
X Tip ovTi ydp ^tparrevoptva Td vrrepqfava -rjBq 'tavTtav ireporiTt-
KiiiTtpa yivtaBai rr'tipvKt. Bas. Ep. 10. ad Euseb. Samos. Ep. [Ep. 239.
p. 533. vol. 3. Paris. 1839.] — Ilota (io-iiSrtia -qpXv Trjg SvriKiig o^piogi
01 Toye dXqBeg oijre 'iaaaiv ovTt paBeXv dvixovTai, ^tvSkai Si i}rrovoiatg
rrpotiXqppkvoi tKtXva rroiovai vvv, d rrporepov irri ^apKtXXtp- rrpbg
piv Tovg Tqv dXqBtiav avToXg drrayyiXXovrag ipiXoveiKqaavrtg- rriv
Si a'lptaiv Si' iavriiv fitjiaiiaaavTtg, Ibid, [Id. J

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 175
what help can we have from the Western superciliousness?
who in truth neither know, nor endure to learn ; bnt being
prepossessed with false suspicions, do now do those things,
which they did before in the cause of Marcellus ; affecting to
contend with those, who report the truth to them ; and estab
lishing heresy by themselves:" would that excellent person
(tbe greatest man of his time in reputation for wisdom and
piety) have thus, unbowelUng his mind in an epistle to a very
eminent bishop, smartly reflected on the quaUties and proceed
ings of the Western clergy, charging them vrith pride and
haughtiness, with a suspicious and contentious humour, with
incorrigible ignorance, and indisposition to learn ; if he had
taken him, who was the leader in all these matters, to have
been his superior and sovereign ? would he have added the
foUowing words, iramediately touching him : " I would not in
the common name have vmtten to their ringleader, nothing
indeed about ecclesiastical affairs, except only to intimate, that
they neither do know the truth of things vrith ns, nor do admit
the way by which they may understand it ; but in general
about their being bound not to set npon those, who were hum
bled with aflUctions : nor should judge themselves dignified by
pride, a sin which alone sufficeth to make one God's enemy."*
Snrely this great man knew better what belonged to govern
ment and manners, then in such rude terms to accost his sove
reign : nor would he have given him that character, which
he doth otherwhere ; where speaking of his brother St. Gre
gory Nyssen, he saith he was an unfit agent to Rome ; be
cause, " Although his address vrith a sober man would find
mnch reverence and esteem ; yet to a haughty and reserved
man sitting I know not where above, and thence not able to
bear those below speaking the truth to him, what profit can
there be to the pubUc from the converse of such a man, whose
disposition is averse from ilUberal flattery ?"f But these
* 'Eyia piv ydp a-vTbg dvtv tov koivov ax-qparog i^ovXopqv avrSiv
imiTTtXXai Tip Kopvf a'lip, rrtpi piv Tiav iKKXqaiaOTiKiav ovSiv, ti pfj 'oaov
rrapaiv'iXaaBai, ort miTt laaaiv Tiav rrap' qpXv Tqv dXqBeiav, ovre Tqv
iSov Sl qg dv pdBoitv KaraS'txovTai- KaBoXov Si rrtpi TOv prj StXv ToXg
vrrb TiHv rreipaapiav TarrtiviaBtXaiv 'tmr'iBtaBai, pqSi d^itapa Kpivttv
irrepqipaviav, dpdprrfpa, Kai povov dpKOVv exBpav noirjaat eig Qedv.
Ibid. [Id.]
t Kai eiyviapovi piv dvSpi a'lS'taipov a-VTori Kai rroXXoH diiav Tqv
avvTVxiav vtpqXip Si Kai ptrtiipip, dvia rrov KaBqpkvtp Kai Sid tovto
dicoujij' tuv xapSBev avnp Trjv dXqBeiav ipBeyyop,kviav pfj Svvapkvip Ti
dv ykvoiTO oipeXog roXg KOivoXg, rrapd rrjg tov toiovtov dvSpbg bpiXiag,

176 A TREATISE OF
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 obsequious
ness. St. Chrysostom,f having by the practices of enrious men
combined against hira, in a packed assembly of bishops, upon
vain surmises, been sentenced and driven from his see, did
thereupon write an epistle to Pope Innocent I., bishop of
Rorae, together with his brethren the bishops of Italy ;} therein
representing his case, coraplaining of the wrong, vindicating
his innocency, displaying the iniquity of the proceedings
against hira, together with the raischievous consequences of
thera towards the whole Church, then requiring his succour
for redress : yet (although the sense of his case, and care of his
interest were Ukely 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 acknowledgment of the
Pope's supremacy ; he doth not address to him as to a go
vernor of all, who could by his authority coramand justice to
be done,§ but as to a brother, and a friend of innocence, from
whose endeavour he might procure relief; he had recourse not
to his sovereign power, but to his brotherly love ; he informed
his charity, not appealed to his bar ;|| he in short did no more
than implore his assistance in an ecclesiastical way ; that he
would express his resentment of so irregular dealings, that he
would avow communion with him, as with an orthodox bishop
innocent and abused ; that he would procure his cause to be
brought to a fair trial in a Synod of bishops, lawfully called-
and indifferently affected :ir 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
'bg dXXorpiov 'ixti SriaTTtiag dveXevBkpov tS qBog; Bas. Ep. 250. [Ep. 215.
p. 468. vol. 3. Paris. 1839.]
• Anast. ad Joh. Hier. apud Hier.
t Tom. 7. Epist. 122. X Vid. Laun. Epist. 1. 3.
§ Tlpbg Tqv vptTtpav dvaSpapeXv dydrrqv.
II AiSd^optv vpiav Trjv dydrrqv.
^ 'Hpdg St rovg ovx dXovrag, ovk iXtyxopsvovg, ovB drroctiX'
B'tvrag vrrtvBvvovg, Tiav ypappaTiav Tiav vptrkpiav Sort drroXavtiv
Gvvtxiag, Kai Trjg dydrrqg, Kai rrdvTiav Tiav dXXiav, lavrrtp Kai tprrpo-
adtv. — But as for us, we who are not condemned nor convicted, nor
proved guUty, let us continuaUy enjoy the benefit of your letters and love,
and all other things as before.

THE POPES SUPEEMACY. 177
of proceeding in his behalf : but it is plain enough that he had
no such notion of things, nor had any ground for such an one.
For indeed Pope Innocent in his answer to him, could do no
more than exhort him to patience ; in another to his clergy
and people could only comfort them ; declare his dislike of the
adversaries' proceedings and grounds ; signify his intentions to
procure a General Synod, with hopes of a redress thence ; his
sovereign power, it seems, not availing to any such purposes :
" But what (saith he) can we do in such cases ? a synodical
cognizance is necessary, which we heretofore did say ought to
be called; the which alone can aUay the motions of such
tempests."* It is true that the later Popes (Siricius, Anastasius, Inno
cent, Zozimus, Bonifacius, Celestinus, &c.) after the Sardican
Council in their epistles to the Western bishops, over whom
they had encroached, and who were overpowered by them, &c.
do speak in somewhat more lofty strain ; but are more modest
toward those of the East, who could not bear, &c.
22. Further: it is most prodigious that in the disputes ma
naged by the Fathers against heretics (the Gnostics, Valenti-
nians, Marcionites, Montanists, Manichees, PauUanists, Arians,
&c.) they should not, even in the first place allege and urge
the sentence of the universal pastor and judge, as a most eri
dently conclusive argument, as the most efficacious and com
pendious method of conrincing and sUencing them : had this
point been well proved and pressed, then without any more
concertations from Scripture, tradition, reason, all heretics
had been quite defeated ; and nothing then could more easily
have been proved, if it had been true ; when the light of tradi
tion did shine so brightly ; nothing indeed had been to sense
more conspicuous, than the continual exercise of such an au
thority. We see now among those who admit of such an authority,
how surely when it may be had it is aUeged, and what sway it
hath, to the determination of any controversy ; and so it would
have been then, if it had been then as commonly known and
avowed. 23. Whereas divers of the Fathers purposely do treat on i
methods of confuting heretics, it is strange they should be so '
* 'AXXd rt Kara Tiav TotoVTiav vvv iv Tip rrapovn rrotqaiaptv; dvay-
Kaia ian Sidyviaaig avvoSiKq rjv Kai rrdXai iipqpev avvaBpoiaTtav
povq ydp ianv, j/ne SvvaTai rdg Kivqatig nav ToiovTiav KaTaareXXai
KaraiyiSiav—Soz. 8. 26, [Cantab. 1720.]
VOL. I. N

178 A TREATISE OP
blind or dull, as not to hit on this most proper and obrious
way, of referring debates to the decision of him, to whose oflBce
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 raeans of settling points
of faith, and of overthrowing heresies, should not light upon
this notable way, by haring recourse to the Pope's magisterial
sentence ; yea that indeed he should exclude it : for he*
(after raost intent study and diligent inquiry, consulting the
best and wisest raen) could find but two ways of doing it : "1
(saith he)f did always and from almost every one receive this
answer, that if either I or any other would find out the frauds
and avoid the snares of upstart heretics, and continue sound
and upright in the true faith, he should guard and strengthen
his faith, God helping him by these two raeans, viz, : first by
the authority of the Divine law, and then by the tradition of
the cathoUc Church." And again :} " We before have said,
that this hath always been, and is at present the custom of
catholics, that they prove their faith by these two ways, first,
by the 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 rauch sway, and
who doth express great reverence to the Apostolic see), should
omit that way of determining points, which of all (according
to the modern conceits about the Pope), is most ready and
most sure ?
24. In like manner Tertullian professeth the catholics in
his time to use such compendious methods bf confuting here
tics : " We (saith he),^ when we would dispatch against here-
* Saepe igitur magno studio, et summa attentione perquirens i quam-
plurimis sanctitate et doctrina praestantibus viris, &c. p. 316.— (in edit.
Balus.) t Hujusmodi semper responsum ab omnibus fere retuU, qubd sive ego
sive quis alius vellet exurgeutium hasreticorum fraudes deprehendere,
laqueosque vitare, et iu fide sana sanus atque integer permanere, duplici
modo munire fidem suam Domino adjuvante deberet, Primo sciUcet, divinse
legis Auctoritate, tum deinde Ecclesiae Catholicae traditione. p. 317.
J Diximus in superioribus banc fuisse semper et esse hodie Catholico
rum consuetudinem ut fidem veram duobus his modis adprobent, Primum
divini Canonis Auctoritate, deinde Ecclesiae CathoUcse traditione. p. 364.
§ His fere compendUs utimur, quum de EvangeUi fide adversus Hitre-
ticos expedimur, defendentibus et temporum ordinem posteritati falsano-
rum prsescribentem, et auctoritatem Ecclesiarum traditioni Apostolorum
patrocinantem. Tertull. in Marc. 4. 5.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 179
tics 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 patronizing apostolical tradition ;" but why did he
skip over a more corapendious way than any of those, namely,
standing to the judgraent ofthe Roman bishop ?*
25. It is true that both he, and St. Irenseus before him,
disputing against the heretics of their times, who had intro
duced pernicious novelties of their own derising, when they
allege the general consent of Churches (planted by the Apos
tles, and propagated by continual successions of bishops from
those whom the Apostles did ordain) in doctrines and practices
opposite to those derices, as a good argnmeut (and so indeed
it then was, next to a demonstration) against them, do produce
the Roman Church as a principal one among them, upon
several obrious accounts ; and this indeed argueth the Roraan
Church to have been then one corapetent vritness, or credible
retainer of tradition ;f as also were the other apostoUcal
Churches, to whose testimony they likewise appeal : but what
is this to the Roraan bishop's judicial power in such cases ?
why do they not urge that in plain terms ? They would cer-
tamly have done so, if they had known it, and thought it of
any vaUdity.
Do but mark their words, involring the force of their argu
mentation : " When (saith Irenseus)} we do again (after
aUegation of Scripture) appeal to that tradition, which is from
the Apostles, which by successions of presbyters is preserved
in the Churches :" and, " that (saith Tertullian) § wiU appear
to have been delivered by the Apostles, which hath been kept
as holy in the apostolical Churches : let us see what milk the
Corinthians did draw from Paul ; what the PhiUppians, the
* Solemus haereticis compendii gratis de posteritate praescribere. TertuU.
contra Hermog. cap. 1.
t The like discourse against heretics doth Clemens Alex. use. Strom.
7. p. 549.
t Cilm autem ad eam iterum traditionem, quae est ab Apostolus, quae
per successores Presbyterorum in Ecclesiis custoditur, provocamus. — Iren.
3.2. ^ Constabit id esse ab ApostoUs traditum quod apud Ecclesias Aposto
Ucas fiierit sacrosanctum ; videamus quod lac a Paulo Corintbii hauserint ;
quid legant PhUippenses, Thessalonicenses, Ephesii ; quid etiam Romani
de proximo sonent ; quibus EvangeUum et Petrus et Paulus sanguine
quoque suo signatum reliquerunt ; habemus et Johannis alumnas Eccle
sias, &c. Adv. Marc. 4. 5. N 2

180 A TREATISE OF
Thessalonians, the Ephesians do read : what also the Romans
our nearer neighbours do say, to whom both Peter and Paul
did leave the Gospel sealed with their blood ; we have also the
Churches nursed by St. John," &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
accounted true ; as undoubtedly holding that, which the
1 Churches did receive from the Apostles, the Apostles from
Christ, and Christ from God ; but all other doctrine 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 short is plainly this, that the con
spiring of the Churches in doctrines contrary to those, which
the heretics vented, did irrefragably signify those doctrines to
be apostolical ; which discourse doth nowise favour the Roman
pretences, but indeed, if we do weigh it, is very prejudicial
thereto; it thereby appearing, that Christian doctors then in
the canvassing of points and assuring tradition had no peculiar
regard to the Roman Church's testiraony, no deference at all
to the Roraan bishop's authority; (not other at least than to
the authority of one single bishop yielding attestation to tra
dition.) 26. It is odd, that even old Popes themselves in elaborate
tracts disputing against heretics (as Pope Celestine against
Nestorius and Pelagius, Pope Leo against Eutyches--) do con
tent themselves to urge testimonies of Scripture, and argu
ments grounded thereon ; not alleging their own definitive
authority, or using this parlous argumentation, " I, the supreme
/doctor of the Church, and judge of controversies, do assert
thus ; and therefore you are obUged to submit your assent."
27. It is matter of amazement, if the Pope were snch as
they would have him to be, that in so many bulky volumes of
the ancient Fathers, living through many ages after Christ, in
those vast treasuries of learning and knowledge, wherein all
sorts of truth are displayed, aU sorts of duty are pressed ; this
moraentous point of doctrine and practice should nowhere be
* Constat proinde omnem doctrinam, quae cum iUis Ecclesiis Aposto
licis matricibus et originalibus fidei conspiret, veritati deputandam, id
sine dubio tenentem quod Ecclesiae ab Apostolis, Apostoli a Christo,
Christus a Deo suscepit ; reUquam vero doctrinam de mendacio prsjndi-
candam, quae sapiat contra veritatem Ecclesiarum, et Apostolorum, et
Christi, et Dei.— Tert. de praescr. 21.

THE pope's SUpflE.MAClf. 181
expressed in clear, and peremptory terms ; (I speak so, for
that by wresting words, by impertinent appUcation, by
straining consequences the most ridiculous positions imaginable
may be deduced from their writings.)
It is strange that somewhere or other, at least incidentally,
in their commentaries upon the Scripture, wherein many
places concerning the Church and its luerarchy do inrite to
speak of the Pope ; in their treatises about the priesthood,
about the unity and peace of the Church, about heresy and
schism ; in their epistles concerning ecclesiastical affairs ; in
their historical narrations about occurrences in the Church, in
their concertations with heterodox adversaries, they should not
frequently touch it, they should not sometimes largely dwell
upon it.
Is it not marveUous, that Origen, St. Hilary, St. CyrU, St.
Chrysostom, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, in their commentaries
and tractates npon those places of Scripture {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. Augustine in his so many elaborate tractates against
the Donatists (wherein he discourseth so proUxly about the
Church, its unity, communion, discipline), should never insist
upon the duty of obedience to the Pope, or charge those
schismatics with their rebeUion against him, or allege his
authority against them ?
If we consider that the Pope was bishop ofthe imperial city,
the metropoUs of the world ; that he thence was most eminent
in rank, did abound in wealth, did live in great splendour and
reputation ; had many dependencies, and great opportunities
to gratify, and reUeve many of the clergy ; that ofthe Fathers,
whose volumes we have, all well affected towards him, divers
were personally obliged to him, for his support in their distress
(as Athanasius, Chrysostom, Theodoret), or as to their patrons
and benefactors (as St. Jerome) : divers could not but highly
respect him as patron of the cause wherein they were engaged
(as BasU, Gregory Nazianzen, Hilary, Gregory Nyssen,
Ambrose, Augustine) : some were his partizans in a common
quarrel (as Cyril) : divers of them lived in places, and times
wherein he had got much sway (as all the Western bishops) :
that he had then improved his authority much beyond the old
limits : that aU the bishops of the Western or Latin Churches
had a pecuUar dependence on him (especially after that by

182 A TREATISE OF
advantage of his station, by favour ofthe court, by colour of
the Sardicancanons, by voluntary deferences and submissions,
by several tricks he had wound hiraself to meddle in most of
their chief affairs) : that hence divers bishops were tempted to
admire, to court, to flatter him ; that divers aspiring Popes
were apt to encourage the coraraenders of their authority which
they theraselves were apt to magnify and inculcate;* considering,
I say, such things, it is a wonder, that in so many voluminous
discourses so little should be said favouring this pretence, so
nothing that proveth it, [so rauch that crosseth it, so much
indeed (as I hope to shew) that quite overthroweth it.]
If it be asked how we can prove this : I answer, that (beside
who carefully peruseth those old books, will easily see it) we
are beholden to our adversaries for proring it to us, when they
least intended us such a favour ; for that no clear and cogent
passages for proof of this pretence can be thence fetched, is
sufficiently evident from the very allegations, which after their
most diligent raking in old books they produce ; the which are
so few, and fall so very short of their purpose, that without
much stretching they signify nothing.
28. It is monstrous, that in the code ofthe Catholic Church
(consisting of the decrees of so many Synods, concerning
ecclesiastical order and discipline) there should not be one
canon directly declaring his authority ; nor any mention made
of him, except thrice accidentally ; once upon occasion of
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 pririleges with him.f
If it be objected, that these discourses are negative, and
therefore of small force ; I answer, that therefore they are
most proper to assert such a negative proposition ; for how can
we otherwise better shew a thing not to be, than by shewing it
to have no footstep there, where it is supposed to stand ? how
can we raore clearly argue a raatter 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 exercise
of it ? Such arguments indeed in such cases are not merely
* T^f 'Piapa'iiav imaKorrqg bpoiiag Ty ' AXe^avSpeiav rr'epa rtjj
'itpiaavvqg irri SvvaoTt'iav r'lSq rrdXai rrpotXBovaqg. Soc. 7. 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.
t Cone. Nie. Can. 6. Cone. Const. Can. 2. Cone. Chalc. Can. 28.

THE pope's SUPllEMACY. 183
negative, but rather privative ; proving things not to be,
because not affirmed there, where in reason they ought to be
affirmed ; standuig therefore upon positive suppositions, that
holy Scripture, that general tradition are not imperfect and
lame toward their design ; that ancient writers were compe
tently intelUgent, faithful, diUgent ; that all of them could not
conspire in perpetual sUence about things, of which they had
often fair occasion, and great reason to speak : in fine, such
considerations, however they may be deluded by sophistical
wits, wiU yet bear great sway, and often vriU amount near to
the force of demonstration, with raen of honest prudence.
However, we shaU proceed to other discourses more direct and
positive against the popish doctrine.
II. Secondly, we shall shew that this pretence, upon several
accounts, is contrary to the doctrine of holy Scripture.
1. This pretence doth thwart the holy Scripture, by assign
ing to another the prerogatives, and pecuUar titles appropri
ated therein to our Lord.
The Scripture asserteth him to be our only Sovereign
Lord and King : " To ns (saith it) there is one Lord ;" and,
"One King shaU be king over thera;" who "shall reign
over the house of David for ever, and of his kingdom there
shaU 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 " I will
(said God in the prophet) set up one Shepherd over them,
and he shall feed the sheep :" and " There (saith our Lord
himself) shall be one fold, and one shepherd ;"f who that shall
be, he expresseth, adding, " I am the good Shepherd ; the
good Shepherd giveth his Ufe for the sheep," (by Pope Boni
face, his good leave, who raaketh St. Peter or himself this
shepherd.)} The Scripture telleth us, that we have " oue High-priest of
our profession," answerable to that "one" in the Jewish
Ghnfch, his type.§
The Scripture informeth us, that there is but one Suprerae
• 1 Cor. viii. 6. xu. 5. Eph. iv. 5. Exek. xxxvii. 22. Luke i. 33.
1 Tim. vi. 15, James iv. 12.
t 1 Peter v. 4. it 25. Heb. xiii. 20. Ezek. xxxiv. 23.
X John X. 16. xi. 14. Extrav. Com. Ub. 1. tit, 8. cap. 1.
5 Heb. iii 1. ix. 7, 24.

184 A TREATISE OF
Doctor, Guide, Father of Christians, prohibiting us to ac
knowledge 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 narae) did take this for a good argument ; for
" What therefore, dearest brother (said he to John of Con
stantinople), wilt thou say in that terrible trial of the Judge
who is coraing ; who dost affect to be called not only Father,
but General Father in the world ?"f
The Scripture representeth the Church as " a building
whereof Christ hiraself 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 all things to the Church, which is
his body."§
Hs is the one Spouse of the Church ; which title one would
think he raight leave peculiar to our Lord, there being no rice-
husbands ; yet hath he been bold even to claim that, as may
be seen in the Constitution of Pope Gregory X. in one of their
General Synods. |1
It seemeth therefore a sacrilegious arrogance (derogating
from our Lord's honour) for any man to assume or admitthose
titles of ^" Sovereign of the Church, Head of the Church, our \
Lord, Arch-pastor, High-priest, Chief Doctor, Master, Father,
Judge of Christians ;" upon what pretence, or under what dis
tinction soever : these " pompatic, foolish, 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 Bishop,
and CEcumenical Patriarch, no less modest in sound, and far
» Matth. xxiu. 8, 9.
t Quid ergo frater charissime, in illo terribUi examine venientis judicis
dicturus es, qui non solum Pater, sed etiam generalis Pater in mundo
vocari appetis .' Greg. M. Epist. 4. 38.
X Eph. n. 20. 1 Pet. U. 4.
§ Heb. in. 6. Matth. x. 25. Eph. iv. 4. u. 1 6. Rom. xii, 5. 1 Cor.
xU. 13. Eph. i. 22. iv. 15. v. 23. Col. i. 18. Hos. i. 11. One
Head. II John Ui. 29. Eph. v. 23. 2 Cor. xi. 2. 'ivi dvSp'i. Sext. Decret.
lib. 1. tit. 6. cap. 3.
IT Baron. A. 34. § 208.
** Vid Greg. I. Epist. Ub. 4. Ep. 32, 34, 36, 38, 39. lib. 6. Ep.
24, 28, 30, 31. lib, 7, Ep. 70.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 185
more innocent meaning, than those now ascribed to the Pope),
are therefore to be rejected, not only because they are injurious
to aU other pastors, and to the people of God's heritage ;
but because they do encroach upon our only Lord, to whom
they do only belong ; much more to usurp the things, which
they do naturally signify, is a horrible invasion upon our Lord's
prerogative. Thus hath the great Pope taught us to argue, in words ex
pressly condemning some, and consequentiaUy all of them, to
gether with the things which they signify :* " What (saith he,
writing to the Bishop of Constantinople, who had admitted the
title of Universal Bishop or Patriarch) wilt thou say to Christ,
the head ofthe Universal Church, in the trial ofthe last judg
ment, who by the appeUation of Universal, dost endeavour to
subject aU his members to thee ? Whom I pray dost thou
mean to imitate in so perverse a word, but him who despising
the legions of angels constituted in fellowship with him, did
endeavour to break forth unto the top of singularity, that he
might both be subject to none, and alone be over aU ? who
also said, I wfll ascend into heaven, and wiU exalt my throne
above the stars — for what are thy brethren all the Bishops of
the Universal Church, but the stars of heaven ; to whom
whUe by this haughty word thou desirest to prefer thyself, and
to trample on their name in comparison to thee, what dost thou
say, but I vriU 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 aU things to hiraself,
and studieth by the elation of pompous speech to subject to
himself aU the merabers of Chirist, which do cohere to one
sole head, namely to Christ."f
* Tu quid Christo Universalis Ecclesiae capiti in extremi judicii dic
turus examine, qui cuncta ejus membra tibimet coneris universalis appel-
latione supponere ? quis rogo in hoc tam perverse vocabulo ni si iUe ad
imitandum proponitur, qui despectis Angelorum legionibus secum socia-
liter constitutis ad culmen conatus est singularitatis erumpere, ut et nulU
subesse, et solus omnibus praeesse videretur ? qui etiam dixit. In coelum
consceudam, super astra cceli exaltabo soUum meum — -quid enim fratres
tui omnes Universalis Ecclesise Episcopi, nisi astra cceU sunt ? quibus
dnm cupis temetipsum vocabulo elationis praeponere, eorumque nomen
tui comparatione calcare. — Greg. Ep. 4, 38.
t Jactantiam sumpsit ita ut universa sibi tentet adscribere, et omnia
quae soU uni capiti cohaerent, videUcet Christo, per elationem pompatici
sermonis ejusdem Christi sibi studeat membra subjugare. Greg. M. Ep.

186 A TREATISE OF
Again, " I confidently say, that whoever doth caU himself
Universal Bishop, or desireth to be so called, doth in his ela-
! tion 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 iraagine that even
this Pope could approve, could assume, could exercise it? If
he did, was he not monstrously senseless and above measure
impudent to use such discourses, which so plainly, without
altering a word, raight 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 aU Chris
tians ; the which indeed (seeing never Pope was of greater
repute, or did write in any case raore soleranly and seriously)
have given to the pretences of his successors so deadly a wound,
that no balra 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,f to whora for company
let us adjoin St. Basil M. (that we raay have both Greek and
Latin for it), who saith,} that (according to St. Paul) "we
4. 36. — The same words we have in the Epistle of P. Pelagius (predecessor
of St. Gregory) to the bishops of Constantinople. (P. Pelagu Ep. 8,)
* Ego autem fidenter dico, quia quisquis se Universalem Sacerdotem
vocat, vel vocari desiderat, in elatione sua Antichristum prfficui rit quia
superbiendo se cseteris praeponit. (Greg. I. lib. 6. Ep. 30.) Nei; dispari
superbi^ ad errorem ducitur ; quia sicut pei-versus ilie Deus viiieri vult
super omnes homines ; ita quisquis est, qui solus Sacerdos appeilari ap-
petit, super caeteros Sacerdotes se extollit. ( ad Mauric. Aug.)
t Vid. P. Pelag. Ep. 3.
+ K.paTovaqg SqXovoTi Kai avvarrTOvaqg 'iKaaTov np aXXip rrphg
bpovoiav Trjg pidg Kai povqg dXqBtag Ktij>aXqg, qng ianv o Xpiirroc-
Bas. M. de Jud. div. tom. 2. p. 261. [p. 300. vol. 2. Paris. 1839.]-
Totus Christus Caput et Corpus est ; Caput unigenitus Dei Filins, et Cor
pus ejus Ecclesise, Sponsus et Sponsa, duo in carne una. Quicunque de
ipso Capite ab Scripturis Sanctis dissentiunt, etiamsi in omnibus locis
inveniantur in quibus Ecclesia designata est, non sunt in Ecclesia, &c.
Aug. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 4. [p. 543. vol, 9. Paris. 1837.] — Whole
Christ is the Head and the Body ; the Head the only-begotten Son of God,
and his Body the Church, the Bridegroom and the Spouse, two in one flesh.
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 the Church, &c. — It was unhappUy expressed by BeUarmine  Ec
clesia secluso etiam Christo unum Caput habei-e debet. De Pont. R. 1. 9-
§. Ac ne forte, [p. 291. u. 19. vol. 1. Praga;, 1721.] The Church, even
Christ himself being set aside, ought to have one Head.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 1 87
are tl^e body of Christ and members one of another, be
cause it is manifest, that the one and sole truly head, which
is Christ, doth hold and connect each one to another unto
concord." To decUne these allegations of Scripture, they have forged
distinctions, of several kinds of Churches, and several sorts of
heads; the which evasions I shall not particularly discourse,
seeing it may suffice to observe in general, that no such distinc
tions have any place or any ground in Scripture ; nor can well
consist with it ; which simply doth represent the Church as
one kingdom, " a kingdom of heaven, a kingdom not of this
world ;"* all the subjects whereof have their -KoXirevfia in
heaven, or are considered as members of a city there ; so that
it is vain to seek for a sovereign thereof in this world ; the
which also doth to the cathoUc Church sojourning on earth
usually irapart the narae and attributes properly appertaining
to the Church raost universal (coraprehensive of all Christians
in heaven and upon earth)f because that is a risible represen
tative 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 understood of the other ; especially considering
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 corporal or visible head of this
spiritual body is needful.}
It was to be sure a risible headship, which St. Gregory did
so eagerly impugn, and exclaim against; for he could not ap
prehend the bishop of Constantinople so vrild, as to affect a
jurisdiction over the Church, mystical or invisible.
2. ^Indeed, upon this very account the Romish pretence doth
not well accord vrith holy Scripture,^ because it transforraeth
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
* John xvui. 36. PhU. iu. 20. Heb. xu. 22.
t Acts XX. 28. Matth. xvi. 18. 1 Cor. xu. 28. xv. 9. Gal. i. 13.
} Matth. xxviU. 20. Christus arbitrio et nutu ac praesentia sua et
prsepositos ipsos, et Ecclesiam cum praepositis gubernat. Cypr, Ep. 69.
—Christ by his own arbitrement and power and presence governs both tbe
bishops themselves, and the Church with the bishops.
§ John xvui. 36. || Eph. iv. 4, 5. 2 Cor. x. 4.

188 A, TREATISE OP
charity ;* but this pretence turneth it into a worldly frame ;
united by the sarae bands of interest and design, managed ui
the sarae manner by terror and aUureraent, supported by the
same props of force, of policy, of wealth, of reputation and
splendour, as all other secular corporations are.
You raay call it what you please, but it is erident that in
truth the Papal monarchy is a temporal dominion, driring on
worldly ends by worldly means; such as our Lord did never
mean to institute 5 so that the subjects thereof raay with far
more reason, than the people of Constantinople had, when
their bishop Nestorius did stop sorae of their priests from con
tradicting him, say, " We have a king, a bishop we have not ;"t
so that upon every Pope we may charge that, whereof Anthi
mus was accused, in the Synod of Constantinople, under
Menas : " that he did account the greatness and dignity of
the priesthood to be not a spiritual charge of souls, but as a
kind of politic rule."}
This was that, which seeming to be affected by the bishop
of Antioch, in encroachment upon the Church of Cyprus, the
Fathers of the Ephesine Synod did endeavour to nip ; enact
ing a canon against all such invasions, § " lest under pretext of
holy discipline the pride of worldly authority should creep
in ;" and what pride of that kind could they mean beyond that
which now the Popes do claim and exercise. || Now, do I say,
after that the Papal empire hath swollen to such a bulk;
whereas so long ago, when it was but in its bud, and stripling
age, it 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."^
* Caput nostrum, quod Christus est, ad hoc sua esse membra nos
voluit, ut per compagem charitatis et fidei unum nos in se corpus efficeret
Greg. M. Ep. 7. 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.
t BaaiXka ixopev, 'ErriaKorrov ovk exoptv. Cone. Eph. part. cap. 30.
t Tb Trjg dpxiepwffuvije pkytBog Kai d^iiapa ov rrvsvpariKqv.ilivxii"'
imaraa'iav t'ivai Xoyiadpevog, dXX' oioi' nva rroXiTiKqv dpxqv, &c.
Cone, sub Men. Act. i. p. 9.
§ MqSi iv 'itpovpyiag rrpoax-qpan l^ovaiag KoapiKqg rinpog rraptm
Svqrai. Con. Eph. 1. Can. 8.
||Thiswasthatwhich,aboutthesametime,theFathersof the African Synod
do request P. Celestine to forbear ; — nee permittere, ut fumosum mundi
fastum Christi Ecclesiae inducere videamur. Cone. Afr. ad P. Celest. 1.
IF Tijg 'Yiapa'iiav 'EmaKorrrjg bpoiiag Ty 'AXeS,avSpkiav rr'epa rqi ifP"-
avvqr irri Swaartiav rrdXai rrpotXBovaqg Socr. 7. 11. [Cantab. 1720.]

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 189
3. This pretence doth thwart the Scripture by destroying
that brotherly co-ordination and equality, which our Lord did
appoint among the bishops and chief pastors of his Church.
He did (as we before shewed) prohibit all his Apostles to as
sume any denomination or authoritative superiority over one
another ; the which command, together with others concern
ing the pastoral function, we may well suppose to reach their
successors ; so did St. Jerome suppose, collecting thence that
aU 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
Eugubiura, at Constantinople or at Rhegium, at Alexandria or
at Thanis, he is of the sarae worth, and of the same priesthood ;
the power of wealth or lowness of poverty do not make a
bishop higher or lower, but all are successors ofthe Apostles ;"*
where doth not he plainly deny the bishop of Eugubiura to be
inferior to him of Rome, as being no less a successor of the
Apostles than he ? doth he not say these words, in way of
proofjf that the authority of the Roman bishop or Church
was of no validity against the practice of other bishops and
Churches ? (upon occasion of deacons there taking upon them
more than in other places, as cardinal-deacons do now) which
excludeth such distinctions, as scholastical fancies have devised
to shift off his testimony, the which he uttered simply, never
dreaming of such distinctions.
This consequence St. Gregory did suppose, when he there
fore did condemn the title of " Universal Bishop," because it
did "imply an affectation of superiority," and dignity in one
bishop above others ; of " abasing the name of other bishops
m comparison of his own," of extolUng " himself above the rest
of priests," &c.}
This the ancient Popes did reraeraber, when usuaUy in their
compeUation of any bishop, they did style thera, " brethren,
* Ubicunque fuerit Episcopus sive Romae, sive Eugubu, sive Constan-
tmopoU sive Rhegii, sive Alexandriae sive Thanis, ejusdem meriti, ejtisdem
et sacerdotii ; potentia divitiarum et paupertatis humiUtas vel sublimio-
rem vel inferiorem Episeopum non facit ; caeteriim omnes Apostolorum
successores sunt. Hier. Ep. 85. (ad Evagr.) [vol.4. Ep. 101. p. 803.
Paris. 1606.]
t Si auctoritas quaeritur, orbis major est urbe ; Ubicunque, &c.
i Illud appetunt unde omnibus digniores videantur. Gr. Ep. 4, 34 —
Cluia superbiendo se caeteris praponit. Ep. 6. 38. — Super cieteros Sacer
dotes se extolUt. Ib.— Cupis Episcoporum nomen tui comparatione cal
care. Ep. 4. 38. — Cuncta ejus membra tibimet conaris supponere. Ib.

190 A TREATISE OF
colleagues, fellow-ministers, fellow-bishops,"* not intending
thereby compliment or mockery, but to declare their sense of
the original equaUty among bishops ; notwithstanding some
differences in order and privileges, which their see had ob
tained. And that this was the general sense of the Fathers
we shall afterwards shew.
Hence, when it was objected to them, that they did affect
superiority, they did sometiraes disclaim it ; so did Pope Ge
lasius I. (a zealous raan for the honour of his see.)f
4. This pretence doth thwart the holy Scripture, not only
by trarapling down the dignity of bishops (which, according to
St Gregory, doth iraply great pride and presumption) but as
really infringing the rights granted by our Lord to his Chnrclj,
and the governors ofit.}
For to each Church our Lord hath imposed a duty, and im
parted a power of maintaining Divine truth, and so approring
itself " a pillar and support of truth:" of deciding controversies
possible and proper to be decided with due temper, ultimately
without farther resort ; for that he, who will not obey or ac
quiesce in its decision, is to be "as a heathen or publican :"§
of censuring, and rejecting offenders (in doctrine, or demean
our) : " Those within (saith St. Paul to the Church of Corinth)
do not ye judge ? But them that are without God judgeth ;
wherefore put away from among yourselves that wicked per
son :"|| of preserving order and decency; according to that
rule, prescribed to the Church of Corinth, "let aU things; be
done decently and in order :"^ of promoting edification : of
deciding causes.
All which rights and privileges the Roraan bishop doth be-
* (Invigiletur ergo ut omnibus co-Episcopis nostris et fratribus inno-
tescat. P. Com. apud Cypr. Ep. 48 ) [Ep. 50. p. 97. Lipsiae, 1838.] ' '
t Hie non tam optamus praeponi aliis, (sicut praedicas) qu^m cum fide
libus cunctis sanctum et Deo placitum habere consortium. P. Gelas, I.
Ep. 9. (ad Euphem. Ep. CP.) — Here we do not so much desire to bead-
vanced above others, as together with all the faithful to make up a con
sort holy and well-pleasing to God.
t Vobis Eubtrahitur, quod alteri plus quam ratio exigit prsebetur.
Greg. 7. 30. !p. 451.)— What is yielded to another more than reason re
quires, is taiien from you. — rrpaypa —Trjg rrdvTiav iXtvBepiagarrTopevQV.
Syn Eph. I. Can. 8. A thing that entrencheth upon the freedom of all
others. § Apoc. ii. et iu. 1 Tim. iii. 15. Matth. xviu. 17. idv Si rrapaieoiny,!"'-
Ovxi Tovg eaia vp.Xg Kp'ivtrt ;
II ] Cor. V, 12 Kai ejaipc— Vid. v. 4, 5. Apoc. ii, 20'.
fl Cor xiv, 40. 1 Thess, v. 14. Rom. xiv. 19. 1 Cor. vi. 1.

THE pope's supremacy. 191
reave the Churches of, snatching them to himself ; pretending
that he is the sovereign doctor, judge, regulator of all Churches ;
overruling and voiding all that is done by thera, according to
h^pleasure. TEe~^cripture hath enjoined and empowered aU bishops
to feed, guide, and rule their respective Churches, as the
ministers, stewards, ambassadors, angels of God ; " for the
perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the
edification of the body of Christ."* To them God hath
committed the care of their people, so that they are responsible
for their souls.f
AU which rights and privileges of the episcopal office the
Pope hath invaded, doth obstruct, cramp, frustrate, destroy ;
pretending (without any warrant) that their authority is de
rived from him ; forcing them to exercise it no otherwise than
as his subjects, and according to his pleasure. But of this
point more afterward.}
5. This pretence doth thwart the Scripture, by robbing all
Christian people of the hberties and rights, with which by that
dirine charter they are endowed, and which they are obUged
to preserve inriolate.§
St. Paul enjoineth the Galatians to " stand fast in the Uberty,
wherewith Christ hath made us free ; and not to be entangled
again with the yoke of bondage;" || there is therefore a Uberty,
which we must maintain, and a power to which we must not
submit ; and against whom can we have more ground to do
this, than against; him, who pretendeth to dogmatize, to define
points of faith, to impose doctrines (new and strange enough)
on our consciences, under a peremptory obligation of yielding
assent to them ? to prescribe laws, as divine and necessary to
be observed, without warrant, as those dogmatists did, against
* Acts XX. 28. Heb. xUi. 17. 1 Pet. v. 2. .1 Tim. iu. 15. Tit. i. 7.
1 Cor. xu. 28. Eph. iv. 11. Apoc. u., &c. Eph.iv. 12.
+ Heb. xui. 17.
X Dei et ApostoUca sedis gratis. Vid. post. Superbum nimis est et
immoderatum ultra fines proprios tendere, et antiquitate calcat^ alienum
jus veUe praeripere, atque ut unius crescat dignitas, tot Metropolitanorum
impugnare primatus, &c. P. Leo I. Ep. 55. — It is too proud and unrea
sonable a thing for one to stretch himself beyond his bounds, and maugre
all antiquity to snatch away other men's rig^t, and that the dignity of one
may be enhanced, to oppose the primacies of so many MetropoUtans.
§ SauctiE EcclesiiE universali injmiam facit. Greg. I. Ep 4.32. — It
does wrong to the Holy Catholic Church.— Plebis [iutus positse fideUs
atque incorrupta] Majestas. — Cypr. Ep. 55. (ad Corn. P.) Ep. 59. p.
147. Lipsiae, 1838.] (| Gal. v. 1.

192 A TREATISE OP
whom St. Paul biddeth us to maintain our Uberty : (so that if
he should declare "virtue to be rice, and white to be black,
we must beUeve him,"* some of his adherents have said, con
sistently enough vrith his pretences); for,
Against such tyrannical invaders we are bound to maintain
our liberty, according to that precept of St. Paul ; the which if
a Pope might well allege against the proceedings of a General ^
Synod.f with much more reason may we therefore justify our
non-submission to one raan's exorbitant domination.
This is a power, which the Apostles themselves did not chal
lenge to themselves ; for "we (saith St. Paul) have not do
minion over your faith, but are helpers of your joy."}
They did not pretend, that any Christian should absolutely
beUeve them, in cases wherein they had not revelation (general
or special) from God ; in such cases referring their opinion to
the judgment and discretion of Christians. §
They say, " Though we or an angel from heaven preach any
other Gospel unto you, than that which we have preached
unto you, let him be accursed ; if any man," || &c. which pre
cept, with many others of the like purport (enjoining us to
examine the truth, to adhere unto the received doctrine, to
decline heterodoxies and novelties), doth signify nothing, if
every Christian hath not allowed to him a judgment of dis
cretion, but is tied blindly to follow the dictates of another.
St. Augustine (I am sure) did think this Uberty such, that
without betraying it no man could be obliged to beUeve any
thing not grounded upon canonical authority : for to a Dona-
tist his adversary, citing the authority of St. Cyprian agamst
him, he thus replieth : " But now seeing it is not canonical
which thou recitest, with that liberty to which the Lord hath
called us, I do not receive the opinion, differing from Scripture,
of that man whose praise I cannot reach, to whose great learn
ing I do not compare my writings, whose wit I love, in whose
speech I delight, whose charity I admire, whose martyrdom 1
reverence."^ • Gal. V. 1. Coloss. u. 16, 18.
t P. Leo I. Ep. 28. X 2 Cor. i. 24.
^ 1 Cor, A. 15. vU. 12, 25, 40. || Gal.i. 8.
f Nunc vero quoniam Canonieum non est quod recitas, ek libertate ad
quam nos vocavit Dominus, ejus viri, cujus laudem consequi non valeo,
cujus multis literis Scripta mea non compare, cujus ingenium dihgo, cujus
ore detector, cujus cbaritatem miror, cujus martyrium veneror, hoc quod
aliter sapuit non accipio. Aug. contr. Cresc. 2. 32. [p. 669. vol, 9. Pans.
1837]

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 193
This liberty, not ouly the ancients, but even divers Popes
have acknowledged to belong to every Christian ; as we shall
hereafter shew, when we shall prove, that we may lawfully re
ject the Pope, as a patron of error and iniquity.
6. It particularly doth thwart Scripture by wronging
princes in exempting a numerous sort of people from subjec
tion to their laws and judicatures ; whereas by God's ordina
tion and express command " every soul is subject to them ;"*
not excepting the Popes themselves ; (in the opinion of St.
Chrysostom, except they be greater than any Apostle.)
By pretending to govern the subjects of princes vrithout
their leave ; to make laws, without his permission or confirma
tion ; to cite his subjects out of their territories, &c. which
are encroachments upon the rights of God's unquestionable
ministers, III. Farther, because our adversaries do Uttle regard any
aUegation of Scripture against them (pretending themselves to
be the only masters of its sense or of common sense, judges and
interpreters of them) we do allege against them, that this pre
tence doth also cross tradition, and the common doctrine of the
Fathers. For,
1. Common usage and practice is a good interpreter of
right, and that sheweth no such right was knovm in the pri-
' mitive Church —
' 2. Indeed, the state of the primitive Church did not ad
mit it. ^
' 3. The Fathers did suppose no order in the Church, by
• original right or Divine institution, superior to that of a
bi^op ;f whence they commonly did style a bishop the highest
priest, and episcopacy the top of ecclesiastical orders.
" The chief priest (saith TertuUian),} that is the bishop,
hath the right of giring baptism."
! " Although§ (saith Saint Ambrose) the presbyters also do
it, yet the beginning of the ministry is from the highest
priest." * Rom. xiii. 1.
t 'Atto Toi Kvpiov SiSaxBevTtg dKoXovBiav rrpaypdnav ToXg piv
'EmaKorrotg rd Trjg dpxi-^pi^^^i^iig iveipaptv, &c. Const. Apost. 8. 46.
X Dandi qnidem jus habet summus Sacerdos, qui est Episcopus. Tert.
de Bapt. c. 1 7.
^ Licet enim et preshyteri faciant, tamen exordium ministerii est a
summo sacerdote. Ambr. de Sacr. 3. 1. Suscepisti gubernacula summi
sacerdotu. Id. Ep. 5.
VOL. I. O

194 A TREATISE OP
Optatus calleth bishops "the tops and princes of aU."*
" The Dirine order of bishops (saith Dionysi«s)f 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 accomplished."
This language is common even among Popes themselves,
complying with the speech then current; for, "presbyters!
(saith Pope Innocent I.) although they are priests, yet have
they not the top of high priesthood."
"No raan (saith Pope ZosimusI.),§ against the precepts of
the Fathers should presume to aspire to the highest priest
hood of the Church."
"It is decreed (saith Pope Leo I.)|| that the chorepiscopi,
or presbyters, who figure the sons of Aaron, shaU not pre
sume to snatch that, which the princes of the priests (whom
Moses and Aaron did typify) are commanded to do." (Note
by the way, that seeing according to this Pope's mind (after
St. Jerome)^ Moses and Aaron did in the Jewish policy re
present bishops, there was none there to prefigure the Pope.)
* Apices et Principes omnium Sacerdotes. Opt. 1. Ecclesiae salus in
summi Sacerdotis dignitate pendet. Hier. c. Lucif. 4. — ^The safety of tie
Church depends upon the dignity of the High-priest. — Ego dignus summo
sacerdotio decemebar. Id. Ep. 99. (ad AseU.) — In episcopo omnes or.
dines sunt, quia primus Sacerdos est, hoc est princeps sacerdotum, et pro
pheta et evangelista, et caetera adimplenda officia Ecclesite in ministerio
fidelium. Ambros. in Eph. iv. 11. — In the" bishop there are aU orders,
because he is the first priest, (i. e.) the prince of priests, and prophet and
evangelist, and aU other ofiices of the Churcb, to be fulfilled in the minis.
try of the faithful.
t 'H Srtia Tiav itpapxiav Td^ig, &c. supr. Pontifex princeps sacerdotum
est, quasi via sequentium ; ipse et summus sacerdos, ipse et pontifex maxi
mus nuncupatur. Lsid. Hisp. apud Grat. dist. 21. cap. 1.
X Nam preshyteri, licet sint sacerdotes, pontificatiis tamen apicem non
habent. P. Innoc. I. Ep. 1. (ad Decent. ) — dum facUe imponuntur manas,
dum negligenter summus sacerdos eligitur. Id. Ep. 12. (ad Aurel.)
§ Ne quis contra patrum praecepta — ad summum Ecclesiae sacerdotium
aspirare prajsumeret. P. Zoz. I. Ep. 1. (ad Hesych.)
II Idedque id quod tanttim facere principibus sacerdotum jussum eat,
quorum typum Moses et Aaron tenuerunt, omnino decretum est, ut Cho
repiscopi vel Preshyteri qui fiUorum Aaron gestant figuram, arripere non
praesumant. P. Leo, Ep. 88. Pontificatus apicem nou habent. Ibid, Vid.
Ep 84. cap. 5,
IT S, Hier, ad Evagr. (Jt sciamus traditiones ApostoUcas sumptaa k
veteri Testamento, Quod Aaron et filii ejus atque Levitee in templo fiierunl,
hoc sibi episcopi, preshyteri et diaconi vendicant in Ecclesia. Or. 19.
p 309.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 1 95
In those days the bishop of Nazianzum* (a petty town in
Cappadocia) was an high -priest (so Gregory caUeth his
father.) And the bishop of a poor city in Africa, is styled
"Sovereign Pontiff of Christ, most blessed Father, most
blessed Pope ;"f and the very Roman clergy doth eaU St.
Cyprian, " most blessed and glorious Pope ;"} whigh titles the
Pope doth now so charUy reserve and appropriate to himself.
But innumerable instances of this kind might be produced ;
I shall only therefore add two other passages, which seem
very observable, to the enforcement of this discourse.
St. Jerome, reprehending the discipline of the Montanists,
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 into the third, that is almost the last
place ; as if thence religion became more stately, if that which
is first with us, be the last with them."
Now doth not St. Jerorae here affirm that every bishop
hath the place of an Apostle, and the first rank in the Church?
doth not he tax the advancement of any order above this ?
may not the Popish hierarchy most patly be compared to
that of the Montanists, and is it not equally liable to the cen
sure of St. Jerome ? doth it not place the Roraan Pope in
the first place, and the cardinals in the second, detruding the
bishops into a third place ? Could the Pepusian patriarch, or
his Cenones either more over-top in dignity, or sway by power
over bishops, than doth the Roman patriarch and his car
dinals. Again, St. Cyprian telleth Pope Cornelius, that in episco
pacy doth reside "the sublime and Divine power of gpverning
the Church, it being the sublirae top of the priesthood : he
* A bishop called dpxiepevg. Apost. Const. 8. 10, 12.
t Summus Christi Pontifex Augustinus. (Paulin. apud Aug. Ep. 36.)
[Ep. 32. p. 86. vol. 2. Paris. 1836.] Aug. Ep. 35.— Beatissuno Papae
Augustine. Hieron. (Aug. Ep. 11, 13, 14, &c.) [Ep. 75. p. 251. vol. 2.
Ed. ut supra.]
X Optamus te beatiss. et gloriosissime Papa in Domino semper valere.
Ep. 31.
§ Apud nos Apostolorum locum Episcopi tenent, apud eos Episcopos
tertius est ; habent enim primes de Pepusa Phrygiffi Patriarchas, secundos
quos appellant Cenones ; atque ita in tertium, id est pene ultimum locum
Episcopi devolvuntur ; quasi exinde ambitiosior religio fiat, si quod apud
nos primum est, apud Ulos novissimum sit. Hier.(ad Marcellam.) Ep.54.
0 2

196 A TREATISE OF
(saith the blessed man concerning Pope Cornelius), did not
suddenly arrive to episcopacy, but being through all ecclesias
tical offices promoted, and haring in dirine administrations
often merited of God, did by all the steps of reUgion mount to
the subUmest pitch of priesthood ;"* where it is risible that
St. Cyprian doth not reckon the papacy, but the episcopacy of
Cornelius to be that top of priesthood (above which there was
nothing eminent in the Church) unto which he passing through
the inferior degrees of the clergy had attained.
In fine, it cannot well be conceived that the ancients con
stantly would have spoken in this raanner, if they had allowed
! the papal office to be such as now it doth bear itself; the
! which indeed is an order no less distant from episcopacy, than
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 preced
ing) that in the primitive Church there were some distinctions
and subordinations of bishops (as of patriarchs, primates, metro
politans, common bishops) ; for,f
These were according to prudence constituted by the
Church itself for the raore orderly and peaceable administra
tion of things.
These did not iraport such a difference among the bishops
that one should domineer over others to the infringing of pri
mitive fraternity, or coraraon liberty : but a precedence in
the same rank, with sorae moderate advantages for the
coraraon good.
These did stand under authority of the Church, and might
be changed or corrected as was found expedient by common
agreeraent. By rirtue of these the superiors of this kind could no nothing
over their subordinates in an arbitrary manner, but according
to the regulation of Canons, established by consent in Synods;
by which their influence was arapUfiedor curbed.}
* Actum est de episcopates vigore, et de ecclesiae gubcmandB sub-
Umi, ac divina potestate. Cypr. Ep. 55. (ad P. Cornel.) [Ep. 59. p. 133.
Lipsiae, 1838.] — Non iste ad episcopatum subitb pervenit, sed per omnu
ecclesiastica oificia promotus, et in divinis administrationibus Dominum
saepe promeritus, ad sacerdotu subUme fastigium cunctis reUgionis gradi.
bus ascendit. Cypr. Ep. 52. [Ep. 55. p. 107, Lipsia;, 1838.]
t Tbe Africans had a particular care, that this primacy should not de
generate into tyranny.
X Cone. Ant. Can. 9. Vid. Apost. Can. 34. Cone. Caith. apud Cypr.
Cod, Afr, Can. 39.

THE pope's supremacy. 197
When any of these did begin to domineer or exceed his
Umits, he was liable to account and correction : he was ex
claimed against as tyrannical.*
When priraates did begin to swell and encroach, good raen
declared their displeasure at it, and wished it removed ; as is
known particularly by the famous wish of Gregory Nazi-
anzen.f But we are disconrsing against a superiority of a different
nature, which foundeth itself in the institution of Christ, im-
poseth itself on the Chnrch, is not alterable or governable by
it, can endure no check or control, pretendeth to be endowed
with an absolute power to act without, or against the consent
of the Church, is Umited by no certain bounds but its own
pleasurCj &c.}
IV. Farther this pretence raay be irapugned, by many ar
guments springing from the nature and reason of things
abstractedly considered ; according to which the exercise of
such an authority may appear impracticable without much
iniquity and great inconvenience, in prejudice to the rights of
Christian states and people, to the interests of religion and
piety, to the peace and welfare of mankind, whence it is to be
rejected as a pest of Christendom.
1. Whereas all the world in design and obUgation is
Christian ; ("the utmost parts ofthe earth" being granted in
possession to our Lord ; and his Gospel extending to " every
creature under heaven ;")§ and may in effect become such,
when God pleaseth, by acceptance of the Gospel ; whereas it
may easily happen that the most distant places on the earth
may embrace Christianity : whereas really Christian Churches
have been and are dispersed all about the world ; it is thence
hugely incommodious that all the Church should depend upon
an authority resident in one place, and to be managed by one
person : the Church being such is too immense, boundless, un-
circumscribed, unwieldy a bulk to be guided by the inspection,
or managed by the influence of one such authority or person.
If the whole world were reduced under the government of
• Nestorius, Dioscorus, Ola re Tvpavv'iSag Tdg fiXapxiag iKBvpiag
lieKSiKoivTtg. Euseb. 8. 1.
t So Eusebius complaineth of the bishops in his time. — So Isidor.
Pelusiot, X So Socrates of the bishop (not only of Rome, but) Alexandria. — So
S. Chrysostom. So Greg. Naz. complained of TvpavviKi) -irpovopia.
k Psal, ii. 8. Col. 1. 23. Luke xxiv. 47. Matth. xxviii. 19.

198 A treatise of
one ciril monarch, it would necessarily be ill-governed, as to
poUcy, to justice, to peace : the skirts or remoter parts from
the raetropoUs or centre of the government would extremely
suffer thereby ; for they would feel little Ught or warmth from
majesty shining at such a distance : they would Uve under
small awe of that power, which was so far out of sight: tbey
must have very difficult recourse to it for redress of grievances,
and relief of oppressions ; for final decision of causes and com
posure of differences ; for correction of offences, and dispen
sation of justice, upon good information, with tolerable ex
pedition : it would be hard to preserve peace or quell seditions,
and suppress insurrections that might arise in distant quarters;
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, in customs ?
What mind of man, what industry, what leisure could serve to
sustain the burthen of that care, which is needful to the
vrielding 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 resolutions and dispatches requisite for such a charge ?
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 governraent there must
be allowed a raajesty, and power correspondent, the which
cannot be committed to one hand, without its degeneration
into extreme tyranny. The words of Zosimus to this purpose
are observable ; who saith, that the Romans by admitting
Augustus Caesar to the government, did do very perillously ;f
for, " If he should choose to manage the government rightly
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 raany magistrates,
as would not be ashamed to defeat the opinion conceived of
thera ; nor could he suit thera to the differences of so many
manners : or, if transgressing the bounds of royalty, he should
warp to tyranny, disturbing the magistracies, overlooking mis
demeanours, 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,
* Cum tot sustineas, et tanta negoiia solus, &c. Hor. Ep. 2.1.
t Eire ydp bpBiag, &c. Zoz. Hist. 1. (p. 4. Steph.)

THE POPES SUPREMACY. 19!)
for then flatterers being by him dignified with gifts and honours
do invade the greatest commands ; and those who are modest
and quiet, not affecting the same life with them, are conse
quently displeased, not enjoying the same advantSiges ; so that
from hence cities are fiUed with seditions and troubles. And
the civU and miUtary employments being delivered up to
avaricious persons do both render a peaceable life sad and
grievous to men of better disposition, and do enfeeble the
resolution of soldiers in war."
Hence St. Augustine was of opinion, that "it were happy
for mankind, if aU kingdoms 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 disorders springing up in so vast
a body, which did throw it into continual pangs, and at length
did bring it to ruin : for " then (saith St. Augustine concerning
the times of Pompey) Rome had subdued Africa, it had sub
dued Greece ; and vridely also ruling over other parts, as not
able to bear itself did in a manner by its own greatness break
itseff."f Hence that wise prince Augustus Caesar did himself forbear
to enlarge the Roman dominion, and did in his testament advise
the senate to do the like.}
' FeUcioribus sic rebus hnmanis, omnia regna pai'va essent, concordi
vidnitate laetantia. Aug. de Civ. D. 4. 15. 'Etrn rt Kai rroXtat pty't-
Bovg p'sTpov, iiarrep Kai Tibv dXXiav rrdvnav. Ziaiav, tpVTiav, bpydviav'
Kai ydp TOVTiav 'iKaarov ovTe Xiav piKpbv, ovTe KaTa pkyeBog vrrep^dX-
Xov s'fei T^v avToH Svviipiv. Arist. Pol. 7. 4. — There is a certain mea
sure of greatness fit for cities and commonwealths, as well as for aU other
things, Uving creatures, plants, instruments, for every one of these hath its
proper virtue and faculty, when it is neither very Uttle nor yet exceeds in
bigness. Tig ydp aTpaTqybg irrTai t-oC Xiav vrrtpjSdXXovTog rrX-qBovg,
^Tig-ifqpv^ p-q arevToptiog ; Ibid. — For who would be a captain of an ex
cessive huge multitude, &c.
t Suis et ipsa Roma viribus ruit. Hor. Ep. 16. — Quse ab exiguis initiis
creverit, ut jam magnitndine laboret suit. Liv. I. — Ac nescio au satius
fiierit populo Romano Sicilia et Africa contentos fuisse, aut his etiam ipsis
carere dominanti in ItaUa sua, quam eo maguitudinis crescere, ut viribus
suis conficeretur. Flor. 3. 12. — Tunc jam Roma subjugaverat Africam,
subjngaverat Gr8eciam,lateque etiam alus partibus imperans tanquam seip
sam ferre non valens, se sua qnodammodo magnitudine fregerat. Aug. de
Civ.:;D. 18. 45. Tac. Hist. 2. p. 476.
X Tviapqv Tt aiiToig eSiaKe ToXg Tt rrapoiaiv dpKeaBrjvai, Kai pqSa-
piag irri rb rrXtXov Trjv apxrjv irrav^qaai iBtXrjaaf SvaipiiXaKTOV re
yap avrrjv eaeaBai iijiq- tovto ydp Kai avrbg ovnag deirroTt ov Xoyip

200 A TREATISE OP
To the Uke inconveniences (and much greater in its kind,
temporal things being more easily ordered than spiritual, and
haring secular authority, great advantages 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 discipUne, 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 correction
of misdemeanours, the constitution, relaxation, and abolition of
laws, the resolution of all matters concerning religion and the
public state, in all countries must be referred.
Tig Trpbg raura iKavog ; what shoulders can bear such a
charge without perpetual rairacle ? (and yet we do not find
that the Pope hath any proraise 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 tirae to cast a glance on each of
so numberless particulars ? what sagacity of wit, what variety
of learning, what penetrancy of judgraent, what strength of
raemory, what indefatigable rigour of industry, what abundance
of experience would suffice for enabling one raan to weigh
exactly all the controversies of faith, and cases of discipline
perpetually starting up in so raany regions.*
What reach of skill and ability would serve for accommo
dation of laws to the different humours and fashions of so
many nations ? Shall a decrepit old man in the decay of his
age, parts, vigour — (such as Popes usually are) undertake
this ? May we not say to him, as Jethro did to Moses, Ultra
vires tuas est negotium ; " The thing thou doest is not good ;
thou vrilt surely wear away, both thou and this people that is
with thee ; for this thing is too heavy for thee ; thou art not
able to perform it thyself alone. "f
povov, dXXd Kai ipyip tTripqae. rrapbv yoiiv avTip rroXkdiK TOV jiap-
fiapiKoi rrpoaKT-qaaaBai, ouB qBkXqae. Dion lib. 56. Tac. Ann. 1.—
He advised them to be content with what they had, and by no means to
endeavour the enlargement of their empire, for, said he, it will be hardly
kept ; and this he himself observed not in word only, but in deed ; for
when he might have gotten more from tbe barbarous nations, yet he would
not. — Ipsa nocet moles, utinam remeare Uceret Ad veteres fines, etmoenia
pauperis Anci, &c. Clau. de beUo Gildon.
* The Synod of Basil doth weU describe the duty of a Pope, but it is
infinitely bard to practise it in any measure. (Cone. Bas. Sess. 23. p.
64, &c.) + Exod. xviu. 18.

THE Pope's supremacy. 201
If the care of a small diocese hath made the most able and
mdustrious bishops (who had a conscience and sense of their
duty) to groan under its weight, how insupportable must such
a charge be ?
Thecareof his own particular Church, if he would act the
part of a bishop indeed, would sufficiently take up the Pope ;
especially in some times ; when as Pope Alexander saith, — " Ut
intestina nostris specialis Ecclesia negotia vix possemus venti-
lare, nedum longinqua ad plenum extricare."*
If it be said that St. Paul testifieth of hiraself, that he had "a
care of aU the Churches"f incurabent on hira ; I answer, that he
(and other Apostles had the like) questionless had a pious
soUcitude for the welfare of all Christians, especially of the
Churches which he had founded, being rigilant for occasions
to edify them ; but what is this to bearing the charge of a
standing government over aU Churches diffused through the
world ? that care of a few Churches then was burthensome to
bim, what is the charge of so many now ? to one seldom
endowed with such apostolical graces and gifts as St. Paul was.
How weak raust the influence of such an authority be upon
tbe circuraferential parts of its oecumenical sphere 1
How must the outward branches of the Churches faint and
fade for want of sap from the root of discipUne, which raust
be conveyed through so raany obstructions to such a distance ?
How discomposed must things be in each country, for want
of seasonable resolution, hanging in suspense, till information
do travel to Rome, and determination corae back thence ?}
How difficult, how impossible will it be for him there to
receive faithful information, 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 1 for
any Uke person to decline the due correction laid on him 1 by
transferring the cause from home to such a distance 1
* P. Alex. n. (Epist. ad Ger. Rhem.) Bin, p. 284.
t 2 Cor. xi. 28.
X Tanta me occupationum onera deprimunt, ut ad superna animus nul-
lafenus erigatur, &c. Greg, I. lib. 1. Ep. 7, 25, 5. — Such a weight of
employments presses me down, that my mind can by no means be raised
to things above. — Si administratio ilUus temporis Mare fuit, quid de prae-
senti Papatu dicendum erit.' Calv. Inst. 4. c. 7. 22.— If the ordering of
affairs in those times was a boundless sea, what shaU we say of the present
Papacy?

202 A TREATISE OP
How much cost, how much trouble, how much hazard must
parties concerned be at to fetch light and justice thence?
Put case a heresy, a schism, a doubt or debate of great
moraent should arise in China, how should the gentleman in
Italy proceed to confute that heresy, to quash that schism, to
satisfy that doubt, to determine that cause ? how long must it
be ere he can have notice thereof? to how many cross accidents
of weather and way must the transmitting of information be
subject ? how difficult will it prove to get a clear and sure
knowledge concerning the state of things ?
How hard will it be to get the opposite parties to appear, so
as to confront testimonies, and probations requisite to a fair
and just decision? how shall witnesses of infirm sex or age
ramble so far ? how easily will some of thera prepossess and
abuse hira with false suggestions, and raisrepresentations of
the case ? how slippery therefore will the result be, and how
prone he to award a wrongful sentence ?*
How tedious, how expensive, how troublesorae, how vexa
tious, how hazardous raust this course be to all parties ? Cer
tainly causes must needs proceed slowly, and depend long ; and
in the end the resolution of them must be very uncertain.f
What temptation will it be for any one (how justly soever
corrected by his immediate superiors) to complain ; hoping
thereby to escape, to disguise the truth, &c. Who being
condemned will not appeal to one at distance, hoping by false
suggestions to delude him ?
This necessarily will destroy all discipline, and induce im
punity or frustration of justice.}
Certainly much more convenient, and equal it should be,
that there should be near at hand a sovereign power, fully
capable, expeditely, and seasonably to compose differences, to
decide causes, to resolve doubts, to settle things, without more
stir and trouble.
Very equal it is that laws should rather be framed, inter
preted, and executed in every country, vrith accommodation
to the tempers of the people, to the circurastances of things,
to the civil state there, by persons acquainted with those par-
* Nunquid miraudum est de tam longinquis terris Episcopos tuos tibi
narrare impune quod volunt ? Aug. contra Crescon. 3. 34.— What marvel
if the bishops from so remote countries teU you what they please without
check or control ?
+ De lungas vias luengas mentiras. Hispan. Prov. Syn. BasU. Sess. 31.
P- 86. X Vid. Bernard. Ep. 178. de Consid.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 203
ticulars, than by strangers ignorant of them, and apt to mis
take about them.
How often wUl the Pope be imposed upon, as he was in the
case of BasiUdes, of whom St. Cyprian saith : " Going to Rome
he deceived our colleague Stephen, being placed at distance
and ignorant of the fact and concealed truth, aspiring to be un
justly restored to the bishopric frora which he was justly
removed."* As he was in the case of Marcellus, who gulled Pope Julius
by fair professions, as St. Basil doth often complain f
As he was in aiding that versatile and troublesorae bishop,
Eustathius of Sebastia, to the recovery of his bishopric }
As he was in rejecting " the raan of God, and raost adrair-
able bishop, Meletius ;"§ and admitting scandalous reports
about him, which the same saint doth often resent, blaming
sometimes the fallacious misinformation, sometimes the vrilful
presumption, negUgence, pride of the Roman Church, in the
case. II
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 pro
secuting them.^
How many proceedings we should we have like that of Pope
* Romam pergens Stephanum CoUegam nostrum longe positum, et
geste rei, ac tacitae veritatis ignarum fefelUt ; ut exambiret reponi se in-
justfe iu Episcopatum, de quo fuerat juste depositus. Cypr. Ep. 67.
t 'EKeXva rroiovai vHv, 8. rrpoTepov irri MapKeXXip, rrpbg piv [roue]
rrjv dXqBeiav avToXg drrayyk'KXovTag fiXoveiKqaavTtg, &c. Basil.
Ep. 10. [Ep. 239. p. 533. vol. 3. Paris. 1839.]
X Bas. Ep. 73, 74, [Ep. 226. Paris. 1839.]
§ Tou dvBpiarrov rov Qtov MtXtTiov — rov StavpaaiiaTarov irriaKorrov
rrjg aXqBivrjg tov Otov 'EKKXqaiag MeXtTiov. — Bas. Ep. 349. [Ep. 214.
p. 464. vol. 3. Ed. ut supra.]
II Ot piv ydp dyvoi/ai rravTeXiHg Td ivTavBa' oi Si Kai So-
KoivTeg eiSkvai ipiXoveiKOTtpov pdXXov fi dXqBkoTtpov avToXg i^q-
yovvTai. Ibid. — Some are altogether ignorant of wbat is here done,
others that think they know them declare them unto us more conten-
tiously than truly. — 'EXuirei qpdg X'tyiav ToXg 'Aptiopav'naig avyKUTa-
piBptXaBai Tovg deo^iXeardTovg dSeXfoiig -qpiav KeXinov Kai Evat-
/3ioi/. Epist. 321. ad Pet. Alex. [Ep. 266. p. 598. vol. 3. Paris, 1839.]
—He grieved us when he said that our godly brethren, Meletius and Euse
bius were reckoned among the Arians. — Iloia j3o-q9tia qpXv rqg SvTiKrig
bi^piog, ol Toye dXqBig ovTt 'iaaaiv, oiiTt paBtXv dvixovTai ; Bas.
Ep. 10. [Ep. 239. p. 533. vol. 3. Paris. 1839.]— "What help can we have
from the pride of the Africans, who neither know the truth, nor endure to
leam it-.' % P. Zoz. I. Ep. 3 et 4.

204 A TREATISE OF
Zosimus I., concerning that scandalous priest, Apiarius; whom
being for grievous crimes excommunicated by his bishop, that
Pope did admit to coraraunion, and undertake to patronize,
but was baffled in his enterprise.*
This hath been the sense of the Fathers in the case.
St. Cyprian therefore saith, that ' ' Seeing it was a general
statute among the bishops, and that it was both equal and just
that every one's cause should be heard there, where the crime
was committed : and that each pastor had a portion of the
flock allotted to him, which he should rule and govern, being
to render unto the Lord an account of his doing."f
St. Chrysostora thought it " improper that one out of
Egypt should administer justice to persons in Thrace :"} (and
why not as well as one out of Italy ?)
The African Synod thought " the Nicene Fathers had pro
vided most prudently and raost justly, that all affairs should
be finally determined there where they did arise." §
They thought " a transmarine judgment could not be firm,
because the necessary persons for testimony, for the infirmity
of sex or age, or for many other infirmities could not be brought
thither." II
Pope Leo hiraself saw how dilatory this course would be,
* Deinde qubd inter tantam hominum multitudinem adeo pauci sunt
episcopi, et amplse singulorum Parochise, ut in subjectis plebibus curam
episcopalis oflicu nuUatenus exequi, aut rite administrare valeant. P. Greg.
VII. Ep. 2. 73.— And then because in so great a multitude of people
there are so few bishops, and every one's diocese very large, that they are
in no wise able to execute or rightly perform the charge of the episcopal
office among the people over whom they are set.
t Cypr. Ep. 55_. (p. 116.) [Ep. 59. Leipsiae, 1838.]
X OvSi ydp dKoXovBov qv tSv 'ti, A'lyiirrTov ToXg tv OpaKy SiKaZetv.
Chrys. Ep. 102. (ad P. Innoc. I.) [p. 616. voL 3. Paris. 1835.] Ei yap
TOVTO Kparqatit tS iBog, Kai iibv ykvoiTO ToXg (iovXopkvoig tig a\Xo-
Tpiag dmivai rrapoiKiag « Toaovnav Siaarqpdnav, Kai iKBdXXiiv oBf
dv iBiXoi rt£, iart 'on rrdvTa oix-qatTUi, &c. — For if this custom
prevail, and if they that wiU may go to other men's dioceses at so
great a distance, and eject whom any man pleases, know that aU wiU go to
wreck, &c.
§ Decreta Nicena sive inferioris gradus clericos, sive ipsos episcopos
suis MetropoUtanis apertissime commiserunt; Prudentissime enim jus-
tissimeque viderunt (providerunt) quaecunque negotia in suis locis, ubi
orsa sunt, finienda. Ep. Cone. Afric. ad P. Celest. I. (in fine Cod. Afric.)
vel apud Dion. Exig,
II Aut quomodo ipsum transmarinum judicium ratum erit, ad quod
testium necessarise personae vel propter sexus, vel propter senectutis in
firmitatem, vel multis aliis impedimentis adduci non poterunt. Ibid.

THE pope's supkemacy. 205
and that " longinquity of region doth cause the examination
of truth to becorae over dilatory."*
Pope Liberius for such reasons did request Constantius,
that Athanasius's cause should be tried at Alexandria ;
where — " he (saith he) that is accused, and the accusers are,
and the defender of them, and so we may upon examination
had agree in our sentence about them."f
Therefore divers ancient canons of Synods did prohibit,
that any causes should be reraoved out of the boimds of pro
rinces or dioceses ; as otherwhere we shew.}
2. Such an authority, as this pretence claimeth, must ne
cessarily (if not withheld by continual miracle) throw the
Chitfch 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 restrained within any bounds
of place or time, having no check upon it of equal or co-ordi
nate power, standing upon dirine institution, and therefore
immutably settled) must of its own nature become absolute,
and unUmited. §
Let it be however of right Umited by Divine laws, or human
canons, yet will it be continually encroaching, and stretching
its power, untU it grows enormous, and boundless. It will
not endure to be pinched by any restraint. It will draw to
itself the coUation of all preferments, &c.||
It wiU assume aU things to itself; trampUng dovra aUoppo-
* Ne ergo (quod inter longinquas regiones accidere solet) in nimias
dilatioues tenderent veritatis examina. — P. Leo I. Ep. 34.
t Tots irri Tqv 'AXe^avSpkiav rrdvTtg drravrqaavTtg evBa b iyKa-
\ovptvog Kaloi iyKaXovvTtg eiat, Kai b dvnrroiovpevog avTtav, i^trd-
Gavrtgrdrrtpi avTiav avprrtpievtxevSipev. Theod. 2. 16. [cap. 13. p. 86.]
X luolevenmt autem hactenus intolerabiUum vexationum abusus per-
mnlti, dum nimium frequenter k remotissimis etiam partibus ad Ro
manam curiam, et interdum pro parvis et minutis rebus ac negotiis quam-
plnrimi citari ac evocari consueverunt, &c. Vid. Cone. Bas. Sess. 31. (p.
86.) — But hitherto very many intolerable vexatious abuses have prevailed,
while too often men have been used to be cited and caUed out even from
the remotest parts to the Court of Rome, and sometimes for sUght and
tririal businesses and occasions.
§ Vid. Hist. Cone, Trid. p. 61. PrivUegia istius sedis perpetua sunt,
divinitus radicata, atque plantata, impingi possunt, transferri non possunt ;
trahi possunt, eveUi non possunt. P. Nie. I. ad Mich. Imp. — The privi
leges 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.
II Vid. Concil. Bas. Sess. 31. p. 87.

206 A TREATISE OF
site claims of right and liberty ; so that neither pastor nor
people shall enjoy or do any thing otherwise than in depen
dence on it, and at its pleasure.
It vrill be always forging new prerogatives,* and interpreting-
aU things in favour of them, and enacting sanctions to establish
them ; which none must presume to contest.
It wUl draw to itself the disposal of all places ; the exac
tion of goods. All princes must become his ministers, and
executors of his decrees.f
It will mount above all law and rule ; not only challenging
to be uncontrollable and unaccountable, but not enduring any
reproof of its proceedings, or contradiction of its dictates : a
bUnd faith must be yielded to all its assertions as infaUibly
true, and a blind obedience to all its decrees, as unquestionably
holy :} whosoever shall anywise cross it in word or deed,
shall certainly be discountenanced, condemned, ejected from
the Church ; so that the most absolute tyranny that can be
iraagined vrill ensue : all the world hath groaned and heavily
coraplained of their exactions, particularly our poor nation ;
it would raise indignation in any raan 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 erident, that the Papacy hath devoured all the pri
rileges and rights of all orders in the Church, either granted
by God, or established in the ancient canons.^
The royalties of Peter are become immense; and con-
• Lic^t ApostoUca praerogativa possimus de qualibet ecclesia clericum
ordinare. P. Steph. apud Grat. caus. 9. qu. 3. cap. 20. — Though by our
apostoUcal prerogative we may ordain a clergyman of any Church.
t Hist. Cone. Trid. p. 60. so they pretend. ConcU. Later. 4. (sub
Innoc. 3.)
i Sitque alienus a divinis et pontificalibus oflicus, qui noluit praeceptis
ApostoUcis obtemperare. Greg. IV. (dist. 19. cap. 5.)— And let him have
nothing at all to do with divine and pontifical offices, who would not obey
apostoUcal precepts. — Oportet autem gladium esse sub gladio, et tempo
ralem authoritatem spirituaU subjici potestati. Bonif. VIII. Extrav. Com.
Ub. 1. tit. 8. cap. 1. [Corp. Jur. Can. a Pithaeo, vol. 2. Paris. 1695.]
% Vid. Mat. Paris.
II Chesia piu officio di Pontefici aggiurgere con I'armi, et col sorgue
de Christiani, &c. Guicc. Ub. 11. p. 858.
H Quid hodie erant episcopi, nisi umbra quujdam .' quid plus eis resta-
bat quam baculus et mitra, &c. An. Sylv. de gestis Syn. Bas. Ub. I.—
What were bishops now, but kiad of shadows .' What had they left more
than a staff" and a mitre, &c.

THE pope's supremacy. 207
sistently to his practice the Pope doth allow men to tell him
to his face, that " all power in heaven and in earth is given
unto him."*
It belongeth to him " to judge of the whole Church."+
He hath " a plenitude (as he calleth it) of power,"} by
which he can infringe any law, or do anything that he pleaseth.
It is the tenor of his bulls ; that " whoever rashly dareth
to thwart his wiU, shall incur the indignation of Almighty
God ; and (as if that were not enough) of St. Peter and St.
Paul abo."
" No man must presume to tax his faults ; or to judge of
his judgment." §
"It is idolatry to disobey his commands," || against their
own sovereign lord.
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 plausible opinion ; so that at Rome
the contrary " is erroneous, and within an inch of being he
retical."^ We are now told,** that "if the Pope should err hy en
joining rices, or forbidding virtues, the Church should be
bound to beUeve rices to be good, and virtues eril, unless it
would sin against conscience."
The greatest princes mnst stoop to his will ; otherwise he
hath power to cashier and depose them.
* ConcU. Lat. 5. Sess. 11. p. 129.
t De omni Ecclesia jus habet judicaudi. (P. Gelas. Grat. Caus, 9. qu. 3.
cap. 18.)
} Secundum plenitudinem potestatis de jure possumus supra jus dispen-
sare. Greg, decret. lib. 3. tit. 8. cap. 4.
§ Hujus culpas isthic redarguere praesumit mortaUum nuUus. Grat.
dist. 40. cap, 6. (Si Papa — ). Neque cuiquam Ucere de ejus judicare judi-
pio. Caus. 9. qu. 3. cap. 10.
II Com enim obedire ApostoUcas sedi superbe contemnunt, scelus idolo-
latrisBj teste Samuele, incurrunt. Greg. VII. Ep. 4. 2.— NulU fas est vel
veUe, vel posse transgredi ApostoUcae sedis praecepta. Greg. IV. apud
Grat. dist. 19. cap. 5. — No man may nor can transgress the commands of
the apostoUc see. — Ab omnibus quicquid statuit, quicquid ordinat, per
petuo et irrefragabiUter observandum est. Ibid. cap. 4. (P. Steph.) —
Whatever he decrees, whatever he ordains, must always and inviolably be
observed hy aU. f Erronea, et hseresi proxima. BeU, de P. 4. 2.
** Si autem Papa eiTaret praecipiendo vitia, vel prohibendo virtutes,
teneretur Ecclesia credere vitia esse bona, et virtutes malas, nisi vellet
contra consdentiam peccare. BeU. de Pont, 4, 5, [p. 456. n. 8, vol, 1.
Pragse, 1721.]

208 A treatise op
Now what greater inconvenience, what raore horrible ini
quity can there be, than that aU God's people (that " ree
people"* who are "called to freedom") should be subject to
so intolerable a yoke and miserable a slavery ?
That tyranny soon had crept into the Roman Church,
Socrates telleth us.f
They have rendered true that definition of Scioppius.} "The
Church is a staU, or herd, or raultitude of beasts, or asses.
" They bridle us, they harness us, they spur us, they lay
yokes and laws upon us."
The greatest tyranny that ever was invented in the world
is the pretence of infallibility : for Dionysius and Phalaris did
leave the raind 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, vrill have us also to
think so ; denouncing his imprecations and spiritual menaces
if we do not.
3. Such an authority will inevitably produce a depravation
of Christian doctrine, by distorting it in accommodation of it
to the promoting its designs and interests. It will blend
Christianity with worldly notions and policies.
It certainly will introduce new doctrines, and interpret the
old ones so as raay serve to the advanceraent of the power,
reputation, pomp, wealth, and pleasure of those who manage
it, and of their dependants.
That which is called KarrqXeictv tov Xoyov tov ^eov' to make
a trade of religion, will be the great work of the teachers of
the Church. § It vrill turn all divines into raercenary, slarish,
designing flatterers.
This we see come to pass, Christianity by the Papal in
fluence being from its original simpUcity transformed into
quite another thing than it was ; from a Dirine philosophy
designed to improve the reason, to moderate the passions, to
* Gal. V. 1. 13. 1 Pet. U. 16.
t Papa occupavit omnia jura inferiorum Ecclesiarum, it^ qubd infe-
riores Praelati sunt pro nihUo. Card. Zab. de Sch. Inn. VII. p. 560.—
The Pope hath invaded all the rights of inferior churches, so that aU m-
ferior prelates are nothing set by.
X Ecclesia est mandra sive grex aut multitude jumentorum sive asino-
rum. Eccl c. 47. — IUi nos fraenant, nos lore aUigant, nos stimulant, nobis
jugum et onus imponunt. Ibid.
§ 2 Cor. ii. 17. 1 Tim. vi. 5. vopiZor'nav rropiapbv tlvai rriv tiitrt'
jitiav — Supposing that gain is godliness. 'Ev rrpoipdaei rrXtovtUag.
1 Thess. n. 5. — A cloke of covetousness. Kvfieia. Eph. iv. 4.

THE pope's suPliK^rACV. -09
correct the manners of meu, to prepare men for cou\ ersation
with God and angels ; modelled to a system of politic devices
(of notions, of precepts, of rites) serring to exalt and enrich
the Pope, with his court and adherents, clients and vassals.*
What doctrine of Christian theology, as it is interpreted by
their schools, hath not a direct aspect, or doth not squint that
way ? especiaUy 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 infaUibility ; his double sword, and do-
mmiou (direct or indirect) over princes ; his dispensing in
laws, in oaths, in vows, in matrimonial cases, 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 jurisdiction' and immunity of their goods
from taxes 'signify, but their entire dependence on the Pope,
and their being closely tied to his interests ?
What is the exemption of Vnonastical places from the juris
diction of bishops,' but listing so many soldiers and advocates
to defend and advance the Papal empire ?
What meaneth the^ doctrine concerning that middle region
of souls, or cloister of purgatory, whereof the Pope holdeth
the keys / opening and shutting it at his pleasure, by dispen
sation of pardons and indulgences ; but that he must be raaster
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 driring a trade,
and drawing money frora simple people to his treasury ?
Whither doth the entangling of folks in perpetual vows tend,
but to assure them in a slavish dependence on their interests,
eternally, without evasion or remedy, except by favourable dis
pensation from the Pope ?
Why is the opus operatum in sacraments taught to confer
grace, but to breed a high opinion of the priest, and all he
doth? Whence did the' monstrous doctrine of transubstantiation
(urged with so furious zeal) issue, but from design to magnify
* Pasce, id est regio more Impera. Ecce duos Gladios. — Oravi ne defice-
ret.— Feed (i. e.) rule as a king. Behold two swords.
VOL. I. p

210 A treatise of
the credit of those, who by saying of a few words can make
our God and Saviour ? and withal to exercise a notable instance
of their power over men, in raaking thera to renounce their
reason and senses ?
Whither doth tend the doctrine concerning the mass being
a propitiatory sacrifice for the dead, but to engage raen to leave
in their wills good suras 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 re
ligion, from the priesthood?
Why is saying private mass (or celebrating the communion
in solitude) allowed, but because priests are paid for it, and live
At what doth the doctrine concerning the necessity of
auricular confession aira, but that thereby the priests may have
a raighty awe on the consciences of all people, raay dive into \,
their secrets, raay raanage their lives as they please ?
And what doth a Uke necessary particular absolution intendy
but to set the priest in a lofty state of authority above the
people, as a judge of his condition, and dispenser of his salva
tion ?
Why do they equal ecclesiastical traditions vrith Scripture,
but that on the pretence of them they may obtrude whatever
doctrines advantageous to their designs ?
What drift hath the doctrine concerning the infallibility of
Churches or Councils, but that when opportunity doth invite,
he may call a company of bishops together to estabUsh what he
liketh, which ever after must pass for certain truth, to be con
tradicted by none ; so enslaring the minds of all men to his
dictates, which always suit to his interest ?
What doth the prohibition of holy Scripture drive at, but a
monopoly of knowledge to themselves, or a detaining of petiple
in ignorance of truth and duty ; so that they must be forced tb
rely on them for direction, must beUeve all they say, and ¦
blindly submit to their dictates ; being disabled to detect their
errors, or contest their opinions ?
Why must the sacraments be celebrated, and pubUc devo
tions exercised in an unknovra tongue, but that the priests may
seem to have a peculiar interest in themj and abiUty for them ?
Why raust the priesthood be so indispensably forbidden mar-.
riage, but that it raay be wholly untacked frora the state, and
rest addicted to him, and governable by him; that the persons
and wealth of priests may be purely at his devotion ?

the pope's SUPUEMACY. 211
To what end is the clogging religion by multiplication of
ceremonies and formalities, but to amuse the people, and main
tain in them a blind reverence toward the interpretation of the
dark mysteries couched iu them ?* and by seeming to encourage
an exterior show of piety (or form of godliness) to gain reputa
tion and advantage, whereby they might oppress the interior
rirtue and reality ofit, as the scribes and pharisees did, although
with less designs.
Why is the veneration of images and relics, the credence of
miracles and legends, the undertaking of pilgrimages, and
voyages to Rome, and other places, more holy than ordinary ;
sprinklings of holy water, consecrations of baubles (vrith in
numerable foppish knacks and trinkets), so cherished ; but to
keep the people in a slavish credulity and dotage ; apt to be
led by them whither they please, by any sleeveless pretence ;
and in the mean whUe to pick various gains from them by such
trade? What do aU such things mean but obscuring the nativct
simpUcity of Christianity, whereas it being represented intelU-
gible to aU men, would derogate from that high admiration,
which these men pretend to from their peculiar and profound
wisdom ? And what would men spend for these toys, if they
understood they might be good Christians, and get to heaven
without them ?
What doth all that pomp of religion serve for, but for osten
tation of the dignity of those who administer it ? It may be
pretended for the honour of religion, but it really conduceth
to the glory of the priesthood ; who shine in those pa-

Why is monkery (although so very different from that which
was m the ancient times) so cried np as a superlative state of
perfection ; but that it fiUeth aU places vrith swarms of lusty
people, who are vowed servants to him and have little else to
do but to advance that anthority, by which they subsist in that
dronish way of life?
In fine, perusing the controversies of Bellarmine or any
other champion of Romanism, do but consider the nature
and scope of each doctrine, maintained by them ; and you
may easily discern, that scarce any of them doth but tend to
advance the interest of the Pope, or of his sworn vassals.
Whereas, indeed, our Lord had never any such design, to
• Vid Sleid. p. 673. p 2

212 A TUEATISE OF
set up a sort of men in such distance above their brethren ;
perk over them, and suck them of their goods by tricks ; it
only did charge people to allow their pastors a competent main
tenance for a sober life, with a moderate respect, as was need
ful for the common benefit of God's people, whom they were,
with huraility and raeekness, 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 frora the leaven of hurtful errors,
infiuential on practice.
4. The errors in doctrine, and miscarriages in practice,
which this authority in favour to itself would introduce, would
be establishing iraraoveably, to the irrecoverable oppression of
truth and piety ; any reformation becoraing irapossible, while
it standeth, or so far as it shall be able to oppose and ob
struct it.
While particular Churches do retain their liberty, and pastors
itheir original co-ordination in any measure, if any Church or
ibishop shall offer to broach any novel doctrine or practice of
Bad import, the others may endeavour to stop the settlement
or progress of thera ; each Church at least raay keep itself
sound frora contagion.
But when all Churches and bishops are reduced into subjec
tion to one head, supported by the guards of his authority, who
will dare to contest, or be able to withstand, what he shaU 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, however irregular and
culpable. He will assume to himself the privilege not to be crossed in
anything ; and soon will claim " infallibility, the mother of in
corrigibility." No error can be so palpable, which that authority wiU not
protect and shroud frora confutation ; no practice so enormous,
which it will not palliate, and guard from reproof.
There will be legions of mercenary tongues to speak, and
stipendiary pens to write in defence of its doctrines and practices,
so that whoever will undertake to oppose it shall be voted down
and overwhelmed with noise ; and shall incur all the discou
ragement, and persecution imaginable. So poor truth wiU he-
come utterly defenceless, wretched rirtue destitute of succour
or patronage.

THE pope's SUPilEMACV. 213
This is so in speculation, and we see it confirmed by ex
perience; for when from the influence of this power (as Pope
Adrian VI.* did ingenuously confess) an apparent degeneracy
in doctrine, in discipline, in practice, had seized on Christen
dom, aU the world seeing it, and crying out loudly for refor
mation, yet how stiff a repugnance did the adherents to this
interest make thereto ? with what industry and craft did Popes
endeavour to decline all means of remedy ?
What will not this party do rather than acknowledge them
selves mistaken or Uable to error ? what paUiations, what shifts
do not they use ? what evidence of light do they not outface ?f
5. The same will induce a general corruption of raanners.
For the chief clergy partaking of its growth, and protected
by its interest (reciprocaUy supporting it, and being sheltered
by it from any curb or control), wUl swell into great pride and
haughtiness ; wiU be terapted to scrape and hoard up wealth
by rapine, extortion, siraony ; will come to enjoy ease and
sloth; will be iramersed in sensuaUty and luxury, and will
consequently neglect their charge.
The inferiors will become enamoured and ambitious of such
dignity, and wUl use all raeans and arts to attain it.
Thence emulation, discord, sycophantry will spring.
Thence aU ecclesiastical olfices will become venal ; to be
purchased by bribes, flattery, favour. — }
The higher ranks wiU become fastnous, supercilious, and
domineering. The lower wiU basely crouch, cogg —
What then mnst the people be, the guides being such ?
Were such guides Uke to edify the people by their doctrine ?
Were they not like to damnify them hy their example ?
That thus it hath happened experience doth shew, and
history doth abundantly testify. This was soon observed by a
Pagan historian. Am. Marcellin. by St. Basil oippvg duTucq.^
¦ What mischief this, what scandal to religion, what detriment
to the Chnrch, what ruins of souls it produceth is visible.
The descriptions of Rome and of that Church by Mantuan,
do in a lively manner represent the great degeneracy and cor
ruptions ofit.
• Sleid, Ub. 4. p, 82. lib. 12 p, 322, Hist. Cone. Trid. p. 24. Vid.
Riv. in Castig. Noi. p. 525 t Centum gravamina.
t Vid. ipsum Greg. VII. Ep. 1. 42, 2. 45. See the description of them
in S. Bernard, in Cant. Serm. 33 Guicciard, in Suppl.
§ Alv. Pelag. in Riv. Castig N. cap. 8. Vid. Bernard. Convers. S.
Paul. Serm. 1, p, 87.

214 A TREATISE OF
6. This authority as it would induce corruption of manners,
SO it would perpetuate it ; and' render the state of things m-
corrigible. For this head of the Church, and the supporters of bis
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 wiU not be
able to reform ; the interests of his dependants crossing it.f
If there hath happened a good Pope, who desired to reform ;
yet he hath been ridiculous when he endeavoured it; and
found it impossible to reform even a few particulars in his own
house, the incorrigible Roman Court.
The nature and pretended foundation of this spiritual autho
rity 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 revolutions of state,
\ raay dispense a redress, they have prevented this by supposing
\that in this case God hath tied his own hands ; this authority
being iraraoveably fixed in the same hands, from which no
revolution can take it ; whence from its exorbitancies there can
be no rescue or relief.
7. This authority will spoU him in whom it is seated;
corrupting his mind and manners ; rendering hira a scandal
to religion, and a pernicious instrument of wickedness by the
influence of his example.}
To this an uncontrollable power (bridled with no restraint)
and impunity doth naturally tend, and accordingly hath it
been — §
• NuUa unquam monitione, nulla exhortatione induct jam largo tem
pore potuit, ut aliquam errorem emendationem Christo placentem, aut
notissimorum abusuum correctionem in Ecclesia Sancta Dei efficere sata-
geret. Cone. Bas. Sess. 23. (p. 76.) Sess. 31. 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 correction of the most gross abuses in
the Holy Church of God.
t Vid. Cone. Trid. p. 22.
i It wiU certainly render him a tyrant, according to the definition of
Aristotle, Pol. 4. 10. Cui plus licet quam par est, plus vult qu^m licet.
Unde sicut langueseente capite, reliquum postea corpus morbus invadat.
Cone. Bas. Sess. 23. (p. 64.)— Whence it comes to pass that if the head
be sick, the rest of the body afterward grows diseased. Vid. Cone. Bas,
p 87. Cone. Const, p. 1110.
^ Vid. dist. 40. cap. 6. (hujus culpas, etsi.)

THE pope's SUPUEMACY. 215
How many notorious reprobates, monsters of wickedness
have been in that see ?*
If we survey the lives of the Popes, written by historians
most indifferent, or (as most have been) partial in favour to
them, we shall find, at first good ones, martyrs, confessors,
saint^ — but after this exorbitant power had grown, how few
good ones ? how many extreniely bad? The first Popes before
Constantine were holy men ; the next were tolerable, while the
Papacy kept within bounds of modesty ; but when they hav
ing shaked off their master, and renounced allegiance to the
emperor, (i. e. after Gregory II.) few tolerable, generally they
were either rake-heUs, or intolerably arrogant, insolent, turbu
lent, and ravenous.
Bellarmine and Baronius do bob off this, by teUing us that
hence the proridence of God is most apparent.f
But do they call this preserring the Church; the permis
sion of it to continue so long in such a condition, under the
prevalence of such mischiefs ? when hath God deserted any
people if not then, when such impiety more than pagan doth
reign in it ?}
But what in the mean time became of those souls, which by
this means were ruined ; what amends for the vast damage
which reUgion sustained ? for the introducing so pernicious
customs hardly to be extirpated ?§
To what a pass of shameless wickedness must things have
come, when such men as Alexander II. having risibly such an
inipure brood, shonld 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.
* Vid. Alv. Pelag. apud Riv. Cath. Orth. p. 141. Baron. Pope Mar-
eeUus II. doubted whether a Pope conld be saved. Thuan. lib. 15. (p.
566.) From John VIII. to Leo IX. what a rabble of rake-heUs and sots
did sit m that chair ! Machiav. Hist. Ub. 16. p. 1271. Baron. Ann.
912. § 8.
t Baron. Ann. 897. § 5. It was said of Vespasian, solus imperantium
meUor— so apt is power to corrupt men. Solus omnium ante se Princi
pum in meUus mutatus est. Tac. Hist. i. (p. 451.)
i How vaui is that which P. Greg. VII. citeth out of P. Symmachus,
B. Petrus perennem meritorum dotem cum haereditate innocentiae misit ad
posteros, Greg. VII. Ep. 8. 21.
§ Subd Romanus Pontifex, si canonice fuerit ordinatus, meritis B.
Petri indubitanter efficitur sanctus ; was one of P. Greg. VII.'s dictates.
That the Roman Pontiff, if canonicaUy elected, is undoubtedly made holy
by the merits of blessed Peter.

216 A TREATISE OF
How unfit must such men be to be the guides of all
Christendom, to breathe oracles of truth, to enact laws of
sanctity ?
How improper were those vessels of Satan to be organs of
that " Holy Spirit of discipUne, which wiU flee deceit, and re
move from thoughts that are without understanding, and will
not abide where unrighteousness cometh in."*
It will engage the Popes to make the ecclesiastical authority
an engine of advancing the temporal concerns of his own rela
tions (his sons, his nephews).
What indeed is the popedom now but a ladder for a family
to raount unto great estate ?f
What is it, but introducing an old raan into a place, by ad
vantage whereof, a faraily must raake hay while the sun
shines ?}
8. This pretence, upon divers obrious accounts, is apt to
create great raischief 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 supposing 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 independent each of other ; then must aU
Christians be put into that perplexed state of repugnant and
incompatible obUgations ; concerning which our Lord saith,
" No man can serve two masters ; for either he wiU hate the
one and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and de
spise the other." II
They will often draw several ways, and clash in their de
signs, 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; aUtera-
* Sap. 1, 5.
t Vid. Guicciard. Machiav, His. Fl. p, 19. Cone. Bas. (p. 65.)
X Ciim non ob religionem, et Dei cultum appetere Pontificatum nostri
Sacerdotes videantur, sed ut fratrum, vel ncpotum, vel familiarium inglu-
viem et avaritiam expleant. Plat, in Joh. XVI. (p, 298.) [p. 159. Colon,
1 593.] — Whereas our priests seem to desire the Popedom, not for religion
and the worship of God, but that they may tiU the ravening appetite and
covetousness of their brethren or nephews, or famiUars.
ij 1 Tim, U. 1, 2. II Matth. vi. 24.
H Bell, 5, 6. (p. 1415.)

THE POPES SUPUEMACY. 217
poral matters being in sorae respect spiritual (as being referable
to spiritual ends, and in sorae raanner allied to religion) and
all spiritual things becoming 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 its cog
nizance, 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 he of the differences hence
arising ; there being no third power to arbitrate or moderate
between them ?
Each will prosecute its cause by its advantages ; the one by
instruments of temporal power, the other by spiritual arms of
censures and curses.
And in what a case must the poor people then be ? how dis
tracted in their consciences, how divided in their affections,
how discordant in their practices ? according as each pretence
bath 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 puUing) wUl be withdrawn from yielding due
compUance on the one hand or the other ?
What shall a man do, whUe one in case of disobedience to
his commands doth brandish a sword, the other thundereth
out a curse against him ; one threateneth death, the other ex
cision from the Church ; both denounce damnation ?
. What animosities and contentions, what discomposures and
confusions must this constitution of things breed in every
place? and how can "a kingdom so dirided in itself stand, or
not come into desolation ?"*
Such an advantage infallibly will make Popes affect to in
vade the temporal power.
It was the reason, which Pope Paschal alleged against
Henry IV. because he did ecclesice regnum auferre.-\
It is indeed impossible, that a co-ordination of these powers
should subsist, for each vrill be continually encroaching on the
other ; each for its own defence and support wiU continually
he struggling and clambering to get above the other : there
wiU never be any quiet till one corae to subside and truckle
under the other ; whereby the sovereignty of the one or the
* Matth. xii. 25. t P. Pasch, II. Ep. 7.

218 A TREATISE OF
other will be destroyed. Each of them soon will come to claim
a supremacy in all causes, and the power of both swords ; and
one side will carry it.
It is indeed necessary, that men for a time continuing pos
sessed with a reverence to the ecclesiastical authority, as in
dependent and uncontrollable, it should at last overthrow the
temporal, by reason of its great advantages above it ; for,.
The spiritual power doth pretend an establishraent purely
dirine, which cannot by any accidents undergo any change,
diminutions or translation, to which temporal dominions are
subject : its power therefore, being perpetual, irreversible, de
pending iraraediately of God, can hardly be checked, can never
be conquered.*
It fighteth with tongues and pens, which are the most peril
ous weapons.
It can never be disarmed ; fighting with weapons that cannot
be taken away, or deprived of their edge and vigour.
It worketh by most powerful considerations upon the con
sciences and affections of raen upon pain of daranation ; pro-
raising heaven, and threatening hell; which upon some men
have an infinite sway, upon all raen a considerable influence ;
and thereby will be too hard for those who only can grant tem
poral rewards, or inflict temporal punishments. It is surely a
notable advantage that the Pope hath above all princes, that
he commandeth not only as a prince, but as a guide ; so that
whereas we are not otherwise bound to obey the commands of
princes, than as they appear concordant with God's law, we
must observe his commands absolutely, as being therefore law
ful, because he comraandeth them, that involving his assertion
of their lawfulness, to which (without farther inquiry or
scruple) we raust submit our understanding, his words suffi
ciently authorizing his coraraands for just. We are not
only obUged to obey his commands, but to embrace his doc
trines. It hath continual opportunities of conversing with men ;
and thereby can insinuate and suggest the obligation to obey
it, with greatest advantage, in secrecy, in the tenderest
seasons. It claimeth a power to have its instruction admitted with
* Vid. Mach. Hist. Flor. p. 18. — Impeti possunt humanis prajsump-
tionibus quae divino sunt judicio constituta, vinci autem quorumUbet
potentate non possunt. P. Gel. Ep. 8. Felix. P. Ep. 1. (p. 597.)

THE pope's SUPRE.MACY. 219
assent ; and vrill it not instruct them for its own advantage ?
All its assertions must be believed — is not this an infinite ad
vantage? By such advantages the spiritual power (if admitted for such
as it pretendeth) wUl swaUow and devour the teraporal ; which
will be an extreme mischief to the world.
The very pretence doth immediately crop and curtail the na
tural right of princes,* by exempting great numbers of persons
(the participants and dependants of this hierarchy) from sub
jection to thera ; by withdravring causes from their jurisdiction ;
by commanding in their territories, and dravring people out of
them to their judicatories ; by haring influence on their opi
nions ; by draining thera of wealth, &c.
To this discourse experience abundantly doth yield its attes
tation ;f for how often have the Popes thwarted princes in the
exercise of their power ;} chaUenging their laws and adrainistra-
tions as prejudicial to reUgion, as contrary to ecclesiastical
Uberty. Bodin (I. 9) observeth that if any prince were a heretic (that
is, if the Pope could pick occasion to call him so), oratyrant§
(that is, in his opinion), or anyvrise scandalous, the Pope would
excommunicate him ; and would not receive him to favour, but
upon his acknowledging himself a feudatory to the Pope : so he
drew in most kingdoms to depend on him.
How often have they excommunicated them, and interdicted
their people from entertaining communion with them ?
How many commotions, conspiracies, rebeUions, and insur
rections against princes have they raised in several countries ?||
* Non enim volumus aut propter Principum potentiam Ecclesiasticam
minui dignitatem, ant pro Ecclesiastica dignitate Principum potentiam
mulnlari. P. Pasch. II. Ep. 28 et 29, — For we wiU not that either the
ecclesiastical dignity should be diminished, by reason of the Prince's power,
or that the Prince's power should be curtaUed for the ecclesiastical dignity.
t In vain did St. Bernard (de Consid. I.) cry. Quid fines alienos inva-
dilis ? quid falcem vestram in alienam messam extenditis .' — Why do you
invade other men's territories ? Why thrust you your sickle into other
men's harvest ? X Arietes fiiriosos. BeU. 5. 7.
§ Vid. Tort;.T. p. 216. Greg. VII. Ep. I. 7. 112. 13, 63.
II Vid. Plat, de Bonif. VIII. p. 467. Jul. 2. Nou sine suspicione, quod
iUorum temporum Pontifices, qui bella extinguere, diacordias toUere de-
buissent, suscitarent ea potius atque nutrirent. Episc. Modrus. in Cone.
Lat. V. Sess. 6. (p. 72.) — Not without suspicion, that tbe Popes of those
times, who ought to have extinguished wars, and put an end to dissen
sions, did rather raise them up and cherish them. — See Greg. VII. Ep. 4.
2. 8. 21.

220 A treatise of
How have they inveigled people from their allegiance ? How
raany raassacres and assassinations have they caused ? How
have they depressed and viUified the temporal power ?
Have they not assumed to themselves superiority over all
princes ? The Eraperor hiraself (the chief of Christian princes)
they did call their vassal, exacting an oath from thera, whereof
you have a form in the canon law, and a declaration of Pope
Clement V.* that it is an oath of fealty.
Have they not chaUenged propriety in both swords, Ecce
duo gladii.
How many princes have they pretended to depose, and dis
possess of their authority ?f
Consider the pragmatical sanctions, prorisors, compositions,
concordats, &c, which princes have been forced to make against
thera, or with them to secure their interest.
Many good princes have been forced to oppose them, as
Henry II. of England, King Lewis XII. of France, (that just
Tpxixice, pater patrice) perdatn Babylonis nomen.X
How often have they used this as a pretence of raising and
fomenting wars ?§ confiding in their spiritual arms ; inter
dicting princes, that would not comply with their designs for
advancing the interests not only of their see, but of their
private farailies ?
Bodin II observeth that Pope Nicholas I. was the first who
excoraraunicated princes. Platina doth mention some before
him : but it is remarkable, that although Pope Leo I. (a high-
spirited Pope, Fortissimus Leo, as Liberatus caUeth him) was
highly provoked against Theodosius Junior ; Pope Gelasius,
and divers of his predecessors and followers — Pope Gregory II.
against Leo — Virgilius against Justinian, &c. yet none of them
did presume to excommunicate the emperors.
All these dealings are the natural result of this pretence ;
and, supposing it well grounded, are capable of a plausible
* Vid ConcU, Lugd, p. 851.
i* Auctoritate Apostolica de fratrum nostrorum consUio declaramus ilia
juramenta prtedicta fidelitatis existere et censeri debere. Clementin. Ub. 2.
tit. 9. cap. unicum. — We declare out of our apostolical [authority by the
advice of our brethren that the foresaid oaths of fealty ought to be, and be
so esteemed. } Thuan. Ub. 1.
§ Abuteute Christiauorum Pastore Christianorum Principum viribus, ut
privatae ambitioni, et suorum Ubidini inserviret. Thuan. lib. 1. p, 42.—
The Pastor of Christians abusing the power of Christian Princes that he
might gratify his private ambition, and the will and lust of his friends,
II Observ,

THE pope's SUPUEMACY. 221
justification : for is it not fit (seeing one must yield) that tem
poral should yield to spiritual ?
Indeed, granting the Papal supremacy in spirituals, I con
ceive the high-fiying zealots of the Roman Church, who sub
ject all temporal powers to them, have great reason on their
side, for co-ordinate power cannot subsist, and it would be
only an eternal seminary of perpetual discords.
The quarrel cannot otherwise be well composed than by
whoUy disclairaing the fictitious and usurped power ofthe 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 ricegerents in his king
dom at the same time.
But it is plain, that he hath instituted the ciril power ; and
endowed it vrith a sword. That princes are his lieutenants.*
That in the 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 Christianity ; for they will not endure to be
crossed, to be depressed, to be trampled on.f
This Popes often have coraplained of; not considering it
was their own insolence that caused it.
10. Whereas now Christendora is split into many parcels,
feubject to divers ciril sovereignties, it is expedient that corre-
spondently there should be distinct ecclesiastical governments,
iindependent of each other, which may comply vrith the
irespective civfl authorities in promoting 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 inconveniences must ensue.
• Tort. T. p. 210. P. Anast. calleth the Emperor Anast. Vicarium.
Epist. (p. 670.) t Eccles. Leod. p. 522.
+ Secundum mutationes temporum transferuntur etiam regna terrarum ;
unde etiam Ecclesiasticarum parochiarum fines in plerisque provinciis mu-
teri expedit et transfen-i. P. Pasch. II. Ep. 19.

222 A TBEATISE OF
It is of perilous consequence, that foreigners should have
authoritative infiuence upon the subjects of any prince ; or
have a power to intermeddle in affairs.
Princes have a natural right to determine with whom their
subjects shall have intercourse ; which is inconsistent with a
right of foreigners to govern or judge them in any case, vrith
out their leave.
Every prince is obUged to employ the power entrusted to
hira, to the furtherance of God's service, and encouragement of
all good work.s ; as a supreme power, vrithout being liable to
obstruction from any other power.
It would irritate his power, if another should be beyond his
coercion. It is observable, that the Pope by intermeddling in the
affairs of kingdoms did so wind himself into them, as to get a
pretence to be raaster of each ; princes being his vassals and
feudatories.* 1 1 . Such an authority is needless and useless ; it not serving
the ends which it pretendeth ; and they being better compassed
without it.
It pretendeth to raaintain 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 sorae will be ready to
relieve it, when assaulted by others.
Truth cannot be supported merely by human authority;
especiaUy that authority is to be suspected, which pretendeth
dominion over our minds. What controversy, being doubtful
in itself, wUl not after his decision continue doubtful ? his
sentence may be eluded by interpretation as weU as other
testimonies or authorities.
* Vid. Bod. de Rep. 1. 9. (p. 195.) Car les Princes Chrestien avoient
presque tous opinion, que le Pape estoit absolvement seigneur soveraigne
de tous les Boyaumes dela Chrestiente. Bod. ibid, p 196. Tort. Tort. p.
216, &c.— Greg. VII. Ep. 1, 7. 2. 13. Alex. lI.Ep. 8.-'H roaavrq Sia-
iptavia Kai pdxq Tiav iv r-y 'EKKXqaiif yiverai, tKaaTov rqg piv tov
Kvpiov qpiav 'Iqaob Xpiarov SiSaaKaXiag dipiarapkvov, Xoyiapovg
Si Tivag Kai 'opovg iSiovg iKSiKovvTog 'ti, aiBtvriag, Kai paXXov
dpxtiv drr' ivavriag toU Kvp'iov, q ap;^£cr0ai vrrb tov Kvpiov^ovXo--
pivov. Bas. de Jud. Dei, T. 2. p. 259. [p. 299. vol. 2. Paris. 1839.]-
So great a dissonancy and jarring there is among men in the Church,
whUe every one swei-ves from the doctrine of our Lord Jesus Christ, and
asserts certain conceits and rules of his own by his owu authority, and
had rather rule contrary to the Lord, than be ruled by the Lord.

THE pope's SUPREMACY". 223
The opinion of a man's great wisdom or skill may be the
ground of assent, in defect of other more cogent arguments ;
but authority of name or dignity is not proper to convince a
man's understanding. Men obey, but not believe princes more
than others, if not more learned than others.
It pretendeth to maintain order : but how ? by introducing
slavery ; by destroying all rights ; by multiplying disorders ;
by hindering order to be quietly administered in each country.
It pretendeth to be the only means of unity and concord in
opmion, by determining controversies : which its advocates
affirm necessary.*
But how can that be necessary which never was de facto ?
not even in the Roman Church ?
Hath the Pope affected this ? do all his followers agree in
all points ; do they agree about his authority ? Do not they
difier and dispute about infinity of questions ? Are all the
points frivolous, about which their dirines and schoolmen
dispute ? Why did not the Council of Trent itself, vrithout
more ado, and keeping such a disputing, refer all to his
oracular decision ?
Necessary points may and vrill by all honest people be
known and determined without him, by the clear testimony of
Scripture, by consent of Fathers, by general tradition. — And
other points need not to be deterrained.f
That he raay be capable of that ofiice, he raust be believed
appointed by God thereto ; which is a question itself to be
decided without hira, to satisfaction. His power is apt no
othervrise to knock down controversies, than by depressing
truth ; not suffering any truth to be asserted, which doth not
favour its interests.
Concord was raaintained, and controversies decided without
them in the ancient Church ; in Synods, wherein he was not
the sole judge, nor had observable influence.
, The Fathers did not think such authority needful, other-
\wise they would have made more use of it.
A more ready way to define controversies, is for every one
not to prescribe to others, or to persecute : for then men
would more calmly see the truth and consent.}
* Necesse est, ut omnes fideles idem sentiant. BeU. 1.9. [p. 292. vol.
1, Pragae, 1721,] — It is necessary that all the faithful should be of the
same opinion.
t 'iKaviar'tpa q Btia ypafq. Ath. % Nemini praescribentes.

224 A TKEATISE OP
It pretendeth to maintain peace and unity. But nothing
hath raised more fierce dissensions, or so many bloody wars in
Christendom as it.
It is apt by tyrannical administration to become intolerable,
and so to break the ecclesiastical state ; to raise schisms and
troubles. It is like to extinguish genuine charity, which is free and
uncompelled. All the peace and charity which it endureth, is by force
and compulsion, not out of choice and good affection.
V. The ancients did assert to each bishop, a free, absolute,\
independent authority, subject to none, directed by none,
accountable to none on earth, in the administration of affairs;
properly concerning his particular Church.
This is raost erident in St. Cyprian's writings; out of which
it will not be amiss to set down some passages, manifesting
the sense and practice of the Church in his time, to the satis
faction of any ingenuous mind.
" The bond of concord abiding, and the sacrament (or
doctrine) ofthe Catholic Church persisting undirided, eveiy
bishop disposeth and directeth his own acts, being to render
an account of his purpose to the Lord:"* this he writeth,
when he was pleading the cause of Pope Cornelius against
Novatian ; but then, it seemeth, not dreaming of his supre
macy over others
" But we know, that some vrill not lay down what once they
have imbibed, nor vrill easily change their mind ; but, the
bond of peace and concord with their coUeagues being pre
served, will retain sorae peculiar things, which have once been
used by thera ; in which matter neither do we force any, or
give law ; when as every prelate hath in the administration of
his Church the free power of his will, being to render unto the
Lord an account of his acting :"+ this, saith he, writing to
* Manente concordise vinculo, et perseverante Catholicae Ecclesiae in-
dividuo Sacramento, actum suum disponit et dirigit unusquisque Episco
pus, rationem propositi sui Domino redditurus. Cypr. Ep. 52. (ad .Kb-
tonianum.) [Ep. 55. p. 114. Lipsiae, 1838.]
t Caeteriim scimus quosdam quod semel imbiberint noUe deponere, nee
propositum suum facile mutare, sed salvo inter CoUegas pacis et concor-
diae vinculo quaedam propria, quse apud se semel sint usurpata, retinere ;
qua in re nee nos vim cuiquam facimus, aut legem damus ; cum habeat in
Ecclesise administratione voluntatis suae liberum arbitrium unusquisque
propositus, rationem actus sui Domino redditurus. Cypr. Ep. 72. (ad
Stephanum.) [Id. p. 208.]

THE POPES SUPREM.'VCY. li'.'j
Pope Stephanus, and in a friendly manner, " out of common
respect and single love,* (not out of serrile obeisance), ac
quainting him what he and his brethren ina Synod by common
consent and authority had established concerning the degra
dation of clergymen, who had been ordauied by heretics, or
had lapsed into schism.
" For seeing it is ordained by us all, and it is likewise equal
and just, that each man's cause should be there heard where
the crime is comraitted ; and to each pastor a portion of the
flock is assigned, which each should rule and govern, being to
render an account to his Lord ; those indeed over whom we
preside ought not to ramble about :"f this saith he in his
epistle to Pope Coraelius, upon occasion of some factious
clergymen addressing themselves to him with factious sugges
tions, to gain his countenance,
" These things I have briefly written back, according to our
meanness, dear brother ; prescribing to none nor prejudging,
that every bishop should not do what he thinks good, haring
a free power of his will."}
" In which raatter our bashfulness and modesty doth not
prejudge any one, so that every one may not judge as he
thinketh, and act as he judgeth :§— prescribing to none, so
that every bishop may not resolve what he thinks good, being
to render an account to the Lord," || &c.
" It remaineth that each of us do utter his opinion about
this matter, judging no man, nor removing any man, if he
* Haec ad conscientiam tuam, frater charissime, et pro honore communi
et pro simpUci dUectione pertuUmus, etc. — Consensu et auctoritate com
muni. f Nam cum statutum sit omnibus nobis, et aequum sit pariter ac jnstum,
ut uniuscujusque causa ilUc audiatur, ubi est crimen admissum, et singu
lis Pastoribus portio gregis sit adscripta, quam regat unusquisque et gu
bemet, rationem actus sui Domino redditurus, oportet utique eos quibus
prsesumus, non circumcursare, &c. Cypr. Epist. 55. (ad ComeUum.) [ut
supra. Bp. 59. p. 144.]
} HsBC tibi breviter pro nostra mediocritate rescripsimus, frater charissime ;
nemini prsescribentes, aut prsejudicantes, quo minus unusquisque Episco
porum quod putat faciat, habens arbitrii sui Uberam potestatem. Cypr.
Epist. 73. (ad Jubabaianum.) [Id. p. 221.]
^ Qu^ in parte nemini verecundia et modestia nostra praejudicat, quo
minus unusquisque quod putat sentiat, et quod senserit faciat, Cypr. Epist.
76. (ad Magnum.) [Id. Ep. 69.]
II Nemini praescribentes, quo miniis statuat quod putat unusquisque
Praepositus, actus sui rationem Domino redditurus ; secundum quod Apos
tolus, &c. Ibid. [Id.]
VOL. I. a

226 A TREATISE OF
dissenteth from the right of coraraunion ; for neither doth any
of us constitute hiraself bishop of bishops, or by tyrannied
terror driveth his colleagues to a necessity of obeying : whereas
every bishop hath upon account of his liberty and authority
his own free choice, and is no less exerapted from being
judged by another, than he is incapable to judge another ; but
let us all expect the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ, who,
and who alone hath power both to prefer us to the govern
ment 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 ex
press or more full in assertion of the episcopal liberties and
rights against almost every branch of Romish pretences ?
He disavoweth the practice of one bishop excluding another
from communion for dissent in opinion about disputable points.
He rejecteth the pretence that any man can have to be a bishop
of bishops, or superior to all his brethren : he condemneth the
imposing opinions upon bishops, and constraining them to
obedience : he disclairaeth any power in one bishop to judge
another ; he asserteth to each bishop a full liberty and power
to manage his own concerns according to his discretion ; he
affirmeth every bishop to receive his power only from Christ,
and to be liable only to his judgraent.
We may observe that St. Augustinef in his reflections upon
the passages of that Synod, doth approve, yea admire that
preface, passing high comraendations on the sraartest passages
of it which assert coraraon liberty, professing his own confor
mity in practice to them : "In this consultation} (saith he) is
shewed a pacific soul, overflowing with plenty of charity ; and
we have therefore a free choice of inquiry granted to us by the
* Superestut dehac [ipsa] re singuli quid sentiamusproferamus, neminem
judicantes, aut a jure communionis aliquem si diversum senserit amoven-
tes ; neque enim quisquam nostrum Episeopum se esse Episcoporum con
stituit, aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequeudi necessitatem CoUegas suos
adigit ; quando habeat omnis Episcopus pro Ucentia liberatis et potestatis
suae arbitrium proprium, taraque judicari ab aUo non possit, qu^m iiec ipsi
potest alterum judicare ; sed expeetemus universi judicium Domininostri
Jesu Christi, qui unus et solus habet potestatem et praeponendi nos in
Ecclesiae suae gubernatione, et de actu nostro judicandi. Cypr. in prsef.
Cone. Carthag. [Cyp. tractat. Pars 2. p. 266. Lipsise, 1839.]
t Aug. de Bapt. contr. Donat. lib. 2, 3, &c.
X Habemus ergo quaereudi liberum arbitrium ipsius Cypriani nobis
mitissimo et veracissimo sermone concessum. Lib. 3, cap, 3. [p. 201.
vol. 9. Paris. 1837.]

THE POPE S SUPllEMACY. 2'27
most mild and most veracious speech of Cyprian himself, * and
now if the proud and tumid minds of heretics dare to extol
themselves against the holy huraility of this speech— than
which what can be more gentle, more humble ?"f
Would St. Augustine have swallowed those sayings, could
he have so much applauded them, if he had known a just
power then extant and radiant in the world, which they do
impeach and subvert ? No, I trow : he did not know, nor so
much as dream of any such, although the Pope was under his
nose whfle he was discussing that point, and he could hardly
talk so much of St. Cyprian vrithout thinking of Pope Stephen.
However, let any man of sense honestly read and weigh
those passages, considering who did write them, to whom he
writ them, upon what occasions he writ thera, when he writ
them; that he was a great primate of the Church, a most
holy, most prudent, most humble and meek person ; that he
addressed divers of them to bishops of Rome ; that raany of
thera were touching the concerns of Popes, that he writ them
in times of persecution and distress, which produce the most
sober and serious thoughts ; then let him if he can, conceive,
that aU Christian bishops were then held subject to the Pope,
or owned such a power due to him as he now claimeth.
We may add a contemporary testimony of the Roman
clergy, addressing to St. Cyprian these words :} " Although a
mind well conscious to itself, and supported by the vigour of
evangeUcal discipUne, and haring in heavenly doctrines be
come a true witness to itself, is wont to be content with God
for its only judge ; and not to desire the praises, nor to dread
the accusations of another ; yet they are worthy of double
praise, who when they know they owe their consciences to
God only as judge, yet desire also their actions to be approved
* Nunc si se undent superbae et tumidae cervices hsereticorum adversus
sanctam humilitatem hujus sententiae extoUant. Lib. 2. cap. 3. [Idem.
p. 183.]
t Quid mansuetius, quid humUius ? Lib. 3. cap. 3. [Id. p. 200.]
X Quanquam bene sibi conscius animus, et Evangelicae discipUnaa
vigore subnixus, et verus sibi in decretis coelestibus testis effectus, soleat
solo Deo judice esse contentus, nee aiterius aut laudes petere, aut accusa-
liones pertimescere ; tamen geminate sunt lande condigni, qui cum con
scientiam sciant Deo soli debere se judici, actus tamen suos desiderant
etiam ab ipsis suis fratribus comprobari : quod te, frater Cypriaue, facere
non mirum est, qui pro tua verecundia, et ingeuita industria consiUorum
tuorum nos non tam judices voluisti, quam participes inveniri. — Cler. Rom.
ad Cypr. Ep.31. [Ep. 30. p. 56. Lipsiae, 1838.]
a 2

228 A TREATISE OF
by their brethren themselves ; the which it is no wonder that
you, brother Cyprian, should do, who according to your mo
desty and natural industry would have us not so much judges
as partakers of your CouncUs." Then it seems the College of
Cardinals, not so high in the instep as they are now, did take
St. Cyprian to be free, and not accountable for his actions to
any other judge but God.
That this notion of liberty did continue a good time after
in the Church, we raay see by that canon of the Antiochene
Synod;* "ordaining that every bishop have power of his
own bishopric, govern it according to the best of his care and
discretion, and provide for all the country belonging to his
city, so as to ordain priests and deacons, and dispose things
aright." The raonks of Constantinople in the Synod of Chalcedon,
said thus:f "We are sons of the Church, and have one
father, after God, our archbishop:" they forgot their So
vereign Father the Pope.
The like notion raay seera to have been then in England,
when the Church of Canterbury was caUed "the common
mother of all under the disposition of its spouse Jesus
Christ."} VI. The ancients did hold aU bishops, as to their office,
originally according to dirine institution, or abstracting from
human sanctions framed to preserve order and peace, to be
equal ;§ for that all are successors of the Apostles, aU derive
their comraission and power in the same tenor from God, all
of them are " arabassadors, stewards, ricars of Christ ;" en
trusted with the sarae dirine ministeries of instructing, dis
pensing 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,
* "EKaaTov ydp irriaKorrov i^ovaiav exeiv Trjg eavTOv rrapoiKiag,
SioiKtXv Kara Tqv tKdaTip imfSaXXovaav tvXdfieiav, Kai rrpovoiav rroi-
eXaBai rrdaqg rrjg xiapag rrjg vrrb Tijv tavrov rroXiv-, iiig Kai %fiporo-
vtXv rrpea(3vTepovg Kai SiaKovovg, Kai ptrd Kpiatiag 'iKaara SioKap.
pdveiv.—Sjn. Aut. Can. 9.
t 'EpeXg Si Kai TeKva rqg 'EKKXqa'iag iaptv, Kai 'ivd irartpa peril
Tbv Qt'ov, rbv dpxitrr'iaKorrov txopiv. Syn. Chalced. Act. 1. p. 114.
X Omnium nostrum mater communis sub sponsi sui Jesu Christi dispo
sitione. Gervas. Dorob. (p. 1663.) apud Twisd. p. 72.
$ Vid. Epist, P. Celestini I. m Cone. Eph. Act. 2. (p. 324.)

THE pope's supremacy. 229'
ia reputation, in extent of jurisdiction, as one king may sur
pass another in ampUtude 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 chUdren, whom thou mayest make
princes in all the earth."
This was St. Jerome's doctrine in those famous words •:f
" Wherever a bishop be, whether at Rome or at Eugubium, at
Constantinople or at Rhegium, at Alexandria or at Thenis, he
is of the sarae worth, and of the same priesthood ; the force
of wealth and lowness of poverty doth riot 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. Jerorae surely did never think,
he speaking siraply concerning bishops, as they stood by
divine institution, not according to huraan models, which gave
some advantages over other.
That this notion did continue long in the Church, we may
see by the elegies of bishops in later Synods ; for instance,
that in the Synod of Compeigne : " It is convenient all Chris
tians 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 aU of us
unworthy, yet are the Vicars of Christ and successors of his
Apostles."§ In contemplation of which verity, St. Gregory Nazianzen
obserring the declension from it introduced in his times by the
ambition of some prelates, did vent that famous exclamation:
"0 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 raean to level against the ordi-
* Baron. An. 57. §30. Psal, xlv. 16.
t Ubicunque fuerit Episcopus, sive Romse sive Eugubii, &c. Hieron.
ad Evagr. Ep. 85.
t Omnibus in Christiana religione constitutis scire convenit quale sit
ministerium Episcoporum— quos constat esse Vicarios Christi, et Clavi
geros Regni Coelorum, &c.— Syn. Compend. Ann. D. 833. (apud Bin.
torn. 6. p. 361.)
§ Nos omnes licet indigni, Christi tamen Vicarii, et Apostolorum ipsius
successores. Syn. Meldens. Ann. D. 845. (apud Bin. tom. 6. p. 402.)
II Qg bifttXov yt pqSi qv rrpotSpia, pqSe ng rorrov rrpoTipqaig, Kai
rvpavviKij rrpovopia.—Gtes.'Saz. Orat. 28.

230 A TKEATISE OF
nance of God, but against that which lately began to be intro
duced by raen : and what would the good raan have wished, if
he had been aware of those pretences, about which we dis
course ; which then did only begin to bud and peep up in the
world ?
1 . Coraraon practice is a good interpreter of coramon senti
ments in any case ; and it therefore sheweth that in the primi
tive Church the Pope was not deemed to have a right of uni
versal 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 con
tinuaUy) 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 Qther considerations, declaring the
sense of the Fathers ; only I shall add, that indeed
2. The state of the most primitive Church did not well
admit such an universal sovereignty. For that did consist of
sraall bodies incoherently situated and scattered about in very
distant places, and consequently unfit to be raodelled into one
political society, or to be governed by one head. Especially
considering their condition under persecution and poverty.
What convenient resort for direction or justice could a few
distressed Christians in Egypt, Ethiopia, Parthia, India, Meso
potamia, Syria, Armenia, Cappadocia, and other parts have to
Rome ? What trouble, what burthen had it been to seek
instruction, succour, decision of cases thence? Had they
heen obliged or required to do so, what offences, what clamours
would it have raised ; seeing that afterward, when Christendom
was connected, and compacted together ; when the state of
Christians was flourishing and prosperous, when passages were
open, and the best of opportunities of correspondence were
afforded, yet the setting out of these pretences did cause great
oppositions and stirs ; seeing the exercise of this authority,
when it had obtained most rigour, did produce so many
grievances, so many complaints, so many courses to check and
curb it, in countries feeling the inconveniences and mischiefs
springing frora it ?
The want of the Uke in the first ages is a good argument,
that the cause of thera had not yet spmng up ; Christendom

THE pope's supremacy. 231
could not have been so stUl, if there had been then so meddle
some a body in it, as the Pope now is.
The Roman clergy in their epistle to St. Cyprian told him,
that " because of the difficulty of things and times, they could
not constitute a bishop who might moderate things "* imme
diately belonging 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 Rigaltius truly
noteth, " the Church being then oppressed with various vexa
tions, the communication of provinces between themselves was
difficult and unfrequent."f
Wherefore Bellarmine himself doth confess, that in those
times, before the Nicene Synod, " the authority of the Pope
was not a Uttle hindered, so that because of continual persecu
tions he could not freely exercise it."}
The Church therefore could so long subsist vrithout the use
of such authority, by the rigilance of governors over their
flocks, and the friendly correspondence of neighbour Churches :
and if he would let it alone, it might do so still.
That could be no dirine institution, which had no rigour
in the first and best times ; but an innovation raised by ambi
tion. VII. The ancients, when occasion did require, did maintain
their equality of office and authority, particularly in respect to
the Roman bishops ; not only interpretatively by practice, but
directly and formaUy in express terms asserting it.
Thus when Felicissimus and his compUces, being rejected by
St. Cyprian, did apply theraselves to Pope CorneUus for his
communion and coimtenance, St. Cyprian affirmed that to be
an irregular and unjust course ; snbjoining,§ " Except to a few
desperate and vricked persons, the authority of the bishops
* Nobis, post excessum nobUissimae memoriae viri Fabiani, nondum est
Episcopus propter rerum et temporum ditfioultatem constitutus, qui omnia
ista moderetur.— CI. Rom. ad Cypr. Ep. 31. [Ep. 30. p. 59. Lipsise,
1838,] t.Variis tunc Ecclesia vexationibus oppressa difficilis et infrequens
erat Provinciarum inter sese communieatio. Rigalt. in Cypr. Ep. 67.
t Verum enim est impeditam fuisse eo tempore non pariim Pontificis
auctoritatem — propter persecutiones continuas non potuisse Romanes Pon
tifices libere exercere eam, quam a Christo acceperant auctoritatem, &c.
BeU. de R. P. 2. 17. [p. 365. n. 24. vol. 1. Prags, 1721.]
§ Nisi si paucis desperatis et perditis minor esse videtur auctoritas Epis
coporum in Africa constitutorum, qui jam de iUis judicaverunt— [Epist. ad
Cornel. 54. p, 73, Paris. 1836.]

232 A TKEATISE OF
constituted in Africa, who have already judged of them, do
seem less ;" less, that is inferior to any other authority, par
ticularly to that of Rome, unto which they had recourse ; what
other meaning could he have ? doth not his argument require
this meaning ?
Another instance is that of the Fathers of the Antiochene
Synod* (being ninety-seven bishops), the which St. HUary
caUeth " a Synod of saints congregated," (the decrees whereof
the Catholic Church did adrait into its code, and the canons
whereof Popes have caUed " venerable "),f these in their
epistle to Pope JuUus, complaining of his deraeanour in the
case of Athanasius, did fiatly assert to theraselves an equaUty
with him. " They did not," as Sozomen reciteth out of their
epistle, " therefore think it equal that they should be
thought inferiors, because they had not so big and nuraerous a
Church."} That Pope himself testifieth the sarae in his epistle to them,
extant in the second Apology of Athanasius : " If," saith he,
" you do truly conceive the honour of bishops to be equal, and
the sarae ; and yet do not, as ye write, judge of bishops accord
ing to the magnitude of cities ;"§ which assertion of theirs so
flatly thwarting papal supremacy he doth not at all confute,
yea not so rauch as contradict ; and therefore reasonably may
be interpreted to yield consent thereto ; the rule, " He that
holdeth his peace seeraeth to consent," || never holding better
than in this case, when his copyhold was so nearly touched ;
indeed he had been very blaraeable to waive such an occasion
of defending so iraportant a truth ; or in letting so pestilent an
error to pass without correction or reproof.
After the Pope had climbed higher than at that time (upon
the ladders of dissension and disorders in the Church) yet he
was reproved by Euphemius, bishop of Constantinople, for
preferring himself before his brethren , as we raay collect from
those words of a zealous Pope, " We desire not to be placed
* Fides quam exposuerunt qui afiiierunt Episcopi 97. — Hilar, de
Synodis. (p. 367.) — Congregatam Sanctorum Synodum. Hilar, ibid.
t VenerabUes Antiocheni Canones. P. Nicol. I. Ep. 9. (p. 519.)
X Ov rrapd toiito tu StVTtptXa ipkptiv -q^iovv, on p-q ptytBti, ij
rrXqBti 'EKKXqaiag rrXtovtKTOvaiv. Soz. 3. 8. [Cantab. 1720.]
§ Et ovv dXqBiag laqv Kai nriv avT-qv -qytXaBe nprjv nav 'EmuKii-
rrujv, Kai p-q tK roir ptykBovg twv rroXtiav, itg ypdiptrt, Kp'ivtri roi'C
'EmnKorrovg. V. Jul. I. apud Athan. in Apol. 2. (p. 744.)
II Qui tacet consentiri videtur.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 233
above others (as you say) so much as to have fellowship holy
and well-pleasing to God with all the faithful."*
, That Pope Gregory I. did not hold himself superior to other
bishops, many sayings of his do infer ; for in this he placeth
the fault of the Bishop of Constantinople, which he so often
and so severely reprehendeth, that he did "prefer himself
before and extol himself above other bishops "f
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 compli-
mentally said, " Sicut jtissistis, As you comraanded," he doth
thus express his resentment : "That word of command I desire
you let me not hear ; because I know who I ara, and who you
are ; by place ye are my brethren, in goodness, fathers ; I did
not therefore coraraand, but what seemed profitable, I hinted
to you."}
That many such instances may not be alleged out of anti
quity, the reason is, because the ancient Popes did not under
stand this power to belong to them, and therefore gave nd
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
appUcations to the Roman 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 respect due to them ; as indeed
* Hie non tam optamus praeponi aliis (sicut praedicas) quam cum fide
libus cunctis sanctum et Deo placitum habere consortium. P. Gelas. I.
Ep. 1. (ad Euphemium.)
t In elatione sua Antichristum praecurrit, quia superbiendo se caeteris
praeponit. P. Greg. I. Ep. 6. 30. Super caeteros Sacerdotes se extoUit.
ibid. Christi sibi student membra judicare. P. Greg. I. Ep. 4. 36.
Solus omnibus praeease. id. Ep. 4. 38. — Quibus (Episcopis) cupis teme
tipsum vocabulo elationis praeponere. ibid.
t Quod verbum jussionis peto k meo auditu removeri ; quia scio quis
sura, qui estis ; loco enim mihi fratres estis, moribus patres, non ergo
jussi, sed quae utiUa visa sunt, indicare curavi, &c. — Greg. I. Ep. 7. 30.
(ad Eulog. Alex.)
§ Cypr. Ep. 4. 41. 58. 67, 68. 45. 49, &c.

234 A TREATISE OF
his practice demonstrateth, he did not apprehend any other
due ; or that he did take them for his superiors in office,
" Know now, brother," was the compeUation of Dionysius (bishop
of Alexandria) to Pope Stephanus. * The Synod of Antioch,
which rejected Paulus Samosatenus, inscribeth its epistle to
" Dionysius (then bishop of Rome) and Maximus, and all our
feUow ministers through the world. "f
The old Synod of Aries directeth their epistle to " Signior
Sylvester, their brother." Athanasius saith, " These things
may suffice, which have been written by our beloved and
feUow-minister Damasus, bishop of great Rome."} MarceUus
inscribed to Pope Julius, to his "most blessed fellow- minister." §
So Cyril spake of Pope Celestinel.|| " Our brother and fellow-
minister the bishop of Rome."ir So St. BasU and his feUow-
bishops of the East did inscribe their epistle, " To the beloved
of God and our raost holy brethren and fellow-rainisters the
unanimous bishops through Italy and France."** In this style
do the Fathers of Sardica salute Pope Julius ;f f those of Con
stantinople Pope Daraasus ; those of Ephesus Pope Celestme
I. "Our brother and fellow-minister Celestine;"}} those of
Carthage Pope Celestine I.§§ in the very same terms wherein
St. Augustine doth salute Maximinus, a Donatist bishop :
"Signior, ray beloved and most honoured brother." |||| The
oriental bishops Eustathius, Theophilus, and SUvanus did
* "laBi viiv dSeXipi, Euseb. 7. 5.
t Aiovvaiip Kai Ma^ipip Kai roXg KaTa tijv oiKOvpkvqv rrdai avXXti-
TovpyoXg qpiav. Euseb. 7. 30. [p. 248. Oxon. 1845, vel p. 359. Can
tab, 1720.]
X 'iKavd piv Td ypaftVTa rrapd Tt tov dyarrqToH Kai avXXeiTOVpyoU
Aapdaov. Athan. Epist. ad Afr. (p, 931.) [vol. 1. Colon. 1686.]
§ Tip paKapiiaTdnp avXXtiTOvpyip 'lovXiip. MarceU. ad P. Jul.
Epiph. haer. 72.
II 'AStXipoH Kai avXXtiTOvpyov qpiav toii Trjg 'Piapaiiav 'EKKXqaiag
'EmaKorrov. — CyrU. ad Nest, in Syn. Eph. p. 207.
IT ToXg ^tofiXtaTaToig Kai baiiaraTOig dSeXipoXg avXXtiTovpyoXg Kara
Tqv 'iTaXiav Kai raXXiav bpoipvxoig 'EmaKorroig. Bas. Ep. 69.
[Ep. 92. p. 262. VOL 3. Paris. 1839.]— Athanas. Apol. 2. (p. 761. 756.)
** Theod. 5. 9,
t* Tou dStXtpob Kai avXXtiTovpyov qpiav KeXearivov. Syn. Eph.
p. 217.
XX Domino dUectissimo et honoratissimo fratri. — Cone. Afr. [Lab.
Concil. vol. 2. p. 1674. Paris. 1C71.]
i^ Domino dUectissimo et honorabUi fratri Maximino. Aug. Ep. 203.
[vol. 2. Ep, 23. p. 30. Paris. 1679.]
IIII Kvpiip dStXipip,Kai avXXtirovpyip Aifiepiip EvardBiog, OtoijiiKog,
XiXfiavbg iv Kvpiip xa'p;i>'.— Socr, Ub. 4. cap, 12. [Cantab. 1720.]

THE pope's supremacy. 235
inscribe their remonstrance to Pope Liberius, " To Signior, our
brother and fellow-minister Liberius."* So John of Antioch
to Nestorius writeth "to my master." The Synod of lUyricum
call Elpidius, " Our senior and fellow-minister." f
In which instances and some others of later date we may
observe that the word Kupioc, or Dominus was then (as it is
now) barely a term of civility, being then usually given to any
person of quaUty, or to whora 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. Augustine doth thus salute even Donatist bishops ;
reflecting thereon thus, " Since therefore by charity I serve
you in this ofSce of writing letters to you, I do not improperly
call you master, for the sake of our one true Master who has
commanded ns so to do. — My most honored Master. — Now
therefore haring vrith me my most honoured signior and most
reverend presbyter, &c. — My most honored master, Asyncritus
the elder."}
Pope Celestine himself did salute the Ephesine Fathers
Kiipioi dSeX^o'i, masters, brethren. Even in the sixth Council, §
Thomas, bishop of Constantinople, 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 acknowledge for your brethren and fellow-bishops."^
Such are the terms and titles which primitive integrity, when
• Tip Starrory pov. Cone, Eph. p. 202. [Lab. ConcU. vol. 3. p. 387.
Paris. 1671.]
t Tov Kvpiov qpiav Kai avXXeiTovpyov. Theod. lib 4. cap. 9. [p. 159.
Cantab. 1720.]
{ Ciim ergb vel hoc ipso officio Uterarum per cbaritatem tibi serviam,
non absurde te Dominum voco, propter unum et verum Dominum nostrum
qui nobis ista praecepit. Aug. Ep. 103. [vol. 2, Ep. 203. p. 30. Paris.
1679.— AsffTTord pov npiiaTaTt. Chrys. Ep. 26. — 'Nvv yoiii/ 'tmXajio-
ptvoi TOV Kvpiov pov TipiiardTov Kai evXafieaTaTov rrpeafSvTkpov.
Chrys. Ep. 26. [Ep. 27. p. 731. vol.3. Paris. 1835.]— AtaTrorj/j/ poU
TipiiliTaTov 'AavyKpiTov Tbv Upta^vTtpov. Ep. 68. (71. 75. 77.84.
91, &c.)
§ Kipioi dXtXipoi. P. Cel. I. Epist. ad Syn. Eph. Act. 2. (p. 324.)
[ConcU. Lab, vol. 3. p. 613. Paris. 1671.]
II Cone. 6. Act. 13. p. 224.
II Scias nos non tuos esse, ut te jactas et extoUis, clericos, quos ut fratres
et co-episcopos recognoscere, si elatio permitteret, debueras. Ann. Franc.
Pith. (Ann. 858.)

23C A TREATISE OF
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 soleran addresses and reports
concerning them :) which is an argument sufficiently plain,
that bishops in those times did not take theraselves to be the
Pope's subjects, or his inferiors in office, but his fellows and
mates co-ordinate in rank.
Were not these improper terras for an ordinary gentleman,
or nobleraan to accost his prince in ? yet hardly is there such
a distance between any prince and his peers, as there is between
a modern Pope and other bishops.
It would now be taken for a great arrogance and sauciness,
for an underling bishop to address to the Pope in such language,
or to speak of hira in that raanner ; which is a sign that the
world is altered in its notion of hira, and that he heareth a
higher conceit of' himself than his primitive, ancestors did.
Now nothing but Beatissimus Pater, " raost blessed Father;''
and Dominus noster Papa, " our Lord the Pope," in the highest
sense will satisfy hira.
Now a Pope in a General Synod, in a solemn oration, could
be told to his face, that " the raost 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 sarae ancient times the style of the Roraan bishops
writing to other bishops was the sarae ; he calling them
brethren and. fellow-ministers.
So did Cornelius write to Fabius of Antioch, " beloved bro
ther ;" so did he call all other bishops : — " Be it known to aU
our feUow-bishops and brethren."f So JuUus to the Oriental
bishops, "To our beloved brethren."} So Liberius to the
Macedonian bishops, " To our beloved brethren and fellow-
ministers :"§ and to the Oriental bishops, "To our brethren
and feUow-bishops." || So Damasus to tbe bishops of lUyricum.^
* Verfe divina providentia factum censendum est, quod te sacerrimus
iste senatus — fratrem, et ita dixerim fiUum in patrem, coUegam in Domi
num — elegeriot, assumpserint, adoraverint. Bait. Delrio. in Cone. Later.
ad Leonem X. Sess. 8. (p. 85.)
t 'ASeXipi dyarrqri. Euseb. 6. 43. [Cantab. 1720.] Omnibus co-
episcopis nostris et fratribus innotescat. P. Com. apud Cypr. Ep, 48.
[Ep, 47. Paris. 1836.]
X 'AyarrqToXg dStXipoXg, Athan. p. 739.
§ ' AyarrqToXgdStX^oXg Kai avXXtiTovpyoXg. Socr. 4. 12. [Cant. 1720.]
II Fratribus et co-episcopis. Hil. frag. p. 450.
11 Soz. 6. 23.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 237
So Leo himself frequently in his epistles. So Pope Celestine
calleth John of Antioch, " most honoured brother ;"* to Cyril
and to Nestorius himself, "beloved brother ;"f to the Fathers
of Ephesus, " Signiors, brethren."} Pope Gelasius to the
bishops of Dardania, "your brotherhood." St. Gregory to
Cyriacus, " our brother and fellow-priest, Cyriacus."§
If it be said the Popes did write so then out of condescension,
or humiUty and modesty ; it may be replied, that if really there
was such a difference as is now pretended, it may seem rather
affectation, and indecency or mockery : for it would have more
become the Pope to maintain the majesty and authority of his
place, by appellations apt to cherish their reverence, than to
collogue with them in terms void of reality, or signifying that
equality which he did not raean.
But Bellarmine hath found out one instance (which he
maketh much of) of Pope Damasus, who writing (not as he
allegeth, to the Fathers of Constantinople, || but) to certain
Eastern bishops, caUeth 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 sorae corrup
tion in the place; for why, if he writ to bishops, should he
use a style so unsuitable to those times and so different from
that of his predecessors and successors ? why should there be
such a disparity between his own style now and at other times ?
for writing to the bishops of lUyricum he calleth them " be
loved brethren ;"** why then is he so inconstant and partial,
as to yield these Oriental bishops less respect ; wherefore per
haps viol was thrust in for adeXipol ; or perhaps the word
'ETTireoTTois was intruded, and he did write to laymen ; " those
who governed the east,"ff who well might be called " most
honoured sons ;" otherwise the epithet doth not seera well to
suit : but, however, a siraple exaraple of arrogance or stateli
ness, (or of what shaU I call it ?) is not to be set against so
many modest and mannerly ones ?
* TipuaraTt dStXfk. Cone. Eph. p. 196. [Cone. Lab. vol. 3. p. 376.
Paris. 1671.]
t T^ dyarrqTtp dSeXftp. P. 179. 183.
} K^pioi dSeXJ>oi. Act. 2. p. 324.
§ Fratemitas Vestra. P. Gelas. Ep. 12. Greg.— Epist. 6. 24. Fratris
et con-sacerdotis nostri Cyriaci.
n BeU. 2. 14. [p. 357. n. 10. vol. 1. Pragffi, 1721.] Theod. 5. 10.
^ Vales, in Theod. ibid, v'loi ripiiaraToi.
*• 'AyarrqToXg dSeX^oXg. Soz. 6. 23.
tt ToXg Tqv iiaav iBvvovai.

238 A TREATISE OF
In fine, that this salutation doth not always imply superiority,
we may be assured by that inscription of Alexander bishop of
Thessalonica to Athanasius of Alexandria, " to my beloved son
and unaniraous colleague Athanasius."*
IX. The ground of that eminence, which the Roman bishop
did obtain in the Church, so as in order to precede other
bishops, doth shake this pretence.
The Church of Rome was indeed allowed to be the principal
Church,f as St. Cyprian calleth it ; but why ? was it pre
ferred by Divine institution ? no surely, Christianity did not
make laws of that nature, or constitute differences of places.
Was it in regard to the succession of St. Peter ? no ; that was
a slim upstart device ; that did not hold in Antioch ; nor in
other apostoUcal Churches.
But it was for a more substantial reason; the very same, on
which the dignity and pre-eminency of other Churches was
founded ; that is, the dignity, magnitude, opulency, opportu
nity of that city in which the bishop of Rome did preside ;
together with the consequent numerousness, quality, and wealth
of his flock ; which gave him many great advantages above
other his fellow-bishops. It was (saith Rigaltius) called by St.
-Cyprian the principal Church, "because constituted in the
principal city."}
That Church in the very times of severest persecutions " by
the proridence of God (as Pope CorneUus said in his epistle to
Fabius) had a rich and plentiful number, with a most great and
innumerable people ;"§ so that he reckoneth 44 presbyters,
7 deacons (in imitation of the number in the Acts), 7 sub-
deacons, 42 acoluthi, 52 others of the inferior clergy, and
above 1500 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
* 'AyarrqTip v'lip Kai bpo^vxip avXXtirovpyip ' ABavaaiip. Apud
Athan. Apol. 2, p. 783.
f Ecclesia principalis. Cypr. Ep. 55.
J Ecclesia principalis, id est in urbe principaU constituta. Rigalt. in
Cypr, Ep. 55. [p. 84. Paris. 1666.]
^ Aid rqg tov Qtov rrpovoiag rrXovaiog Tt Kai rrXqBvtav dpiBpbg ptrd
pty'iarov Kai dvapiBpqTov Xoou. Euseb, 6. 43. [p. 217. Oxon. 1845,]
II Et qnanquam sciam, frater, pro mutua dilectione quam debemus et
exhibemus invicem nobis florentissimo iUic Clero tecum pr sidenti, et
sanctissimae atque amplissimae plebi, legere te semper Uteras nostras.—
Cypr. Ep. 55, (ad Corn.) [Paris. 1666.]

THE pope's supremacy. 239
ordered that " the bishop of each metropolis should take care
of the whole province, because all that had business did resort
to the metropolis."*
That Church was most able to yield help and succour to them
who needed it ; and accordingly did use to do it ; according
to that of Dionysius (bishop of Corinth) in his epistle to bishop
Soterof 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 — "f
Whence it is no wonder that the head of that Church did
get most reputation, and the privilege of precedence vrithout
competition. " To this Church (said Irenseus) it is necessary that every
Church (that is, the faithful who are all about) should resort,
because of its more powerful principality ;"} what is meant by
that resort, vrill be easy to him, who considereth how men here
are wont to go up to London, drawn thither by mterests of
trade, law, &c.§ What he did understand by more powerful
principality the words themselves do signify, which exactly do
agree to the power and grandeur of the imperial city ; but do
not weU suit to the authority of a Church ; especially then
when no Church did appear to have either principaUty or
puissance. And that sense may clearly be erinced hy the
coiitext, wherein it doth appear that St. Irenseus doth not
allege the judicial authority of the Roman Church, but its
credible testiraony, which thereby became more considerable,
because Christians commonly had occasions of recourse to it.
Such a reason of precedence St. Cyprian giveth in another
case, II "Because (saith he) Rome for its magiutude ought to
precede Carthage."
For this reason a Pagan historian did observe the Roman
* Kai T-qv ppovTiSa dvaSexeaBai rrdaqg Tqg irrapxiag. — Aid rb iv
Ty MqTporroXei avvTpkxtiv rrdvrag TOvg rd rrpdypara ixovTag. Syn.
Ant. Can. 9.
t 'E^ dpxqg ydp vpXv iBog iari toiito, rravrag p'tv dSeXipovg rroi-
KiKiag evepyereiv, 'EKKXqa'iaig xt rroliXaXg TaXg KaTd rrdaav rroXiv iipoSia
Tikprreiv, iaSt piv Tqv Tiav Seop'tviav Ttev'iav dva^vxovrag, &c. Dionys.
Corinth, apud Euseb. 4. 23,
J Ad banc Ecclesiam, propter potentiorem prineipaUtatem, necesse est
omnem convenire Ecclesiam, hoc est eos qui sunt ubique fideles. Iren. 3.
3. [Genev. 1570.]
% {SvvaTiarkpav dpxqv I conjecture he said.)
Il Quoniam pro magnitudine sua debeat Carthaginem Roma praecedere.
Cypr. Ep. 49. [Ep. 48. ad Cornel, p. 54. Paris. 1836.]

240 A treatise of
bishop "had a greater authority"* (that is a greater interest
and reputation) than other bishops.
This reason Theodoret doth assign in his epistle to Pope
Leo, wherein he doth highly compliment and cajole him:
" For this city (saith he) is the greatest and most splendid,
and presiding over the world, and flowing vrith raultitude of
people ; and which moreover hath produced the empire now
governing — ^"f
This is the sole ground upon which the greatest of aU an
cient Synods, that of Chalcedon, did affirm the Papal emi
nency to be founded ; for " to the throne (say they) of ancient
Rorae because that was the royal city, the Fathers reasonably
conferred the pririleges :"} the fountain of Papal eminency
was in their judgment not to any Divine institution, not the au
thority of St. Peter deriring itself to his successors ; but the
concession of the Fathers, who were moved to grant it upon
account that Rorae was the imperial city.
To the sarae 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 re
verence in all things. "§
This reason had indeed in it much of equity, of decency, of
conveniency : it was equal that he should have the preference
and raore than coraraon respect, who was thence enabled and
engaged to do raost serrice to religion ; it was decent, that
out of conforraity to the State, and in respect to the Imperial
Court and Senate, the pastor of that place should be graced
¦vrith repute ; it was convenient, that he who resided in the
ipentre of all business, and had the greatest infiuence upon
ifiairs, who was the emperor's chief counsellor for direction and
instrument for execution of ecclesiastical affairs, should not be
put behind others.
• Autoritate qua potiores Eeternae urbis Episcopi. Amm. MarceU. lib.
15. (p. 47.) [cap. 7. p. 92. Paris. 1681.]
+ 'H ydp avTrj rraaiav peyiarq, Kai XapTrpordrq, Kai Trjg oiKovpkvriQ
TrpoKaBqpkvq, Kai Tip rrXqBei riav oiKqTopiav Kvpaivovaa- rrpbg Si roil-
TOig Kai viiv Kparovaav qytpoviav ifiXdarqae. — Theod. Ep. 113,
[vol, 3. p. 984. Paris. 1642,]
X Tip Spovip TTJg Ttpea^vr'tpag 'Piapqg Sid rb fiaaiXtvtiv rroXiv iKtivqv
0( IlaTiptg t'lKOTiag drroStStiiKaai Td rrpta^tXa. Syn, Chalc. Act. 16.
Can, 28. [Concil. Lab. vol, 4. p. 769. Paris. 1671.]
§ Upkrrti qpdg ravry Ty piy'iary rroXti, iJTig Skarroiva rraaiav iirrap-
Xti Tiav ytiav, iv rrdai rb a'tjiag rrapaipvXdKai. Placid, in Syn. Chalc.
p. 27. [Id. vol. 4. p. 769. Paris, 1671]

THE POPE S SlPEEMACY. 241
¦ Hence did the Fathers of the second General Synod ad
vance the bishop of Constantinople " to the next pririleges of
honour after the Bishop of Rome, because it was new Rome,"
and a seat of the empire.*
And the Fathers of Chalcedon assigned " equal privileges
to the most holy see of new Rome, vrith good reason (say
they) judging that the city, which was honoured with royalty
and senate, and which (otherwise) did enjoy equal pririleges
with the ancient royal Rome, should likewise in ecclesiastical
affairs be magnified as it, being second after it."f
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 extin-
guisbed there ; and sometimes was styled " the head of all
Churches."} * Tbv ptvToi KiavaTavTivovrroXtiag 'ErriaKorrov ixtiv rd rrpta^eXa
Trig Tipqg perd rbv Tiig ''Piapqg 'ErriaKorrov Sid to elvai avrqv veav
'Pw/iijj/.-Syn. Const. Can. 3. [ConcU. Lab. vol. 2. p. 948. Paris. 1671.]
t Td iaa rrpea^eXa irrkveipav Tip Trig vkag 'Piapqg dyiiardnp Srpovip,
evXiyiag KpivavTtg Tqv fiaaiXe'ia Kai ovyKXrinp TipqBeXaav rroXiv, Kai
Tiav iaiav drroXavovaav rrpea^tiiav Ty Trpta^vTtpq, (BaaiXiSi 'Piapy, Kai
tv roig 'EKKXqaiaoTiKoXg lag tKtivqv ptyaXvveaBai rrpdypaai, StVTtpav
ittivqv irrdpxovaav. Syn. Chalc. Can. 28. [ConcU. Lab. vol. 4. p. 769.
Paris. 1671.]
X Sacrosanctam quoque hujus reUgiosissimae civitatis Ecclesiam, et ma-
trem nostrse pietatis, et Christianorum Orthodoxae reUgionis omnium, et
ejnsdem Regiae urbis sanctissimam sedem, &c. Imp. Leo. Cod. Lib. 1.
tit. 2. § 16. — The Holy Church of this most reUgious city, the mother of
oar devotion, and of aU orthodox Christians, and the most holy see of
that imperial city.
Bonifacius III. a Phoca Imperatore obtinuit, magn^ tamen contentione,
ut sedes B. Petri Apostoli, quae caput est omnium Ecclesiarum, ita et dice
retur, et haberetur ab omnibus ; quem quidem locum Ecclesia Constanti-
nopolitana sibi vindicare eonabatur ; faventibus interdum Principibus,
affirmantibusque eo loci primam sedem esse debere, ubi Imperii caput esset.
Plat, m Bonif. III. (p. 161.)— Boniface III. (though with a great deal of
stir) obtained of the Emperor Phocas, that the see of St. Peter the Apos-
Ue, which is the head of aU Churches, should be so caUed and accounted
liy all ; which dignity the Church of Constantinople did indeed endeavour
to assert to itself, Princes sometimes favouring them, and affirming that
there the chief see ought to be where the head of the empire was.
Phocas rogante Pap& Bonifacio statuit sedem Romana: Ecclesiae caput
esse omnium Ecclesiarum, quia Ecclesia ConstantinopoUtana primam se
omnium Ecclesiarum scribebat. Anastas. in Bonif. III. Idem SabeHicus,
Blondus, Lffitus, &c. tradunt. — Phocas, at the entreaty of Pope Boniface,
appointed that the Roman see should be the head of aU Churches, be
cause the Church of Constantinople wrote herself the chief of aU Churches.
TOL. I. R

242 A TREATISE OF
It is also natural and can hardly be otherwise, but that the
bishop of a chief city (finding himself to exceed in wealth,, in
power, in advantages of friendships, dependencies, &c.) should
not affect to raise himself above the level : it is an ambition,
that easUy will seize on the most moderate, and otherwise reh-
gious minds. Pope Leo objected it to Anatolius, and Pope
Gregory to John (from his austere life called the Faster.)
Upon the like account it was, that the bishops of other cities
did mount to a pre-eminency, metropolitan, primatical, patri
archal. Thence it was that the bishop of Alexandria, before Con
stantine' s time, did acquire the honour of second place to Rome ;
because that city, being head of a most rich and populous
nation, did, in magnitude and opulency (as Gregory Nazianzen
saith) " approach next to Rome, so as hardly to yield the next
place to it."*
Upon that account also did Antioch get the next place, as
being the most large, flourishing, commanding city of the East;
'' the which (as Josephus saith) for bigness and for other ad
vantages had, without controversy, the third place in aU the
world subject to the Romans ;"f and the which St. Chrysostom
calleth " the head of aU cities seated in the East."}
St. Basil seemeth to call the Church thereof the principal m
the world ; for " what (saith he) can be raore opportune to the
Churches over the world than the Church of Antioch ? the
which, if it should happen to be reduced to concord, nothing
would hinder, but that as a sound head it would supply health
to the whole body."§
Upon the sarae account the bishop of Carthage did obtain
the privilege to be standing priraate of his province (although
other primacies there were not fixed to places, but foUowed
seniority), and a kind of patriarch over all the African provinces.
• ''VptXg q ptydXq rroXig, oi p'tv Tqv rrpioTqv tiiBkiag, q pqSi tovto
TTapaxiapoUvTtg. Greg. Naz. Orat. 27, [Orat. 28, p. 178. Antverp.
1612] 'H ' AXt^avSpkiav ptyaXorroXig. Evag. 2. 4. et passiin.
t 'H pqTpbrroXig ian rffg Svpiag, ptykBovg 'ivtKa Kai r^£ dXXiig ei-
Saipoviag TpiTov dSqp'inag irri Trjg vrrb 'Piapaioig oiKOvpevqg txovoa
Torrov. Joseph, de Bello Jud. 3. 3.
X HoXig ovria peydXq, Kai nav vrrb T-qv 'iia Ktipkviav q Kifaki}.
Chrys. dySp. /3. [vol. 2. hom. 2. p. 27. Paris. 1838.]
^ Tl S' dv y'tvoiTO TaXg Kard Tqv o'lKovp'tvqv'EKKXqa'iaigTiav'AvTiQ^
-Xt'iag Kaipiiartpov ; rjv eiavve^q rrpbg bpovoiav irraveXBeiv, oiiSiv
e.Kil)Xvtv, laarrep KtipaX-qv ippiap'evqv, -rravri rip aiapari imxopiiyi'^
Ttiv iyieiav. Bas. Ep.48. (ad. Athanas.) [vol. 2. p. 820. Paris, 1618.)

THE POPE S SUPUEMACY. 243
Hence did Csesarea, as exceeding in temporal advantages,
and being the political metropolis of Palestine, overtop Jeru
salem, that raost ancient, noble, and venerable city, the source
of our reUgion.
It was indeed the general rule and practice to conform the
privileges of ecclesiastical dignity in a proportion convenient to
those of the secular government, as the Synod of Antioch in
express terms did ordain ; the ninth canon whereof runneth
thus : " The bishops in every prorince ought to know that the
bishop presiding in the metropolis doth undertake the care of
aU the prorince, because aU that have business do meet toge
ther in the metropoUs ; whence it hath been ordained that he
should precede in honour, and that the bishops should do
nothing extraordinary vrithout him, according to a more ancient
canon holding from our Fathers,"* (that is, according to the
34th canon ofthe Apostles).
It is true, that the Fathers do sometimes mention the
Church of Romef being founded by the two great Apostles, or
the succession of the Roraan bishop to them in pastoral charge,
as a special ornament of that Church, and a congruous ground
of respect to that bishop, whereby they did honour the memory
of St. Peter ; but even some of those, who did acknowledge
this, did not avow it as a sufficient ground of pre-eminence ;
none did admit it for an argument of authoritative superiority.
St. Cyprian did call the Roman See " the chair of St. Peter
and the principal Church;"} yet he disclaimed any authority
of tbe 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 ;"§ yet did not he think himself thereby
• Toig iv tKaary 'trrapxiif 'EmaKorrovg tiSivai xpi) rbviv T-ytHqTpo-
noXti irpoeaTiaTa 'ErriaKorrov, {Kai) T-qv ippovriSa dvaSextaBat rrdaqg
T^s 'errdpxiag' Sid rb iv T-y MqTporroXei avvrptxeiv rravrag Toiig rd
Trpdypara txovTag' '69tv iSo^t Kai Ty Tip-y rrpoqyeXaBai avrbv, pqSkv
Te rrpaTTtiv Treptrrbv Tovg Xoirroig 'EmaKorrovg dvev airov, Kara
t'ov apxaiorepov KpaTqaavra 'tK riav rrartpiav qpiav Kavova. — Syn.
Ant. Can. 9. Syn. Chalc. 17. [ConcU. Lab. vol. 2. p. 584. Paris. 1671.]
X Sedis ApostoUcae primatum S. Petri meritum (qui Princeps est Epis-
Cbpalia coronae) Romanae dignitas Civitatis, sacrae etiam Synodi firmavit
authoritas. Valentin. Nov. 24. in fin. Cod. Theod.
§ Cypr. Ep. 55. 52.
I Atque ego in hac parte juste indignor ad banc tam apertam et mani
festam Stephani stultitiam, qubd qui sic de Episcopates sui loco gloriatur,
et se successiouem Petri tenere contendit, — Stephanus qui per successio-
B 2

244 A TREATISE OP
obUged to submit to his authority, or follow his judgment ; but
sharply did reprehend hira as a favourer of heretics, an author
of schisms, and one who had cut hiraself off from the commu
nion of his brethren.
The Fathers of the Antiochene Synod " did confess, that in
writings all did willingly honour the Roman Church, as haring
been from the beginning the school of the Apostles, and the
metropolis of religion ; although yet frora the East the instruc
tors of the Christian doctrine did go and reside there ; but from
hence they desired not to be deemed inferiors, because they did
not exceed in the greatness and numerousness of their Church."*
They allowed sorae regard (though faintly and with reser
vation) to the Roman Church, upon account of their aposto
lical foundation ; they implied a stronger ground of pretence
frora the grandeur of that city ; yet did not they therefore
grant themselves to be inferiors, at least as to any substantial
pririlege, 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 anything to God's institution,
or as if that did need human confirmation ? The pretence to
that surely was weak, which did need corroboration, and to be
propped by worldly considerations.
Indeed, whereas the Apostles did found many Churches, ex
ercising apostoUcal authority over them (eminently containing
the episcopal), why in conscience should one claim privileges
on that score rather than, or above, the rest ?
Why should the see of Antioch, " that most ancient and
truly apostoUcal Church,"f 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
nem Cathedram Petri habere se praedicat. — FirmU. apud Cypr. Ep. 75.
[Ep. 74. p. 130. Paris. 1836.]
' ^tptiv piv ydp rrdai (piXonp'iav T-qv 'Piapaiiav 'EKKXqaiav iv rol£
ypappaaiv lapoXbyovv, lag 'ArroaroXiav ippovnaTqpiov, Kai tbne^tiag
MqTporroXiv a? dpxqg yeyevqp'tvqv ei Kai ii 'ita ivtSqpqaav airy
01 Tob Soyparog 'tiqyqrai- ov 5rapd roSro Si rd StvrtptXa ifiiptiv
ili'iovv, 'on pri peykBti q rrXqBei 'EKxXqaiag rrXtovtKTOvatv.—Soz. 3. 8.
Cantab, 1720.]
t T^c TrptafSvTaTqg Kai ovnag 'ArroaToXiKqg 'EKKXqaiag. — Quae quan-
tumUbet a Petro ante Alexandrinam fuerat instituta, tamen quoniam pne-
feetura Alexandrina AugustaUs dicta — longfe praestabat Syrise prsefectursB,
&c. Baron. Ann. 39. § 10.

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 245
of our Lord himself, the mother of all Churches,"* the foun
tain 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
Sariour ; by the first preaching of the Apostles, the effusion of
the Holy Spirit, the conversion of so many people, and consti
tution of the first Church, and celebration of the first Synods),f
upon these considerations not obtain pre-eminence to other
Churches,} but in honour be cast behind divers others ; and as
to power, be subjected to Csesarea, the metropolis of Palestine ?
The true reason of this even Baronius hiraself did see, and
acknowledge; for "that (saith he) the ancients observed no
other rule in instituting the ecclesiastical sees, than the dirision
of provinces, and the prerogative before established by the
Romans, there are very raany exaraples."§
Of which examples, that of Rorae is the most obrious and
notable ; and what he so generally asserteth may be so applied
thereto, as to void all other grounds of its pre-eminence.
X. The truth is, aU ecclesiastical presidencies ahd subordi
nations, or dependencies of some bishops on others in adminis
tration of spiritual affairs, were introduced merely by human
ordinance, and estabUshed by law or custom, upon prudential
accounts, according to the exigency of things : hence the pre
rogatives of other sees did proceed ; and hereto whatever dignity,
'^tivUege, or authority the Pope vrith equity might at any time
" cMm, is to be imputed.
To clear which point, we vriU search the matter nearer the
quick ; propounding some observations concerning the ancient
forms of discipUne, and considering what interest the Pope had
therein. At first each Church was settled apart, under its own bishop
and presbyters, so as independently and separately to manage its
own concernments; each was avroKe^dXog, and avrovofiog, "go
verned by its own head, and had its own laws." Every bishop,
as a prince in his own Church, did act freely, according to his
will and discretion, vrith the advice of his ecclesiastical senate,
• Epiph. Syn. Const. t Optat. Ub. 6. (p. 169.)
X Hier. Epist. 61. Cone. Nie. Can. 7.
§ Majores enim in instituendis sedibus Ecclesiarum nou aliam iniisse
rationem, quam secundum divisionem Provinciarum, et Prserogativas k
Romanis antea stabUitas, quam plurima sunt exempla. Baron. Ann. 39.
10. [vol. I. p. 270. Antv. 1612.]

246 A TREATISE OP
and with the consent of his people (the which he did use to
consult),* vrithout being controllable by any other, or account
able to any, further than his obligation to uphold the verity of
Christian profession, and to maintain fraternal communion in
charity and peace vrith neighbouring Churches did require ; in
which regard, if he were notably peccant, he was liable to be
disclaimed by them, as no good Christian, and rejected from
communion, together vrith his Church, if it did adhere to him
in his misdemeanours. This may be collected from the re
mainders of state in the times of St. Cyprian.
But because little, disjointed and incoherent bodies were
like dust apt to be dissipated by every wind of external assault,
or intestine faction ; and 'peaceable union could hardly be
retained without some Ugature of discipline ; and Chnrches
could not mutually support and defend each other without
some method of intercourse and rule of confederacy, engaging
thera :f therefore for many good purposes (for upholding
and advancing the common interests of Christianity, for prO" '
* Cypr. Ep. 52. 55. 72. 73. 76. Omnis hie actus populo erat insinuan-
dus. P. Corn, apud Cypr. Ep. 46 — AU this busmess was to have been
imparted to the people. — Secundum arbitrium quoque vestrum, et omnium
nostrum commune consilium — ea quae agenda sunt disponere. Cypri Ep.
40. (Plebi Univ.) [Ep. 43. p. 87. Lipsiae, 18.38.]— To order what was
to be done according to your judgment, and the common advice of us aU.
— Et Umanda plenius ratio non solum cum CoUegis meis, sed et cum
plebe ipsa universa. Cyp, Ep. 28. — And the reason is more thoroughly to
be examined not only with my colleagues, but with the whole people.—
Praejudicare ege et soli mihi rem communem vindicare non audeo. Ep. 18.
— I dare not therefore prejudge, nor assume to myself alone a matter
which is common to all.
t Hoc enim et verecundise et disciplinae et vitae ipsi omnium nostriim
convenit, ut Episcopi plures in unum convenientes, prsesente et stantium
plebe, (quibus et ipsis pro fide et timore suo honor habendus est) dispo
nere omnia consilii communis religione possimus. Cypr. Ep. 14. [Ep. 35.
p. 70. Lipsise, 1838.]— For it becomes the modesty, the discipline, and the
manner of our Uving, that many bishops meeting together, the people
being also present (to whom respect ought to be had for then- faith and
fear), we may order all things with the common advice. — Quoniam non
paucorum, nee Ecclesiae unius aut unius Provinciae, sed totius orbis hffic
causa est. Cypr. Ep. 14. [Ep. 19. p. 41. Lipsiae, 1838.]— Because this is
the concern not of a few men or of one churcb, or one province, but of
the whole world.— Idcirco copiosum corpus est Sacerdotum — ut si quis ex
CoUegio nostro haeresin facere, et gregem Christi lacerare et vastare tentave
rit, subveniant caeteri. Cypr. Ep. 76. — Therefore the clergy is a large
body — that if any one of our owu society should vent a heresy, and attempt
to rent and waste the flock of Christ, the rest might come in to their help.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 247'
tection and support of each Church from inbred disorders and
dissensions; 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 scan
dalously bad* or unfaithful) it was soon found needful that
divers Churches should be combined and linked together in
some regular form of discipline ;f that if any Church did
want a bishop, the neighbour bishops might step in to approve
and ordain a fit one ;} that if any bishop did notoriously
swerve from the Christian rule, the others might interpose to
correct or void him ; that if any error or schism did peep up
in any Church, the joint concurrence of divers bishops might
avail to stop its progress, and to quench it ; by convenient
means of instruction, reprehension, and censure ; that if any
Church were oppressed by persecution, by indigency, by fac
tion ; the others raight be engaged to afford effectual succour
and teUef : for such ends it was needful, that bishops in certain
precincts should convene, vrith intent to deliberate and resolve
about the best expedients to compass them ; and that the
manner of such proceeding (to avoid uncertain distraction, con
fusion, arbitrariness, dissatisfaction and mutinous opposition),
should be settled in an ordinary course ; according to rules
known, and aUowed by all. §
In defining such precincts it was most natural, most easy,
most commodious to follow the dirisions of territory, or juris
diction already estabUshed in the ciril state ; that the spiritual
administrations being in such circumstances aptly conformed
to the secular might go on more smoothly and expeditely, the
wheels of one not clashing vrith the other ; according to the
judgment of the two great Synods, that of Chalcedon, and the
Tmllane ; 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 ciril and public form."||
Whereas therefore in each nation or prorince subject to one
poUtical jurisdiction, there was a metropolis or head city to
* Particularly in the dispensation of Church goods. Cone. Ant. Can. 25.
t Nov. 137. cap. 4. 123. cap. 10.
t Vid. Can. Apost. 38. (al. 30.) de Synodis.
\ (OiKovo/tiat 'EKKXqaiaanKai. Syn. Const. Can. 2.)
II Ei Si Kai ng 'tK haaiXiKrjg Hovaiag 'tKaiv'iaBq rrbXig, r) aliBig Kai-
viaSeiq, roXg rroXmKoXg Kai Sripoaioig rvrroig Kai riav iKKXqaiaariKiav
TiapoiKuSv q Tdi,ig aKoXovBeina. Cone, Chalced. Can. 17. et Cone.
TniU. Can, 38.

248. A TREATISE OP
which the greatest resort was for dispensation of justice, and
dispatch of principal affairs eraergent in that prorince ; it was
also raost convenient, that also the deterraination of ecclesias
tical matters should be affixed thereto ; especially considering
that usually those places were opportunely seated ; that many
persons upon other occasions did meet there; that the Churches
in those cities did exceed the rest in number, in opulency, in
ability and opportunity to promote the coramon 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 dispatch, for preventing endless dissensions and
confusions both in resolring upon and executing things), it is
needful that one person should be authorized to preside among
the rest, unto whom the power and care should be entrusted
to convoke assemblies in fit season, to propose matters for
consultation, to moderate the debates and proceedings, to de
clare the result, and to see that what is agreed upon may be
duly executed.f Such a charge then naturally would devolve
itself upon tbe prelate of the raetropoUs, as being supposed
constantly present on the place ; as being at home in Ins own
seat of presidence, and receiving the rest under his wing ; as
incontestably surpassing others in all advantages answerable to
the secular advantages of his city; for that it was unseemly
and hard, if he at home should be postponed in dignity to
others repairing thither ; for that also coraraonly he was in a
raanner the spiritual father of the rest (reUgion being first
planted in great cities and thence propagated to others), so that
the reverence and dependence on colonies to the mother city
was due from other Churches to his see. '
Wherefore by consent of all Churches, grounded on such
obvious reason of things, the presidency in each prorince was
assigned to the bishop of the metropolis, who was called the
first bishop, the MetropoUtan, (in some places the Primate,}
* P. Anacl. dist. 99. cap. 1. P. Greg. VII. Ep. 6. 35.
t Ad hoc divinae dispensationis provisio gradus et diversos constituit
ordines in se distinctos, ut dum reverentiam minores potioribus exhibe-
rent, et potiores minoribus dUigentiam impenderent, una concordiae fieret
k diversitate contentio et recte officiorum gereretur administratio singulo
rum. Joh. VIII. Ep. 95.— To this end Divine Providence hath appointed
decrees and diverse orders distinct from one another, that while the less re
verence the greater, and the greater take care of the less, from this diversity
there might arise one frame of concord, and all offices be duly adminis-
*^^^- t Primas Provinciffi. Cod. Afr. Can. 19.

THE pope's supremacy. 249
the Archbishop, the Patriarch, the Pope) of the prorince.
The ApostoUcal Canons call him the first bishop* (which
sheweth the antiquity of this institution) ; the African Synodsf
did appoint that name to him as most modest, and calling him
Primate in that sense ; other ancient Synods style him the
MetropoUte ; and to the MetropoUtes 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 deferred to any other bishop.
During this state of things, the whole Church did consist of
so many provinces, being avroKsipaXoi, independent on each
other in ecclesiastical administrations ; each reserring to itself
the constitution of bishops, the convocation of Synods, the
enacting of canons, the decision of causes, the definition of
questions ; yet so that each province did hold peaceful and
amicable correspondence with others; upon the like terms as
before each Tcapotda, or episcopal precinct did hold intercourse
with its neighbours.
And whoever in any prorince did not comply vrith or submit
to the orders and determinations resolved upon in those assem-
bUes, was deemed a schismatical, contentious and contumacious
person ;} vrith good reason, because he did thwart a discipline
plainly conducible to public good ; because declining snch
judgments he plainly shewed that he would adrait none (there
not being any fairer way of deterraining things than by
common advice and agreeraent of pastors), because he did in
effect refuse all good terras of communion and peace.
Thus I conceive the MetropoUtical goxernance was intro
duced, by human prudencS'foHowing considerations of pubUc
necessity or utiUty. There are indeed sorae, who think it was
instituted by the Apostles ; but their arguments do not seem
conrincing, and such a constitution doth not (as I take it) well
suit to the state of their times, and the course they took in
founding Churches.
Into such a channel, through all parts of Christendom
(though vrith some petty differences in the methods, and mea
sures of acting), had ecclesiastical administrations faUen of
Tovg'EmaKorrovg tKaaTov iBvovg tlS'tvaixP^rbv iv abrdig rrpiaTov.
Can. Apost. 27.— The bishops of each nation ought to know who is chief
among them.
t Can. Afr. Can. 39. Dist. 99. cap. 3.
X Hapdralig. Syn. Nie. Can. 18.

250 A TREATISE OF
themselves ; plain community of reason, and imitation insen
sibly propagating that course ; and therein it ran for a good
time, before it was by general consent and solemn sanction
established. The whole Church then was a body consisting of several
confederations of bishops, acting in behalf of their Churches,,,
under their respective Metropolitans, who did manage the
common affairs in each prorince ; convoking Synods at stated
times and upon emergent occasions ; in thera deciding causes
and controversies incident, relating to faith or practice;* framing
rules serviceable to coramon edification, and decent uniformity
in God's serrice ; quashing heresies and schisms ; declaring
truths impugned or questioned ; maintaining the harmony of
coraraunion and concord with other provinces, adjacent or
remote. Such was the state ofthe Church, unto which the ApostoUcal
Canons and Constitutions do refer answerable to the times
in which they were framed ; and which we may discern in the
practice of ancient Synods.
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),f backed by the imperial authority and power, did
confirm those orders, as they found them standing by more
general custom, and received rules in raost provinces; reducing
them into more uniforra practice; so that what before stood
upon reason, custoraary usage, particular consent, by so august
sanction did becorae universal law ;} and did obtain so great
veneration, as by sorae to be conceived everlastingly and im
mutably obligatory ; according to those maxims of Pope Leo.
It is here farther observable, that whereas divers prorinces
did hold coraraunion aud intercourse ; so that upon occasion
they did (by their formed letters) render to one another an
account of their proceedings, being of great raoment, especially
of those which concerned the general state of Christianity, and
coraraon faith ; calUng, when need was, for assistance one of
other to resolve points of faith, or to settle order and peace ;
• Can, Apost. 38. TertuU. de Jej. cap. 13. Syn. Nie. Can.5.-Aia
Tdg 'EKKXqaiaanKdg xpeiag Kai rdg Tiav dpipia^qTovpeviav SiaXiiretg.
—Syn. Ant. Can. 20.
t IlaXawg Te lag tare deapbg KtKpdrqKt, Kai riav dy'iiav 'tv'SiKauf
Tlarkpiav 'bpog.— Synod. Constant. Theod. 5. 9.
X ''Xrrip TOV rrdvra iv rrday rrapoiKiq. bpoiiag tpvXaTTtaBai. Can. 20.

THE Pope's supremacy. 251
there was in so doing a special respect given to the metropolites
of great cities : and to prevent dissensions, which naturally am
bition doth prompt men to, grounded upon degrees of respect,
an order was fixed among thera, according to which in sub
scriptions of letters, in accidental congresses, and the like
occasions, some should precede others ; (that distinction being
chiefly and commonly grounded on the greatness, splendour,
opulency of cities; or follovring the secular dignity of thera :)
whence Rome had the first place, Alexandria the second,
Antioch the third, Jerusalera the fourth, &c.
Afterward, Constantine having introduced a new partition
of the empire,* whereby divers provinces were corabined to
gether into one territory, under the regiment of a vicar, or a
lieutenant of a Preefectus-prcetorio, which territory was called
a diocese ; 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 prorinces, an ecclesiastical exarch (othervrise some
times called a primate, sometimes a diocesan, sometimes a
patriarch) was constituted, answerable to the ciril exarch of a
diocese ; who by such constitution did obtain a like authority
over the metropolitans of provinces, as they had in their
prorince over the bishops of cities ; so that it appertained to
them to call together the Synods of the whole diocese, to
preside in them, and in thera to dispatch the principal affairs
concerning that precinct, to ordain metropolitans, to confirm
the ordinations of bishops, to decide causes and controversies
between bishops upon appeal from prorincial Synods. f
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 dirision (after that Constantine was settled in a peaceful
enjoyment of the empire), and scarce could take notice of so
fresh a change in the state ; that doth not pretend to innovate,
• Zos. Ub. 2. p. 63. Sextus Rufus, Brev.
t 'E!riKoXoip6))(7a Tip l?apxV ^o"- ^V^- Chalc. Act. 10. p. 388. —
b.ioixqTr\g. Epist. Orient, ad Rufum. in Syn. Eph. p. 396.— Dist. 99.
cap. 1, 2. — O'l'oaihiraroi Warpidpxai SioiKqatiag tKaffTqg. Syn. Chalc.
Act. 2. (p. 211.) — Ephesi SiKaiov narpiapxiKov. Evag. 3. &.—Tivig
ptv t^apxovg riav SioiKqaeiav Tovg Uarpidoxag ipaai. Zon. ad 28. Can.
Chalc— NoveU. 137. cap. 5. et 123. cap. 10.— P. Greg. I. Ep. 11. 56.—
Ordo Episcoporum quadripartitus est, id est in Patriarchis, Archiepisco-
pis, MetropoUtanis, atque Episcqpis. Isid. dist. 21. cap. 1. — Dionysius
Ej. translates flap^ov, Primatem.in Syn. Chalc. Can. 9. et 17.

252 A TREATISE OP
but professeth in its sanctions specially, to regard "ancient
custora, saringto the Churches their pririleges,"* of which they
were possessed ; that only mentioneth provinces, and repre
senteth the metropolitans in them as the chief governors
ecclesiastical then being ; that constituteth a peremptory
decision of weighty causes in provincial Synods, which is in
consistent with the diocesan authority; that taketh no notice
of Constantinople, the principal diocese in the East, as seat of
the erapire; (and the Synod of Antioch, insisting in the foot
steps of the Nicene, doth touch only raetropoUtans,f (Can. 19.)
and the Synod of Laodicea doth only suppose that order.)
In fine, that Synod is not recorded by any old historian to have
framed such an alteration ; which indeed was so considerable,
that Eusebius who was present there could not well have passed
it over in silence.
Of this opinion was the Synod of Carthage in their epistle
to Pope Celestine I., who understood no jurisdiction but that
of metropolitans to be constituted in the Nicene Synod.
Sorae think the Fathers of the second General Synod did
introduce it, seeing it expedient that ecclesiastical adminis
trations should correspond to the political ; for they did inno
vate soraewhat in the form of government; they do expressly
use the new word diocese, according to the civil sense, as
distinct frora a province ; they do distinctly narae the particular
dioceses of the Oriental erapire, as they stood in the ciril
establishment ; they do prescribe to the bishops in each
diocese to act unitedly there, not skipping over the bounds of
it ; they order a kind of appeal to the Synod of the diocese,
prohibiting other appeals : the historians expressly do report
of them, that they did " distinguish and distribute dioceses,"
that they did constitute patriarchs, that they did prohibit that
any of one diocese should intrude upon another.}
* "Orrtp oiirt b Kaviav, ovTt q avvqBtia rrapkSiaKev. — Can.HS.— Ti
dpxaia iBq KpaTt'ina. Can. 6. [Lab. vol. 2. p. 32. Paris. 1671.] — 'Eireiili
avv-qBtia KtKpdrqKt Kai rrapdSoaig dpxaia. Can. 7. — 'OpoiMg Si Kat
Kard T-qv 'Avnbxtiav, Kai 'tv TaXg dXXaig irrapx'iaig rd rrpea^tXa oiii-
ZeaBai TaXg 'EKKXqaiaig. Ibid.
t Tovg 'EmaKorrovg Kpiati riav MqTporroXiTiav, Kai riav rrepi^'En-
aKorriav KaB'iaraaBai. — Syn. Laod. Can. 12. — That bishops should be
constituted by the judgment of the metropolitans and the neighbouring

X El Se avpfiaiq dSwarqaai rouj irrapxiiarag -irpbg SiopBiaaiv iirufl-
pop'tviav iyKXqpaTiav Tip 'EmaKomp, Tort aiiToig rrpoai'evaiptiZovi avv-
dSip Tiav Trig SioiK-qatoig 'EmaKomav 'tKtivqgvrrip Tqg aiTiagravTtpjiiv-f

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 253
But if we shall attently search and scan passages, we may
perhaps find reason to judge, that this form did soon after the
Synod of Nice creep in vrithout any solemn appointment by
spontaneous assumption and submission, accommodating things
to the poUtical course ; the great bishops (who by the ampli
fication of their city in power, wealth, and concourse of people
were advanced in reputation aud interest) assuming such
authority to themselves ; and the lesser bishops easUy com
plying : and of this we have sorae arguments. Cyril bishop
of Jerusalem,* being deposed and extruded by Acacius
metropolitan of Palestine, did appeal to a greater judicatory ;
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
Constantinople; in which there is a raention "of a greater
Synod of the diocese."f
There was a convention of bishops of the Pontic diocese at
Tyana (distinguished from the Asian bishops) ; whereof
Eusebius of Caesarea is reckoned in the first place, as president;
in the time of Valens.}
Nectarius bishop of Constantinople is said by the Synod of
Chalcedon to have presided in the Synod of Constantinople. §
A good arguraent is drawn from the very canon of the
KoXovp'tviav.Sjn. Const. Can. 6. — But if it so happen that the bishops
of any province cannot rectify those things which are laid to the charge of a
bishop, they shaU then go to a greater Synod of the bishops of that diocese,
met together for that purpose. — The Fathers of Constantinople in their
Synodic Epistle distinguish the province and diocese of Antioch, oi renqg
irrapxiag, Kai Trjg dvaToXiKrjg SioiKqaetag avvSpapdvTtg. — Theod. 5. 9.
Kai Uarpidpxag Kar'tarqaav Siavtipdptvoi rdg irrapxiag. Socr. 5. 8.
— 'Ev 'tKt'ivy ydp T-y ^aaiXtvovay iroXtt avvtXBovTtg oi paKdpioi Ila-
Ttptg avpijiiaviag ToXg iv ry NiKai^ avvaBpoiaBtXai rdg SioiK-qaeig Sik-
Kpivav, Kai eKdary SioiKqaei rd iavTqg drreveipav, dvTiKpvg drrayo-
peiovTeg ii tTkpag nvdg SioiK-qaeiag irkpf pij irritvai. Theodor.
Epist. 86. (ad Flavianum.)^For, says Theodoret, the blessed Fathers
meeting together in the Imperial City, distinguished dioceses agreeably to
what the Nicene Fathers had done, and aUotted to every diocese what be
longed to it : on the contrary charging that no one of one diocese should
encroach upon an ther.
* Theod. 2. 26. Soz. 4. 25.
t Ei^X/ov ToXg KaBtXovai Siarrtpipdptvog ptiZov irriKaXkaaTO SiKa-
ar^piov — roiJro piv ovv povog Kai rrpiaTog rrapd Tip avvqBtg 'Ek-
K\r]aiaaTiKip Kavovi KvpiXXog irro'iqaev. — Socr. 2. 40.
X Sozom. 6. 12.
§ TSiv Si NfKrapioc avv Vpqyop'up qyepoviav rjpuTo. (iu prosphone-
tico ad Imper. )

254 A TREATISE OF
Synod of Constantinople itself;* which doth speak concerning
bishops over dioceses as already constituted, or extant; not
instituting that order of bishops, but supposing it, and together
with an implicit confirmation regulating practice according *fo
it, by prohibiting bishops to leap over the bounds of their
diocese, so as to meddle in the affairs of other dioceses ; and
by ordering appeals to the Synod of a diocese.
Of authority gained by such assumption, and concession
without law, there might be produced divers instances.
As particularly that the see of Constantinople did assume
to itself ordination and other acts of jurisdiction, in three
dioceses, before any such power was granted to it by any
Synodical decree ; the which to have done divers instances
shew ; some whereof are alleged in the Synod of Chalcedon ;
as St. Chrysostom, of whom it is there said, "That going into
Asia he deposed fifteen bishops, and consecrated others in
their room ."f
He also deposed Gerontius bishop of Nicomedia, belon^ng
to the diocese of Pontus.}
Whence the Fathers of Chalcedon did aver, " that they had
in a Synod confirmed the ancient custom which the holy
Church of God in Constantinople had, to ordain metropolitans
in the Asian, Pontic, and Thracian dioceses."§
The which custora, (consistent with reason, and becoming
the dignity of the empire, and grateful to the court) that great
Synod did estabUsh, although the Roraan Church out of jea
lousy did contest and protest against it. ||
But the raost pertinent instances are those of the Roman,
Alexandrine, and Antiochene Churches haring by degrees
assuraed to themselves such power over divers provinces ; in
imitation of which Churches the other diocesan bishops may
weU be thought to have enlarged their jurisdiction.
* Toig vrrip Sio'iKqaiv 'EmaRoxovg. — Can. 2. [Lab. vol. 2. p. 947.
Paris. 1671.] — Ilpoaikvai ptiZovi avvoSip riav Tijg SioiK-qatiag 'ETfiir-
Komav. — Can. 6. [Id. vol. 2. p. 950.]
t Syn. Chalc. Act. 16. (p. 463.) —'liadvvqg StKarrkvTt 'EmaKorrovQ
KaBtXXtv, drrtXB&v 'tv 'Aa'i^, Kai ixtiporovqaev dXXovg dvr' air&v.
Syn. Chalc. Act. 11. (p. 411.) X Sozom. 8. 6.
§ Tb ydp tK rroXXov Kparijaav iBog 'orrtp iaxtv r'l Kiavaravrivov-iroKi.
riav ay'ia Qtoij 'EKKXqaia eig to x^iporoveXv pqrporroX'iTag tSiv SioikIi-
atia-y Tijg Tt 'Aaiavrjg, Kai TlovTiKfjg, Kai QpaKiK-qg Kai viv Kard amo-
SiKqv tKvpiaaaptv ^iiipov. Syn. Chalc. in Epist. ad P. Leonem. [VU-
Can. 28. Lab. Vol. 4. p, 770, Paris. 1671.]
II Syn. Chalc. Act. 16. (p. 462.)

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 255
This form of government is intimated in the S3Tiod of
Ephesus ; by those words in which dioceses and provinces are
distinguished : " and the same shall be observed in aU dio
ceses and all prorinces everywhere."*
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 controversy vrith his metropolitan of his pro
rince, he shaU resort to and be judged by the exarch of the
diocese, or by the see of Constantinople."f
This was a great pririlege conferred on the bishop of Con
stantinople, the which perhaps did ground (to be sure it did
make way for) the plea of that bishop to the title of (Ecume
nical Patriarch, or Universal bishop, which Pope Gregory did
so exagitate ; and indeed it soundeth so fairly toward it, that
the Pope hath nothing comparable to it to allege in favour of
his pretences ; this being the decree of the greatest Synod that
ever was held among the ancients, where all the patriarchs did
concur in making these decrees, which Pope Gregory did re
verence as "one ofthe Gospels." — If any ancient Synod did
ever constitute any thing like to nniversal monarchy, it was
this: wherein a final determination of greatest causes was
granted to the see of Constantinople, vrithout any exception or
reservation : I mean as to semblance, and the sound of words ;
for as to the true sense, I do indeed conceive that the canon
did only relate to causes emergent in the eastern parts, and
probably it did only respect the three dioceses (of Asia, Pontus,
and Thrace), which were immediately subjected to his patri
archal jurisdiction.
Pope Nicholas I. doth very jocularly expound this canon,
affirming that by the primate of the diocese is understood the
Pope (diocese being put hy a notable figure for dioceses), and
that an appeal is to be made to the bishop of Constantinople,
onlybypermission, in case the party wiU be content therewith.}
* To Si aiiTO xai irri Tiav dXXiav SioiKTiaeiav Kai Toiv drravraxov
iirapxuiiv rrapaijivXaxBriatTai. Syn. Eph. Can. 8 (There is mention
of dioceses in Stiabo.)
t El Si rrpbg tov rqg avT-qg irrapxiag MqTporroXirqv 'ErriaKorrog rj
icXripiKbg appia^qroiq, KaTaXapjiavtna q rbv iiapxov T^g SioiKqatiag,
q rbv Trig PaaiXtvo-uaqg KiavaravTivovTroXeiag dpofoi', Kai irr' avnp
SmaZkaBia. Syn. Chalc. Can. 19. et 17.
X Quem autem primatem dioeceseos S. Synodus dixerit, praeter Apos
toU primi vicarium, nuUus penitus intelUgitur. — None can understand
whom the holy Synod should call primate of a diocese, except the vicar

256 A TREATISE OF
We may note that some provincial Churches were by an
cient custom exempted from dependence on any primacy or
patriarchate. Such an one the Cyprian Church was adjudged to be in the
Ephesine Synod, wherein the privileges of such Churches were
confirmed against the invasion of greater Churches ; and to
that purpose this general law enacted : " Let the same be
observed in all dioceses and provinces everywhere — that none
of the bishops most beloved of God invade another prorince
which did not formerly belong to hira or his predecessors; and
if any one have invaded one, and violently seized it, that he
restore it."*
Such a Church was that of Britain anciently, before Augus
tine did introduce the papal authority here, against that canon,
as by divers learned pens hath been shewed.
Such was the Church of Africa, as by their canons against
transmarine appeals, and about all other matters doth appear.
It is supposed, by sorae, that discipline was screwed yet one
peg higher, by setting up the order of patriarchs, higher than
primates, or diocesan exarchs ; but I find no ground of this
supposal except in one case ; that is, of the bishop of Constanti
nople being set above the bishops of Ephesus, Caesarea, and
Heraclea, which were the primates of the three dioceses.f
It is a notable fib, which Pope Nicholas II. telleth, as
Gratian citeth him : " That the Church of Rome instituted aU
patriarchal supreraacies, all metropoUtan primacies, episcopal '
sees, all ecclesiastical orders and dignities whatsoever."}
Now things standing thus in Christendom, we may, con
cerning the interest of the Roraan bishop, in reference to
them, observe,
1. In all these transactions about modeUing the spiritual
of the prime Apostle. — Tantundem valet dixisse primatem dioeceseos,
quantum si perhibuisset dioeceseon. P. Nich. 1. Ep. 8. (p. 507.)— To say
the primate of a diocese is as much as to say of dioceses.
* To Si avrb Kai irri Tiav dXXiav SioiKqaeiav Kai nav arravraxov
irrapxiiHv rrapaipvXaxBqatTai — laare pqSkva nav SreoipiXeaTdriav Eiri-
aKomav irrapx'i-i^v trtpav ovK ovaav dviaBtv Kai iiapxvg vrrb t^v avrov
•qyovv nav rrpb avrov xtTpa KaraXap^dveiv, dXX' ti Kai ng KurtXapev,
Kai v^' tavnp rrtrro'iqrai [iiaadptvog totjtov drroSiSbvai; &c. Cone.
Eph. Can. 8. [Lab. Cone. vol. 3. p. 802. Paris. 1671.]
t Isid. dist. 2. cap. 1.
X Omnes sive Patriarchae cujuslibet apices, sive Metropolewn Primatus,
aut Episcopatuum Cathedras, vel Ecclesiarum cujusUbet Ordinis Digm-
tates instituit Romana Ecclesia. P. Nich. II. Dist. 22. cap. 1.

THE pope's supremacy. 25?
discipUne, there was no canon established any pecuUar juris*
diction to the bishop of Rome : only the
2. Synod of Nice did suppose that he by custom did enjoy
some authority within certain precincts of the West, like to
that which it did confirm to the bishop of Alexandria in Egypt,
and the countries adjacent thereto.
3. The Synods of Constantinople did allow him honorary
pririleges or precedence before all other bishops, assigning the
next place after him to the bishop of Constantinople.*
4. In other privileges the Synod of Chalcedon did equal the
see of Constantinople to the Roraan.f
5. The canons of the two first and fourth general Synods,
ordering all affairs to be dispatched, and causes to be deter
mined in the metropoUtan and diocesan Synods, do exclude
the Roman bishop from meddling in those concerns.
6. The Popes (out of a humour natural to them, to like
nothing but what they did themselves, and which served their
interests) did not relish those canons, although enacted by
Synods which themselves admitted for oecumenical : " That
subscription of some bishops made above sixty years since as
you boast, does no whit favour your persuasion : a subscription
never transmitted to the knowledge of the apostolic see by
your predecessors, which from its very beginning being weak,
and long since ruinous, you endeavour now too late and un^
profitably to rerive."}
So doth Pope Leo I. treat the second great Synod, writing
to AnatoUns: and Gregory speaking of the same says, "That
the Roman Church has not the acts of that Synod, nor received
its canons."!
7. Wherefore in the west they did obtain no effect, so as to
estabUsh diocesan primacies there.
The bishops of cities, which were heads of dioceses, either
did not know of these canons (which is probable, because Rome
* IIp£ir/3Eia npqg. Can. 3. — Td rrpiareXa Kai i^aiperog Tlpq. Syn.
Ch. Act. 16.
t 'Iaa rrpeajSeXa.
X Persuasioni enim tuae in nuUo penitus suffi-agatur quorundam Episco>^
porum ante sexaginta, ut jactas, annos facta subscriptio, nilnquamque a
prsedecessoribus tuis ad ApostoUcae Sedis transmissa notitiam, cui ab
initio sni caducae, dudumque coUapsae sera nunc et inutiUa subjicere
fomeuta voluisti.— P. Leo. Ep. 53. (ad Anatol.) Vid. Ep. 54. et 55.
et61. § Romana autem Ecclesia eosdem Canones vel gesta Synodi ilUus hac»
tenus non habet, nee accepit. Greg. M. Ep. 6. 31. (ad Eulog. Alex.)
VOL. I. 8

258 A TREATISE OF
did smother the notice of them :) or were hindered from using
them ; the Pope having so vrinded himself in and got such
hold among them, as he would not let go.*
8. It indeed turned to a great advantage of the Pope, in
carrying on his encroachments, and enlarging his worldly
interests, that the Western Churches did not, as the Easteni,
conform themselves to the poUtical frame in embracing dio
cesan primacies ; which would have engaged and enabled them
better to protect the hberties of their Churches from papal
invasions.f 9. For hence for want of a better, the Pope did claim to
himself a patriarchal authority over the Western ChurcheijJ
pretending a right of calUng to Synods, of meddling in, ordijl
nations, of determining causes by appeal to him ; of dictatmg
laws and rules to them, against the old rights of metropoUtans}
and the later constitutions for primacies. i
Of this we have an instance in St. Gregory; where he,
alleging an imperial constitution importing that in case a
clergyman should appeal from his metropolitan, " the cause
should be referred to the archbishop and patriarch of that
diocese, who judging according to the canons and laws
should give an end thereto ;" doth consequentially assume an
appeal from a bishop to himself, adjoining, "If against these:
things it be said, that the bishop had neither metropolitaaf
nor patriarch, it is to be said, that this cause was to be heard
and decided by the apostolical see, which is the head of all
Churches."} 10. Haring got such advantage, and as to extent stretched
his authority beyond the bounds of " his sub-urbicarian pre*
cincts,"§ he did also intend it in quality far beyond the priri
leges by any ecclesiastical law granted to patriarchs; or
* N. A Roman Synod, Ann. 378, consisting of Italian bishops, didgi?e
the Pope such a privilege as the Synod of Constantinople did to the bishop
of that see, (Marc. dePrimat. p. 103. ex app. Cod. Theodos. videBarOn.)
— But there is difference between a tieneral Synod and an ItaUan Sped ;
and what had an Italian Synod to prescribe to all the provinces of the
Roman empire, or rather of the West .' P. Greg. I. Ep. 7. 8. .'
+ Balusius thinketh, that Hilarius of Aries did pretend and offer at this
primatical power, apud Marc. 5. 32. but P. Leo did mainly check and
quash his attempt.
X Contra haec si dictum fuerit, quia nee MetropoUtam habuit, nee Pa-
triarcham ; dicendum est quia a sede Apostolica, quae omnium Ecclesis-
u m caput est, causa hcec audienda ac dirimenda fuerat. Greg. I, Ep.
1 . 56. § Ruffin. Hist. 1. 6.

THE pope's supremacy. 259
tilaimed or exercised by any other patriarch ; tiU at length by
degrees he had advanced it to an exorbitant omnipotency, and
thereby utterly enslaved the Western Churches.
' The ancient order did allow a patriarch or primate to caU
a Synod of the bishops in his diocese, and vrith them to de
termine ecclesiastical iiffairs by majority of suffrages ; but he
doth not do so, but setting himself down in his chair vrith a
few of his courtiers about him, doth make decrees and dictates
to which he pretendeth all must submit.
The ancient order did allow a patriarch, to ordain metropo*
litans duly elected in their dioceses ; learing bishops to be or
dained by the metropolitans in their provincial Synods ; but
he will meddle in the ordination of every bishop, suffering
none to be constituted vrithout his confirmation, for 'Which he
must soundly pay.
The ancient order did allow a patriarch, with the adrice
and consent of his Synod to make canons for the weU order
ing his diocese ; but he sendeth about his decretal letters,
eomposed by an infalUble secretary, which he pretendeth must
have the force of laws, equal to the highest decrees of the
whole Church.
The ancient order did suppose bishops by their ordination
Sufficiently obUged to render unto their patriarch due observ
ance, according to the canons, he being liable to be judged in
a. Synod for the transgression of his duty ; but he forceth all
Bishops to take the most slavish oaths of obedience to him
that can be imagined.
The ancient order did appoint that bishops accused of
offences should be judged in their prorinces ; or upon appeal
ifrom them in patriarchal Synods : but he receiveth appeals at
the first hand, and determineth them in his court, vrithout
calhng such a Synod in an age for any such purpose.
The ancient patriarchs did order aU things as became good
subjects, vrith leave and under submission to the emperor,
who as he pleased did interpose his confirmation of their
sanctions: but this man pretendeth to decree what he pleaseth
vrithout the leave, and against the vrill of princes.
•'Wherefore he is not a patriarch of the Western Churches
(for that he acteth according to no patriarchal rule), but a cer
tain kind of Sovereign Lord, or a tyrannical oppressor of
them. U. In all the transactions for modelling the Church there
never was aUowed to the Pope any dominion over his fellow
s 2

260 A TREATISE OF
patriarchs,* or of those great primates who had assumed thati
name to theraselves ; among whom indeed, for the dignity of
his city, he had obtained a priority of honour or place ; but
never had any power over them settled by a title of law, or
by clear and uncontested practice.
Insomuch, that if any of them had erred in faith, or offended
in practice, it was requisite to call a general Synod to judge
them ; as in the cases of Athanasius, of Gregory Nazianzen
and Maxiraus, of TheophUus and St. Chrysostom, of Nesto
rius and of Dioscorus, is erident.
1 2. Indeed all the oriental Churches did keep themselves
pretty free from his encroachments, although, when he had
swollen so big in the west, he sometime did take occasion to
attempt on their liberty ;. which they soraetimes did warily
decline, soraetiraes stoutly did oppose.
But as to the main, those flourishing Churchesf constantly
did maintain a distinct administration from the Western
Churches, under their own patriarchs and Synods, not suffer
ing hira to interlope in prejudice to their liberty.
They without his leave or notice did call and celebrate
Synods (whereof all the first great Synods are instances) ; their
ordinations were not confirmed or touched by him ; appeals
were not (with public regard or allowance) thence made to
him in causes great or little, but they decided them among
theraselves : they quashed heresies springing up among them,
as the second general Synod the Macedonians, Theophilus the
Origenists, &c. Little in any case had his worship to do with
them or they with him, beyond what was needful to mamtain
general communion and correspondence with him; which
they commonly, as piety obliged, were wilUng to do.
And sometiraes, when a pert Pope, upon some incidental
advantage of differences risen among them, would be more
busy than they deemed convenient in tampering vrith their
affairs, they did rap his fingers ; so Victor, so Stephanus, so
Julius and Liberius of old did feel to their smart ; so afterward
Damasus and other Popes in the case of Flarianus ; Innocent
in the case of St. Chrysostom ; 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 aU to meddle
vrith their affairs.
* Isid. in dist. 21. cap. 1. + Vid. de Marc. Ub. 7. cap. 4 et 5-

THE pope's supremacy. 261
Before I proceed any further I shall briefly draw some corol
laries fi-om this historical account which I have given of the
pr^inal and growth of MetropoUtical, Primatical and Patri
archal jurisdiction.
1. Patriarchs are an human institution.
2. As they were erected by the power and prudence of men,
so they may be dissolved by the same.
3. They" were erected by the leave and confirmation of
princes ; and by the same they may be dejected, if great
reason do appear.
4. The patriarchate of the Pope beyond his own province
or diocese doth not subsist upon any canon of a general Synod.
5. He can therefore claim no such power otherwise than
upon his invasion or assumption.
6. The primates and metropoUtans of the Western Church
cannot be supposed othervrise than by force or out of fear to
have submitted to such an authority as he doth usurp.
7. It is not really a patriarchal power (like to that which
was granted by the canons and princes), but another sort of
power which the Pope doth exercise.
8. The most rightful patriarch, holding false doctrine, or
imposing unjust laws, or tyrannically abusing his power, raay,
; and ought to be rejected from communion.
9. Such a patriarch is to be judged by a free Synod, if it
may be had.
10. If such a Synod cannot be had by consent of princes,
each Church may free itself from the mischiefs induced by his
perverse doctrine or practice.
11. No ecclesiastical power can interpose in the manage
ment of any affairs vrithin the territory of any prince vrithout
his concession.
12. By the laws of God, and according to ancient practice,
princes may model the bounds of ecclesiastical jurisdiction,
'erect bishoprics, enlarge, diminish, or transfer them as they
please. 13. Wherefore each prince (haring supreme power in his
own dominions, and equal to what the emperor had in his) may
exclude any foreign prelate frora jurisdiction in his territories.
14. It is expedient for peace and public good that he should
do thus.
15. Such prelate, according to the rules of Christianity,
ought to be content with his doing so.
16. Any prelate, exercising power in the dominion of any

262 A TREATISE OF
prince, is eatenus, his subject ; as the Popes and aU
were to the Roman emperors.
17. Those joints of ecclesiastical discipline, estabUshed in
the Roraan empire by the confirmation of emperors, were (as
to necessary continuance) dissolved by the dissolution of the
Roraan empire.
18. The power of the Pope in the territories of any prince
did subsist by his authority and favour.
19. Bythe same reason, as princes have curbed the exorbi
tancy of Papal power in some cases (of entertaining legates,
making appeals, disposing of benefices, &c.) by the same they
might exclude it.
20. The practice of Christianity doth not depend upon the
subsistence of such a form instituted by man.
Haring shevved at large that this universal sovereignty and
jurisdiction of the bishop of Rorae over the Christian Church
hath no real foundation either in Scripture or elsewhere, it will
be requisite to shew by what ways and means so groundless a
claim and pretence should gain belief and submission to it, from
so considerable a part of Christendom ; and that from so very
slender roots (from slight beginnings and the slimmest pretences
one can well imagine)* this bulk of exorbitant power did grow,
the vastest that ever man on earth did attain, or did ever aim
at, wiU be the less wonderful, if we do consider the many
causes which did concur and contribute thereto ; some whereof
are proposed in the following observations.
V 1 . Eminency of any kind (in wealth, in honour, in reputa
tion, in might, in place, or mere order of dignity), doth easily
pass into advantages of real power and coramand over those
who are inferior in those respects, and have any dealings or
coraraon transactions with such superiors.
For to persons endowed vrith such eminency by voluntary
deference the conduct of affairs is wont to be allowed ; none
presuming to stand in competition vrith them, every one rather
yielding place to them than to their equals.
The same conduct of things, upon the same accounts, and by
reason of their possession, doth continue fast in their hands,
so long as they do retain such advantages.
Then from a custom of managing things doth spring up an
opinion or a pretence of right thereto ; they are apt to assume
a title, and others ready to allow it.
* De pusUlo crescere. P. Leo. Ep. 55.

THE pope's supremacy. 263
Men naturally do admire such things, and so are apt to defer
extraordinary respect to the possessors of them.
Advantages of wealth and might are not only instruments
¦to attain, but incentives spurring men to affect the getting
authority over their poorer and weaker neighbours : for men
vriU not be content with bare eminency, but will desire real
power and sway, so as to obtain their vriUs over others, and
not to be crossed by any. Pope Leo had no reason to wonder
that Anatolius bishop of Constantinople, was not content vrith
dry honour.* (Men are apt to think their honour is precarious,
and standeth on an uncertain foundation, if it be not supported
vrith real power; and therefore they vriU not be satisfied to let
their advantages lie dead, which are so easily improvable to
power, by inveigUng some, and scaring and constraining others
to bear their yoke ; and they are able to benefit and gratify
<some, and thereby render them vriUing to submit, those after
wards become serriceable to bring others under, who are dis
affected or refractory.)
So the bishops of Constantinople and of Jerusalem, at first
had only pririleges of honour ; but afterward they soon hooked
in power.
Now the Roman bishops from the beginning were eminent
above all other bishops in all kinds of advantages.
He was seated in the imperial city, the place of general
resort, thence obrious to all eyes, and his name sounding in all
mouths.f He had a most numerous, opulent, splendid flock
and clergy. He had the greatest income (from Uberal ob
lations) to dispose of. He Uved in greatest state and lustre.
He had opportunities to assist others in their business, and to
reUeve them in their wants.J He necessarily thence did ob-
tam great respect and veneration. Hence in all common
affairs the conduct and presidence were naturaUy devolved on
him, without contest.
No wonder then, that after some time the Pope did arrive
to some pitch of authority over poor Christians, especially
those who lay nearest to him, improring his eminency into
power, and his pastoral charge into a kind of empire ; accord
ing to that observation of Socrates, that " long before his time
* Quid iUi satisfaciet, si tantae urbis magnificentia et claritudo non
sufficit? Leo. Ep. 55.
t Euseb. 6. 43. (Anno 254.) Oblationibus matronarum ditati. Circum-
*pectB vestiti. Amm. Marc. 1. 27. (p. 337.) An. 367. X Euseb.

264 A TREATISE OF
¦the Roman episcopacy had advanced itself beyond the priest.
hood into a potency."^
And the like he observeth to have happened in the Church
of Alexandria,f upon the like grounds, or by imitation of such
a pattern. 2. Any sraall power is apt to grow and spread itself: a
spark of it soon will expand itself into a flame : it is very hke
to " the grain of raustard-seed, which indeed 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." J " Encroaching (as Plutarch saith)
is an innate disease of potentacies."§ Whoever hath any pit
tance of it, will be improving his stock, haring tasted the
sweetness of haring his vrill (which extremely gratifieth the
nature of man), he will not be satisfied vrithout jhaving more ;
he will take himself to be straitened by any bonds, and will
strive to free himself of all restraints.
Any pretence will serve to ground attempts of enlarging
power, and none will be baulked. For power is bold, enter
prising, restless : it always watcheth, or often findeth, " never
passeth opportunities of dilating itself." || Every accession
doth beget further advantages to ampUfy 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 dependants.
None can resist or obstruct its growth without danger and
manifold disadvantages, for as its adherents are deemed loyal
and faithful, so its opposers are branded with the imputations
of rebelUon, contumacy, disloyalty : and not succeeding in their
resistance they vrill be undone.
None ever doth enterprise more than to stop its career, so
that it seldom loseth by opposition, and it ever gaineth by
composition. If it be checked at one time, or in one place, it
will, like the sea, at another season, in another point, break
* Trig Piapaiiav 'ETTiaKorrqg rrkpa Tqg 'lepiaa-livqg irri Swaartiav ijSil
rrdXai rrpotXBovaqg. Socr. 7. 11. [Cantab. 1720.]
+ Socr. 7. 7. J Matth. xiu. 32. ;
§ To avpipvTOV voaqpa raXg Svvaare'iaig, -q rrXeovtiiia. Plut. in
Pyrrh. II Subrependi occasiones non praetermittit ambitio. — P. Leo I. Ep. 62.
K FacUiiis crescit dignitas quam incipit. Sen. Ep. 101.
** Primse dominandi spes in arduo ; ubi sis ingressus, adsunt studia et
ministri. Tac. Ann. 4. (p, 143,)

THE pope's SUPUEMACY. 265
UI. If it is sometimes overthrown in a battle, it is seldom
conquered in the war.
litis always on its march forward, and gaineth ground, for
one encroachment doth countenance the next, and is alleged
for a precedent to authorise 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
iU-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 pririleges ; after he becarae a monarch invested
vrith high prerogatives : in fine he creepeth forward to be a
grand seignior usurping absolute dominion i so did Augustus
Csesar first only assume the style of prince of the senate, de
meaning himself modestly as such, but he soon drew to him
self the administration of all things, and upon that foundation
his successors very suddenly did erect a boundless power. If
yon trace the footsteps of most empires to the beginning, you
may perceive the like.
So the Pope when he had got a Uttle power, continually did
sweU it. The puny pretence of the succeeding St. Peter, and
the name of the apostolical see; the precedence by reason of the
imperial city ; the honorary pririleges allowed him by Councils;
the authority deferred to him by one Synod of rerising the
causes of bishops ; the countenance given to him in repressing
some heresies, he did improve to constitute himself sovereign
lord of the Church.
3. Spiritual power especially is of a grovring nature, and
more especiaUy that which deriveth from Dirine institution :
for it hath a great awe npon the hearts and consciences of
men ; which engageth them to a firm and constant adherence.
It useth the most subtle arms, which it hath always ready,
which needeth no time or cost to furnish, which cannot be ex
torted from its hand, so that it can never be disarmed. And
its weapons make strong impression, because it proposeth the
most effectual encouragements to its abettors, and discourage
ments to its adversaries : alluring the one vrith promises of
God's favour and eternal happiness, terrifying the other vrith
menaces of vengeance from heaven and endless raisery, the
which do ever quell reUgious, superstitious, weak people, and
often daunt men of knowledge and courage.
It is presumed unchangeable and unextinguishable by any

266 A TREATISE OF
human power, and thence is not (as all other power) subject
to revolutions. Hence like Achilles it is hardly rincible, be
cause almost imraortal. If it be soraetime rebuffed or impaired;
it soon will recover greater strength and vigour.
The Popes derive their authority from Divine institution;
and their weapons are always sentences of Scripture;* they
pretend to dispense remission of sins, and promise heaven to
their abettors. They excomraunicate, 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
recede or give back. "The privileges ofthe Roman Church
can sustain no detriraent."f
4. Power is easily attained and augmented upon occasion of
dissensions. Each faction usually doth make itself a head,
the chief in strength and reputation which it can find in
clinable to favour it ; and that head it wUl strive to magnify,
that he may be the abler to proraote its cause ; and if the cause
doth prosper he is rewarded vrith accession of pririleges and
authority : especially those who were oppressed, and find
relief by his raeans, do become zealously active for his
aggrandisement. Thus usually in civil broils the captain of the prevalent
party groweth a prince, or is crowned vrith great pririleges, (as
Csesar, Octarian, Cromwell, &c.)
So upon occasion of the Arian faction, and the oppression of
Athanasius, Marcellus, Paulus and other bishops, the Pope
who by their application to him had occasion to head the
catholic party did grow in power ; for thereupon the Sardican
Synod did decree to him that pririlege, which he infinitely
enhanced, and which became the main engine of rearing himself
so high.
And by his interposal in the dissensions raised by the Nes-
torians, the Pelagians, the Eutychians, the Acatians, the
Monothelites, the Image-worshippers, and Image-breakers,
&c. his authority was advanced ; for he, adhering in those
causes to the prevaUing party, was by thera extoUed, obtainmg
both reputation and sway.'
5 . All power is attended by dependencies of persons sheltered
* Dist. 21. cap. 2, 3.
t PrivUegia Romanae Ecclesiae fiuUum possunt sustinere detrimentum.
-^P. Nie. I. Ep. 36. (32.)

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 267
under it, and by if enjoying subordinate advantages ; the which
proportionably do grow by its increase.
Snch persons, therefore, will ever be inciting the chief and
patron to amplify his power, and in aiding him to compass it,
tbey vriU be very industriously, resolutely and steadily active ;
their own interest moving them thereto.
Wherefore their mouths vriU ever be open in crying him up,
tbeir heads vrill be busy in contriring ways to farther his in
terests, their care and pains vrill be employed in accomplishing
his designs ; they vrith their utmost strength vrill contend in
his defence against all oppositions.
Thus the Roman clergy first, then the bishops of Italy, then
all the clergy of the West became engaged to support, to
fortify, to enlarge the Papal authority ; they all sharuig with
him in domination over the laity; and enjoying wealth, credit,
support, pririleges and immunities thereby. Some of them
especiaUy were ever putting him on higher pretences, and fur
thering him by all means in his acquist and maintenance of them.
6. Hence if a potentate himself should have no ambition,
nor much abiUty to improve his power ; yet it would of itself
grow ; he need only be passive therein ; the interest of his
partisans would effect it ; so that often power doth no less
thrive under sluggish aud weak potentates, especially if they
are void of goodness, than under the most active and able.
let the ministers alone to drive on their interests.
7. Even persons othervrise just and good do seldom scruple
to augment their power hy undue encroachment, or at least to
uphold the usurpations of their foregoers ; for even such are
apt to favour their own pretences, and afraid of incurring
censure and blame, if they should part vrith any thing left them
by their predecessors. They apprehend themselves to owe a
deamess to their place, engaging them to tender its own weal
and prosperity, in promoting which they suppose themselves
not to act for their own private interest ; and that it is not out
of ambition or avarice, but out of a regard to the grandeur of
their office that they stickle and bustle ; and that in so doing
they imitate St. Paul who did " magnify his office." They are
encouraged hereto by the applause of men, especially of those
vho are aUied vrith them in interest, and who converse vrith
them ; who take it for a maxim boni principis est ampliare
imperium : the extenders of empire are admired and cora-
mended however they do it, although with cruel wars, or by
any unjust means.

268 A TREATISE OF
Hence usually the worthiest men in the world's eye are
greatest enlargers of power; and such raen, bringing appearances
of virtue, ability, reputation to aid their endeavours, do most
easily corapass designs of this nature, finding less obstruction
to their attempts ; for men are not so apt to suspect their in
tegrity, 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 JuUus I., Damasus I., Innocent I., Gregory I., and
the like Popes, whora history representeth as laudable persons,
did yet confer to the advancement of Papal grandeur. But
they who did most advance that interest, as Pope Leo. I.,
Gelasius I., Pope Nicholas I., Pope Gregory VIL, in the
esteem of true zealots pass for the best Popes. 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 commendation of those who are in a superior rank,
especially upon occasion of address and intercourse ; which
commendations are liable to be interpreted for acknowledg-
raents or attestations of right, and thence do sometimes prove
means of creating it.
Of the generality of men it is truly said, that it " doth
fondly serve fame, and is stonn'd vrith titles and images ;"f
readily ascribing to superiors whatever they claim, without
scanning the grounds of their title. Siraple and weak men
out of abjectedness or fear are wont to crouch, and submit to
any thing upon any terras. Wise men do not love brangling,
nor will expose their quiet and safety without great reason ;
thence being incUnable to coraply with greater persons. Bad
men out of design to procure advantages or impunity are
prone to flatter and gloze with them. Good men out of due
reverence to them, and in hope of fair usage from them, are
ready to compliment them, or treat thera vrith the most
respectful terras. Those who are obliged to them vriU 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 favour
able sense ; and allegeth them as verdicts and arguments of
* Sixtus V. 1/
t — Qui iarme servit ineptus,
Ac stupet in titulis et imaginibus. — Hor.

THE pope's supremacy. 269
Unquestionable right. So are the compliments or terms of
respect used by Jerome, Augustine, Theodoret, and divers
others towards Popes, drawn into argument for Papal autho
rity ; when as the actions of such Fathers, and their discourses
upon other occasions do manifest their serious judgment to
have been directly contrary to his pretences : • wherefore the
emperor of Constantinople in the Florentine Synod had good
reason to decline such sayings for arguraents; for " If (saith
he) any of the saints doth in an epistle honour the Pope, shall
he take that as importing privileges ?"*
9. Good raen commonly (out of charitable simplicity, raeek
ness, modesty and humility, love of peace, and averseness from
contention) are apt to yield to the encroachments of those who
anywise do excel them ; and when such men do yield, others
are ready to follow their example. Bad men have little in
terest to resist, and no heart to stand for public good ; but
rather strike in presently, taking advantage by their com
pUance to drive a good market for themselves. Hence so
many of all sorts in all times did comply vrith Popes, or did
not obstruct thera ; suffering them without great obstacle to
raise their power.
10. If in such cases a few vrise men do apprehend the con
sequences of things, yet they can do little to prevent them.
They seldom have the courage with sufficient zeal to bustle
against encroachments ; fearing to be overborne by its stream,
to lose their labour, and vainly to suffer by it. If they offer
at resistance, it is usually faint and moderate : whereas power
doth act vigorously, and push itself forward with raighty rio
lence ; so that it is not only difficult to check it, but dangerous
to oppose it.
Ambiguity of words (as it causeth many debates, so) yield
eth much advantage to the foundation and amplification of
power : for whatever is said of it, wUl be interpreted in favour
of it, and vrill afford colour to its pretences.f Words inno
cently or carelessly used are by interpretation extended to sig
nify great raatters, or what you please. For instance.
The word bishop raay import any kind of superintendency
or inspection ; hence St. Peter came to be reckoned bishop of
* Kard pqrd riav dyiiav. M-fimag,^qai, r'lg nav dy'iiav iv imaroX-g
Tip^ Tbv rrdrrav, Kai iKXdfSy tovto dvri rrpovopiiav. Syn. Flor.
Sess. 25. (p. 848.)
t Ita de vocabulorum occasionibus plurimiim quaestiones subornantur,
sicut et de verborum in communionibus. Tertul. de Resur. Carn. 54.

270 A TREATISE OF
Rome, because in rirtue of his apostoUcal oflSce he had inspec
tion over that Church founded by him, and might exercise
some episcopal acts.
The word head* doth signify any kind of emmency, the
word prince any priority, the word to preside any kind of su
periority or pre-eminence ; 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 superiority m
power over all bishops, notvrithstanding such Fathers did et-
press a contrary judgraent.
The word successor may import any derivation of power ;
hence because St. Peter is said to have founded the Chnrch of
Rome, and to have ordained the first bishop there, the Pope is
called his successor.
The word authority doth often import any kind of influence
upon the opinions or actions of men (grounded upon eminence
of place, worth, reputation, or any such advantage). Hence
because the Pope of old sometimes was desired to interpose
his authority, they vrill understand him to have had right to
coraraand or judge in such cases ; although authority is some
times opposed to command, as where Livy saith, that " Evandeif
did hold those places by authority rather than by command ;"
and Tacitus of the German princes, saith, " They are heard
rather according to their authority of persuading, than power
of coramanding." " The word judge (saith Canus) is fre
quently used to signify no more than I do think or conceive ;"f
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 raay be vaUd, that being dissolved.") Yet if the Pope
is said to have judged so or so in any case, it is alleged for a
certain argument of proper jurisdiction.
1 1 . There is a strange enchantment in words ; which being
* Kai qyeXaBai KeipaXriv. Can. Apost. 34.
t Quia duobus Episcopis, quorum ek tempestate summa authoritas
erat uon Uluserant. Sulpit. Sev. 2. 63. — Because he had not deluded the
two bishops who had the greatest authority in those times. — Non mediocris
authoritatis Episcopus Carthag. Aug. Epist. 162. — The bishop of Car
thage was of no mean authority. — Audiuntur authoritate suadendi potius
qu^m jubendi potestate. Tac. de Mor. Germ. (p. 640.) — Evander— e»
authoritate magis quam imperio retinebat loca. Liv. 1. ^Verbum /aiK"
frequenter in ea significatione usurpatur, ut idem sit quod sentio seu
opinor. Can. loc. 6. cap. 8. (comp. lib. 6. 1.)

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 271
(although vrith 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 raost operative,
by their force sustaining and extending itself.
So divers prevalent factions did assume to themselves the
name of Catholic ; and the Roman Church particularly hath
appropriated that word to itself, even so as to commit a bull,
implying Rome and the universe to be the sarae place ; and
the perpetual canting of this terra hath been one of its most
effectual charms to weak people. " I am a Catholic, that is,
an universal, therefore all I hold is true," this is their great
argument. The words successor of Peter, apostoUc 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 understanding
and vrisdom.
12. The Pope's power was much ampUfied by the impor
tunity of persons conderaned or extruded from their places,
whether upon just accounts, or wrongfully and by faction : for
they finding no other more hopeful place of refuge and redress,
did often apply to him : for what will not men do, whither vrill
not they go in straits ?*
Thns did Marcion go to Rome, and sue for admission to
communion there.f So Fortunatus and FeUcissimus in St.
Cyprian, being condemned in Africa did fly to Rome for
shelter, of which absurdity St. Cyprian doth so complain. J
So Ukevrise Martianus and BasiUdes, in St. Cyprian, being:
outed of their sees for haring lapsed from the Christian pro
fession did fly to Stephen for succour to be restored. So
Maximus (the Cynic) went to Rome, to get a confirmation of
his election at Constantinople. So Marcellus, being rejected
for heterodoxy, went thither to get attestation to his ortho-
doxy (of which St. Basil complaineth.) So Apiarius, being
condemned in Africa for his criraes, did appeal to Rome.
And on the other side, Athanasius being with great partiality
condemned by the Synod of Tyre, Paulus, and other bishops
• Ut ad Domini mei tanti Pontificis et piissimi Patris, omnium ad
se confiigientium tutissimi defensoris ac protectoris, &c. Rothaldi appeUj
(in P. Nich. I. Ep. 37. p. 563.) — My Lord so great a Pontiif, and most
pious a Father, the safe defender and protector of all those that flee unto
him for succour.
t Cypr. Ep. 68. X Epist. 55.

272 A TREATISE OF
being extruded from their sees for orthodoxy ; * St. Chry.
sostorn being conderaned and expelled by TheophUus and his
corapUces ; Flarianus being deposed by Dioscorus, and the
Ephesine Synod ; Theodoret being conderaned by the same,—
did cry out for help to Rome. CheUdonius, bishop of Resanon,
being deposed by Hilarius of Aries (for crimes), did fly to
Pope Leo. Ignatius, patriarch of Constantinople, bemg
extruded frora his see by Photius, did complain to the
Pope.f 13. All princes are forward to heap honour on the bishop of
their imperial city ; it seeming a disgrace to themselves, that
so near a relation be an inferior to any other : who is as it were
their spiritual pastor, who is usually by their special favour
advanced. The city itself and the court will be restless iu
assisting hira to clirab.
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 advanceraent. And how ready the emperors were to pro*
mote the dignity of that bishop, we see by many of tbeir edicts
to that purpose, as particularly that of Leo.J
So, for the honour of their city, the emperors 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 Valen*
tinian, together with those of Placidia and of Eudoxia the
empresses, to Theodosius in behalf of Pope Leo, for retrac
tation of the Ephesine Synod ; wherein they do express them
selves engaged to maintain the honour of the Roman see :
" Seeing that (saith Placidia, mother of Theodosius) it be
cometh us in all things to preserve the honour and dignity of
this chief city, which is the mistress of all others."§
So Pope Nicholas confesseth, that the emperors had "ex-
* Calendion of Antioch, Liber, cap. 18.
t P. Leo. Ep. 89. Marc. 5. 32. P. Nich. I. Ep. 38. (p. 554.) Eo-
tbaldus. X Cod. Ub. 1. tit. 2. cap. 16.
§ 'Orrore rrpkrrti qpdg Tavry Ty pty'iary rroXei, ijng Siarroiva rra
aiav vrrdpxei nav yeiav, iv rrdai rb ak^ag rrapaipvXd^ai. Syn. Chalc*
(P- 27.)

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 273
tolled the Roraan see with divers privileges, had enriched it
with gifts, had enlarged it with benefits (or benefices)," &c.*
14. The Popes had the advantage of being ready at hand
to suggest what they pleased to the court, and thereby to pro
cure his edicts (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 Eraperor Leo in favour of that see : " These
things Leo ; but questionless conceived in the words of Aca
cius, swelling with pride."f
And no less unquestionably did the Popes conceive words
for tbe emperor in countenance of their authority.
Such was that edict of Valentinian in favour of Leo J against
Hilarius bishop of Aries, § (in an unjust cause as Binius con
fesseth), who contested his authority to undo what was done
in a GalUcan Synod. And we m&y thank Baronius himself
for this observation, "By this, reader, thou understandest,
that when the emperors ordained laws concerning reUgion,
they did it by transcribing and enacting the laws of the
Church, npon the admonition of the holy bishops requiring
them to do their duty." |1 It was a notable edict, which Pope
• Hilarius allegeth, " It was also decreed by the laws of Chris
tian princes that whatsoever the bishop of the apostolic see
should upon examination pronounce concerning Churches and
their governors, &c. should vrith reverence be received and
strictly observed," &c.^
Such edicts by crafty suggestions being at opportune times
from easy and unwary princes procured, did hold, not being
easily reversed ; and the power which the Pope once had ob-
* QuaUter (Imperatores) eam diversis beneflciis extulerint, donis dita
verint, beneficus ampUaverint, quaUter iUam, &c. P. Nich. I, Ep. 8.
(p. 513.)  Romanus tempore prisco
Pauper erat Praesul, Regali munere crevit, &c. — Gunth. Lig. Ub. 6.
t Hsec Leo, sed Acacii fastu tumentis proculdubio verbis concepta, et
stylo superbifB exarata. Baron. Ann. 473. ^ 4.
t Apud Marc. 5. 32. § Bin. ad P. HU. Ep. 11. (p. 576.)
II Ex his inteUigis, Lector, cum de rebus sacris Imperatores leges sanxi-
vere, id ipsum admonitione ss. Praesulum requirentium eorum officium ex
scriptis legibus statuisse. Baron. Ann. 458. ^ 4.
r H Christianorum quoque Principum lege decretum est, &c. P. HUarius-
Ep. 11. (p. 576.)
VOL. I. T

274 A TREATISE OP
tained by them, he would never part with;* fortifying it by
higher pretences of dirine immutable right.
The Emperor Gratian,f having gotten the world under hira,
did order the Churches to those who would comraunieate with
Pope Daraasus. This and the Uke 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 Eoman
State) should find interest sufficient to make themselves by
degrees what they would be ; for they not only surpassing the
provincial bishops in wealth and repute, but having power in
court, who dared to pull a feather with them, or to withstand
their encroachments ? What wise man would not rather bear
much, than contest upon such disadvantages, and vrithout pro
bable grounds of success ?
16. Princes who favoured them with such concessions and
abetted their undertakings, did not foresee what such increase
of power in time would arise to ; or suspect the prejudice
thence done to imperial authority. They little thought that
in virtue thereof Popes would check and mate princes ; or
would claim superiority over them ; for the Popes at that time
did behave and express themselves with modesty and respect
to emperors.
17. Power once rooted doth find seasons and favourable
junctures for its growth ; the which it wiU be intent to em
brace. The confusions of thmgs, the eruptions of barbarians, the
straits of emperors, the contentions of princes, &c. did all
tum to account for him ; and in confusion of things he did
snatch what he could to hiraself.
The declination and infirmity of the Roman empire gave
him opportunity to strengthen his interests, either by closing
with it, so as to gain somewhat by its concession ; or by
opposing it, so as to head a faction against it. As he often
had opportunity to promote the designs of emperors and
princes, so those did return to him increase of authonty; so
they trucked and bartered together. For when princes were
in straits or did need assistance (frora his reputation at
horae) to the furtherance of their designs, or support of their
interest in Italy, they were content to honour him and grant
what he desired : as in the case of Acacius, which had caused
» P. Nich, I, Ep. 36. t Theod. 5. 2.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 275
SO long a'breach, the emperor to engage Pope Hormisdas, did
consent to his will. And at the Florentine Synod, the em
peror did bow to the Pope's terms, in hopes to get his assist
ance 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 yielding countenance to one
side, would be sure to make a good market for himself: for
this pretended successor to the fisherman, was reaUy skilled to
angle in troubled waters.
They have been the incendiaries of Christendom, the
'kindlers and fomenters of war. And would often stir up wars,
andincUning to the stronger part, would share with the con
queror: as when he stirred up Charles against the Lombards.
-They would, upon spiritual pretence, be interposing in all
affairs .f
He did obUge 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 acknowledg
ment and recompense. As when he did allow Pepin's usur
pation. J
He pretended to dispose of kingdoms, and to constitute
1 princes, reserving obeisance to himself. Gregory VII. granted
-to Robert Guislard Naples and Sicily beneficiario jure.§
Innocent II. gave to Roger the title of king. ||
There is scarce any kingdom in Europe which he hath not
claimed the sovereignty of by some pretence or other. Princes
sometime for quiet sake have desired the Pope's consent and
allowance of things appertaining of right to themselves, whence
the Pope took advantage to claim an original right of disposing
such things.
The proceeding of the Pope upon occasions of wars is re
markable; when he did enter league vrith a prince to side
vrith him in a war against another, he did covenant to prose
cute the enemy vrith spiritual arms (that is, with excommuni-
* Apvbg rrtaovaqg rrdg dv^p ivXiZtrai. When the oak is faUen every
one gets some wood.
t Anast. in Vit. Zach. P. Nich. I. Ep. 25. 30, &c. Non sine suspi
cione, quod iUorum temporum Pontifices, qui bella extinguere, discordias
tollere debuissent, suscitarent ea potiiis atque nutrirent. Modruviensis
Episc. m Cone. Lat. sub Leone X. Sess. 6. (p. 72.)
t Ann. 752. § Ann 1060. || Ann. 1139.
T 2

276 A TREATISE OF
cations and interdicts), engaging his confederates to use
temporal arms. So making ecclesiastical censures tools of
interest. When princes were in difficulties (by the mutinous disposi
tion of princes, the emulation of antagonists), he would, as
served his interest, interpose, hooking in some advantage to
himself. In the tumults against our king John, he struck in, and
would have drawn the kingdom to himself.
He would watch opportunity to quarrel with princes, upoa
pretence they did entrench on his spiritual power : as about the
point ofthe investiture of bishops, and receiving homage from
them. Gregory VII. did excomraunicate Henry III. (a. d.1076).
CaUxtus II. did excoraraunicate Henry IV. (a. d. 1120).
Adrian IV. did excoraraunicate Frederick (a. b. 1160).
Celestinus III. did excoramunicate Henry V. (a. d. 1196).
Innocent III. did excommunicate Otho (a. d. 1219).
Honorius III. and Gregory IX. i Frederick II. (a. d. 1220).
Innocent IV. intheLugd. Cone. ) 1245).
18. The ignorance of times did him great service ; for then
all the little learning which was, being in his clients and fac
tors, they could instil what they pleased into tbe credulous
people. Then his dictates would pass for infalUble oracles,
and his decrees for inviolable laws : whence his veneration was
exceedingly increased.
1 9. He was forward to support factious churchmen against
princes,* upon pretence of spiritual interest and liberty. And
usually by his importunity and arts getting the better in such
contests, he thereby did rauch strengthen his authority.
20. He making himself the head of all the clergy, and car
rying hiraself as its protector and patron, did engage thereby
innumerable most able heads, tongues and pens ; who were de
voted to maintain whatever he did, and had little else to do.
21. So great a party he cherished with exorbitant liberties,
suffering none to rule over them or touch thera beside himself.
22. He did found divers militias and bands of spiritual
janissaries, to be combatants for his interests ; who, depending
imraediately upon hira, subsisting by his charters, enjoying
exemptions by his authority frora other jurisdictions, beuig
sworn to a special obeisance of hira, were entirely at his devo-
• Anselm, Ann. 1109. Becket, Ann. 1 154. Eadmer. Matt. Par..

THE pope's supremacy. 277
tion, ready vrith all their might to advance his interests,, and tO'
maintain aU the pretences of their patron and benefactor.
These had great sway among the people, upon account of
their religious guises and pretences to extraordinary heights of
sanctimony, austerity, contempt of the world. And learning
being. mostly confined to them, they were the chief teachers
and guides of Christendom ; so that no wonder, if he did chal
lenge and could maintain any thing by their influence.
They did cry up his power as superior to all others. They
did attribute to hira titles strangely high. Vice- God, Spouse of
the Church, &c., strange attributes of omnipotency, infallibi
lity, &e.
23. Whereas wealth is a great sinew of power, he did invent
divers ways of dravring great store thereof to himself.*
By how many tricks did he proU money; from all parts of
Christendom ? as by
Dispensations for marriage within degrees prohibited, or at
uncanonical tiraes ; for vows and oaths ; for observance of fasts
and abstinences; for pluraUties and incompatible benefices,
non-residencies, &c.
Indulgences, and pardons, and freeing souls from the pains
of purgatory.
.Reservations, and prorisions of benefices, not bestowed
gratis.f Consecrated presents ; Agnus Dei's, swords, roses, &c. J
Confirmation of bishops ;§ sending paUs.
^. Appeals to his court.
Tributes of Peter-pence, 1| annates, tithes, introduced upon
occasion of holy wars, and continued.
Playing fast and loose, tying knots, and undoing them for
gain. Sending legates to drain places of money.
f Gopiinutations of penance for money.
Inriting to pilgrimage at Rome.
I 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.
* Pro pallio omnino aUquid dare prohibeo. Greg, I. Ep, 4. 44.
t Vendit plumbum pro auro. i Taxa Camerariae.
¦ § In the tunes of Henry I. the Bishop of York did pay iglO,000 ster
ling for his paU. Matt. Par, (p. 274.)
II Peter-pence. Plat. p. 257.
IF Quantas nobis divitias peperit htec fabula Christi ?

278 A TREATISE OF
dirines, transform most points of divinity, in accommodation to
his interests of power, reputation and gain.
25. Any pretence, how slender soever, vrill in time get some
validity ; being fortified by the consent pf divers authors, anda
current of suitable practice.
Any story, serring the designs of a party, will get credit by
being often told, especially by writers bearing a semblance of
gravity ; whereof divers wUl never be wanting to abet a flou
rishing party.
26. The histories of sorae ages were coraposed only by the
Pope's clients, friars and monks, and such people ; which
therefore are partial to him, addicted to his interests, and under
awe of him.
For a long time none dared open his mouth to question any
of his pretences, or reprehend his practices, vrithout being
called heretic, and treated as such.
27. Whereas the Pope had two sorts of opposites to subdue,
teraporal princes and bishops ; his business being to overtop
princes, and to enslave all bishops ; or to invade and usurp the
rights of both ; he used the help of each to compass his
designs on the other ; by the authority of princes oppressmg
bishops, and by the assistance of bishops raating 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 ofthe Decretal Epistles (wherein the ancient
Popes are made expressly to speak and act according to some
of his highest pretences, derised long after their times, and
which they never thought of, good men) did hugely conduce
to his purpose ; authorising 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 vvhich were
soon embraced, as we see in Pope Gregory II.
As also legends, fables of miracles, and all such " deceivable-
ness of unrighteousness."t
30. Popes were so cunning as to form grants, and impute
* duando et ApostoUca prseceptio ad injuriam B. Petri in Uiis partibus
non observatur, et a te spernitur et violatur. P. Nich. I. Ep. 37.
t 'ArruTq Tfjg dSiKiag. — 2 Thess, U. 10. Twisd. p. 17. Non neces
sitatis, sed honoris causa peto.

THE pope's supremacy. 279
that to pririleges derived from them, which princes did enjoy
by right or custom.
31. iSynods of bishops called by him at opportune seasons,
consisting of his votaries or slaves. None dared therein to
whisper anything to the prejudice of his authority. He carried
whatever he pleased to propose, vrithout check or contradiction.
Who dared to question anything done by such numbers of
pastors styUng themselves the representative of Christendom?*
32. The haring hampered all the clergy vrith strict oaths of
universal obedience to him (beginning about the times of Pope
Gregory VII.) did greatly assure his power.
33. AiVhen intolerable oppressions and e.xactions did constrain
princes to struggle vrith hira, if he could not utterly prevail,
things were brought to coraposition ; whereby he was to be
sure for that tirae a gainer, and gained establishment in some
pouits, learing the rest to be got afterward in more favourable
junctures. Witness the concordats between Henry II. and P. Alexander
III. A.D. 1172; Edward III. and P. Gregory XI. a.d. 1373;
Henry V. and P. Martin V. a.d.- 1 4 1 8 .
34. When princes were fain to curb their exorbitancies by
Pragmatical Sanctions, they were restless tiU they had got those
sanctions revoked. And when they found weak princes, or
any prince in circumstances advantaging their design, they did
obtain their end. So Pope Leo X. got Louis XII. to repeal
the Pragmatical Sanctions of his ancestors.
35. The power he did assume to absolve men from oaths and
vows, to dispense vrith 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 himself. For
to him they owed the quiet of their conscience from scruples.
To him they owed the satisfaction of their desires, and legiti
mation of their issue, and title to their possessions.
36. So the derice of indulgences did greatly raise the vene
ration of him ; for who would not adore hira, that could loose
his bands, and free his soul from long and grievous pains ?
VII. The next supposition is this. That in fact the Roraan
bishops continually from St. Peter's time have enjoyed and
exercised this sovereign power. This is a question of fact
which vrill best be decided by a particular consideration
of the several branches of sovereign power, that so we may
* Extortis assentationibus. P. Leo. Epist. (ad. Syn. Chalc.)

280 A TREATISE OF
exaraine the more distinctly whether in aU 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.
I. If the Pope were sovereign of the Church, he would have
power to convocate its suprerae Councils and judicatories; and
would constantly have exercised it.
This power therefore the Pope doth claim ; and indeed did
pretend to it a long tirae since, before they could obtain to
exercise it : " It is raanifestly apparent (saith P. Leo X. with
approbation of his Lateran Synod*) that the Roman bishop
for the time being (as who hath authority over all Councils)
hath alone the fuU right and power of indicting, translating,
and dissolring Councils :" and, long before him, " To the
apostolical authority (saith Pope Adrian I.f) by our Lord's
command, and by the merits of St. Peter, and by the decrees
of the holy canons and of the venerable Fathers, a right and
special power of convocating Synods hath manywise been com
mitted;" and, yet before him, "The authority (saith P.
Pelagius II-J) of convocating Synods hath been delivered to
the apostolical see by the singular pririlege of St. Peter."
But it is manifest, that the Pope cannot pretend to this
power by virtue of any old ecclesiastical canon ; none such
being extant or produced by hira : nor can he aUege any ancient
custora ; there haring been no General Synod before Con
stantine : and as to the practice frora that tirae, it is very clear,
that for sorae ages the Popes did not assurae or exercise such
a power, and that it was not taken for their due. Nothing
can be more evident, and it were extrerae irapudence to deny
that the emperors at their pleasure, and by their authority did
* Distinc. 17.— Cvim etiam solum Rom. Pontificem pro tempore existen-
tem, tanquam auctoritatem super omnia ConciUa habentem, Concilioram
indicendorum, transferendorum ac dissolvendorum plenum jus et potesta
tem habere — manifest^ constet. Con. Later. Sess. 11. (p. 152.)
t Cui jnssione Domini, et meritis B. Petri Apostoli, singularis congre-
gandarum Synodorum authoritas, et Sanctorum Canonum ac Veneran-
dorum Patrum decretis multipUciter privata tradita est potestas. P. Ha
drian. I. apud Bin. tom. 5. p. 565. (Ann. 785.)
X Cum generalium Synodorum convocandi auctoritas Apostolicse Sedi
B Petri singulari privilegio sit tradita.— P. Pelag. II. Epist. 8, (Bin, tom.
4. p, 476.) Ann. 587. Q«. an hsec Epistola sit Pelagii II. ?— Negat Lau-
noius.

THE pope's supkemacy. 281
.congregate all the first General Synods ; for so the oldest his
torians 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 vrithout scruple ; it was deemed their right to do it, none
did remonstrate against their practice, the Fathers in each
Synod did refer thereto, with aUowance, and coraraonly vrith
applause ; Popes theraselves did not contest their right, yea
commonly did petition them to exercise it.
These things are so clear and so obrious, that it is almost
yain to prove them ; I shall therefore but touch them.
In general, Socrates doth thus attest to the ancient practice :
" We (saith he) do continually include the emperors in our
history, because upon thera, ever since they becarae Christians,
ecclesiastical affairs have depended, and the greatest Synods
have been and are made by their appointment :"* and Justinian
in his prefatory type to the fifth General Council beginneth
thus : " It hath been ever the care of pious and orthodox
emperors 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
m a Synod, St. Jerome to confute hira, did ask ; " Tell me,
what emperor did coraraand this Synod to be congregated :" J
implying it to be iUegal or impossible that a Synod should be
congregated without the imperial command.
Particularly, Eusebius saith of the first Christian emperor,
that " as a coraraon bishop appointed by God he did sumraon
Synods of God's rainisters ;"§ so did he coraraand a great
number of bishops to raeet at Aries, (for decision of the
* Avvtxiag Kai rovg (BaaiXtXg ry 'laropii^ TrepiXapjidvopev, Sion dip'
ov XpianaviZeiv ijp^avTO, rd Trjg 'EKKXqaiag rrpdypara -ijpTqTO ii ab^
Tiav, Kai aX pkyiarai avvoSoi T-y avnav yviapy yeyovaai Tt Kai yivovrai.
Socr. 5. prooem.
t Semper studium fuit orthodoxis, et piis Imperatoribus, pro tempore
exortas Haereses per congregationem reUgiosissimorum Episcoporum am-
putare, et recta 6de sincere praedicata in pace Sanctum Dei Eoclesiarn
custodire.— Justm. in Syn. 5, CoUat. 1. (p. 209.) Graec^. p. 368. magis
Emphatic^. X Doce — quis Imperator banc Synodum jusserit eongregari. — Hier.
§ Ola ngKoivbg 'Err'iaKOTTog iK Qtoii KaBiardptvog avvoSovg nav rov
%eov XeiTovpyiav avvtKpoTti. Eus. de Vit. Const. 1.44. [p, 524. Can^
tab. 1720.]

282 A TREATISE OF
Donatists' cause) ;* so did he also command the bishops from
all quarters to meet at Tyre for exaraination of the affairs con
cerning Athanasius ; and that he did convocate the great Synod
of Nice (the first and raost renowned of all General Synods)
all the historians do agree,f he did himself aflSrm, the Fathers
thereof in their Synodical remonstrances did avow ; as we shall
hereafter, in remarking on the passages of that Synod, shew.
The same course did his son Constantius follow, without
irapediraent ; for although he was a favourer of the Arian
party, yet did the Catholic bishops readily at his call assemble
in the great Synods of Sardica, { of Arimniura, § of Seleucia, || of
Sirraiura,^ of Milan,** &c. which he out of a great zeal to
corapose dissensions araong the bishops did convocate.
After him the Eraperor Valentinian, understanding of dis
sensions about divine ihatters, to corapose them, did indict a
Synod in lUyricum. ff
A while after, for settlement of the Christian state (which
had been greatly disturbed by the persecution of JuUan and of
Valens, and by divers factions,) Theodosius I. did "command
(saith Theodoret) the bishops of his erapire to be assembled
together at Constantinople ;"tj 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 waa
celebrated against his will.§§
* nXtiarovg iK Siafopiav Kai dpvBqTiav Torriav 'EmaKorrovg eig ttiv
' AptraXqa'iiav rroXiv avvtXBtXv 'tKtXtvaapev. Eus. Hist. 10. 5. [p. 485.
Ed.ut supra.] Epist. ad Chrestum. Ad Arelatensium civitatem piissimi Im
peratoris voluntate adducti, say the Fathers in their Epistle to P. Sylvester
himself. t Vid. Euseb. de Vit. Const, lib, 4. cap. 41, 42, 43. et Socr. 1. 28.
[p. 65. Cantab. 1720.]
J Upoa'iTti^tv tig 'SapSucqv avvSpapeXv 'EmaKorrovg. Theodor. 2. 4.
Soz. 3. 11. Socr. 2. 16. 20. Athan. tom. 1. p. 761. HU. in fragm. p.
Jubet ex toto orbe apud Sardicam Episcopos eongregari. Sulp. 2. 52,
^ "Ek Tt Trjg TOU Qtot) KeXtvatiag, Kai Tqg aqg tvat^eiag rrpoardypa-
Tog, &c. Syn. Arim. Epist. ad Const. Socr. 2. 37.
II Socr. 2. 39. rjv— ytvkaBai to j3aaiXeiag iKtXtvae rrpoaraypa.
Ann. 381.
H 'O jBaaiXtig avvoSov 'EmaKdmav iv na Siipu'iip ytvkaBai 'tK'tXevut.
Socr. 2, 29, Soz. 4. 6.
**¦ Upoaraypa Si qv roi (iaaiXkiag iv MeSioXdvip rroXti rroitXuBaiTtjv
avvoSov, Socr. 1.36. Soz. 4. 9.
tt 'Ev piv Tip 'iXXvpiKip avvoSov ytvkaBai rrpoakraZe. Theod. 4. 7.
Jt AvvoSov bpoSo^iav avnp avvtKdXtae, Soz. 7. 7. Socr. 5. 8.—
Movjje Trjg o'lKtiag ^aaiXtiag Toig 'EmaKorrovg eig T-qv Kiavaravn-
vovrroXiv avvaBpoiaBqvai rrpoa'traiev. Theod. 5. 7. [Cantab. 1720.]
§^ Repugnante Damaso celebrata, &c. Baron. Ann. 553. ^ 224.

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 283
, Afterwards, when Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople,
affecting to seem wiser than others in explaining the mystery
of Christ's incarnation, had raised a jangle to the disturbance
ofthe Church, for remoring it, the Eraperor Theodosius II.
did "by his edict coraraand the bishops to raeet at Ephesus ;"*
who there did celebrate the third General CouncU : in the
beginning of each action it is affirmed, that the Synod was
"convocated by the imperial decree ;"f the Synod itself doth
often profess it ; the Pope's own legate doth acknowledge it ;
and so doth Cyril the president thereof. J
The sarae Emperor, upon occasion of Eutyches being con
demned at Constantinople, and the stirs thence arising, did
indict the second General Synod of Ephesus, (which proved
abortive by the miscarriages of Dioscorus, bishop of Alexandria)
as appeareth by his imperial letters to Dioscorus, and the other
bishops, summoning them to that Synod : — "We have decreed
that the most holy bishops meeting together," &c. After the
same manner the other most reverend bishops were written to,
to come to the Synod. § And as Pope Leo doth confess;
caUing it, "the council of bishops which you (Theodosius)
commanded to be held at Ephesus." i|
The next General Synod of Chalcedon^ was convocated by
the authority of the Emperor Marcian ; as is expressed in the
beginning of each action, as the emperor declareth, as the
* Upoaraypa rov ^aaiXtiag tig T-qv avvoSov avvikvai iKtXtvaev.
Socr. 7. 34. [Cantab. 1720.] Evagr. 1. 3. [Cantab. 1720.]
t 'Ek BtarriapaTog Tiav (iaaiXkiav avyKporqBtXaa.
X 'H dy'ia avvoSog, q xdpiri 9£o5 Kara to Bkamapa riav tiaefSeaTd-
Tiav Kai ^iXoxpianav qpiav fiaaiXkiav avyKporqBtXaa. Syn. Eph. Act. 1.
p. 291. [Lab. vol. 3. p. 445. Paris. 1671.]— The holy Synod assembled
bythe grace of God, according to the decree of our most religious emperors.
&0. — r'l x^piri Qtoii Kai vtvpan tov vperkpov Kpdrovg avvaxBtXaa.
p. 297. — Td rrpoartrayp'tva r-y dyig, avvoSip rrapd rob vptrkpov
Kpdrovg, &c. Act. 5. p. 347. — ToTs dBpoiaBeXai Kard rrpoaraypa Tiav
^aatXkiav. p. 404. "Hvnva avvoSov ot xpi^riaviKiaTaroi Kai tbiXav-
Bpiarroraroi ^aaiXeXg lapiaav. — Which Synod our most Christian and gra
cious emperors appointed, saith PhUip, the Pope's legate Act. 3. p. 330. —
Ty ay'ir^ avvbSip T-y KaTd 0£ov xaptv Kai Bkamapa riav BtotpiXtardnav
Kai ^iXoxpianov ^aaiXtiav avvaxBtiay. — To the holy Synod assembled
by the grace of God, and the command of our emperors, &c. So do Cyril
and Memnon inscribe their Epistle. Act. 4. p. 337.
$ EBtarr'iaaptv Kard ravrb avvtXBovnav baiordnav, &c. — Tip avnp
Tvrriff iypd^q Kai ToXg dXXoig ebXafiearaTOig 'EmaKorroig laare rrapa-
ytvkaBaittg rijv a-vvoSov. Syn. Chalc. pars 1. p. 53.
I Episcopale concUium, quod haberi apud Ephesum prsecepistis. P.
Leo. I. Ep. 25. (et 24.) ad Theod. f Ann. 451.

284 A TREATISE OF
Synod itself in the front of its definition doth avow ; " the holy,
great and oecumenical Synod, gathered together by the grace
of God and the command of our most dread Eraperors, &c,
has determined as follows."*
The fifth General Synodf was also congregated, by the
authority of Justinian I. and the emperor's letter authorizing
it,J beginneth (as we saw before) with an assertion (backed
with a particular enumeration) that all former great Synods
were called by the same power : the Fathers themselves do
say, that they " had come together according to the wiU of
God, and the command of the most pious emperor."§ So
little had the Pope to do in it, that, as Baronius himself telleth
us, it was congregated against his will, or with his resistance.!
The sixth General Synod at Constantinople was also indicted
by the Eraperor Constantine Pogonatus ; as doth appear by
his letters, as is intiraated at the entrance of each action, as
the Synod doth acknowledge, as Pope Leo II. (in whose time
it was concluded) doth affirra. The Synod in its definition, as
also in its epistle to Pope Agatho doth inscribe itself — " The
holy and oecuraenical Synod, congregated by the grace of God,
and the altogether reUgious sanction of the raost pious, and
most faithful great eraperor Constantine ;"^ and, in then:
definition they say, " By this doctrine of peace dictated by
God, our most gracious emperor through the Dirine wisdom
being guided, as a defender of the true faith, and an enemy to
the false, having gathered us together in this holy and (ecu
menical Synod, has united the whole frame of the Church,"**
* Kard BtXov Bkamapa avvaBpoiaBtXaa.—T-qv dyiav vpiav qBpoi-
aapev avvoSov. (Act. 6. p. 345.) — 'H dyia Kai peydXq Kai oiKov-
ptviKrj avvoSog q Kara Gtoi xdpiv, Kai Bkamapa riav tvXa^tardriav
Kai ijiiXoxpianav -qpiav fiaaiX'tiav avvaxBtXaa.  lapiat rd irrortray-
pkva. Act. 6. 346. [Lab. vol. 4. p. 325. Paris. 1671.]
t Ann. 553.
X Act. p, 368, Gr. p. 309. Lat. [Lab. vol. 5. coUat. 1. p. 419. Ed.ut
supra,] § Pro Dei voluntate, et jussione piissimi Imperatoris ad banc urbem
convenimus. CoUat. 8. [Id. p, 562.]
II Ut quae resistente Romano Pontiiice fuerit congregata. Baron.
Ann. 553. § 219.
yi 'H dyia Kai ptydXq, Kai oiKovptviKq avvoSog, q Kara Qtov %aptv
Eai rravtvatfi'tg Bkamapa roil tvatjitardTov Kai maTordrov ptyiAov
j3aaiXkiag Kiavaravrivov avvaxSrtiaa. Act. 18. p, 255, et p. 285. (Iu
Epist, ad P. Agath.) [Lab. vol. 6. p. 1072. Paris. 1671,]
** Tavry ry BtoXtKnp Tqg e'lpqvqg SiSaaKaXiif Beoaofiag b rrpaora-
Tog qpiav ^aaiXtig bSqyovpevog, b rfjg piv bpBoSo^iag vrr'sppaxog.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 285
&c. In its acclamatory oration to the Emperor it saith,
TaTe ^twraraig vjxiav rrpoara^eaiv i'lKovreg ore rrjg Trpea/Svrd-
-rqg Kai ' ArroaroXiKrig dxporroXeiag dpj^itpartKWTaroj rrpotSpugical
fipeig 'tXdxmrot, &c. Act. 18. p. 271. "We all acquiescing
in your most sacred commands ; both the most holy president
of (Rome) the most ancient and apostolical city, and we the
least,"* &c.
These are all the great Synods, which posterity with clear
consent did adrait 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),f so that even divers
Popes after them did not reckon them for General Couucils ;
and aU the rest have been only assemblies of Western bishops,
celebrated after the breach between the Oriental and Occidental
Churches. Yet even that second Synod of Nice, which is called the
seventh Synod, doth avow itself to have " convened by the
emperor's command ;"J and in the front of each action, as
also of their Synodical definition, the same style is retained.
Hitherto it is evident, that all General Synods were convo -
cated by the imperial authority, and about this matter divers
things are observable.
It is observable in how peremptory a manner the emperors
did require the bishops to convene at the time and place ap
pointed by thera. Constantine in his letter indicting the
Synod of Tyre hath these words : " If any one presuming to
riolate our coramand and sense," &c.§
Theodosius II. suraraoneth the bishops to the Ephesine
Synod in these terms: " We taking a great deal of care about
Trjg Si KaKoSo^iag dvr'ipaxog, rijv KaB' -qpdg dyiav ravrqv Kai o'lKovpe-
viKqv dBpoiaag bp-qyvpiv, rb rrjg 'EKKXqaiag iirrav qviaae avyKpipa.
Act. 18. p. 256. in definitione Synodica. [Lab. vol. 6. p. 1013. Ed. ut
supra.] * Kat ydp irrkyviapev 'on r'l dyia Kai peydXq Kai o'lKovptviK-q tKrq
avvoSog, rjng Kard Otov x^pi-v. rip jiaaiXiKip rrpoardypaTi ivayxog
iv ry PaaiXiSi avvqOpoiaBq rroXtt. — P. Leo. II. in Epist. ad Constant.
Imp. p. 309.
t P. Joh. VIII. Ep. 247. P. Nich. I. Ep. 7, 8, 10. P. Hadrian. II.
Ep. 26.
X Udaa -q dyia avvoSog -q Kar' tvSoKiav Qtov, rrpoard^tt re Tqg
^iXoxpiarov vpoiv [3aaiXtiag avvtXBobaa. Act. 7. p, 831. Act. 1. p.
519. Act. 2. p. 551. Act. 3. p. 586. Act. 4. p. 609. Act. 5. p. 696. Act.
6, p. 722. Act, 7. p. 812. Defin. Synod. Act. 7. p. 817.
§ Euseb. de Vit. Const. 4. 42. (Vid. in 5. p. 30.)

286 A TEEATISE OP
these things will not suffer any one if he be absent to go Un
punished ; nor shall he find excuse either vrith God or us, who
presently vrithout delay does not by the tirae set, appear in the
place appointed."*
In Uke terms did he call them to the second Ephesine
Synod: "If any one shall choose to neglect meeting ma
Synod, so necessary and grateful to God, and by the set time
do not with all diUgence appear in the place appointed, he shall
find no excuse," &c.f
Marcian thus indicteth the Synod of Nice (after by him
translated to Chalcedon) : "It properly seeraeth good to our
cleraency that an holy Synod meet in the city of Nice, in the
province of Bithynia."J
Again we raay observe, that in the imperial edicts or epistles
whereby Councils effectually were convened, there is nothing
signified concerning the Popes haring any authority to call
them ; it is not as by licence from the Pope's holiness, but in
their own name and authority they act : which were very
strange if the Popes had any plea then commonly approved for
snch 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 soraetimes they prevailed, sometimes they
were disappointed : so Pope Liberius did request of Constan
tius to indict a Synod for deciding the cause of Athanasius :
" Ecclesiastical judgments (said he, as Theodoret reports)
should be made with great equity ; wherefore if it please your
* Kai qptXg Si Tovnav rroXXqv rroiovptvoi tjipovriSa d-iroXipiravt-
aBai ovSkva fopqriag dve%6ptBa- ovSep'iav,\Te 'e%ei rrpbg Bebv oiSi
-irpbg qpdg drroXoyiav, b pq rrapaxpqpa Kard rbv rrpotiprip'tvov
Kaipbv, tig rbv dipopiaBkvra rorrov arrovSAiiag rrapayevbptvog. Theod.
Jun. Ep. ad Cyril. Cone. Eph. pars 1. p. 226.
t Et ^£ ng Tqv ovnag dvayKaiav Kai np Qeip ^iXqv rraptStXv eXoiTO
a-uvoSov, Kai pij rrday Svvdpei Kard rbv rrpoeipqpkvov Kaipov rbv
dipopiaBkvTa KaraXafioi rcmov, oiStpiav 'i%ti rrpbg rb KpfXrrov, ^ ;rpic
rqv qptrkpav tvakfitiav drroXoyiav. Theodos. in Ep. ad Diosc. in Cone.
Chalc. Act. 1. p. 53.
X ToiiTO iSiKiag ry qptrkpq, qptatv -ripepbrqri, 'iva dyia irivoooi
iv T-y '^iKaieiav rroXei T-qg BiBvviav irrapxiag avyKporqBrj. In Epist.
ad Episc, Syn. Chal. pars 1. p. 34.
§ KvpiXXog — t'iKonag tSkqat vtvpaai rob v'eov QeoSoaiov rd ff/cijTr-
Tpa rrjg iiaag Sierrovrog T-qv 'tv 'Eip'eaip Trpiarqv avvoSov dXMBrjvah
Evagr. 1. 3.

THE pope's supremacy. 287
piety, command a judicatory to be constituted ;"* and in his
epistle to Hosius, produced by Baronius, he saith, " Many
bishops out of Italy met together, who together with me had
beseeched the most religious emperor, that he would com
mand, as he had thought fit, the CouncU of Aquileia to
meet."f So Pope Damasus, haring a desire that a General Synod
should be celebrated in Italy for repressing heresies aud fac
tions then in the Chnrch, did obtain the imperial letters for
that purpose directed to the Eastern bishops ; as they in their
epistie to the Western bishops do intimate : " But because
expressing a brotherly affection 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 you are gathering at
Rome."! It is a wonder that BeUarmine should have the confidence to
aUege this passage for himself §
So again Pope Innocent I. being desirous to restore St.
Chrysostom, " did (as Sozomen teUeth us) send five bishops
and two priests of the Roman Church to Honorius and to Ar-
cadius the emperor, requesting a Synod, vrith the time and the
place thereof," Ij in which attempt he suffered a repulse ; for
the courtiers of Arcadius did repel those agents, " as troubUng
another government, which was beyond their bounds,"^ or
wherein the Pope had nothing to do, that they knew of.
So also Pope Leo I. (whora no Pope could well exceed in
zeal to maiutain the pririleges, and advance the eminence of
bis see) did in these terras request Theodosius to indict a
Synod : "Whence if your piety shall vouchsafe consent to our
sn^iestion and suppUcation, that you would command an
* Atorrtp « aov SoKti ry tvat^t'iq., KpiTqpiov ovaraBrivai KtXevaov.
Theod. 2. 16.
t Multi ex Italia Episcopi twnvenerunt, ijni mecum reUgiosissimum
imperatorem fuerant deprecati, ut juberet sicut ipsi placuerat, dudum con-
riliam Aquileiense eongregari. !^ron. Ann. 353. § 19.
X 'ErrtiSdv ptvTOL rriv dStX^ucjjv rrtpi rjpdg dydrrqv imStiKvvptvoi,
avvoSov eTri Tqg Piapqg Qtov jiovXqati uvyKporovvTeg, Kai qpdg lag
oiKtia peXq rrpoatKaXkaaaBt, Sid twv rob BtotpiXtaTarov ^aaiXkwg
ypappdnav. Theod. 5. 9. [Cantab. 1720.]
$ BeU.de Pont. K. 2. 13. [p. 358. voL l.Pragae, 1721.]
II Il'trrop^tv 'EmaKorrovg rrkvTt Kai rrptajivrkpovg Svo rijg 'Piapaiwv
EKKXqaiag rrpbg 'Ovwpiov, Kai 'ApKaSiov rbv ^aaiXta, avvoSov a'lrq-
aovrag, koi Kaipbv ravrqg Kai Torrov. Soz. 8. 28. [Id.]
H 'Qc inrtpop'iav dpxqv ivox-qXaavrag. Ibid.

288 A TKEATISE OF
episcopal CouncU to be held in Italy ; soon, God aiding, may
all scandals be cut off."'* Upon this occasion the emperor did
appoint a Council (not in Italy, according to the Pope's desire,
but) at Ephesus ; the which not succeeding well. Pope Leo
again did address to Theodosius in these words : "All the
Churches of our parts, all bishops with groans and tears do
supplicate your grace, that you would command a General
Synod to be celebrated within Italy ;"f to which request
(although backed with the desire of the Western emperor),
Theodosius would by no means consent ; for, as Leontius re
porteth, " when Valentinian, being importuned 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 no, Theodosius did write back to hira saying, I shall
make no other Synod. "J
The same Pope did again of the sarae emperor petition for
a Synod to exaraine the cause of Anatolius, bishop of Con
stantinople: "Let your clemency (saith he) be pleased to
grant an universal Council to be held in Italy; as with me the
Synod, which for this cause did meet at Rome, doth request :"
Thus did that Pope continually harp upon one string to
get a General Synod to be celebrated at his own doors; but i
never could obtain his purpose, the emperor being stiff in
refusing it.
The same Pope, with better success, (as to the tbing,§
though not as to the place) did request of the emperor Marcian
a Synod; for he (concurring in opinion that it was needful)
" did (saith Liberatus) at the petition of the Pope and the
* HumUiter ac sapienter exposcite, ut petitioni nostrae, quSl plenariam
indici Synodum postulamus, cleraentissimus Imperator dignetur annuere,
(saith Pope Leo, to the clergy and people of Constantinople. Ep. 23.)—
Unde si pietas vestra snggestioni ac supplicationi nostrae dignetur annuere,
ut intra Italiam haberi jubeatis Episcopale ConciUum, cito auxUiante Deo
poterunt omnia scandala resecari. P, Leo I, Ep. 9.
t Omnes partium Ecclesite nostrarum, omnes mansuetudmi vestrse
cum gemitibus et lacrymis supplicant sacerdotes, ut generalem Synodum
jubeatis intra Italiam celebrari. P. Leo I. Ep. 42.
+ OvaXtvnavbg oxXovptvog vrrb Akovrog toU rrdrra ypdipti Qtooo.
aiijp Tip piKpip, 'iva irriTpk^y avvoSov ytvkaBai, tig rb yviavai ti KaXwf
tKpivtv b AioaKopog ij ov' b Si QeoSoaiog dvrkypaiptv airip Xtyi^v,
¦on ov rfoiia dXXqv avvoSov. Leont. de Sect. Act. 4.
§ Sanctum clementiae vestrae studium, quo ad reparationem pacis Eccle-
siasticae Synodum habere voluistis, adeo libenter accepi, ut quamvis eam
fieri intra ItaUam poposcissem, &c. Leo. Ep. 50.

THE pope's supremacy. 289
Roman princes coraraand a General Council to be congre
gated at Nice."*
Now if the Pope had hiraself a known right to convocate
Synods, what needed all this appUcation, or this suppUcation
to the emperors? would not the Pope have endeavoured to exer
cise his authority ? would he not have clamoured or whined
at any interruption thereof? would so spiritful and sturdy a
Pope as Leof have begged that to be done by another, which
he had authority to do of himself, when he did apprehend so
great necessity for it, and was so much provoked thereto ?
would he not at least have remonstrated against the injury
therein done to him by Theodosius ?
All that this daring Pope could adventure at, was to wind in
a pretence that the Synod of Chalcedon was congregated by
his consent ; for " it hath been the pleasure (of whom I pray ?)
that a General CouncU should be congregated, both by the
command of the Christian princes, and with the consent of the
apostoUc see,"J saith he very cunningly : yet not so cunningly,
but that any other bishop raight have said the same for his see.
This power indeed upon many just accounts peculiarly doth
belong to princes ; it suiteth to the dignity of their state, it
appertaineth to their duty, they are most able to discharge it.
They are the guardians of public tranquillity, which constantly
is endangered, which commonly is riolated by dissensions in
reUgious matters ; (whence we must pray for thera, that by
their care " we raay lead a quiet and peaceable Ufe in all godli
ness .and honesty,") § they alone can authorize their subjects to
take such journeys, or to meet in such assemblies ; they alone
can well cause the expenses needful for holding Synods to be
exacted and defrayed ; they alone can protect thera, can main
tain order and peace in them, can procure observance to their
I 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
* Poposceram quidem a gloriosissima dementia vestra, ut Synodum,
quam pro reparanda Orientadis Ecclesiae pace a nobis etiam petitam neces
sariam judic4stis, aUquantisper differri ad tempus opportunius juberetis. —
P. Leo. Ep. 43, 44. 50. — Sed eo defuncto, ciim Martianus Imperu culmen
fiiisset adeptus, pro Ula Papae et Principum Romanorum petitione Univer
sale ConcUium in Nicea eongregari jussit. Liber Brev. cap. 13.
t Fortissimus Leo. Liber, cap. 12.
t — In causa fidei, propter quam Generale ConcUium et ex praecepto
Christianorum Principum, et ex consensu ApostoUcie Sedis placuit eongre
gari. Ep. 61. § 1 Tim U. 2.
VOL. I. U

290 A TUEATISE OF
peaceably, to agree to observe what is settled : they " as nurs
ing Fathers of the Church, as ministers of God's kingdom, as
encouragers of all good works ;"* as the stewards of Grcd,
entrusted 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 exaraple of
good princes in holy Scripture, who are coramended for pro
ceedings of this nature, for so king Josiah did convocate a
General Synod of the Church in his tirae, " then (saith the
text) the king sent and gathered together all the elders of
Judah and Jerusalem ; in this Synod he presided, standing in
his place, and making a covenant before the Lord ; its resolu
tions he confirmed, causing all that were present in Jerusalem
and Benjarain to stand ' to that covenant ; and he took care of
their execution, raaking all present in Israel effectually to serve
the Lord their God."f
So also did king Hezekiah " gather the priests and Levites
together," did warn, did coraraand them to do their duty, and
reform things in the Church :J "My sons (saidhe) be not now
negligent, for the Lord hath chosen you to stand before him,
to serve bim, and that you should minister unto him, and burn
incense "§
Beside them none other can have reasonable pretence to such
a power, or can well be deeraed able to manage it ; so great
an authority cannot be exercised upon the subjects of afiy
prince without eclipsing his raajesty, infringing his natural
right, and endangering his state. He that at his- pleasure can
suraraon 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 J)er-
son should have all the governors of the Church at his beck,
so as to draw them from remote places whither he pleaseth)
to put them on long and chargeable journeys ; to detain them
frora their charge ; to set thera on what deUberations and de
bates he thinketh good. It is not reasonable that any one
vrithout the leave of princes should authorize so great conven
tions 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 vrith princes, and vrithdraw his
subjects from their due obedience. Neither can any snccess
* Isa. xlix. 23. Sap. vi. 4. Rom. xiu. 3.
t 2 Chron. xxxiv. 29, &c.
X 2 Chron. xxix. 4, 15, 20, 21, &c. § Ver. 11.

THE pope's supremacy. 291
he weU expected from the use of such authority by any, who
hath not power by which he can force bishops to convene, to
resolve, to obey ; whence we see that Constantine, who was a
prince so gentle and friendly to the clergy, was put to threaten
those bishops, who would absent themselves from the Synod
indicted by him at Tyre ; and Theodosius (also " a very mild
and religious prince,'')* did the like in his summoning the
two Ephesine Synods.f We Ukevrise raay observe, that when
" the Pope and Western bishops, in a Synodical epistle, did
inrite those of the East to a great Synod indicted at Rome,
these did refuse the journey, aUeging that it would be to no
good purpose ;"{ so also when the Western bishops did call
those of the East, for resolring the difference between Flaria
nus and PauUnus, both pretending to be bishops of Antioch,
what effect had their summons ? and so vrill they always or
often be ready to say, who are called at the pleasure of those
who want force to constrain them ; so that such authority in
unarmed hands (and God keep arms out of a Pope's hands)
wiU 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, untU he had in a manner
shaken off subjection to the Emperor) or he is not a subject ;
and then it is not reasonable that he should have such power
in the territories of another prince.
The whole business of General Synods, was an expedient for
peace, contrived by Emperors, and so to be regulated by their
order. Hence even in times and places where the Pope was
most reverenced, yet princes were jealous of suffering the Pope
to exercise such a power over the bishops their subjects ;§ and
to obriate it, did coraraand all bishops not to stir out of their
territories vrithout licence ; particularly our own nation, in the
Ty rrpaorqri Kai rrdvrag roig dXqBiag 'lepwpevovg iviKa. — 6 j3aai-
Xevg QeoSoaiog rrpavg aipbSpa rrapd rrdvrag roig dvBpiarrovg roig ov
Tog irri trig -y^g. Socr. 7. 42.
t T))j> drroSqpiav rrapyr-qaavTO tie ovS'ev ixovaav KepSog. Theod.
5. 8.
t Eypa-ij/ev avroi re, Kai Fpanavbg b j3aaiXevg, avyKaXoUvrtg tig T-qv
Ivaiv Toig dvb Tqg dvaroXrig 'EmaKorrovg. Sozom. 7. 11. — Both they
and Gratian the emperor wrote, caUing the Eastern bishops into the West.
\ PhUip of France. Bin. tom. 7. p. 906. (Ann. 1302.)
u 2

292 A TREATISE OF
Council at Clarendon, where it was decreed " that they should
not go out of the kingdom vrithout the king's leave."*
To sorae things above said, a passage raay be objected which
occurreth in the acclaraation of the sixth Synod to the
Eraperor Constantine Pogonatus ; wherein it is said, that
Constantine and Sylvester did collect the Sjmod of Nice,
Theodosius I. and Damasus (together with Gregory and Nec
tarius) the Synod of Constantinople ; Theodosius II. with
Celestine and Cyril the Ephesine Synod, and so of the rest :f
to which I answer, that the Fathers mean only for the honour
of those prelates to signify, that they in their places and ways
did concur and co-operate to the celebration of those Synods ;
otherwise we raight as to raatter of fact and history contest the
accurateness of their relation ; and it is observable, that they
join other great bishops then flourishing, with the Popes; so
that if their suffrage prove anything, it proveth more than our
adversaries would have, viz. that all great bishops and patri
archs have a power or right to convocate Synods.
As for passages alleged by our adversaries, that no Synod
could be called, or ecclesiastical law enacted, without consent
of the Pope, they are no wise pertinent to this question ; for
we do not deny that the Pope had a right to sit in every
General Synod ; and every other patriarch at least had no less ;
as all reason and practice do shew ; and as they of the seventh
Synod do suppose, J arguing 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
• Decretum est — non Ucere — exire Regnum absque Ucentia Regis.
Cone. Clarend, vid. Matt. Par, Ann. 1164.
t Syn. Sext. Act. 18. p. 272. KwvaravrXvog b dtiakl3aarog,Kai^i\^i-
arpog b doiSipog rrjv iv t^iKaiif ptydXqv Tt Kai rrepifSXtrrTOV avviKtytv
avvoSov. — dXX' b jikyiarog l3aaiXtvg QtoSoaiog, Kai Adiiaaog o aSapa{
rijg rriartwg. — Tpqyopiog rt Kai 'NcKTdpiog rbv iv ravry ry ^aaihli
rroXti avv-qBpoiZov avXXoyov.' — IldXiv 'Utaropiog, Kai rrdXiv KeXf-
arivog, Kai K-vpiXXog, b p'tv ydp rbv Xpiarbv Siiipti, Kai KartSixaZ^Vf ^^
Si Tip StarroTy avXXapjiavbptvoi avv np riav aKqrrrpiav Searrolovn
rbv Kararopka KarefBaXXov.
X ' AvayvwaB'kVTwv r'lvwv avvoSiKiav riav Siayoptvbvriav pq Seiv yivt
aBai rrork avvoSov o'lKovptviKrjv rrapeKTbg avpipiaviag tOiv Xoirrav
dyiiardrw-v rrarptdpxwv. Anteacta Syn. Nie. II. p. 518.
§ OiiK iaxe avvtp-ybv rbv rqviKavra rijg 'Pwpa'iiav lldnay—Kami
vopog 'eari raXg avv'^Soig- dXX' ovre avpippovoUvrag avrq roig Uarpi-
dpxag rqg iia, &c. Syn. 7. Act. 6. p. 725.

THE pope's SUPUEMACY. 293
did the Holy Spirit set up patriarchs in the world, that they
might suppress scandals arising in the Church of God :"* and
Photius is in the same Synod told, " that the judgment passed
against him was most equal and impartial, as proceeding not
from one but aU the four patriarchs."f
That a General Synod doth not need a Pope to call it, or
preside in it, appeareth by what the Synods of Pisa and
Constance define, for prorision in time of schisms. J
II. It inseparably doth belong to sovereigns in the general
assemblies of their states to preside, and moderate affairs ;
proposing what they judge fit to be consulted or debated ;
stopping what seemeth unfit to be moved ; keeping proceedings
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 pririlege therefore the Pope doth claim ; not allowing
any General CouncU to be legitimate, wherein he in person, or
by his legates, doth not preside and sway. " All Catholics
(says BeUarmine), teach this to be the Pontiff's proper office,
that either in person or by his legate he preside, and as chief
judge moderate aU."§
But for this prerogative no express grant from God, no an
cient canon of the Church, no certain custom can be produced.
Nor doth ancient practice favour the Pope's claim to such
a prerogative, it appearing that he did not exercise it in the
first General Synods.
St. Peter himself did not preside in the ¦ Apostolical Synod
at Jerusalem,|| where he was present ; but rather St. James,
as we before have shewed.
In aU the first Synods, convocated by emperors, they did
either themselves in person, or by honourable persons authorized
by thera, in effect preside, governing the proceedings.
In the Synod of Nice, Constantine was the chief manager,
* Aid TOVTO rdg rrarpiapxiKdg Kt^aXdg iv rip Koapip iBtro tS rrvtUpa
rb dyiov, 'iva rd iv ry 'EKKXqa'iq, rov Qtov dvafvoptva aKdvSaXa St'
airiSv dva^av'iZwvrai. Syn. 8. Act. 1. p. 930.
*' t ' ATrpoaiaTrbXqrrrog q Kp'iaig, wg ovk 'ti, ivbg povov Sipovov, d'KXd
Tiav reaadpwv HarpiapxiKiav yivopkvq. Act. 5. p. 945.
X Sess. 39. (p. 1109.)
^ Catholici omnes id munus proprium esse docent sumru Pontificis, ut
per se, vel per Legates praesideat, et tanquam supremus judex omnia mo
deretur. BeU. de Cone. 1. 19. [p. 24. vol. 2. Pragffl, 1721.]
II Acts XV.

294 A TKEATISE OF
director, and moderator 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 eridence
appear ; as we shall hereafter out of history declare.
In the Synod of Sardica (which in design was a General
Council, but in effect did not prove so, being dirided 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 prolocuto'r;
so the Synod itself doth imply : " AU we bishops (say they
in their Catholic epistle) meeting together, and especially the
most ancient Hosius, who for his age, and for his confession,
and for that he hath undergone so much pains, is worthy aU
reverence ;"f so Athanasius expressly doth caU him : "The
holy Synod (saith he), the prolocutor of which was the great
Hosius, presently sent to them ¦,"X &c. The canons of thei
Synod intimate the same,§ wherein he proposeth matters, and
asketh the pleasure of the Synod ; the sarae is confirmed by
the subscriptions of their General Epistles ; wherein he is set
before Pope Julius himself. (Hosius from Spain, JuUus of
Rome, by the Presbyters Archidamus and PhUoxenus.JI) In
this all ecclesiastical histories do agree ; none speaking of the
Pope's presiding there by his legates.
In the second General Synod at Constantinople the Pope
had plainly no stroke ; the oriental bishops alone did there
resolve on matters, being headed by their patriarchs (of
Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem), as Sozomen saith; "being
guided by Nectarius and St. Gregory Nazianzen," as the
Council of Chalcedon in its epistle to the Emperor doth aver.f
* npoE^i^oj; rbv Xoyoy roXg rrpokSpoig. Eus. 3. 13.
t Xldvrwv -qpiav avvtXBovrwv 'EmaKomav, Kai pdXiara rob eiyrjpo-
Tarov 'Oa'iov, rov Kai Sid tSv xpovov, Kai Sid Tijv bpoXoyiav, Kai Sii
rbv ToaovTOV Kaparov vrropeptvqKkvai, rrdaqg aiSovg d%iov rvyxdvov-
Tog, &c. Athan. Apol. 2. p. 761.
X EvBbg q dyia avvoSog, qg Trpo^yopog qv b ptyag"Oaiog, iypa\jitv
av-ToXg, &c. Athan. ad SoUt. p. 819.
§ 'AptXti"Oaiog, Kai rrpiaToytvqg, ot Tore vrrqpxov dpxovrtg riSv ani
Tqg Svatwg iv SapSiKy avvtXqXvBorwv — Soz. 12, 13. — Tiav iv Sop-
SiKrj avveXqXvBonav rrpiaTe-vaag. Theod. 2. 15. — 'Iiav piv'Oaiog e?^p-
Xtv rrjg yviapqg. — Syn. Chalc. ad Imp. Marc. p. 468.
II "Oaiog drrb Srraviag, 'lovXiog 'Piapqg Si ' ApxiSdpov, Kai i^iXoi'ivov
rrpta^vrkpwv, &c. apud Athan, p. 767.
IF Baron. Ann. 553. § 224.— 'HyoDj/ro, Soz. 7. 7.— Tiav Si JitKTtt-
piog avv Tpqyopiip rqv qytpoviav -qparo. Cone. Chalc. in Epist. ad
Imp. Marc (p. 469.)

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 295
In the third General Synod at Ephesus, CyrU 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 ofthe place where the Synod
is held, did bear a kind of presidency in all Synods ; so did
St. James bishop of Jerusalem in the first Synod, as St.
Chrysostom noteth; so did Protogenes at Sardica, and Nec
tarius at Constantinople, and Memnon in this of Ephesus.f
It is true, that according to the Acts of that Synod, and the
reports of divers historians, Pope Celestine (according to a new
poUtic derice of Popes) did authorize CyrU to represent his
person, and act as his proctor in those affairs, assigning to him
(as he saith) "jointly both the authority of his throne" (that
is, his right of voting) " and the order of his place" (the first
place in sitting) ; but it is not consequent thence, that CyrU
upon that sole account did preside in the Synod. He thereby
had the disposal of one so considerable suffrage, or a legal con
currence of the Pope vrith him in his actings; J 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 rirtue of the Uke substitution in the place of
others), but he thence could have no authoritative presidency,
for that the Pope himself could by no delegation impart,
haring himself no title thereto, warranted by any law or by any
precedent 5 that depended on the emperor's will, or on the
election of the Fathers, or on a tacit regard to personal emi
nence in comparison to others present. This distinction
Evagrins seemeth to intimate, when he saith, that the dirine
Cynl did " administer it, and the place of Celestine,"§ (where
a word seeraeth to have fallen ont), and Zonaras raore plainly
doth express ; saying that " Cyril pope of Alexandria did pre
side over the orthodox Fathers, and also did hold the place of
Celestine :" and Photius ; " Cyril did supply the seat, and the
person of Celestine." If any later historians do confound
* Prioris Ephesinse Synodi, cui sanctae memoriae CyrUlus Episcopus
tunc praesedit, P. Leo I, Ep. 47 '^KeijiaXij nav avvtiXeypkviav dyiw-
rariav 'EmaKorrwv KvpiXXog. Relat. Act. Eph. cap. 60.
t Digress.
X "SwafBe'iaqg aoi rqg avBtvr'iag rov -qptrkpov S-povov, Kai r-y qpt-
rkpij. TOV Torrov SiaSox-y. Celest. ad Cyril. Relat. cap. 16. — N. Yet the
Fathers in their Epistle to Pope Celestine do only take notice of Arcadius,
Projectus, aud PhiUppus supplying his place. Act. p. 353.
$ Kvp'iKXov TOV ^earreaiov Sikirovrog Kai rbv KtXearivov rorrov,
Evag. 1. 4.

296 A TEEATISE OF
these things, we are not obliged to comply vrith their ignorance
or mistake.*
Indeed, as to presidency there we may observe, that some
times it is attributed to Cyril alone, as being the first bishop
present, and bearing a great sway; sometimes to Pope Celestine,
as being in representation present, and being the first bishop
of the Church in order ; sometiraes to both Cyril and Celestine;
sometimes to Cyril and Memnon bishop of Ephesus, who as
being very active, and haring great influence on the proceed
ings, are styled the presidents and rulers of the Synod. The
which sheweth, that presidency was a lax thing, and no
pecuUarity in right or usage annexed to the Pope ; nor did
altogether depend on his grant or representation, to which
Meranon had no title.f
The Pope himself and his legates are divers times in the
Acts said awtlpevuv, " to sit together"! ^^^ the bishops ;
which considence doth not well comport vrith his sperial right
to presidency.
Yea, it is observable, that the Oriental bishops, which with
John of Antioch did oppose the Cyrillian party in that Synod,
did charge on Cyril, that "he (as if he lived in a time of
anarchy) did proceed to all irregularity ; and that, snatching
to hiraself the authority, which neither was given him by the
canons, nor by the emperor's sanctions, did rush on to all
kind of disorder, and unlawfulness ;" § whence it is erident,
* Upoiarap'tvov Tiav 'OpBoSoiojv Xlarkpwv rob iv dyioig KvpiXXov
Ila^ra 'AXtiavSptiag, irrkxovrog Si Kai rbv rorrov KeXtarivov. Zon.m
Syn. Eph. Can. 1. — Toii 'Piapqg KeXtarivov irrX-ijpov rqv KaBkSpav nai
rrpoawrrov. t HgriytXro b paKapiog Ilarqp qpiav KvpiXXog. Cone. Chalc. Act 4.
p. 302. — J^vvbSov KaBqyqrqg. Cler. Const, in Syn. Eph. p. 418. Cni
preefoit Cyrillus. Syn. Chalc. Act. 1. p. 173, — ^Rg qytpoveg ot ayiona-
Toi KeXtarivog Kai K-vpiXXog. Syn. Chalc. defin. in Act. 5. p. 338. et
Act. 4. p. 300. — The bishops of Isauria to the Emperor Leo say, that
Cyril was partaker with Pope Celestine, &c. — Dum B. Celestino incolumis
Ecclesia; Romanorum particeps. Part. 3. Syn. Chalc. p. 522. — Trjg avvo
Sov rrpotSpoi. Eph. Act. 4. p. 338. (p. 420. et 422.)— npot^O' rw
'EKKXqritg. Act. 5. p. 347. — 'H^Erepoi Trpdt^pot. Relat. Syn. p. 406,—
"Eiapxot rrjg avvoSov. Relat. p, 411,
X 'S.vvocog, y avvtSpevti Kai b rqg ptydXqg 'Piapqg opxitTTttrtoMf,
Relat. ad Imp. p. 422. — SvvtSpevadvTwv drrb rijg iarrtpag, &c. Act 2,
p. 322. — Tbv ' krroaroXiKbv 5u6vov avvtSptvovra -qpXv. -\ct. 4. p, 340,
§ Qg iv dfiaatXtvToig xaipoXg xwp£t Trpo^ rrdaav rrapavop'iav,—
Aprrdaag iavnp rqv avBtvriav rrjv pqrt rrapd riav Kavoviav airif
StSopkvqv, pqrt drrb riav vptrtpwv jtamapdrwv, bppd rrpbg rrdv tiCog
draiiag Kai rrapavopiag. Relat, ad Imper. Act, Eph, p. 380.

THE pope's supremacy. -'97
that in the judgment of those bishops, (among whom were
divers worthy and excellent persons*) the Pope had no right to
anv authoritative presidency.
This -word presidency indeed hath an ambiguity, apt to im
pose on those, who do not observe it ; for it may be taken for
a pririlege of precedence, or for authority to govern things ;
the first kind of presidence the Pope vrithout dispute, when
present at a Synod.f would have had among the bishops (as
being the " bishop of the first see," J as the sixth Synod caUeth
him ; and " the first of priests,"§ as Justinian calleth him)
and in his absence his legates might take up his chair (for m
General Synods eacli see had its chair assigned to it, according
to its order of dignity by custoni.) .\nd according to this
sense the patriarchs, and chief metropoUtans are adso often
(smgly or conjointiy) said to preside, as sitting in one of the
first diairs.
But the other kind of presidency was (as those bishops iu
their complaint against CyrU do imply, and ns we shall see iu
practice) disposed by the emperor, as he saw reason, although
vsuaUy it was conferred on him, who among those present,
in dignity did precede the rest : this is that authority, a'vOst-ria,
whi(i the Syrian bishops complained against Cyril for assuming
to himself, vrithout the emperor's warrant ; and whereof we
have a notable instance in the next General Svnod at Ephesus.
For, In the second Ephesine Synod, (which in design was a
General Smod. lawfully convened, for a pubUc cause of de
termining truth, and settling peace iu the Church : but which
by some miscarriages proved abortive 1 : although the Pope had
his legates there.f yet by the emperor's order Dioscorus bishop
of Alexandria did preside: "We (said Theodosius in his
epistie to him) do also commit to thy godUness the authority,*]
and the pre-eminency of aU things appertaiuiug to the Synod
¦ * The bishops of Syria being then the most learned in the world ; as
John of Antioti dotli imply, p. 377.
t npwroOpovof rijg 'EKKXqaiag. Syn. 6. p. 2S5.
X Ttiy Ts awBpbvtav airy per* ai'ri}c dyiitfrdrwv s'arpiapxwi'.
Ibid. p. 'H;.
§ Dpuros icpetui'. Justin. Cod. Tit. 1.
II Koi /aqv (wvqv) cai "lotiXios "Ettutico-oc: rdirov tXijiiwi' .\,-oi-ii!;.
roS Tqgrrpta^vr'epag'Potpqg 'Ejri<rtdirou. Evag. 1. 10.
S 'AX\d Kilt Tniv ti.WtiJr rrdvTwv nav dyqKbvTiay ry vvv avyaOpot-
Zopivg avi'oSip ri/v ai'Otvriav. K.ii ni irp<i*r«ia ry a^ ^e, crtpsi^i ~ap€-
\op(y. Syn. Chalc. AlI, 1. p 59.

298 A TRE.4.TISE OP
now asserabled ;" and in the Synod of Chalcedon it is said
of him, that " he had received the authority of all affairs, and
of judgment ;"* and Pope Leo I. in his epistle to the em-
peror saith, that Dioscorus did "challenge to himself the
principal place ;"f (insinuating a complaint, that Dioscorus
should be preferred before him, althongh not openly contesting
his right.)
The emperor had indeed some reason not to commit the
presidency to Pope Leo, because he was looked upon as pre
judiced in the cause, having declared in favour of Flarianus,
against Eutyches ; whence Eutyches declined his legate's in
teresting in the judgment of his cause, saying, " they were
suspected to him, because they were entertained by Flarianus
with great regard."J And Dioscorus, being bishop of the
next see, was taken for raore indifferent, and othervrise a person
(however afterward it proved) of rauch integrity and modera
tion : " He did (saith the eraperor) shine, by the grace of God,
both in honesty of Ufe, and orthodoxy of faith ;"§ and Theo
doret himself, before those differences arose, doth say of him,
that he was by common fame " reported a raan adorned with
many other kinds of rirtue, and that especially he was cele
brated for his moderation of mind." ||
It is true, that the legates of Pope Leo did take in dudgeon
this preferment of Dioscorus ; and (if we may give credence to
Liberatus) "would not sit down in the Synod, because the
prsesession was not given to their holy see ;"^ and afterwards
in the Synod of Chalcedon the Pope's legate Paschasinus (to
gether vrith other bishops) did complain** that Dioscorus was
* Tijv i^ovaiav rrdvrwv eiXqipiag rrpaypdrwv Kai rijg Kpiatiag, Syn,
Chalc. Act. p. 160.
t ^Sg ii,apxog KaBtiar-qKti AioOKopog. Evag. 1. 10. — Si is qui sibi
locum principalem vindicabat, Sacerdotalem moderationem custodire vo-
luisset. Leo I. Ep. 25, 26, &c.
X '"irrorrroipoi ytyovaai, &c. Syn. Chalc. Act. 1. p. 80.
$ T^ ay dytiaavvg iKXaprrovay Sid T-qv rov Qtov %aptv 'trrire ry
rob /3iou atpvoTqn, Kai T-y SpBordry Triarti. Theod. Ep. ad Diosc. in
Syn. Chalc. Act. 1. p. 59.
II HoXXoXg piv Kai dXXoig t'iStaiv dptTrjg KoaptXaBai rqv a-fiv dyva-
avvqv aKovoptv — oiiK rJKiara Si arravreg dSovai rb roil ippovtiparog
pkrpiov. Theod. Ep. 60.
t Ecclesiae Romanae Diaconi, vices habentes P. Leonis assidere non passi
sunt, ed qubd non data fuerit praesessio sanctae sedi eorum. Liber cap. 12.
** IlaaxaaXvog tlrrtv — -qSt qptXg Otov S'tXovTog Kvpiov rJ»
'Ai'a?-6\ioj' rrpiarov ixoptv' ovroi rrk/irr-ov iraiav rbv paKopiov i\av-
lavov. Syn. Chalc. Act, 1, p, 62.

THE pope's supremacy. 299
preferred before the bishop of Constantinople ; but notwith
standing those ineffectual mutinies, the emperor's vrill did
take place, and according thereto Dioscorus had (although he
did not use it so vrisely and justly as he should) the chief
mtmagery of things.
It is to be observed, that to other chief bishops the presi
dency in that Synod is also ascribed, by virtue of the emperor's
appointment : " Let the most reverend bishops (say the im
perial commissaries in the Synod of Chalcedon), to whom the
authoritative management of affairs was by the royal sove
reignty granted, speak why the epistle of the most holy archbishop
Leo was not read :"* and, " You (say they again) to whom the
povrer of judging was given ;"f and of Dioscorus, Juvenalis
(bishop of Jerusalem), Thalassius (of Csesarea), Eusebius (of
Ancyra), Eustathius (of Beristus), BasUius (of Seleucia), it is
by the same commissioners said that they " had received the
authority, and did govern the Synod which was then ;"J and
Elpidius, the emperor's agent in the Ephesine Synod itself did
expressly style them presidents ; and Pope Leo himself calleth
them "presidents and primates ofthe Synod."§
Whence it appeareth, that at that time, according to com
mon opinion and practice, authoritative presidency was not
affixed to the Soman chair.
In the Synod of Chalcedon Pope Leo did indeed assume to
himself a kind of presidency by his legates ;|| and no wonder
that a man of a stout and ardent spirit (impregnated with
high conceits of his see, and resolved vrith all his might to ad
vance its interests, as his legates themselves did in effect declare
to the world) should do so ;^ having so favourable a time, by
the misbehariour of Dioscorus and his adherents ; against
whom the clergy of Constantinople, and other Fathers of the
* Ol tiXaPkaTaroi 'En'iaKorroi, dig -q avBevria Tore nav rrparTope-
viav irapd rqg paaiXiKrjg iS'tSoro Kopvprig, Xtykrwaav. — Syn. Chalc.
Act. 1. p. 65.
t "tptXg.olg q iiovaia tov SmdZtiv iSkSoro. Ibid. p. 77.
X Toig iiovaiav tCXqiporag, Kai iidpxovrag rqg rort avvoSov. — Act. 2.
p. 202. et Act. 4. p. 288. (Evag. 2. 4. iKapxoi.) — Koivqg drrdvrwv 0w.
vijg avvBeptvqg re Kai ev^qpqadaqg rijv vpiav nav rrpoeSptvadvrwv
i|i^0ov. — Ibid. p. 70. — Siquidem pend omnes, qui in consensum Praesi-
dentium aut traducti fuerant, aut coacti. Leo. Ep. 51.
§ Ibi Primates Synodi uec resistentibus, &c. P. Leo I. Ep.
II In his fratribus — me Synodo vestrae iraternitas existimet prssidcre.
P. Leo I. Ep. 47.
II Qv ai piv tit; KtfaXr] ptXiSv qytpovtvtg, iv roXg rqv aqv rdiiv
irr'txovai. Syn. Chalc. Epist. ad Leon. p. 473.

300 A TREATISE OF
Synod being incensed were ready to comply vrith Leo (who
had been the champion and patron of their cause) in allowing
him extraordinary respect, and whatever advantages he could
pretend to.
Yet in effect the eraperor by his coramissioners did preside
there ; they propounding and allowing raatters to be discussed;
moderating debates by their interlocution and driring them to
an issue, maintaining order and quiet in proceedings ; perform
ing those things, which the Pope's legates at Trent, or other
where in the height of his power did undertake.*
To them supplicatory addresses were made for succour and
redress by persons needing it ; as for instance, " command
(said Eusebius of Dorylseura), that my supplications may be
read."f Of them leave is requested for tirae to deUberate : " Com
mand (saith Atticus in behalf of other bishops) that respite
be given, so that vrithin a few days, with a calm mind and un
disturbed reason, those things may be formed which shall be
pleasing to God and the holy Fathers. "J
Accordingly, they order the tirae for consultation : " Let
(said 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 AnatoUus, and deliberate in common about
the faith, that the doubtful may be instructed." §
They were acknowledged judges, and had thanks given them
for the issue by persons concerned : " I (said Eunomius
bishop of Nicomedia) do thank your honour for yonr right
judgment."! ^^^ ™ ^^^ cause between Stephanus and Bas-
sianus concerning their title to the bishopric of Ephesus ;
they having declared their sense, " the holy Synod cried.
This is right judgment; Christ hath decided the case, (}od
judgeth by you."^ And in the result, upon their declaring
* Act. 1. p. 50. et p. 202. Act. 2. p. 211. 1
t KtXevaare rdg Stqatig rdg ipdg dvayviaaBqvai, Act. 1. p. 50.
X KtXtvaart ivSoBrjvai qpXv, laare ivrbg bXiywv qpepiHv OKVpaVTif
Siavoig. Kai drapdxip Xoytapip rd np Qeip Sqkovvto Kai roig aycotfi
rraTpdai rvrrwBrjvai. Act. 1. p. 219.
§ 'YrrtTtBqaerai q aKpoaaig 'iwg qptpiav rrkvTt, ware iv Tip peralv
avvtXBtXv rqv vptrtpav dyiiaavvqv eig to tov dyiiararov 'ApxifJriirM-
rrov 'AvaroXiov, Kai Koiviag rrtpi rrjg rriartiag (iovXtvaaaBai, ivaoiap-
^i^dXXovTtg SiSaxBiaai. Act. 4. p. 289.
II Evxapianp ry SiKaioKpiaiq. rqg ptyaXoTrptrrtiag vpiav. Act. Xo,
P-42_0.  , , , . ,r
IT 'H ayia avvoSog EJiorjaEV, avTij SiKaia KpiaiQ, o Xpiffroc tO'-
Kaat, Ty v7ro9i<T€i, 6 Geoff ^t' vfxatv dtKat^. Act. 12. p. 409.

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 301
their opinion : " the whole Synod exclaimed, this is a right
judgment, this is a pious order."*
¦When the bishops, transported with eagerness and passion
did tumultuously clamour, they gravely did check them, say
ing, " these vulgar exclamations neither become bishops, nor
shidl advantage the parties. "f
In the great contest about the pririleges of the Constantino-
poUtan see, they did arbitrate and decide the matter, even
against the sense and endeavour of the Pope'sf legates ; the
whole Synod concurring vrith 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
beheld."! The Pope's legates themselves did avow this authority in
them ; for " if (said Paschasinus, in the case of the Egyptian
bishops) your anthority doth coraraand, and you enjoin that
somewhat of humanity be granted to them," || &c.
And in another case, " If (said the bishops, supplying the
place of the apostoUcal see,) your honours do coramand, we
have an information to suggest "^
Neither is the presidency of these Roman legates expressed
in the Conciliar Acts ; but they are barely said avveXdsiv** (to
concur) and avvehpeieivf-f' to sit together) with the other
Fathers ; smd accordingly although they sometiraes talked high,
yet it is not observable that they did rauch there ; their pre
sidency was nothing like that at Trent, and in other like Papal
Synods. It 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 they who directed the nota
ries were not popish. In effect the emperor was president,
• Udaa q dyia avvoSog i^oqatv, a'vrq SiKaia Kpiaig, ovrog tvae^qg
Tvrrog. Ib. p. 414.
t At hpoqaeig ai SqporiKai ovre 'EmaKorroig rrptrrovaiv, ovre rd
p'tpq wipeX-liaovaiv. Act. 1. p. 55.
X Kard avvoSiKqv eKvpiaaapev i//i;0ov. Syn. Chalc. ad Leon. Ep.
p. 475.
§ Ot evXa^'taTaroi 'ErriaKorroi i^oqaav, avrq SiKaia ^riipog, ravra
rravrtg Xkyoptv, ravra rrdaiv dpkaKti, rrdvra Stovrwg iTvmaBq, rd
TvrrioBtvTa KpaTtira. Act. 16. p. 464.
II Ei rrpoaTarrti q vptr'tpa iiovaia, Kai KtXt-vtrt ri rrort avroXg
rrapaaxtaBirivai tjuXavBpiarriag ixbptvov. — Act. 4. p. 315.
H Ot euXa/Slffrarot'ETritTKO^rot irrkaxovregrbv rorrov tov' ArroaroXiKov
Bpovov iirrov ti irpoardrrti q vptrkpa peyaXtioTqg, ixopev SiSaa-
KoXiav irTol3aXeXv. Act. 16. p. 451.
" Act. 5, 7, 8, (p. 366.) 9, 11, 13, 14. tt Act. 3. p. (230.)

302 A TREATISE OF
though not as a judge of spiritual matters, yet as an orderer
of the ConciUar transactions ; as the Synod doth report it to
Leo, "the faithful emperors (said they) did preside, (or
govern it) for good order sake."*
In the fifth General Synod, Pope Vigilius indeed was moved
to be present, and (in his way) to preside ; but he out of
state or policy declined it ; wherefore the patriarch of Con
stantinople was the ecclesiastical president, as in the beginning
of every collation doth appear ; whence clearly we may infer
that the Pope's presidency is no wise necessary to the bemg
of a General Council.f
In the sixth General Synod the emperor in each Act is ex
pressly said to preside, in person or by his deputies, althongh
Pope Agatho had his legates there. J
In the Synod of Constance soraetiraes the cardinal of Cam-
bray, sometiraes of Hostia did preside (by order of the Synod
itself) and soraetimes the king of the Romans did supply
that place ; so Uttle essential was the Pope's presidency to a
Council deeraed even then, when Papal authority had mounted
to so high a pitch. §
Nor is there good reason why the Pope should have this
pririlege, or why this prerogative should be afiixed to any
one see ; so that (if there be cause ; as if the Pope be unfit, or
less fit ; if princes or the Church cannot confide in him ; if
he be suspected of prejudice or partiality ; if he be party in
causes or controversies to be decided ; if he do himself need
correction ) princes may not assign, or the Church with aUow
ance of princes raay not choose any other president, more
proper in their judgraent for that charge ; in such cases the
public welfare of Church and State is to be regarded.
Were an erroneous Pope (as Vigilius or Honorius) fit to
govern a Council, gathered to consult about defining truth in
the matter of their error ?
Were a lewd Pope (as Alexander VI., John XII., Paul
III., innuraerable such, scandalously ricious) worthy to pre-
* Baa-iXttt; Se maroi rrpbg evKoapiav 'tiqpxoi'- Relat. Syu. ad Leon.
p. 473.
t Ideb petimus Praesidente nobis vestra beatitudine, sub tranquillitate,
et mansuetudine sacerdotali, Sanctis propositis Evangeliis, eommuni trac
tatu, &c. Coll. 1 p. 212. (et in Constit. Vigil.)
X UpoKaBqpkvovTOV tvat^tardrov ^aaiXkwg Kwvaravr'ivov, &c.
§ Dominus Rom. Rex indutus vestibus Regalibus reoessit de Sede sua
solita, et transivit ad aliam Sedem positam in fronte altaris, tanquam
Praesidens pro tunc in Concilio. Syn. Const. Sess, 14. (p. 1044.)

THE pope's supremacy. 303
side in a Synod convocated to prescribe strict laws of refor
mation ?
Were a furious, pugnacious Pope (as Julius II. a.d. 1510.)
apt to moderate an assembly drawn together for settlement of
peace? Were a Pope engaged in schism (as many have been) a
proper moderator of a CouncU designed to suppress schisra ?
Were a Gregory VII., or an Innocent IV., or a Boniface
VIII., an aUowable manager any where of controversies about
tbe Papal authority ?
Were now indeed any Pope fit to preside in any Conncil
wherein the reformation of the Church is concerned, it being
notorious that Popes as such do most need reformation, that
they are the great obstructors of it, that all Christendom
hath a long time a controversy vrith them for their detaining
it in bondage ?
In this and many other cases we may reject their presidency,
as implying iniquity, according to the rule of an old Pope :
" I would know of thera where they would have that judgment
they pretend, examined, what by themselves, that the sarae
may be adversaries, vritnesses, and judges ? to such judgraent
as this even huraan affairs are not to be trusted, much Ises the
integrity ofthe Dirine law."*
It is not reasonable that any person should have such a pre
rogative which would be an engine of mischief : for thereby
(bearing sway in general assemblies of bishops) he would be
enabled and irresistibly tempted to domineer over the world ;
to abuse princes and disturb states ; to oppress and enslave the
Church ; to obstruct all reformation ; to enact laws ;f to pro
mote and establish errors serriceable to his interests : the
which effects of such power exercised by him in the Synod of
Trent, and in divers other of the later General Synods, ex
perience hath declared.
III. If the Pope were sovereign of the Church, the legisla
tive power wholly or in part would belong to hira ; so far at
least, that no Synod or ecclesiastical consistory could vrithout
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
* Qusero tamen ab his, judicium quod praetendunt, ubinam possit
agitari, an apud ipsos, ut iidem sint iuimici, et testes, et judices ? Sed tali
judicio nee humana debent committi negotia, nedum divinae legis inte-
gritas. P. Gel. Ep, 4. t Nie. IL Lugd. Lat. IV. et V.

304 A TREATISE OP
against his will ; this is a raost essential ingredient of sove
reignty ; and is therefore clairaed by the Pope, who long hath
pretended that no decrees of Synods are valid vrithout his con
sent and confirraation.
" But the decrees raade by the holy Popes of the chief see
of the Roraan Church, by whose authority and sanction all
Synods and holy Councils are strengthened and established,
why do you say, that you do not receive and observe them?"*
" Lastly, as you know nothing is accounted vaUd or to be
received in universal Councils, but what the see of St. Peter
has approved : so on the other side whatever she alone has
rejected, that only is rejected. "f
" We never read of any Synod that was valid; unless it were
confirmed by the apostolic authority."!
" We trust no true Christian is 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 ap
proved, than the prime see which by its authoritv confirms
every Synod, and by continued moderating preserves them
according to its principality," &c.§
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,
divers things against his pleasure.
What particular or formal confirmation did St. Peter yield
to the assembly at Jerusalem ?
That in some of the first General Synods he was not appre-
• Decretalia autem, quae a Sanctis Pontificibus primae Sedis Romans
Ecclesiae sunt instituta, cujus auctoritate atque sanctione omnes Synodi,
et sancta Concilia roborantur, et stabilitatem sumunt, cur vos non habere,
vel observare dicitis .' Papa Nie. I. Ep. 6. (ad Photium,)
t Denique ut in universalibus Conciliis quid ratum vel quid prorsus
acceptum, nisi quod Sedes B, Petri probavit (ut ipsiscitis) habetur; sicut
e contrario quod ipsa sola reprobavit, hoc solummodo consistat -hactenus
reprobatum, P. Nich. I. Ep. 7.
{ Nulla' unquam Synodus rata legatur, quae Apostolick, auctoritate non
fuerit fulta. P. Pelag. II. Ep. 8. (Dist. 17.)
^ Confidimus qubd nullus jam veraciter Christianus ignoret uniuscujus
que Synodi constitutum, quod universalis Ecclesiae probavit assensus, non
aliquam magis exequi Sedem prae caeteris oportere, quam primam ; quae et
unamquamque Synodum sua auctoritate confirmat, et continual^ modera-
tione custoifit, pro suo scilicet principatu, &c. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 13. (ad
Episc, Dard.) vid. p. 647. tract, de Anath,
II God hath promised to bless parricular Synods. Matth. xviii. 19.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 305
heuded to have any negative voice, is by the very tenor and
air of things, or by the Uttle regard expressed toward him
sufSciently clear. There is not in the Synodical epistle of
Nice or of Sardica, any mention of his confirmation.
Interpretatively all those decrees may be supposed to pass
vrithout 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 vril-
lingly to have consented in derogation to them.
Wherefore the Nicene canons establishing ecclesiastical ad
ministrations vrithout regard to him, and in authority equalling
other metropolitans vrith him, may be supposed to pass without
his consent.
The canons of the second General Council, and of all others
confirming those;* as also the canons of all Synods which
advanced the see of Constantinople, his rival for authority
above its former state, first to proximity in order, then to an
equality of pririleges with the see of Rome, raay, as plainly
contrary to his interest and spirit, be supposed to pass without
his consent : and so divers Popes have afiSrraed ; 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 I. saith : "That the
Roman Church did not admit thera,"f wherein it plainly dis
corded vrith the catholic Chnrch, which with all reverence did
receive and hold them ; and in despite to the canon of that
Synod, advancing the royal city to that eminency. Pope Ge
lasius 1. would not adrait it for so rauch as a raetropolitan see :J
0 proud insolency, O contentious frowardness, O rebellious
contumacy against the cathoUc Church and its peace 1 (Such
was the humour of that see, to allow nothing which did not
suit vrith the interests of its ambition.)
* Persuasioni tuae in nullo penitus suffragatur, quorundam episcoporum
ante 60, ut jactas, annos, nunquamque k praedecessoribus tuis ad Aposto
Ucae Sedis transmissa notitiam. — Leo. Epist. 53. (ad Anat.) Cone. Con
stant. Can. 3.— Concil. Chalc. Can. 9, 17, 28. Syn. Trull. Can. 36.
t Romana autem Ecclesia eosdem Canones vel gesta Synodi illius hac
tenus uon habet, nee accipit ; in hoc autem eandem Synodum accepit quod
est per eam contra Macodonium definitum. P. Greg. M. Ep. 6. 31.
t The same Pope Leo I. doth affirm, Ep. 53. — Ejus civitatis quae non
aolim inter Sedes numeratur, sed nee inter Metropolitanorum jura cen-
setur, &c. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 13. (ad Episc. Dard,)
VOL. I X

306 A TREATISE OF
But farther, divers Synodical decrees did pass expressly
against the Pope's raind and will : I pass over those at Tyre,
at Antioch, at Ariminum, at Constantinople, in divers places
of the East (the which do yet evince that coraraonly there was
no such opinion entertained of this pririlege belongmg to the
Pope), and shall instance only in General Synods.
In the Synod of Chalcedon equal privileges were assigned to
the bishop of Constantinople, as the bishop of Rome had : this
vrith a general concurrence was decreed and subscribed ; al
though the Pope's legates did earnestly resist, clamour, and
protest against it ; the imperial coramissioners, and all the
bishops not understanding, or not allovring the Pope's negative
voice.* And whereas Pope Leo (moved with a jealousy, that he who
thus had obtained an equal rank with him, should aspire to
get above him)f did fiercely dispute, exclaira, inveigh, menace
against this order, striving to defeat it, pretending to annul it,
labouring to depress the bishop of Constantinople from that
degree, which both himself and his legates in the Synod had
acknowledged due to hira : in which endeavour divers of his
successors did iraitate him ; Eusebius, bishop of Dorylseum
said : " I have wUUngly subscribed, because I have read this
canon to the most holy Pope of Rome, the clergy of Constan
tinople being present, and he received it. "J
Yet could not he or they accomplish their design : tbe vene
ration of that Synod and consent of Christendom overbearing
their opposition ; the bishop of Constantinople sitting in all
the succeeding General Synods in the second place without any
contrast ; so that at length Popes were fain to acquiesce in the
bishop of Constantinople's possession of the second place in
dignity among the patriarchs.
* 'Iffa rrptafitXa. Hdvra q avvoSog tKvpiaat. (in fine Actorum,
p. 464.) Inde enim fratres nostri, ab Apostolica Sede directi, qui rice
mea Synodo prsesidebant, probabiliter atque constauter illicitis ausibus
obstiterunt, aperte reclamantes, &c. Leo I. Ep. 53, 54. — 01 evXajHara-
Toi 'ExttTKOTroi ijioqaav, ovSt'ig -qvayKdaBq. (Act. 16. p. 469. against
P. Leo's assertion, that the consent was extorted.) To k iroXXoii Kparij
aav iBog. — /card avvoSiKqv 'tKvpiaaaptv -ipqijiov, say the Fathers to Pope
Leo. (p. 475.) By a Synodical vote we have confirmed this ancient
custom. , ^ _ t Ep. 53, 54, 55, 61, 62.
X Eva'tjSiog 'Err'iaKorrog AopvXa'iov tlrrtv tKiav vrrkypaij/a' irrtilav
Kai rbv Kavova tovtov np dyiwrdnp Hdrrif iv 'Piapy iyia dvkyvuiv,
rrapovrwv KXqpiKiav KiavaTavnvovrroXtwg, Kai drrtSkiaro avrov. Syn.
Chalc. Act. 16. (p. 462.) supra.

THE pope's supremacy. 307
In the fifth General Synod Pope Vigilius did make a con
stitution, in most express terras prohibiting the conderanation
of the three chapters (as they are called), and the anathemati
zation of persons deceased in peace of the Church : " We dare
not ourselves," says he, " condemn Theodorus, neither do we
yield to have him condemned by any other ;" and in the sarae
constitution he orders and decrees, "That nothing be said or
done by any to the injury or discredit of Theodoret, bishop of
Cyrus, a man most approved in the Synod of Chalcedon ; and
the same," says he, " have the decrees of the apostolical see
determined, that no man pass a new judgment upon persons
dead, but leave them as death found them. Lastly, hj that
constitution he specially provides that (as he had before said),
nothing might be derogated frora persons dying in the peace
and communion ofthe universal Church, by his condemning that
perverse opinion."*
Yet did the Synod (in smart terms reflecting on the Pope)
and giring hira the Ue, not regarding his opinion or authority,
decree, that persons deceased were liable to be anatheraatized ;
they did anathematize Theodorus, they did expressly conderan
each of the chapters ;f they threatened deposition or ex
communication on whoever should oppose their constitu-
* Eum (Theodorum) nostra non audemu's damnare sententia, sed nee ab
alio quopiam condemnari concedimus. Vig. Const, p. 186. Statuimus
atque decemimus nihil in injuriam atque obtrectationem probatissimi iu
Chalcedonensi Synodo viri, hoc est Theodoreti Episcopi Cyri, sub taxa-
tione nominis ejus k quoquam fieri vel proferri. Ibid. Idemque regulari-
ter Apostolicse Sedis definiunt constituta, nuUi licere noviter aliquid de
mortuorum judicare personis ; sed in hoc relinqui, in quo unumquemque
supremus dies invenit. — Hac praesentis constitiitionis dispositione quam
maxime providemus, ne (sicut supra diximus) personis, quae in pace et
communione universalis ecclesiae quieverunt, sub hac damnati a nobis per-
versi dogmatis occasione aliquid derogetur. Ibid.
t Quoniam autem post haec omnia impietatis illius defensoris injuriis
contra creatorem suum dictis gloriantes dicebant non oportere eum post
mortem anathematizare — qui haec dicunt nullam curam Dei judicatorum
faciunt,nec Apostolicarum pronunciationum, nee patemarum traditionum.
Coll. 8. p. 289. Condemnamus autem et anathematizamus una cum om
nibus aliis hereticis et Theodorum. Coll. 8. p. 291. Quod dicitur a
quibusdam qu6d in commnnicatione et pace, defiinctus est Theodorus,
mendacium est, et calumnia magis adversus ecclesiam. Coll. 5. p. 250. —
Si quis conatus fuerit contra haec quse pid disposuimus, vel tradere, vel
docere, vel scribere, siquidem Episcopus vel Clericus sit, iste tanquam
aliena k Sacerdotibus et statu ecclesiastico faciens, denudabitur Episcopatu
vel Clericatu ! si autem Monachus vel Laicus sit, anathematizabitnr. Coll.
8. (p. 293.) X 2

308 A TREATISE OF
tions ;* they anathematize whoever doth not anathematize
Theodorus. But Pope VigiUus did refuse to approve their doctrine and
sentence ;f and therefore (which was the case of many other
bishops, as Baronius himself doth confess and argue)J was
driven into banishment ; wherein he did expire.
Yet posterity hath embraced this Synod as a legitimate and
valid General Synod; and the Popes following did profess the
highest reverence thereto, equally with the preceding General
Synods : so little necessary is the Pope's consent or con
currence to the validity of Synodical definitions. §
Upon this Baronius hath an admirable refiection : " Here
stay (saith he) 0 reader, and consider the matter attently (Ay,
do so I 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 cecumenical Synod,
when as afterward the Pope's will did come in, that it
should obtam such a title. "|1
So in the opinion of this doctor, the Pope can easily change
the nature of things, and make that become a General Synod,
which once was none ; yea which, as it was held, did not
deserve the name of any Synod at all. O the virtue of Papal
magic ! or rather, O the irapudence of Papal advocates !^
The canons of the sixth General Council, exhibited by the
Trullane (or Quinisext) Synod** clearly and expressly do con
deran several doctrines and practices of Rorae ; I ask whether
the Pope did confirm them ? they vriU to be sure, as they are
concerned to do, answer No : and indeed Pope Sergius, as
* Si quis defendit— et non anathematizat eum — anathema sit. Ibid.
t Contra ipsius (Pontificis Rom.) decreta ab ea (Synodo) pariter senten
tia dicta. Baron. Ann. 553. ^ 219. Non consentientes depositi m exilium
missi sunt. Lib. cap. 24.
X Baron. Ann. 553. § 223.
§ Greg. Ep. 1. 24. Quintam quoque Synodum pariter veneror, &c.
1. 24.— Pelag. II. Ep.— Agatho. Syn. 6. Act. 4.— Leo. Syn. 6. Act. 18.
¦ — Hadrian, ad Nectar.
II Hie siste Lector, atque rem attente considera; non esse hoc novum,
ut aliqua Synodus, cui uec per Legates ipse Pontifex interfherit, sed adver-
satus fuerit, titulum tamen obtinuerit cecumenicEe ; cum postea ut hujns-
modi titulum obtineret, Romani Pontificis voluntas aecessit, &c. Baron,
Ann. 553. §224.
f Si ad numeros omnes, &c. Plene consenties ipsam non oecumenicie
tantum, sed nee privatie Synodi mereri nomen. Id. Ann. 553. § 219.
*• Can. 2, 7, 13, 30, 55, 58, 67.

THE pope's supremacy. 309
Anastasius in his life reporteth, did refuse them;* yet did they
pass for legitimate in the whole Church ; for in their General
Synod (the second Nicene) without contradiction, one of them
is alleged (out of the very original paper, wherein the Fathers
had subscribed) as a canon of the holy General sixth Synod ;f
and avowed for such by the patriarch Tarasius, J both in way
of argument of defence and of profession in his synodical
epistle to the patriarchs ; (where he saith, that " together
vrith the divine doctrines of the sixth Synod he doth also
embrace the canons enacted by it;")§ of which epistle Pope
Adrian in his answer thereto doth recite a part containing those
words, and applaud it for orthodox ;|| signifying no offence at
his embracing the Trullane canons. And all those 102 canons
are again avowed by the Synod in their Antithesis to the Synod
of Constantinople. In fine, if we believe Anastasius, Pope
John VII.^ did " being timorous out of human frailty, direct
these canons, vrithout amendment, by two metropolites, to the
emperor,"** that is he did admit them so as they stand.
But it may be instanced that divers Synods have asked the
Pope's consent for ratification of their decrees and acts.
So the Fathers ofthe second General S3mod, haring in an
epistle to Pope Damasus and the Western bishops, declared
what constitutions they had raade, in the close speak thus —
" In which things, being legally and canonically settled by
us, we do exhort your reverence to acquiesce, out of spiritual
charity and fear of the Lord."f f
So the Synod of Chalcedon did, with much respect, ask
from Pope Leo the confirmation of its sanctions. " That you
may know how that we have done nothing for favour or out of
spite, but as guided by the dirine direction, we have made
* In quibus diversa tapitula Romanae Ecclesiae contraria scripta ine-
rant. Anast. in Vit. Job. VII.
t Kaviav Tqg dy'iag Kai oiKovptviKqg 'sKrqg avvoSov. Syn. Nie. II.
Act. 4. (631.)
X UpiaroTvrrog xdprqg iariv, iv ip vrrkypa-^av ot rrarkpeg. Ibid.
§ Tqg Si airrjg dyiag 'eKrqg avvoSov, ptrd rrdvrwv Tibv iKBkapwg
Kai BeiiaSwg iKpiavqBivrwv Soypdrwv rrap' avrrjg, Kai roig iKSoBivrag
Kavovag drrockxopai. Act. 3. p. 592.
II Tavry ry papTvp'iq. rqg bpBoSo^ov rriartwg, &c. ib. (p. 363.)
ir Act 6. p. 732. (Dist. 16. cap. 5, &c.)
** Sed hie humani fragilitate timidus hos nequaquam tomos emendans
per Buprafatos Metropolitas direxit ad Principem. Anast. in Vit. Job. VII.
tt Olg wg iv^kapwg Kai Kavovixiag rrap' qpXv KtKparqKbai Kai rqv vpt
Ttpav avyxaipeiv rrapaKaXovpev evXajStiav, rqg rrvtvpaTiKqg peai-
Tivovaqg dydrrqg, Kai rob KvpiaKov ^o^ov, &c. Theod. 5. 9.

310 A TREATISE OF
known to you the force of all that has been done, for yonr con
currence and for the confirmation and approbation of the
things done."*
Of the fifth Synod Pope Leo II. saith, " that he agrees to
what was determined in it, and confirms it vrith the authority
of the blessed St. Peter."f
To these allegations we reply, that it was indeed the manner
of all Synods, (for notification of things, and promulgation of
their orders ; for demonstration and maintenance of concord,
for adding weight and authority t6 their determinations, for
engaging all bishops ' to a willing compliance in obserring
them, for attestation to the common interest of all bishops in
the Christian truth, and in the governance and edification of
the Church) haring fraraed decrees concerning the public state,
to demand in fairest terms the consent to them of all cathohc
bishops, who were absent from thera, to be attested by theu-
subscription. So did Constantine recoraraend the Nicene decrees to all
bishops, undertaking that they would assent to them.J
So (more expressly) the Synod of Sardica, in their epistle to
all bishops of the catholic Church : " Do you also, our
brethren and fellow ministers, the more use diUgence, as bemg
present in spirit with our Synod, to yield consent by your
subscription, that concord may be preserved everywhere by all
the fellow-rainisters." §
So did Pope Liberius request of the Eraperor Constantius,
" that the faith delivered at Nice might be confirmed by the
subscription of all bishops." ||
* "Iva Si yviare tag ovSiv rrpbg xdpiv, q rrpbg drrexBeiav rrtrroiqKapty,
dXX' lag Btiip KvfStpvwptvoi rrvtvpan, rrdaav vpXv ribv rrtrrpaypkvitiv
rqv Svvapiv iyvwpiaaptv tig avaraaiv qiterkpav, Kai riav mrrpay-
pkvwv ^t^a'iwa'iv Tt Kai avyKardBtaiv. Syn. Chalc. ad P. Leon, I,
p. 476.
t ToXg rrap' avrrjg bpiaBtXai avvaivtX, Kai r-y avBtvr'iq, rov paKopiov
U'erpov fit^awX. P. Leo II. Ep. (p, 306.)
X 'Aapeviag StxtaBe rqv rov Qtob xaptv Kai Bt'iav lag dXqBiag ivTO-
Xqv. — de Vit. Const. 3. 20. Kot avrbg Si r-y vptrkpf dyx"""? ''P^""
vrreaxbpqv. Ibid. 3. 19.
^ ^rrovSaaart Si juaWoi/ Bat vptXg, dSeXipoi Kai avXXeiTovpyoi, ii)£
Tip rrvevpan avvbvreg r-y avvbSip qpiav avvemipqfiZeaBat Si' irroypa-
iprig vptrkpag, vrrip rov rrapd rrdvrwv riav rravraxov av'XXeiTOVpyOiv
rqv bpoipwviav SiaaiaZtaBai. Syn. Sard. Epist. apud Athan. in Apol.
2. p. 766.
II 'EZqrti Si rijv piv iv NtKai'^ rrapaSoBtXaav rrianv vnoypa^aK
TWV rrdvTwv 'EmaKorrwv KparvvtaBai. Soz. 4. 11.

311
So did Athanasius " procure a Synod at Alexandria to con
firm the decrees at Sardica, and in Palestine concerning hira."*
So the Macedonian bishops are said to have authorized their
agents to ratify the faith of consubstantiality.f
Many such instances occur in story, by which it may appear,
that the decrees of Synods concerning faith, or concerning any
matters of common interest were presented to all bishops, and
their consent requested or required ; because, say the Roraan
clergy in St. Cyprian, " a decree cannot be firra which has not
the consent of raany." J
Whence it is no wonder, if any Synods did thus proceed
toward so eminent a bishop as was he of Rome, that they
shoidd endeavour to give him satisfaction ; that they should
desire to receive satisfaction from him of his conspiring vrith
them in faith, of his vrilUngness to coraply in observing good
rules of discipline ; that (as every vote had force, so) the
suffrage of one in so great dignity and reputation might adjoin
some regard to their judgment.^
The Pope's confirmation of Synods, what was it in effect, but
a declaration of his approbation and assent, the which did
confirm by addition of suffrage ; as those who were present by
their vote, || and those who were absent by their subscription
are said to confirm the decrees of Councils ; every such con
sent being supposed to increase the authority ; whence the
number of bishops is sometiraes reckoned according to the
subscriptions of bishops absent ;^ as the Council of Sardica
is sometimes related to consist of three hundred bishops,
although not two hundred were present, the rest concurring by
subscription to its definitions.
Other bishops in yielding their suffrage, do express it by
"I confirm, I define, I decree."**
* AvvoSov ytvkaBai rrapeaKtvaZt riav ii, 'Atyvrrrov 'EmaKorrwv,
Kai imaippayXaai roXg iv ^apSoi Kai IlaXaiarivy rrtpi avroij SeSoy-
pivoig. Soz. 4. 1.
t 'EvreiXdpevoi — Kvpiaaat r-qv rov bpoovaiov rriaTiv. Socr. 4. 12.
t Quoniam nee firmum decretum potest esse, quod non plurimorum
videbitur habere consensum. Cler. Rom. apud Cypr. Ep. 31.
^ IlapaKaXoii/iEJ' to'ivvv Tipqaov raXg aaXg ^ijipoig rqv Kp'iaiv. Syn,
Chalc. ad Leon. p. 476.
II Kara Tqv avvoSiKqv 'tKvpiaaaptv -iprjfov. — Epist. Syn. Chalc. ad
Leon. p. 475.
If Sect. 2. 20. et Vales. Ann. ibid.
** Sententias fratrum omnes sequimur, omnes confirmamus, omnes ob-
seivandas esse decemimus. Cone. Rom. P. HU. p- 579.

312 A TREATISE OF
But the effectual confirraation of Synods, which gave them
the force of laws, was in other hands, and depended on the
iraperial sanction.
So Justinian affirraeth generally : " AU these things at di
vers tiraes following, our abovenamed predecessors of pious
memory, corroborated and confirmed by their laws what each
Council had deterrahied, and expelled those heretics who at
tempted to resist the definitions of the aforesaid four Councils
and disturb the Churches."*
So particularly " Constantine (as Athanasius himself re
porteth) did by law confirra the decrees of the great Synod of
Nice;"+ and Eusebius assureth the sarae: " He (saith he) did
ratify the decrees ofthe Synod by his authority." J His letters
are extant, which he sent about the world exhorting and re
quiring all to conform to the constitutions of that Synod.
So Theodosius did confirm the decrees of the second General
Synod ; " adding (saith Sozoraen) his confirmatory suffrage to
their decree ;"§ the which he did at the supplication of the
Fathers, addressed to him in these terms : " We therefore do
beseech your grace, that by your pious edict the sentence of
the Synod may be authorized ; that as by the letters of convo
cation you did honour the asserably, so you would also confirm
the result of things decreed. "||
The third General Synod was also confirmed by Theodosius
II. as Justinian telleth us : ^" The above naraed Theodosius of
pious memory, maintaining what had been so justly deter-
* His itaque omnibus per diversa tempora subsecutis, praedicti pise re-
cordationis nostri patres ea quae in unoquoque Concilio judicata snnt, legibus
suis corroboraverunt, et confirmaverunt ; et haereticos qui definitionibus
praedictorum S. quatuor Conciliorum resistere, et Ecclesias conturbare
conati sunt, expulerunt. Justin, in Cone. V. coll. ] . (p. 210.)
t Td rrap' 'tKtivwv ypafkvra, rov avveSpiov KOivwvOiv, iKpaTVvt vopif).
Athan. apud Theodor. 2. 4.
t Td Tqg avvoSov Soypara Kvpiav irrta^payiZero. Euseb. de Vit,
Const. 3. 23. — 'YrroSkxtaBai Kai Siardrrtiv biptiXtrt. Eus. ibid. 3, 20,
§ Kai rd pi iaSt r-y avvoSip iSo^t, Kai 6 fiaaiXtig 'trrfjiqipiuaTO.
Sozom. 7. 9.
II AtoptBa Toivvv rrig <f^£ -qptporqrog ypdppaai rqg aijg tiai^tiai
irriKVpwBrjvai rqg avvoSov r-qv i^ij^ov, 'iv' ojarrtp roXg rqg KXqaeitis
ypdppaai rqv 'EKKXqaiav rtripqKag, ovrw Kai riav Soidvriav imaippa-
yiayg rb rkXog. Prsef. ad Can. Cone. Constant, (apud Bin. p. 660.)
HfSed praedictus piae recordationis Theodosius vindicans ea, quse iti recte
contra Nestorium, et ejus impietatem fuerant judicata, fecit firmiter
obtinere contra eum factam condemnationem. Justin, in Quinto Cone,
coll, 1.

THE pope's supremacy. 313
mined against Nestorius and his impiety, made his condemna
tion valid."
And this emperor asserted this privilege 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
contentiousness and vrith truth being examined, ought so to be
estabUshed by our reUgionsness."*
The other abortive Synod at Ephesus was also confirraed by
Theodosius junior, as Dioscorus in his defence aUeged in these
words, which shew the manner of practice in this case : " We
then indeed did judge the things, which were judged ; the
whole S3mod did accord vrith us, and gave verdict by their own
votes, and subscribed ; and they were referred to the most re
Ugious emperor Theodosius, of happy memory ; and he did by
a general law confirm aU things judged by the holy and oecu
menical Synod, "f
So also did the emperor Marcian confirm 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 aU to cease from disputes about re
Ugion:" vrith which Pope Leo signifieth his compUance in
these terms : " But because by all means your piety and most
reUgious wiU must be obeyed, I have vrilUngly approved the
Synodical Constitutions about confirraing the catholic faith and
condemning heretics, which pleased me." J
Justinian did vrith a witness confirm the fifth Synod, punish
ing vrith banishment all who would not subrait to its deter
minations. In the sixth Synod the Fathers did request the emperor, ac
cording to custom, to confirm its definitions, in these very
* Xpi) ydp rrdvra Kara rb np Qtip ptXXov dpkaKtiv S'lxa ipiXovtiKiag
Kai ptrd dXqBeiag iitraaBkvTa ovrw rrapd rijg qptrkpag Stoaefitiag
^t^aiiaBqvai. Epist. Theod. ad Syn. Eph. in Actis Cone. p. 375.
+ 'H/j£tj Toivvv 'tKp'ivaptv rd KtKpip'tva- avvyvtat-v qpXv rrdaa t'l
avvoSog, Kai KarkBero oiKtiaig ipwvaXg, Kai vnkypaipf Kai dvqvkxBq
Tip ivae^tardnp jiaaiXtX Trjg Beiag X-qiewg QeoSoaiip- Kai 'tfitjia'twat
rrdvra rd KtKpipkva rrapd rqg dyiag Kai oiKovptviKqg avvoSov voptp ye-
viKip. Syn. Chalced. Act. 1. p. 59.
X ^lepip rqg -qperkpag -qptporqrog Siardypan r-qv dyiav ^t(3aiwaav-
Teg avvoSov vrrtpvqaaptv lirravrag, ware riav rrtpi SrpqaKtiag rravaa-
aBai SiaXkiewv. Cone. Chalc. Part. 3. p. 478.^ — Quia verb omnibus
modis obediendum est pietati vestrae, religiosissimaeque voluntati, Consti-
tntionibus Synodalibus, quse mihi de confirmatione fidei Catholicae et
hsereticorum damnatione placuerunt, libens adjeci sententiam meam.
P. Leo I. Ep. 59. (ad Mart. Aug,)

314 A TREATISE OF
words: "To what we have deterrained set your seal, your
royal ratification by writing, and confirraation 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."f
" We entreat the power of our lord guided by God's vrisdom
to confirra, for the greater strength and security of the ortho
dox faith, the copies of our determination read in the hearing
of your most serene raajesty, and subscribed us, that they may
be delivered to the five patriarchal sees with your pious con-
firraation."J Accordingly he did confirm that Synod by his edict : " All
these things being thus ordered by this sixth holy and oecu
menical Synod ; we decree, that none whosoever trouble himself
farther about this faith, or advance any inventions about it."§
So he told Pope Leo II. in his epistle to him : " This dirine
and venerable determination the holy Synod has made, to
which we also have subscribed, and confirmed it by our re
ligious edicts, exhorting all our people who have any love for
Christ, to follow the faith there written." ||
Pope Leo tells his naraesake Leo the eraperor, " That he
must always remember that the imperial power was given him
not only to rule the world but more especially to protect the
Church."^ * Kai ToXg rrap' qpiav bpiBtXai a^payXSa, rrapdaxov rrjv ipSiv iyypa.-
<pov ISaaiXiKrjv irriKvpwaiv, Kai Sid Sreiwv qSiKTwv, Kai riav ii eBovg
tvatfiibv Siaro^twv rqv rovrwv drrdvrwv j3tjSaiwatv. Syn. VI. Act. 18.
p. 275.
t AiroHpev Sid St'iag vpiav vrroaqptiiaaewg rb Kbpog ffapaiTjfetrflai
Tip rrap' -qpiav iK^wvqB'evn ivvrroypd^ip 'opip. Ib. p. 283.
X Airobptv rb ^toaoipov rov Starrorov Kpdrog rrpbg peiZova rrjgop-
BoSo^ov rriaTewg daipd'Xeidv re Kai jiejiaiwaiv iaorvrrovg ivarroypdij}OVQ
'opovg TOV dvayvwaBkvrog KaTd rrapovaiav tqv yaXqvordrov vpHiv
Kpdrovg 'opov 'tKSoBrjvai roig rrkvrt HarpiapKixoXg ^povoig ptrd riji
tvaejiovg vpiav vrroaqpeiwaewg. Ibid. p. 284.
§ Tovrwv ovTwg drrdvrwv vrrb Trjg dyiag ravrqg Kai oiKOVptVLKrjs
iKTqg avvoSov SiarvrrwBkvrwv, Sancimus, ware pqSkva ribv rrdvriav
'ertpov Tl rrepi rrjv rrianv ipydaaaBai, rj Kaivortpov Soyparog iftv-
ptpa pqxavqaaaBai, &c. Ibid. Edict. Const, p. 294.
II Qiiov Si at^dapiov opov -q dy'ia avvoSog 'tit^oqatv, if KOt avvvm-
ypd^paptv, Kcti Si' evaifiiav qpiav -qS'iKTWv tovtov irrtKvpiaaapev, rrpo-
rp'ei^avrtg arravra rbv ipiXoxpiarov qpwv Xabv ry iv airoXg iyyt-
ypapp'evy rriarei avvkrrtaBai, &c. Ibid, p. 298. et p. 302.
H Debes incunctanter advertere Regiam potestatem tibi non solum ad
mundi Regimen, sed maxime ad Ecclesiae praesidium esse collatam, &c.
Leo M. Ep. 75.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 313
So by long prescription, commencing vrith the first General
Synod, did the emperor enjoy this prerogative ; and with good
reason, he having an unquestionable warrant and obligation to
promote the welfare ofthe Church, designed by those conven
tions ; he being the guardian of concord among his subjects,
and protector of the liberties, which might be nearly con
cerned in concUiar proceedings ; the power of enacting laws
bemg an incommunicable branch of sovereign majesty ; he
alone haring power committed 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 in a raan
ner retrench some part of the royal prerogative, translating or
imparting to others causes before appropriate to his jurisdic
tion (as in the case of appeals, and of prohibiting addresses to
court, ordered in the Sardican and other Synods ; of exempting
clergymen from secular jurisdiction, from taxes and coramon
burthens, &c.) which ought not to be done vrithout his Ucence
and authority.
So that the Oriental bishops had good reason to tell the
emperor, that " it was impossible without his authority to
order the matters under consideration with good law and
order."* It is novrise reasonable, that any other should have this
power, it being inconsistent vrith pubUc peace that in one state
there should be two legislative powers; which might clash
the one vrith the other, the one enacting sanctions prejudicial
to the interest and wUl of the other : wherefore the Pope
being then a citizen of Rome, and a subject to the eraperor,
could not have a legislative power, or a negative vote in
Synods, but that wholly did belong to the imperial autho
rity. But it is opposed, that some Synods have been declared in-
vaUd for want of the Pope's confirmation ;f for to the decrees
of the Synod of Ariminum it was excepted, that they were null,
because the bishop of Rome did not consent to them : " There
• 'ASvvarov ydp wg riyovptBa SLxa rov vperkpov Kpdrovg evraKrwg
Kai ivBeapwg Td -irpoKtiptva rvTrwBfjvai. Rei. Orient, ad Imp. Act.
Syn. Eph. p. 372.
t Twv iv 'Apipivip vrrtvavriwv ravrqg aKvpwv bvrwv, wg p-qre 'Pw-
pa'iiav'EmaKorrov, pqrt nav dXXwv avvBepkvwv avroXg, Kai wg rroXXwv
Tiav avToBt avvtXBovrwv drrapeaBevTwv roXg rort rrap' avrwv StSoy-
p'tvoig. Soz. 6. 23. [Cantab. 1720.]

316 A TREATISE OF
could not (say the Roman Synod in Theodoret) be any pre.
judice from the number of those asserabled in Arirainum, it being
plain, that neither the Roraan bishop, whose suffrage ought
first to have been received, nor Vicentius, who for so many
years did hold his episcopacy blaraeless, nor others agreeing to
such things."* To which exception I answer, that
1 . That which is alleged against the Synod of Arirainum, is
not the defect of the Pope's confirraation subsequent, but of
his consent and concurrence before it, or in it ; which is
very reasonable, because he had a right to be present, and
to concur in all such assemblies, especially being so eminent a
bishop.f 2. The sarae exception every bishop raight allege, all
haring a like right and coraraon interest to vote in those
assemblies. 3. Accordingly the dissent of other bishops, particularly of
those eminent in dignity or merit, is also alleged in exception ;
which had been needless, if his alone dissent had been of so
very peculiar force.
4. The eraperor, 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 Synods ; as did Pope Leo the decrees of
the SjTiod 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 vrith us, we raake void, and by the
authority of the blessed Apostle St. Peter, by a general de
terraination we disannul ;"|; and in his epistle to those of that
Synod, " For however vain conceit raay arm itself with
extorted compliances, and think its vrilfulness suffiriently
strengthened vrith the name of Councils : yet whatever is
contrary to the canons of the above-naraed Fathers wiU be
* OvSi ydp rrpoKpipd n -qSvv-qBq ytvkaBai vrrb rov dpiBpov riav iv
'Apipivip avvaxBkvTwv, OTrori avvkarqKt, pqrt nav 'Piapaiiav 'E-n-
OKorrov, ov rrpb rrdvTwv iSti t^v yviapqv iKStiaaBai, ovrt OiiKevriov
'bg im roaOvroig ireai Trjv 'EmaKorr-qv darriXwg i^vXa^tv, ovrt rHv
dXXwv roXg Toiovroig avyKaraBtpkvwv. — Theod. 2. 22. [Cantab. 1720.]
t P. Liberius being absent, detained from it by violence in banishment.
X Consensiones verb Episcoporum, Sanctorum Canonum apud Niciam
conditorum regulis repugnantes, unita nobiscum vestrae fidei pietate, in
irritum mittimus, et per authoritatem Beati Petri Apostoli generali prorsus
definitione cassamus. P. Leo I. Ep. 55. (ad Pulcher. Aug.)

THE pope's supremacy. 317
weak and void."* Lastly, in his epistle to Maximus, bishop of
Antioch, he says, ' ' He has such a reverence for the Nicene
canons, that he will not permit or endure that what those holy
Fathers have determined be by any novelty riolated. "f
This behaviour of Pope LeoJ (although applauded and
imitated by sorae of his successors) I doubt not to except
against in behalf of the Synod, that it was disorderly, factious
and arrogant (proceeding indeed from ambition and jealousy) ;
the leading act of high presumption in this kind, and one of
the seeds of that exorbitant ambition, which did at length
overwhelm the dignity and liberty of the Christian republic :
yet for soraewhat qu^fying the business it is observable, that
he did ground his repugnancy and pretended annulling of that
decree (or of decrees concerning discipline) not so much upon
his authority to cross General Synods as upon the inriolable
firmness and everlasting obligation of the Nicene canons ; the
which he (although against the reason of things, and rules of
Government) did presume no Synod could abrogate or alter.
In fine, this opposition of his did prove ineffectual by the sense
and practice of the Church, maintaining its ground against his
pretence. It is an unreasonable thing, that the opinion or humour of
one man (no wiser or better coraraonly than others) should be
prefen'ed before the coraraon agreeraent of his brethren, being
ofthe same office and order with hira ; so that he should be
able to overthrow and frustrate the result of their raeetings and
consultations, when it did not square to his conceit or interest ;
especially seeing there is not the least appearance of any right
he hath to such a pririlege, grounded in holy Scripture,
tradition, or custora ; for seeing that Scripture hath not a
syllable about General Synods, seeing that no rule about thera
is extant in any of the first Fathers till after 300 years, seeing
there was not one such Council celebrated till after that tirae,
seeing in none of the first General Synods any such canon was
* Quantumlibet enim extortis assentationibus sese instruat vanitatis
elatio, et appetitus suos Conciliorum aestimet nomine roborandos, infirmum
atque irritum erit, quicquid a praedictorum Patrum Canonibus discreparit.
Ep. 61. (ad Syn. Chalced.)
t Tanta apud me est Nicenorum Canonum reverentia, ut ea quae sunt a
Sanctis Patribus constituta nee permiserim nee patiar aliqu^ novitate violari.
Leo. Ep, 62, (ad Max. Antioch.)
X P. Gelas. Ep. 13. (ad Episc. Dard.) p. 642. et in Tract, de Anathem.
(p. 647.)— P. Pelag. II. Ep. 5. (ad Eliam. p. 474.)— Greg M. Ep.

318 A TREATISE OF
fraraed in favour of that bishop, what ground of right could
the Pope have to prescribe unto thera, or thwart their pro.
ceedings ? Far more reason there is (in conformity to all
forraer 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 judgraent of the Church,
declared by its practice in the cases before touched.
IV. It is indeed a proper endowment of an absolute
sovereignty, immediately and immutably constituted by God
with no terras or rules limiting it, that its will declared in way
of precept, proclamations, concerning the sanction of laws, the
abrogation of thera, the dispensation vrith them ; should be
observed. This pririlege therefore in a high strain the Pope challengeth
to himself; asserting to his decrees and sentences the force and
obUgation of laws ; so that the body of that canon law, where
by he pretendeth to govern the Church, doth in great part
consist of papal edicts, or decretal epistles, imitating the re
scripts of emperors, and bearing the sarae force.
In Gratian we have these aphorisras from Popes concerning
this their pririlege.
" No person ought to have either the vrill or the power to
transgress the precepts of the apostolic see."*
" Those things which by the apostolical see have at
several times been written for the cathoUc faith, for sound
doctrines, for the various and raanifold exigency ofthe Church
and the raanners of the faithful, how rauch rather ought they
to be preferred in all honour, and by all raen altogether, upon
all occasions whatsoever to be reverently received ?"f
" Those decretal epistles which most holy Popes have at
divers tiraes given out frora the city of Rome upon their being
consulted with by divers bishops, we decree that they be received
with veneration. "J
* NulU fas est vel velle vel posse transgredi Apostolicse Sedis prscepta.
P. Greg. IV Dist. 19. c. 5.
t Quanto potius quae ipsa (sedes Apostolica) pro Catholica fide, profanis
(1, pro sanis) dogmatibus, pro variis et multifariis Ecclesise necessitatibns
et iidelium moribus diverse tempore scripsit, omni debent honore prseferri,
et ab omnibus prorsus in quibuslibet opportunitatibus discretione vel dis
pensatione magistrS reverenter assumi .' P. Nie. I. Epist. Dist. 19, t, 1,
X Decretales Epistolas, quas beatissimi Papae diversis temporibus ab
urbe Roma pro diversorum Patrum consultatione dederunt, venerabiliter
suscipiendas decemimus. P. Gelas. I, (in decreto) lit. a Nie, P, Ep. 42,
ad Epist. Gallis. Dist. 19. c 1.

THE pope's supremacy. 319
" If you have not the decrees of the bishops of Rome, you
are to be accused of neglect and carelessness ; but if you have
them, yet observe them not, you are to be chiden and rebuked
for your temerity."*
''All the sanctions ofthe apostolic see are so to be under
stood, as if confirmed by the voice of St. Peter himself."f
" Because the Roman Church, over which by the will of
Christ we do preside, is proposed for a mirror and exaraple ;
whatsoever it doth deterraine, whatsoever that doth appoint is
perpetually and irrefragably to be observed by all raen."J
" We who according to the plentitude of our power have a
right to dispense above law or right." §
" 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 exercise merely upon
usurpation, and unwaiTantably ; having no ground for it in
original right or ancient practice.
Originally the Church hath no other general lawgiver beside
our one Lord, and one Lawgiver.^
As to practice we may observe —
1. Anciently (before the first General Synod) the Church
had no other laws, beside the Divine laws ; or those which
were derived from the Apostles by traditional custom ;** or
those which each Church did enact for itself in provincial
Synods ; or which were propagated from one Church to
another by imitation and compliance ; or which in Uke manner
were fi-araed and settled.
* Si decreta Romanorum Pontificum non habetis, de neglectu atque in-
curia estis arguendi ; si verb habetis et non observatis, de temeritate estis
corripiendi et increpandi. P. Nie. I. Ep. 6. ad Phot. Dist. 20. cap. 2.
t Sic omnes ApostoUcae Sedis sanctiones accipiendae sunt, tanquam
ipsius Divini Petri voce firmatse sunt. P. Agatho. Dist. 19. c. 2. Vid. Syn.
VI. Act. 4. p. 35.
X Quia in speculum, et exemplum S. Romana Ecclesia, cui nos Christus
prseesse voluit, proposita est, ab omnibus quicquid statuit, quicquid ordinat,
perpetuo et irrefragabiUter observandum est. P. Steph. (Dist. 19. cap. 3.)
P. Gelas. I. Ep. 9. de dispens. (p. 633,)
§ Qui secundum plenitudinem potestatis de jure possumus supra jus
dispensare. P, Inn. III. Decret. Greg. Lib. 3. tit. 8. c. 4.
II Sedes hsec — quod singulari etiam auctoritate perficere valet, multorum
ssepe sacerdotum decemit definire consensu. P. Nie. I. Ep. 18. (ad Cai'O-
lum R.)— Leo I. Ep. I. cap. 5. P. Hilarius in Cone. Rom. p. 578. Caus.
25. qu, 1. cap. 4. P. Urb. Caus. 25, qu. 1. cap. 6. P. Anas, ad Imp.
Anast. P. Suic. Ep. 1. (p. 691.) If Eph. iv. 5. James iv. 12.
** dpxaXa iBq. Syn. Constantinop. Can. 2.

320 A TREATISE OF
Whence, according to different traditions, or different reasons
and circumstances of things, several Churches did 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 Hable
to suffer a repulse ; as is notorious in the case, when Pope
Victor would (although rather as a doctor than ag a lawgiver)
have reduced the Churches of Asia to conform vrith the Roman
in the time of celebrating Easter ; wherein he found not only
stout resistance, but sharp reproof.
In St. Cyprian's time every bishop had a free power accord
ing to his discretion to govern his Church, and it was deemed
a tyrannical enterprise for one to prescribe to another, or to
require obedience from his colleagues : as otherwise by many
clear allegations out of that holy raan we have shewed. " For
none of us ( saith he) makes himself a bishop of bishops, or by
a tyrannical terror corapels his colleagues to a necessity of
obedience ; since every bishop according to the license of his
own liberty and power hath his own freedom, and can no more
be judged by another than he hiraself can judge another."*
If any new law were then introduced, or rule determined
for common practice, it was done by the general agreement of
bishops or of a preponderant multitude among them, to whom
the rest out of modesty and peaceableness did yield compli
ance ; according to that saying of the Roman clergy to St.
Cyprian (upon occasion of the debate concerning the manner
of adraitting lapsed persons to coraraunion), "that decree
cannot be valid that hath not the consent of the raajor part."t
The whole validity of such laws or rules did indeed wholly
stand upon presuraption of such consent, whereby the common
Uberty and interest was secured.
2. After that by the eraperor's conversion the Church enjoy
ing secular protection and encourageraent, did reduce itself as
into a closer union and freer communication of parts, so into a
* Neque enim quisquam nostriim Episeopum se esse Episcoporum con.
stituit, aut tyrannico terrore ad obsequeudi necessitatem Colleges suob
adigit ; quando habeat omnis Episcopus pro Ucentia libertatis et potestatis
suifi arbitrium proprium ; tamque judicari ab aUo non possit, quam nee
ipse potest alterum judicare. Cypr. in Cone. Carthag. LTractat, Pars 2.
p, 266, Lipsiae, 1839.]
+ Quoniam nee firmum decretum potest esse, quod non plurimorum
videbitur habuisse consensum, Cler. Rom. ad Cypr., (Epist. 31.) [Ep. 30,
p, 59. Leipsiae, 1838,]

TIIE POPE S SUPREMACY. 321
:greater uniformity of practice ;* especially by means of great
I Synods, wherein (the governors and representatives of all
Churches being called unto thera, and presumed to concur in
ithem) were ordained sanctions, taken to obUge all. The Pope
)had indeed a greater stroke than formerly,f as haring the first
[place in order, or " privilege of honour" in ecclesiastical assem-
i bUes, where he did concur ; yet had no casting vote or real
advantage above others ; all thing passing by majority of vote :
I this is supposed as notorious in the acts of the fifth CouncU :
" This (say they) is a thing to be granted, that in Councils we
.must not regard the interlocution of one or two, but those
.things which are commonly defined by all, or by the most."J
So also in the fifth CouncU, George, bishop of Constanti
nople, saith, " that seeing everywhere the Council of the mul
titude, or of the most doth prevail, it is necessary to anathe
matize the persons before mentioned."!
3. MetropoUtan bishops in their provinces had far more
power, and more surely grounded, than the Pope had in t^he
whole Church (for the metropoUtans had an unquestioned
authority, settled by custom, and confirmed by Synodical de*
crees) yet had not they a negative voice in Synodical debates ;
for it is decreed in the Nicene Synod, that in the designation
of bishops (which was the principal affair in ecclesiastical ad
ministrations) "plurality of votes should prevail." |1
, It is indeed there said, that none should be ordained \b)ple
yvo)fiqg, "vrithout the opinion of the metropolitan ;" but that
doth not iraport a negative voice in hira, but that the transac
tion should not pass in his absence, or without his knowledge,
adrice, and suffrage : for so the Apostolical canon^ (to which
the Nicene Fathers there did aUude and refer, meaning to
interpret it) doth appoint, that the metropolitan should do
* Idem enim omnes eredimur operati, in quo deprehendimur ecldem
omnes censurae et disciplinae consensione sociati. Cler. Rom. ad Cypr.
Ep. 31. [Ep. 30. p. 56. Ed. ut supra.]
t XlpiareXa nprjg.
t IUo certe coustituto, qubd in ConcUiis non unius vel secundi interlo-
cutionem attendere oportet, sed haec unae communiter ab omnibus vel am.
pliqribus definiuntur. Concil. 5. CoUat. 6. p. 263.
§ 'ErrtiSij rov rrX-qBovg, ijroi riav rroXXiav 7ravra%oC q fiovXq KpaTtX,
avayKaXov ianv ovopaari rd XtxBkvra rrpoawrra dvaBtpanaBqvai.
VI. Syn. Act. 16, p. 249.
II KparEirw i) rdv rrXtwvwv \l/ijipog. Cone. Nie. Can, 6.
1[ Kard Kavova 'EKKXqaiaariKbv, dXXd pqSi iKtXvog dvev rrig riav
rrdvTwv yviapqg rroitirw n. Apost. Can. 34.
TOL. ]. Y

322 A TREATISE OP
nothing avev rrjg rravriav yvoifirig, " without the opinion of
all,"* that is without suffrage of the most, concluding aU (for
surely that canon doth not give to each one a negative voice) ;
and so the Synod of Antioch (held soon after that of Nice,
which therefore knew best the sense of the Nicene Fathers,
and how the custom went), doth interpret it, decreeing, that
" a bishop should not be ordained vrithout a Synod, and the
presence of the metropolitan of the province ;"t in which
Synod yet they determined, that " plurality of votes should
carry it ;" J no pecuUar advantage in the case being granted to
the metropolitan.
Seeing therefore Prorincial Synods were more ancient than
General, and gave pattern to them ; if we did grant the same
pririlege to the Pope in General Synods, as the metropoUtans
had in Provincial (which yet we cannot do vrith any good rea
son or ground) yet could not the Pope thence pretend to an
authority of making laws by himself.
4. It was then a passable opinion, that 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 JuUus did seem to cross a rule ofthe Church,
by communicating with persons condemned by Synods, the
Fathers of Antioch did "smartly recriminate against him,
shewing that they were not to receive canons from him."||
6. So far was the Pope from prescribing laws to others,
that he was looked upon as subject to the laws of the Church
no less than others : as the Antiochene Fathers did suppose,^
complaining to Pope JuUus of his transgressing the canons; the
which charge he doth not repel by pretending exemption, but
by declaring that he had not offended against the canons,**
and retorting the accusation against themselves ; as the Afii-
* 'ErriaKorroi' pq x^iporoveXaBai Sixa avvoSov, Kai rrapoyaidg rov tv
ry MqrporroXii Tqg irrapxiag, Syn. Ant. Can. 19.
t KpartXv rijv riav rrXtioviav ^ijfov. Ibid.
X KpaTtirw q twv rrXtioviav iprjipog. Syn. Nie. Can. 6.
§ Tiav ydp rrXtiovwv 'EmaKorrwv q ihijAog tffvwtiv b^eiXti. Theod.
2. 16.
II Pvwpy Koivy a^oSpoTtpov Si 'trrtaroXrig dvreyKaXovai Tip lowAHi,
SqXovvTtg pri StXv Kavov'iZtaBai rrap' avrov. Socr. 2. 15.
^ 'TpeXg wg rrapd Kavovag rroiiiaavTag, -qpdg ipkp^aaB£.—-P, Julii
Epist. apud Athanas. iu Apol. 2. p. 748.
*• Tivkg tiaiv ot rrapd Kavovag rrpdZavrtg, qptXg, &c. p. 748.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 323
can Fathers supposed, when they told Pope Celestine that he
could not admit persons to communion,* which had been ex
communicated 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,vrithout leave
of his father who had rejected him.f This the whole tenor of
ecclesiastical canons sheweth, they running in a general style,
never excepting the Pope from the laws prescribed to other
bishops. 7. The privUege of dispensing vrith laws had then been a
strange hearing, when the Pope could in no case dispense vrith
himself for infringing them, vrithout bringing clamour and
censure upon him. J
8. It had indeed been a vain thing for Synods vrith so mnch
trouble and solemnity to assemble, if the Pope vrithout them
could have framed laws, or could with a puff of his mouth
blown away the results of them by dispensation.
9. Even in the growth of Papal dominion, and after that
the seeds of Roman ambition had sprouted forth to a great
bulk, yet had not Popes the heart or face openly to chaUenge
power over the universal canons, or exemption from them ;
but pretended to be the chief observers, guardians, defenders,
and executors of them ; or of the rights and privileges of
Churches estabUshed by them ;§ for whUe any footsteps of
aucient Uberty, simplicity, and integrity did remain, a claim of
paramount or lawless authority would have been very ridicu-
Jpus and very odious. Pope Zosimus I. denieth that he could
alter the pririleges of Churches. ||
10. If they did talk more highly, requiring observance to
their constitutions,^ it was either in their own precinct, or in
the provinces where they had a more immediate jurisdiction,
or in some corners of the West, where they had obtained more
* MqSe Tovg rrap' qpiav drroKoivwvqTOvg, &c. Epist. ad P. Celest. I.
t Ofr SvvdptBa dvev rrjg imrporrqg rov Tip'iov Harpog aov Toiro
Troiqaai. Epiph. Hser. 42.
X It was then a majdm becoming the mouth of a Pope : Universse pacis
trauquilUtas non aUter poterit custodiri, nisi sua canonibus reverentia in-
teinerata servetur. P. Leo I. Ep. 62.— The tranquiUity of an universal
peace cannot otherwise he kept, unless due reverence be paid to the canons.
§ P. Hfl. Ep. 2. N. B. P. Innoc. I. Ep. 2. 12. P. HU. Ep. 4. P.
Gelas. I. Ep. 9. p. 634. Ep. 13. p. 639. De Anathem. p. 645.
II P. Zos. I. Ep. 7. (ad Episc. Vienn. et Narb.) Caus. 25. Qu. 1.
cap. 7.
% P.Suric. Ep. I. Leo M. Ep. 1. cap. 5. P. Gelas. Ep. 9.
Y 2

324 A TREATISE OP
sway ; and in some cases, wherein their words were backed
with other inducements to obedience ; for the Popes were com
monly " wise in their generations," accommodating their dis
course to the state of times and places.
11. It is also to be observed, that often the Popes are sup
posed to speak aud constitute things by their ovni authority,
which indeed were done by Synods,* consisting of Western
bishops more closely adhering to that see, in regard to those
regions ; the decrees of which Synods were binding in those
places, not so much by rirtue of Papal authority, as proceed
ing from the consent of their own bishops :f how ready he was
to assume all to himself, pretending those decrees as precepts
of the apostolical see.
Whence all the acts of raodern Popes are invalid, and do
not obUge, seeing they do not act in Synod ; but only of their
own head, or vrith the adrice of a few partisans about them,
men linked in common interest vrith thera 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 vrith 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
disUke of this usurpation.
" For although the bishop of Rome be raore venerable than
the rest that are in the world, upon account of the dignity of
the apostoUcal see, yet it is not lawful for him in any case to
transgress the order for 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 Sariour ; so
generally no bishop ought pragmaticaUy to act anything in
another's diocese. "J
13. In the times of Pope Nicholas I. the Greeks didnotadmit
• P. Siric, Ep. 4. — ^'ATToffo Kard Svaiv avvoSog. Cone. Eph. p. 332.
t ^vvoSoi dvqKovaai ry avvoSip ' ArroaroXiKov hpbvov. Syu. VI.
Act. 4. p. 60. N. The Pope did in those CouncOs ask the Placets.
P. Hil. in Cone. R. (p. 578,)
X Licet namque Pontifex Romanse Ecclesiae ob dignitatem Apostolics
Sedis cceteris in orbe constitutis reverentior habeatur, non tamen ei beet
transgredi in aUquo Canonici moderaminis tenorem ; sicut enim unusquis
que Orthodoxae Ecclesiee Pontifex ac Sponsus propriae Sedis unifomuter
speciem gerit Salvatoris, ita generaliter nulli convenit quippiam in aite
rius procaciter patrare Episcopi Dioecesi. Glab. Rod. 2. 4. Vid. Baron.
Ann. 996. § 22, 23.

THE pope's SUPUEMACY. 325
the Roman decrees ; * so that Pope in an epistle to Photius
complains, " that he did not receive the decrees of the Popes,
when as yet they ordained nothing but what the natural, what
the Mosaical, and what the law of grace required."f And in
another epistle he expostulates with him for saying that " they
neither had nor did observe the decrees made by the holy
Popes ofthe prime see ofthe Roman Church ."J
14. That which greatly did advance the papal jurisdiction,
and introduced his usurpation of obtruding new decrees on
tbe Church, was the venting of the forged Decretal Epistles
under tbe name of old Popes ;§ which when the Pope did
allege for authorizing his practices, the French bishops, en
deavouring to assert their privileges, did allege that "they
were not contained in the whole body of their canons "H
15. The power of enacting and dispensing vrith ecclesiastical
laws touching exterior discipline did of old belong to the em
peror. And it was reasonable that it should, because old laws
might not conveniently suit vrith the present state of things,
and the public welfare ; because new laws might conduce to
the good of Church and State, the care of which is incumbent
on him ; because the prince is bound to use his power and
authority to promote God's service, the best way of doing
which may be by framing orders conducible thereto.
Accordingly the emperors did enact divers laws concerning
ecclesiastical raatters, which we see extant in the codes of
Theodosius and Justinian.
" These things (saith the Council of Aries) we have de
creed to be presented to our Lord the eraperor, desiring his
clemency that if any thing be defective it may be supplied by
his prudence, if any thing be unreasonable it may be corrected
•by his judgment, if any thing be reasonably ordered, it may by
his help, the Divine grace assisting, be perfected."^
* Circa Ann. 860.
t Noli quia decreta ipsorum non susceperis ampliiis asseverare, cum
ipsi nihil nisi quod Naturalis, quod Mosaica, necnon et Gratiae Lex jussit,
mstituant. P. Nie. I. Ep. 11. (ad Phot.)
} Decretalia autem, quse a Sanctis Pontificibus Primae Sedis Romance
EcclesiEE sunt instituta, — cur vos non habere vel observare dicitis .' Id.
Ep. 6. (ad Phot.) ^ Vid. Hincm.
II Quauquam quidam vestrum scripserint baud Ula decretalia priscorum
Pontificum in toto codicis Canonum corpore contineri descripta, &c. P.
Nie. I. Ep. 42. (ad GaUise Episc.)
ITHiBC — Domino Imperatori praesentanda decrevimus, poscentes ejus
clementiam ut siquid hie minus est, ejus pi-udentia suppleatur, si quid

326 A TEEATISE OP
We may observe, that Popes did aUow the validity of im
perial laws. Pope Gregory I.* doth aUege divers laws of
divers emperors concerning ecclesiastical affairs as authentic
and obUgatory rules of practice.
16. Divers Churches had particular rights of independency
upon aU power vrithout themselves.
Such as the Church of Cyprus in the Ephesine Synod did
claim and obtain the confirmation of.
Such was the ancient Church of Britain, before Augustine
came into England.
" The Welsh bishops are consecrated by the bishop of St.
Davids, and he himself in Uke manner is ordained by others
who are as it were his suffragans, professing no manner sub
jection to any other Church."f
V. Sovereign power immediately by itself when it pleaseth,
doth exercise all parts of jurisdiction, setting itself iu the tri
bunal ; 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 ; J requiring of them engagements
or strict submission and obedience 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, absolring, restoring
them, as he seeth cause, or findeth in his heart ;^ he doth en
courage people to accuse their pastors to him, in case any doth
infringe his laws and orders.
But (in general) that originally or anciently the Pope had
no such right appropriate to him may appear by arguments, by
cross instances, by the insufficiency of all pleas, and -examples
aUeged in favour of this claim. For,
secus quam se ratio habet, ejus judicio emendetur; siquid rationabiliter
taxatum est, ejus adjutorio divina opitulante dementia perficiatur. Concil.
Arel. 4. cap. 26. Ann. 813. (sub. Carolo M.)
» P. Greg. 1. Ep. 11. 56.
t Episcopi WalUae a Menevensi Antistite sunt consecrati, et ipse simili
ter ab alUs tanquam sufiiraganeis est constitutus, nulla penitus alii Ecclesise
facta professione vel subjectione. Girald. Cambr. Itin. 2. 1.
X BeU. 2. 18, 26.
§ Per hoc iUam de tota Ecclesia judicare. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 4.
II Cunctos ipse judicaturus a nemine est judicandus. Dist. 40. cap. 6.
^ Caus. 2. qu.7. cap. 45, &c.— Sacra statuta et veneranda decreta Epis
coporum eausas, utpote majora negotia nostrae definiendas censuras man-
darunt. P. Nie. I. Ep. 38.

THE pope's supkemacy. 327
1 . Originally there was not at aU araong Christians any juris
diction Uke to that which is exercised in civil governments, and
which now the Papal court doth execute. For this our Saviour
did prohibit, and St. Peter forbade the presbyters KaraKvpievuv
tUv KXlipiov.* And St. Chrysostom affirmeth the episcopal
power not to be av^evrla, or ap^ij.f And ecclegiastical his
tory doth inform ns, that such a jurisdiction was lately intro
duced in the Church, as by other great bishops, so especially
by the bishop of Rorae : "For (saith Socrates) from that time
the episcopacy of Alexandria, beyond the sacerdotal order did
assume a domineering power in affairs." J
The which kind of power the Roman bishops had long before
assumed; for (saith he) "the episcopacy of Rome, in Uke
manner as that of Alexandria, had already a great while ago
gone before in a domineering power beyond that of the priest-
hood."§ At first the episcopal power did only consist in paternal ad
monition, and correption of offenders, exhorting and persuading
them to amendment; and in case they contumaciously did per
sist in disorderly beharionr, bringing them before the congre
gation, and the cause being there heard and proved, with its
consent imposing such penance or correction on them, as
seemed needfiil for the pubhc good,.or their particular benefit :
" All thmgs (saith St. Cyprian) shall be examined, you being
present and judging." And (elsewhere) " according to your
Divine suffrages; according to your pleasure." ||
2, Originally no one bishop had any jurisdiction over 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 censure his brethen, who dissented
from him : " Let us aU (saith he) expect the judgraent of our
• 1 Peter v.
t Chrys. in 1 Tim. iu. 1. ia Eph. Orat, 11. Hier. Ep. 3. et Ep. 62.
Isid. Pelus. Ep. 20. 125. 4. 219.
X Kai ydp iK iKtivov -q 'EmaKorrq 'AXe^avSpeiag rrkpa Trig 'itpariKqg
ra^eiag Kard Svvaare'iav riav rrpaypdrwv iXa{3t ri^v dpxqv. Socr. 7. 7.
§ Tqg 'Pwfiaiwv 'EmaKorrrig bpo'iwg r-y ' AXt^avSp'twv rrkpa r^
Upiaabvqg irri Svvaare'iav rjSq rrdXai rrpotXBovaqg. Socr. 7. 11.
I 1 Cor. V. 4, 12. 2 Cor. U. 6. — Examinabuntur singulae prsesentibus,
et judicantibus vobis. Cypr. Ep. 12. (fratribus in plebe.) [Ep. 17. p. 39.
Leipsiae, 1838.]— Secundum vestra divina suifragia. Cypr. Ep. 40. [Id.
Ep. 43. p. 83.] — Secundiim arbitrium quoque vestrum. Ibid. (Ep. 46.) —
Tertul. ApoL 39. Ibidem.

328 A TREATISE OP
Lord Jesus Christ, who only hath power to prefer us to the
government of his Church and to judge of what we do."*
3. Even the comraunity of bishops did not otherwise take
notice of or intermeddle vrith 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 raeddle with the
proceedings of their brother, was taken for an dXXorpwemaKorria,
a pragraatical intrusion upon another's business ; and an invasion
of that Uberty 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 pubUc good of the
Church, the law and custom of the Church, confirmed by the
Nicene Synod, did order, that jurisdiction should be exercised,
and all causes finally determined in each prorince ;f so that no
regard is had to the Pope, no exception in favour of him being
expressed or implied.
The which constitution, if we believe Pope Leo himself,
cannot in any case by any power be revoked or infrmged.J
That is most expressly confirmed by the Synod of Antioch,
in the code of the universal Church : " If any bishop accused
of certain crimes shall be condemned by all the bishops in the
prorince, and all shall unanimously vote against him, he shaU
not be judged again by others; but the unanimous sentence of
the bishops ofthe province shall remain valid."§
Here is no consideration or exception of the Pope.
5. Accordingly, in practice. Synods, vrithout regard or re
course to the Pope, did judge bishops upon offences charged
against them.
• Expeetemus universi judicium Domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui unus
et solus habet potestatem et prieponendi nos in ecclesiam suam guberna
tione et de actu nostro judicandi. Cypr. in Cone. Carth. [p. 266. Pars 2.
Tractatus, Lipsiae, 1839.] t Can. 5.
X In venerabUis ConeiUi Niceni contumelia ssepe versatus, alienarum
tibi provinciarum jura temerariS rapuisti. P. FeUx Acacio, apud Baron.
Ann. 484. § 17.
§ E'ing 'ErriaKorrog irri naiv iyKX-qpaai KarqyopqBtig KpiBt'ir) vrro
TTavTwv riav iv ry irrapxi^ 'EmaKorrwv, rrdvreg rt avpipwvoi p'lav Kar'
avrov iitvtyKOiev ipiiipuv, tovtov pqK'tTi rrap' irkpoig SiKaZtaBar aX\a
ptvtiv (St^aiav rqv avpipwvov ribv irri rijg irrapxiag 'EmaKorrwv drro-
ipaaiv. Syn. Ant. Can. 16. [Lab. vol. 2. p. 1674. Paris. 1671.]

THE pope's supkemacy. 329
6. The execution of those judgments was entrusted to me
tropoUtan 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 obUged to confer his part to the execution,
as Pope Gelasius 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,
hut few can be aUeged ; and those (as we shall see) impertinent,
or insufficient.
8. Divers Synods (great and smaller) did make sanctions
contrary to this pretence of the Pope ; appointing the decision
of causes to be terminated in each diocese, and prohibiting ap
peals to him, which they would not have done if the Pope had
originaUy, or according to common law and custom, a supreme
judicial power.
9. The most favourable of ancient Synods to Papal interest,
that of Sardica, did confer on the Pope a power, quaUfied in
matter and manner, of causing episcopal causes to be rerised,
which sheweth that before he had no right in such cases, nor
then had an absolute power.
10. The Pope's power of judging bishops hath been of old
disclaimed as an iUegal 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 inight condemn him, according to the canons. — The
Pope ranteth at it, and reasoueth against it ; but hath no ma-
teaiSt argument or example for it (concerning the Papal
authority peculiarly), beside the Sardican canon.f
11. The Popes themselves have been judged for misde-
meanora', heresy, schism, as hereafter we shall shew.
12. The Popes did execute some judgments, only by a
right common to all bishops ; as executors of Synodical
decrees.J * Quod non solum preesuli Apostolico facere Ucet, sed cuicunque Pon
tifici, ut quosUbet et quemlibet locum, secundum regulam haereseos ipsius
ante damnatse, a Catholica communione discernant. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 4.
t Euphemium verb miror, si ignorantiam suam ipse non perspicit, qui
dicit Acacium ab uno non posse damnari. P. Gelas, I. Ep. 4— Nobis op-
ponunt Canones. Ib.
X Quod non solum praesuli Apostolico facere licet, &c. P. Gelas, I. Ep.
4. (supr. iu ai-g. 6.) Vid. Epist. 13.

330 A TREATISE OF
13. Other bishops did pretend to judicature, by privilege:
as Juvenalis bishop of Jerusalem did pretend that to him did
belong the judgment ofthe bishop of Antioch.*
14. The Popes were subject to the emperors ; who when
they pleased did interpose to direct or qualify aU jurisdiction;
commanding the Popes themselves — wherefore the Popes were
not judges sovereign, but subordinate. f
Pope Gregory I., did refer the great question about the title
of CEcumenical Bishop to the judgment of the emperor Mau-
ricius.J These things vrill more fully appear in the discussion of the
particulars concerning the chief branches of jurisdiction ; more
especially under the tenth branch of sovereignty.
They allege that passage of Valentinian, in his episUe to
Theodosius, " That the most blessed bishop of Rome, to whom
antiquity hath given a priesthood over all, hath a see and
power to judge both of faith and priests."§
This was suggested by Pope Leo and his adherents to the
young emperor — but it signifieth no more, but that in the
judgment of priests (as of faith) he was to have his share ; or
at most to be a leading person therein.
Theodosius (a mature, grave, pious prince) did not regard
that pretence of Leo, nor the appeal of Flarianus. ||
VI. To the sovereign of any state belongeth the choice,
constitution, confirmation, commissionating of all inferior
magistrates ; that none uncapable, unworthy, or unfit for
offices, or disaffected to the state, be entrusted vrith the ma
nagement of affairs.^
Wherefore the Pope doth claim and exercise these pre
rogatives so far as he can ; pretending at least that no bishop
can be constituted vrithout his designation, or his licence,
* 'Expiji' 'Iwdvvqv — np ' ArroaroXiKip rrjg 'ItpoaoX-vpwv dyiag tov
Qtob 'EKKXqaiag vrraKovaat, Kai npqaai' rrap' ip pdXiara 'iBog airhv
riav ' Avnoxkwv Sipovov ii drroaroXiKrig aKoXovBiag Kai rrapaSbaeiag
IBvvtaBai, Kai rrap' ainp SiKaZtaBai. Syn. Eph. Act. 4. (p. 340.)
f Justin. Nov. 123. cap. 3. Jubemus Episc. Rom.
X ut piissimus Dominus Mauritius ipsum Ulud negotium judicare dig-
naretur. Greg. Ep. 4. 32.
§ "Iva paKapiwrarog 'ErriaKorrog rrig 'Pwpa'iwv rroXtwg, ip rqv 'itpia-
avvqv Kard rrdvrwv q d.px^'-^rqg -jrap'taxt, x^^P"** '^"^ tirrop'iav ix^iv
rrtpi re rriartwg Kai ieptwv Kpivtiv. — Act. Syn. Chalc. p. 25.
jl "Iva b rrpoXtxBeig avvaxBkvrwv iK rrdaqg rrig o'movp'evqg Kox ruv
Xoirriav 'iip'ewv. — Ibid. p. 28.
H Upon a sovereign all inferior magistrates depend.

THE POPE S SUPllEMACY. 331
and his confirmation of the nomination, collation, or elec
tion. And these privUeges by the great advocates are upon highest
terms asserted to him.*
In this manner may be distinguished,
1. The designation ofthe 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 aU these the Pope hath intruded himself, and he wUl
have a finger in them.
1. He gladly would have drawn to himself the collation and
disposal of all benefices, chaUenging a general right to dispose
of aU at his pleasure :f but not having been able whoUy to
deprive princes and patrons of their nominations, and corpora
tions of their election ; yet he hath by reservations, provisions,
coUations of vacancies apud sedem,X resignations, devolutions,
and other such tricks, extremely encroached on the rights of
all, to the infinite vexation, damage, and mischief of Chris
tendom. 2. He pretendeth that no bishop shall be ordained without
his Ucence.
3. He obUgeth the person ordained to swear obedience to
him. 4. He pretendeth that aU bishops are his ministers and
deputies. But no such pririleges have any foundation or warrant in
holy Scripture, in ancient doctrine, or in primitive usage ; they
are aU encroachments upon the original rights and liberties of
the Church, derived from ambition and avarice ; subsisting
upon usurpation, upheld by violence.
This vrill appear from a survey of ancient rules and practices
concerning this matter.
The first constitution after our Lord's decease of an ecclesi
astical person was that of Matthias into the vacant apostolate,
» BeU. 4. 24.
t Licet Ecclesiarum, personataum, dignitatum, aUorumque beneficio-
rum ecclesiasticorum plenaria dispositio ad Romanum noscatur Pontificem
pertinere, &c. Clem. IV. in Sexto. Ub. 3. tit. 4. cap, 2. Vid. ibid. cap. 4.
10. 12. 20. —Although the plenary disposal of all churches, parsonages,
dignities, and other ecclesiastical benefices be known to belong to the Pope
of Rome, &c X Ibid. cap. 14, &c.

332 a TREATISE OF
or bishopric of Judas ; wherein (upon St. Peter's motion) all
the disciples present did by consent present two ; out of whom
God himself did select one,"* by determining the lot to fall
upon Matthias ; so that this designation being partly human,
partly dirine ; so far as it was huraan, it went by free election
of the whole fraternity; and St. Peter, beside generally sug
gesting the raatter to be done, did assume nothing peculiar to
himself. The next constitution we meet vrith is that of deacons to
assist the Apostles and elders in discharge of inferior offices ;
wherein the Apostles did comrait the designation of the per
sons to the " raultitude of the disciples," who elected them;
and presented thera to the Apostles, who by prayer and laying
on of hands did ordain thera. Nor had St. Peter in this
action any particular stroke.
As to the constitution of bishops, in the first apostoUcal
tiraes the course was this : the Apostles and apostoUcal persons
(who were authorized by the Apostles to act with their power,
and in their stead) did in Churches founded by them' con
stitute bishops, such as Divine inspiration, or their grace of
discretion did guide them to ;f so did St. John in Asia, " set
ting those apart for the clergy whom the Spirit had marked
out."J; This was uot done without the consent of the Christian
people, as Clemens Romanus teUeth us in his excellent epistle
to the. Corinthians :§ but he doth not acquaint us (although
he were himself bishop of Rome) that the Pope had any thing
to do in such constitutions, or in confirmations of them ; " the
whole Church (saith he) consenting :" why doth he not add,
for his own sake, " and the Pope confirming ?"
In the next times, when those extraordinary persons and
faculties had expired, when usually the Churches planted were
in situations soraewhat incoherent and reraote from each other,
upon a vacancy the clergy and people of each Church did elect
* Acts i. 'E7ri(7K07r;)i/ avrov Xa/3oi irtpog. V. 20. vers. 15,' — Kai
iarqaav Svo. Vers. 23. — 'AvdStiiov tK rovrwv nav Svo 'iva bv iieXk^ia,
Vers. 24.
t Acts vi. 2. To rrXrjBog nav paBqnav Kai iKtXk^avTo. Vers. 5.
X Kai Karaarqayg Kard rrbXiv rrpta^vrtpovg, tag iyw aoi Siera^dpqv.
Tit. ii. 25. — AiaKpiaig rrvtvpdrwv. 1 Cor. xii. 10. — KXqpip 'iva yt
KXqpiaawv nav vrrb rov rrvtvpaTog aqpaivopkvwv. Eus, 3. 23. [p. 82.
O-xon. 1S45. vel p. 113. Cantab. 1720.]
^ Toig ovv KaraaraQ'tvrag vrr' tKtivwv, q ptra^i vip' irkpwv 'tXKoy'i-
p,wv dvSpiav, avvtvSoKqadaqg 'EKKXqaiag rrdaqg, Clem. Epist. p. 57.

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 333
its bishop ; in which action commonly the clergy did propound
and recommend a person or persons, and the people by their
consent approve, or by their suffrages elect one ; a strict exa
mination of his Ufe and doctrine intervening : the which
order Tertullian briefly doth intimate in these words, " The
presidents of the Church are certain elders well approved, who
have obtained that honour not by price, but by proof."*
It may be inquired, how a bishop then was ordained, in
case his city was very remote from any other Churches ?
Did they send for bishops from distant places to ordain
bim ? Or did the presbyters of the place lay their hands on
him ? Or did he receive no other ordination than that he had
before of the presbyter ? Or did he abide no bishop till op
portunity did yield bishops to ordain hira ? Or did proridence
order, that there should be no such solitary Churches ? The
ancient comraentator,f couteraporary to St. Ambrose, and
bearing his narae, did conceive, that upon decease of a bishop
the elder of the presbyters did succeed into his place. J
Whence had he this ; out of his invention and conjecture, or
from some tradition and history ?
Afterward, when the faith was diffused through raany pro
vinces, that Churches grew thick and close, the general prac
tice was this : the neighbour bishops (being advertised of a
vacancy or want of a bishop) did convene at the place ; then
in the congregation the clergy of the place did propound a
person, yielding their attestation to his fitness for the charge ;
which the people hearing did give their suffrages, accepting
him, if no weighty cause was objected against him ; or refusing
him, if such cause did appear : then upon such recoraraenda-
tion and acceptance, the bishops present did adjoin their ap
probation and consent ; then by their devotions, and solemn
laying on of their hands, they did ordain or consecrate him to
the function.
Of this course most commonly practised in his tirae we have
divers plain testimonies in St. Cyprian, the best author extant
concerning these raatters of ancient discipline : " For which
* Kai ourot SoKipaZkaBiaaav rrpwrov, tira SiaKovtirwaav, dvkyKXqTot
ovTtg. 1 Tim. iii. 10. — Preesident probati quique seniores, honorem istum
non pretio, sed testimonio adepti. Tertull. Apol. 39. — Plena diligentiS,
exploratione sincera. Cypr. Ep. 68.
t Primum Preshyteri Episcopi appellabantur ut recedcnte uno sequens
ei succederet, &c, Vid. Dist, 66. cap. 2. — At first Presbyters were called
Bishops, that one departing the next might succeed him.
t' In Eph. iv. 11.

334 A TKEATISE OP
reason (saith he), that from Divine tradition and apostolical
observation is to be observed and held ; which also is vrith us,
and alraost through all prorinces, kept ; that for duly celebrat
ing ordinations unto that people, for whom a bishop is or
dained, 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 Ufe of
each one, and hath from his conversation a thorough insight
into his practice ; the which we see done vrith you in the ordi
nation of our colleague Sabinus, that by the suffrage of aU the
fraternity, and by the judgment of all the bishops, which had
assembled in the presence, and had sent letters to you about
him, the bishopric should be deferred to him."*
Again, " A people obedient to the Lord's commands, and
fearing God, ought to separate itself from a vricked bishop,"
(such a notoriously vricked bishop as those were of whom he
treateth, who had renounced the faith) " and not to mingle itself
vrith the sacrifices of a sacrilegious priest ; seeing especially
that it hath a power either to choose worthy priests, or to
refuse those who are unworthy ; the which also we see to
descend from Dirine authority that a bishop should be chosen
the people being present, before the eyes of all ; and that he
who is worthy and fit should be approved by public judgment
and testimony."f
Again, when (saith he concerning himself) " a bishop is
substituted in the place of one deceased, when he is peaceably
chosen by the suffrage of all the people— and whom if
according to the Divine instructions the whole fraternity would
• Propter quod dUigenter de traditione divina et ApostoUca observa-
tione observandum est et tenendum, quod apud nos quoque et fere per
provincias universas tenetur ; ut ad ordinationes rite celebrandus, ad eam
plebem cui praepositus ordinatur, episcopi ejusdem proximi quique con-
veniant, et episcopus deUgatur plebe praesente quae singulorum vitam
plenissime novit, et uniuscujusque actum de ejus conversatione perspexit ;
quod et apud vos factum videmus in Sabini CoUegae nostri ordinatione, ut
de universse fratemitatis sufTragio, et de episcoporum, qui in praesentia
convenerant, quique de eo ad vos Uteras fecerant, judicio episcopatus ei
deferretur. Cypr. Ep. 68. [Ep. 67. p. 103. Paris. 1836.]
t Plebs obsequens praeceptis Dominicis et Deum metuens k peccatore
praeposito separare se debet, nee se ad sacrilegia sacerdotis sacrificia mis-
cere ; quando ipsa maxime habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos sacer
dotes, vel indignos recusandi ; quod et ipsum videmus de divina auctoritate
descendere ; ut sacerdos plebe praesente sub omnium oculis deUgatur, et
dignus atque idoneus pubUco judicio ac testimonio comprobetur.— Cypr.
Ep. [Ibid.]

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 335
•
obey, no man would raove anything against the college of
priests ; none after the Divine judgment, after the suffrage of
the people, after the consent of the feUow-bishop would make
himself judge not indeed of the bishop, but of God."*
Again, "CorneUus was made bishop by the judgment of
God and his Christ, by the testiraony of alraost all the clergy,f
by the suffrage of the people being then present, and by the
college of priests, ancient and good men — and Cornelius being
in the CathoUc Church ordained by the judgment of God,
and by the suffrage of the clergy and people." J
Again, " When a bishop is once made, and is approved by
(he testimony and the judgment of his colleagues, and of the
people."§ 'The author of the ApostoUcal Constitutions thus in the
person of St. Peter very fully and clearly describeth the manner
of ordination of bishops in lus times : " After one ofthe chief
bishops present has thus prayed, the rest of the priests vrith all
the people shaU say. Amen, and after the prayer, one of the
bishops shall deUver the eucharist into the hands of the person
ordained, and that morning he shall be placed by the rest of
the bishops in his throne, all of them saluting him with a kiss
in the Lord. After the reading of the law and prophets, of
our epistles, the acts and gospel, he who is ordained shall
salute the Church with these words. The grace of our Lord
Jesus Christ, and the love of God the Father, and the fellow
ship of the Holy Ghost be vrith you all, Araen. And let all
answer. And with thy spirit. After which words let him
exhort the people." ||
Thus it was then, in a practice so obvious and observable,
* Suffragio totius popuU Cyprianus eligitur. Optat. 1. — Caeterim
quando Episcopus in locum defuncti substituitur, quando popuU universi
suffragio in pace deUgitur.— Cui si secundum magisteria divina obtemperaret
frateinitas universa, nemo adversum Sacerdotum Collegium quidquam
moveret ; nemo post divinum judicium, post populi suffragium, post co-
episcoporum consensum, judicem se jam non Episcopi sed Dei faceret.
—Cypr. Ep. 55. [Ep.54. p, 71. ut supra.]
t Factus est autem Cornelius Episcopus de Dei, et Christi ejus judicio,
lie Clericorum pene omnium testimonio, de plebis, quae tunc affuit, suffra
gio, et de Sacerdotum anttquorum et bonornm vironim CoUegio. Cypr.
Ep. 52. [Ep. 51. p. 59. ut sup.]
X ComeUo in Catholica Ecclesia de Dei judicio, et Cleri ac plebis suf
fragio ordinate. Cypr, Ep. 67. [Ep. 66. p. 100. ut supra.]
§ Episcopo semel facto, et Collegarum ac plebis testimonio et judicio
comprobato. Ep. 41. (ad Cornel.) [Ep. 40.]
11 Const. Apost. 8. 4. Postquam haec erit precatus, &c.

336 A TREATISE OP
that a Pagan emperor took good notice of it, and chose to
imitate it in constituting governors of provinces, and other
officers: "When (saith Lampridius of Alexander Severus)
he would either give rulers to provinces or make presidents, or
ordain procurators, he set up their names, exhorting the people
if they had anything 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 prorinces, to whom the lives and
fortunes of men were entrusted, 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 improved into a more com
plete shape, for constitution of a bishop ; all the bishops of a
province did convene (or such as could with convenience, the
others signifying their mind by writing), and haring approved
him who was recommended by the clergy, and aUowed by the
people, they did ordain him ; the metropolitan of the prorince
ratifying what was done.f
So the Nicene Synod, regarding the practice which had
commonly obtained, did appoint with a qualification to be
generally observed : " It is most fit (say they), that a bishop
be constituted by all bishops in the province ; J 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 tbeir
consent in writing), let the ordination be performed, but let
the ratification of what is done be assigned to the metropolite
in each prorince. "§
* Ubi aliquos voluisset vel rectores Provinciis dare, vel priepositos
facere, vel procuratores id est rationales ordinare, nomina eorum propone-
bat, hortans populum, ut siquid haberet criminis, probai-et manifestis
rebus ; si non probasset, subiret poinam capitis ; dicebatque grave esse,
quum id Christiani et Jud»i facerent in praedicandis Sacerdotibus qui
ordinandi sunt, non fieri in Provinciarum Rectoribus, quibus et fortunse
hominum committerentur et capita. Lamprid. in Alex. Sev. cap. 45.
t HaXaibg ^tapog. Syn. Constantinop. Theod. 5. 9.
X 'ErriaKorrov rrpoaqnti pdXtara piv vrrb rrdvrwv riav iv ry 'trrap-
xi^ KaOiaraaBat — To ii Kvpog nav yivopkvwv SiSbaBai KaB' 'tKaarriv
irrapxi^v np pqrporroXiry. -Cone. Nie. Can. 4. [Lab. vol. 2. p. 29.
Paris. 1671,]
§ Vid, Can, Apost, 1, Cone. Antioch. Can, 19, Cone, Laod, Can,
12, Cone. Afr. Can. 13.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 337
In this canon (the which is followed by divers canons of
other Synods), there is no express mention concerning the
interest of the clergy and people in election of the bishops ;
but these things ai-e only passed over, as precedaneous to the
constitution ot 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 vrith the Church did live in any city, that, " If any
CathoUc bishop should happen to die, then should those who
were already received ascend into the honour of him deceased ;
in case tbey should appear worthy, and the people should
choose, the bishop of Alexandria withal adding his suffrage to
hira, and his confirmation;"* the which words vrith sufficient
eridence do interpret the canon not to concern the election, but
the ordination of bishops.
Thus the Fathers of the second General Synod plainly did
interpret this canon by their proceeding ; for they in their
Synodical Epistle to Pope Damasus and the Western bishops,
did assure him that they in the constitution of bishops for the
principal Eastern sees, had foUowed this order of the Synod of
Nice, together vrith " the ancient law of the Church ;"f in
agreement whereto they had ordained Nectarius bishop of Con
stantinople ; " vrith common consent, under the eyes of the
most religious emperor Theodosius, and of aU the clergy, the
whole city adjoining also its suffrage;" J and that for "Antioch,
the bishops of the prorince and of the Eastern diocese con
curring, had canonicaUy ordained Flarianus bishop, the whole
Church consenting as vrith one voice to honour the person." §
* Et Sk Ttvag avp[iaiq dvarravaaaOai ribv iv ry 'EKKXqaiq., Tqvi-
KovTa rrpaaavapaivtiv tig rqv Tipqv rob rereXtvKorog roig dpn rrpo-
ahjipBevTag, povov el d^ioi ipaivoivro, Kai 6 Xabg a'lpoXro, avvem^qipi-
ZovTog ainv, Kai ima^pay'iZovrog rov rqg 'AXtiavSptiag 'EmaKorro*.,
Socr. 1. 9. Theod. 1. 9.
t Theod. 5. 9. [p. 206. Cantab. 1720,]
X UaXatog Tt Stapbg KtKpdrqKt, Kai Tiav dyiao/ iv 'SiKaif Ilarepwv
opog. — Olg aKoXovBwg. — Mfrd Koivqg bpovoiag, vrr' o^tat Kai ^to^iXt-
ararov ^aaiXkwg QtoSoaiov, rravrbg rt ro5 KX-qpov, Kai rrdaqg im^j/q-
0i?o/j£i;i)f Trjg Tro^euf.
§ ExiffKowov ^Xa^iavbv di re rrjg irrapxiag, Kai rfjg ' AvaroXi-
Kqg SioiKqatwg avvSpapovreg KavoviKwg ixtiporovqaav, rrdaqg avp-
rjiijipov riig 'EKKXqaiag iiarrep Std pidg fwvrig rbv dvSpa npqadaqg.
VOL, I. Z

338 A TREATISE OF
Indeed the practice generally doth confirm this, the people
everywhere continuing to elect their bishop. So did the people
of Alexandria demand Athanasius for their bishop.* So Pope
Julius did complain that Gregory was intruded into the place
of Athanasius ; " not being required by the presbyters, not by
the bishops, not hy the people."f So Gregory Nazianzen
describeth the elections of bishops in his times to be carried by
the power of wealthy men, and impetuousness ofthe people. J So
Augustine intimateth the sarae in his speech about designation
of a successor to hiraself: " I know," says he, " that after the
decease of bishops the Churches are wont to be disturbed by
arabitious and contentious men."§ So the tumults at Antioch,
in choosing a bishop after Eustathius ; at Rome after Libe
rius ; at Constantinople after Alexander ; at Milan when
St. Arabrose was chosen. 1|
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 the raost reverend
clergy, and of all the rest of the whole city, did ordain ;"^ and
his competitor Bassianus, " Me, with great constraint and rio
lence, the people and the clergy, and the bishops did instal."**
In the Synod of Chalcedon, Eusebius, bishop of Ancyra,
saith, that " the whole city of Gangra did come to him bring
ing their suffrages."f f Posidius telleth us of St. Augustine,
that " in ordaining priests and clergymen he deemed the
greater consent of Christians, and the custom of the Church
was to be foUowed."Jf
* Ath. Apol. 2. p. 726.
t Ml) airqB'tvra roXg Upeajivrepoig, pij rrap' 'EmaKoTrwv, prj rrapi
Xaiav. Ath. ibid. p. 749. X Orat. 19. p. 310. Epist. 21.
^ Scio post obitus Episcoporum per ambitiosos aut contensiosis solere
Ecclesias perturbari. — Aug. Ep. 110.
II Euseb. de Vit. Const. 3. 59, 60. — Socr. 1. 2i.—^epiaB'tvrog tov
-irXqBovg. — Soz. 6. 23. MarceU. lib. 27. — Atvij SiaKpiBiv to rrXrjBoQ.—
Socr. 1. 24. Soz. 3. 4. Theod. 4. 6.
H 'Epi TtaaapaKOvra 'ErriaKorroi rqg 'Aa'iag -^-qftp Kat riav Xaprrpo-
rarwv, Kai riav XoydSwv, Kai rob tv'Xa^taTdrov rravrbg KXqpov, Kat
riav Xoirriav rrdvrwv riig rroXewg rrdaqg ixtiporovqaai. Cone. Chalc,
Act. 11. p. 404.
** 'Epi Si ptrd TroXXjjf dvdyKqg Kai piag ivBpov'iZovaiv eig r-qv ai-
rqv rrbXiv 'iiptaov b Xabg, Kai 6 KXqpog, Kai ol 'ErriaKorroi. Ibid.
tt "Arraaa ydp q rrbXig fiXBt rrpbg ipi tig 'AyKvpav Kai iKopiaav rd
^iq^iapara. Syn. Chalc. Act. 16. p. 462.
XX In ordinandis verb Sacerdotibus et Clericis consensum majorem
Christianorum, et consuetudinem Ecclesiae sequendam esse arbitrabatur.
Posid. in Aug. Vit. cap, 20.

THE pope's SUPllEMACY. 339
So Celestine I. : " Let no bishop be given them against
their vriUs; let the consent and request of the clergy, the
people and the order be expected;"* and Pope Leo I. : —
"When there shall be an election of a bishop, let him be pre
ferred who has the unaniraous consent of the clergy and people,
so that if the votes be dirided and part for another person; let
him, by the judgment ofthe metropoUtan, be preferred, whose
merits and interests are greatest, only that none may be or
dained against their wiUs or without their desire, lest the
unwilUng people contemn or hate a bishop whom they never
desired, and become less reUgious than they ought, because
they could not have such a bishop as they would."f And in
other of his epistles: " There is no reason that they should
be accounted bishops, who were neither chosen by the clergy,
nor desired by the people, nor with the metropoUtan's order
consecrated by the provincial bishops."J
" Certainly the desires of the citizens, and the testimonies
of the people should have been expected, vrith the judgment of
the honourable and the choice ofthe clergy, which in the ordi
nations of priests use to be observed by those who know the
rules of the Fathers. § — When peaceably and vrith 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 ordained be
required peaceably and quietly ; let the subscription of the
clergy, the testimony of the honourable, the consent of the
order and people be observed ; let him who is to preside over
* NuUus invitis detur Episcopus ; Cleri, plebis, et ordinis consensum ac
desiderium requiratur. — Celest. I. Ep. 2.
t Cilm ergb de summi sacerdotis electione tractabitur, Uie omnibus prepo-
natur, quem Cleri plebisque consensus concorditer postulariut; it^ ut
si in aliam forte personam partivnn se vota diviserint, MetropoUtani judicio
is altera praeferatur, qui majoribus et studus juvatur et meritis, tantiim
ut nuUus invitis, et non petentibus ordinetur ; ne Civitas Episeopum non
optatum aut contemnataut oderit, et fiat minus reUgiosa quam convenit,
cui non Ucuit habere quem voluit. P. Leo I. Ep. 84. ad Anastas. [Lab.
VOL 3. p. 1385. Paris. 1671.]
X NuUa ratio sinit, ut inter Episcopos habeantur, qui nee a Clericis sunt
electi, nee a plebibus expetiti, nee a Provincialibus Episcopis cum Metro
poUtani judicio consecrati. P. Leo I. Ep. 92.
§ Expectarentur certfe vota Civium, testimonia populorum, quaereretur
honoratorum arbitrium, electio Clericorum, quae in Sacerdotum solent
ordmationibus ab his qui nSrunt Patrum regulas custodiri. P. Leo. Ep. 89.
Dist. 63. cap. 27.
II Quum per pacem, et Deo placitam concordiam consoms omnium
studiis qui doctor pacis futurus est ordinatur. Ibid.
Z A

340 A TREATISE OF
aU be chosen by aU."* And Pope Nicholas 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."f
Now in all these proceedings it is raost apparent that there
was no regard had to the Pope, or any thought of him, out of
his particular territory, which he had as raetropolitan (or after
ward as primate in some parts of the West) . Nowhere else
had he the least finger in the constitution of a bishop any
where through the whole Church, no not of the least cler
gyman. When by St. Cyprian so largely and punctually the manner
of constituting bishops is declared ;J when the Nicene canon
and those of other Synods do so carefully prescribe about the
ordination of them ; when so raany reports concerning the
election of bishops do occur in history, why is there not a
tittle of mention concerning any special interest of the Roman
bishops about them ?
So true is that of Alb. Crantzius : " There was no need
then of apostoUcal confirmation, it was sufficient if the elec
tion were approved by the archbishop ; now the Church of
Rome has assumed to herself the rights of all Churches," §
We may by the way observe, that in the first times they
had not so rauch as an absolute power of ordaining a presbyter
in the Church of his own city without leave of the clergy and
people : as raay be inferred frora 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 raany of the laity, did request that it raight be granted to
hira to ordain that one person ;"|| and he that so hardly could
* Per pacem et quietem sacerdotes qui praefuturi sunt postulentur;
teneatur subscriptio clericorum honoratorum testimonium, ordinis con
sensus et plebis ; qui praefuturus est omnibus, ab omnibus eligatur. Ibid.
t P. Nich. I. Ep. 5. Quia consuetudinem vestram novimus in" Regia
Urbe, minimo apicem Archieraticse potestatis aliquem posse habere sine
Ecclesiasticae plebis assensu, atque ImperiaU suffragio.— P. Joh. VIII.
Ep. 70. Dist. 62.
t Vid. P. Leo. Ep. 84. 101. 107.
§ NihU tum opus erat ApostoUci confirmatione ; satis erat electionem
ab Archiepiscopo comprobari : nunc ad se omnium Ecclesiarum jura traxit
Romana Ecclesia. Crantz. Metrop. 7. 45.
II AiaKwXvoptvog vrrb rravrbg roS KXripov, dXXd Kai Xamiav rro'XXHv,
rjiiwae avyxwpqBqvai avnp robrov fidvov x^iporovqaai. P. Cornel.
apud Eus. 6. 43. [p. 218. Oxon. 1845.]

THE pope's SUPllEMACY. 341
ordain one priest in his own Church, what authority could he
have to constitute bishops in aU other Churches ?
To all these evidences of fact our adversaries do oppose some
instances of Popes meddUng in the constitution of bishops ;
as Pope Leo I. saith, that Anatolius did, " by the favour of
his assent, obtain the bishopric of Constantinople."* The
same Pope is alleged as haring confirmed Maxiraus of Antioch.
The same doth write to the bishop of* Thessalonica (his ricar),
that he should " confirm the election of bishops by his autho
rity ."f 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 his faith." J Also
Gregory I. doth complain of it as of an inordinate act, that a
bishop of Salonse was "ordained without his knowledge," §
Pope l)amasus did confirm the ordination of Peter Alexan
drinus ; " the Alexandrians (saith Sozoraen) did render the
Churches to Peter, being returned from Rome, with the letters
of Damasus, which confirraed both the Nicene decrees and his
ordination." 11 But what, I pray, doth confirmation here sig
nify but approbation ; for did he othervrise confirm the Nicene
decrees ? did they need other confirmation ?
To the forraer instances we answer, that being well consi
dered, they do much strengthen our argument, in that they are
so few, so late, so lame, so impertinent ; for if the Pope had
enjoyed a power of constituting bishops, more instances of its
exercise would have been producible ; indeed it could not be
but that history would have been full of them, the constitution
of bishops being a matter of continual use, and very remark
able. At least they might have found one instance or other to
allege, before the tiraes of that busy Pope Leo ; in whose tirae
and by whose raeans. Papal authority began to overflow its
* Satis est qubd vestrm pietatis auxiUo, et mei favoris assensu Episcopa
tum tantse Urbis obtinuit. P. Leo Ep. 54. [Lab. vol. 4. p. 847. Paris.
]671.]-DeMarc. 3. 14. §1.
f Ut ordinationem rite celebrandam tua quoque iirmet authoritas. P.
Leo. Ep. 84. (ad Anastas.)
X Donatum^tS, Dominico volumus gregi praesidere, ut Ubellum fidei
suae ad nos meminerit dirigendum. — P. Leo. Ep. 87.
§ Salonitanae Civitatis Episcopus ne ac responsali meo nesciente ordi
natus est, et facta res est, quae sub nuUis anterioribus principibus evenit.
Greg. Ep. 4. 34.
II 'AXt^avSptXg irravtXBbvn Si rort Ukrpip drrb rrig 'Piapqg ptrd
ypappdnav Aapdaov nare iv "SiKaii} So^avra, Kai rqv abrov ^"poTO-
viov KvpovvTwv, rrap'tSwKav rdg 'EKKXqaiag. Sozom. 6. 39.

342 A TKEATISE OP
banks. And those which they produce, do no wise reach home
to the point ; AnatoUus did obtain the bishopric of " Con
stantinople by the 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 Dios
corus (whose responsal he had been), and haring favoured the
Eutychian faction, Pope Leo might thence have had a fair
colour to disavow hira as incapable of that function and dig
nity, he being so obnoxious ;f both having such a flaw in his
ordination, and having been guilty of great faults, adherence
to the party of Dioscorus, and irregularly ordaining the bishop
of Antioch ; but he, " out of regard to tbe eraperor's interven
tion," did acknowledge Anatolius for bishop ; this was the
"favourable assent," with which he upbraideth Anatolius,
haring displeased him ; and what doth this signify ?
Again, Pope Leo did not reject Maxiraus, bishop of An
tioch, from communion, nor disclaimed his ordination, although
liable to exception :J what then, is this a confirraation of him?
No such matter ; it was only, which in such a vixenly Pope
was a great favour, a forbearance to quarrel with him, as not
duly ordained ; which any other bishop might have done. If
a Pope had a flaw in his ordination, another bishop might
refuse him.
Again, Pope Leo did enjoin the bishop of Thessalonica to
confirm ordinations : what is that to the purpose ? It belonged
to that bishop, as a metropoUtan, by the canons to confirm
those in his prorince, or as a primate, to confirm those in his
diocese ; it belonged to hira as the Pope's ricar in those ter
ritories, to which the Pope had stretched his jurisdiction, to
execute the Pope's orders ; but what is this to universal autho
rity ? It is certain, that Illyricura was then in a raore special
raanner subjected to the Pope's jurisdiction, than any of the
• Nos enim vestrae fidei et interventionis habentes intuitura, cum se
cundum suae consecrationis authores ejus initia titubarent, benigniores
erga ipsum quam justiores esse voluimus. P. Leo Epist. 55. (ad Martiar
num.) t Decessore enim tuo B. memoriae Flaviano propter defensionem Ca-
thoUcae veritatis ejecto, non immerito credebatur qubd ordinatores tui con
tra Sanctorum Canonum constituta viderentur sui simUem consecrasse. —
Post iUa itaque ordinationis tuae non inculpata principia. P. Leo Ep. 53.
ad Anatol. — Liber, cap. 12.
X Quod nos amore reparandae fidei, et pacis studio retractare cessavimus.
P. Leo Ep. 54. (ad Marcian.)— Cone. Chalc. Act 10.

THE pope's supremacy. 343
other Eastern Churches : what therefore he did there, cannot
be drawn into consequence as to other places. j
The same may be said in answer to the complaint of Pope
Gregory, and to any the like instances.
Moreover, surreptitious, presumptuous, pragmatical intru
sions, or usurpations of power do not suffice to found a right
in this or any other case; to which purpose, and wholly to
mvalidate any such pleas, these observations may be con
sidered. 1. There do occur divers instances of bishops, who did
meddle in ordinations of other bishops so as to bear great stroke
m constituting them, who did not thereby pretend to universal
jurisdiction, and it would be extremely ridiculous thence to
infer they had any reasonable claim thereto.
Thus it was objected to Athanasius, " that he presumed to
ordain in cities which did not belong to him." Eusebius of
Constantinople did obtrude Eusebius Emisseiius to be bishop
of Alexandria. Eustathius of Antioch did ordain Evagrius
bishop of Constantinople. Euzoius delivered unto Lucius the
bishopric of Alexandria. Lucifer, a Sardinian bishop, did
ordain Paulinus bishop of Antioch ;* they for a salvo, say, as
the Pope's legate, but upon what ground or testimony ? why
did not historians tell us so much ? The Pope had then been
hissed at, if he had sent legates about such errands ; it was in
deed out of presumption and pragraatical zeal to serve a party,
than ordinary in persons addicted to all parties, right and
wrong ; it not being then so expressly forbidden by the canons
as afterward.
Theognis and Theodorus did raake Macedonius bishop of
Constantinople. Theophilus of Alexandria did ordain St.
Chrysostom. The Egyptian bishops surreptitiously did con
stitute Maximus, the Cynic philosopher, bishop of Constan
tinople. Acacius (who had as Uttle to do there as the Pope),
did thrust Eudoxius into the throne of Constantinople.f
'ApiXei TOI Kai tovto iyKXqpa avnp iTT^yov, (!>£ iv rroXtat pqSiv
air^ rrpoaqKovaaig x^iporovtXv irbXpqaev. Soz. 3. 21. — 'Erri tSv
AXe^avSpeiag Trpot^XriBq Spdvov iirrb Evae^iov tov KwvaravTivov-
TioXiiag 'Eirio-KOTTOu. Soz. 2. 5. — Socr. 4. 14. — ^"Etti rip rrapaSoxivai
AovKiip np 'Apeiavip rdg iKeX'EKKXqa'iag. Socr. 4. 21.~'Exeipor6vqae
rbv UavXXvov 'Err'iaKorrov. Socr. 3. 6. Socr. 6. 2.
t Soz. 2. 6. — QeoipiXog'lwdvvqv ixtipoTQvqae. Socr, 6. 2. — To-vtov
KXeTJiavreg r^v x^'poroviav 'E;riO'KO'!roi' KwvaravnvovrrbXewg Kark-
inqaav di Tore ei 'Aiyvrrrov avveXqXvBbreg. Soz. 7. 9.— Tiav rrepi
AicdKiov ivBpoviadvTwv avrov. Socr. 2. 13.

344 A TREATISE OP
Meletius of Antioch did constitute St. Gregory Nazianzen to
the charge of Constantinople. Acacius and Patrophilus;. ex
truding Maxiraus " did in his room constitute Cyril bishop of
Jerusalem."* Pope Leo doth complain of AnatoUus, that
" against the canonical rule he had assuraed to himself the or
dination of the bishop of Antioch."f
2. To obviate these irregular and inconvenient proceedings,
haring crept in upon the dissensions in faith, and especially
upon occasion of Gregory Nazianzen being constituted bishop
of Constantinople by Meletius, and Maximus being thrust into
the sarae see by the Egyptians (whose party for a time the
Roman Church did countenance), the second General Synod
did ordain that no bishop should intermeddle about ordinations
vrithout the bounds of his own diocese.
. 3. In pursuance of this law, or upon the ground of it, the
Pope was sometiraes checked, when he presuraed to make a
sally beyond his bounds in this or the like cases.
As when Pope Innocent I. did send some bishops to Con
stantinople for procuring a Synod to examine the cause of St.
Chrysostora ; " those of Constantinople — did cause them to be
dismissed vrith disgrace, as molesting a government beyond
their bounds."J
4. Even in the Western parts, after that the Pope had
wriggled hiraself into raost countries there, so as to obtain sway
in their transactions, yet he in divers places did not meddle in
ordinations : — "We do not (says Pope Leo I.) arrogate to our
selves a power of ordaining in your prorinces."§
Even in some parts of Italy itself the Pope did not confirm
bishops till the times of Pope Nicholas I. as may be coUected
from the submission then of the bishop of Ravenna to that
condition, II " that he should have no power to consecrate
* "'H.Sq rrpiaqv eig KwvaravrivovrroXiv Sid rqv Vpqyop'iov Kardara-
aiv dfiKopevog. Soz. 7. 2, 3. — 'AKaKiog piv ydp koi 'Qarpoi^iXog Ma-
iipov rbv 'ItpoaoX-iipwv iZwBriaavrtg KvpiXXov avriKar'tarqaav.
Socr. 2. 238.
f Post consecrationem Antiocheni Episcopi, quam tibimet contra Ca
nonieum regulam vendicasti — P. Leo I. Epist. 53. (ad Anatol.)
X Toig piv vrrtpopiav dpxqv ivoxXqaavrag dripwg iKrrepijiBrivai
rrapeaKevaaav. Sozom. 8. 28.
§ Non enim nobis ordinationes vestrarum Provinciarum defendunus.
P. Leo Ep. 89.
II Et ne electos etiam Canonic^ in Flaminia episcopos consecrandi facul-
tatem haberet, nisi id sibi a Sede ApostoUca literis concederetur. Plat, in
P. Nichol. I.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 345
bishops canonically elected in the Regio Flaminia, unless it were
granted him by letters frora the apostolic see."
And it was not vrithout great opposition and struggling
that he got that power other-where than in his original pre
cincts, or where the juncture of things did afford him special
advantage. 5. If examples wonld avail to determine 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 anthority in holy Scripture. " And Zadok
the priest did the king put in the room of Abiathar."* Con
stantine did interpose at the designation of a bishop at Antioch
m the room of Eustathius.f Upon Gregory Nazianzen's re
cess from Constantinople, 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 ordained, and reserved to him
self the choice of one ;"X and accordingly they obeying, he
out of aU that were nominated " did elect Nectarius." " Con
stantius did deUver the see of Constantinople to Eusebius Ni-
comediensis."§ Constantius was angry with Macedoiuus,
because he was ordained " vrithout his licence." || He " re
jecting Eleusius and Sylvanus did order other to be substi
tuted in their places."^ When, before St. Ambrose, the see
of MUan was vacant, a Synod of bishops there " did entreat
the emperor to declare one."** Flavianus said to the emperor
TheodosiuSjf f " Give forsooth, O king, the see of Antioch to
whom you shaU think good." The eraperor did callj J Nesto-
* 1 Kmgs U. 35. t Euseb. de Vit. Const. 3. 59, 60. [Cantab. 1720.]
X OpoardiavTog rob ^aaiXiwg roXg 'itpevaiv iyypd^ai xapry Tdg
-irpoaqyopiag Hv eKaaroi SoKi/idZovaiv eig r-qv x^^porov'iav di'iwv, tav-
Tif Si ^vXdiavrog rov 'ivog rqv aiptaiv — icat NticTapioj' aipeirai.
Sozom. 7. 8.
§ Evae^iip tov KwvaravTivovrroXewg Sipovov rraptSwKtv. Sozom. 3.
i. [Cantab. 1720.]
II "On rrpivavTov irrcrp't^/at, ixtiporov-q^q. Soz. 3. 6. [ut supra.]
IT Toig piv 'ti-qXaat riav 'EKKXqaiiav, ir'tpovg Si dvr' avriav Kara-
aTrjvai rrpoa'tra^t. Theodor. 2. 27. [p. 112. Cantab. 1720.]
** Airbv q avvoSog qiiov TpqipiaaaBai. Theod. 4. 7.
tt Toi ydp TOI Sbg ip fiovXti rbv 'Avnoxkwv Sipovov, ia jSafftXeS. —
Theod. 5. 23.
tt Visum est Imperatoribus nuUum ordinare de ConstantinopoUtana
Ecclesia Pontificem.— Nestorium quasi ntilem ad docendum Constantino.
poUn Principes evocaverunt. Liber. Brev. 6. Socr. 7. 29 — Quem tanto
imperii judicio electum, tanto sacerdotum studio prosecutum. — Vine. Lir.
J). 330.

346 A TREATISE OP
rius frora Antioch to the see of Constantinople ; and he was
(saith Tincentius Lir.) " elected by the eraperor's judgment."*
The favour of Justinian did advance Menas to the see of Con
stantinople :f and the same did prefer Eutychius thereto.:^
He did put in Pope VigiUus.
In Spain the kings had the election of bishops by the de
crees of the Council of Toledo. §
That the eraperor Charles did use to confirm bishops. Pope
John VIII. doth testify, reproving the archbishop of Verdun,'
for rejecting a bishop, " whom the clergy and people of the
city had chosen, and the eraperor Charles had confirmed by
his consent." II
When Macarius bishop of Antioch for MonotheUtism 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,
vrithout the eraperor's leave and licence. As indeed there are
also in later times other decrees (made by Popes of another
kidney, or in other junctures of affairs) which forbid princes
to meddle in the elections of bishops ; as in the seventh S)Tiod,
and in the eighth Synod as they call it, upon occasion of Pho
tius being placed in the see of Constantinople by the power of
the court.** And that of Pope Nicholas I. By which discor
dance in practice we may see the consistence and stability of
doctrine and practice in the Roman Church.f f
* Tunc Papa Principis favore Menam pro eo (Authimo) ordinavit An
tistitem. Liber, cap. 21.
+  dvefi'i^aat rbv Evrvxiov. Evag. 4. 38. [Cantab, 1720.]
X Cone. Tolet. 12, cap. 6. apud Gr. Dist. 63. cap. 25. [Lab. vol. 6.
Paris. 1671.]
§ Quem clerus et populus Civitatis elegerat, piaeque memoriae Carolus
Imperator suo consensu firmaverat. P. Joh. VIII. Ep. 70. [Lab. vol. 9.
p. 56. Paris. 1671.]
II AiTobpev Tijv vptrkpav ivSoiorqra rov dvaydyai np eiae^e-
ardrip Kai ^eoar'trrqv r'ipwv Starrory Kai ptydXip (BaaiXtX 'ertpov dvri
MaKapiov — Sid rb pq xj/paiiEii/ rbv roiovrov bpovov. Syn. VI. Act.
12. (p. 208.) [Lab. vol. 6. Paris. 1671.]
1[ Dist. 63. cap. 9. Greg, 1. Ep. 4. 15. cap. 15, 16, 17, 18. P. Leo IV.
et Steph. Distinc. 63. cap. 6, 7. Distinc. 63. cap. 1, 2.
** Ibid. cap. 4. — (It is a notorious thing, that most princes in the west,
in Germany, France, and England, did invest bishops, tUl the time of
Pope Gregory VII. Vfhen that boisterous man did raise so much stir iu
Christendom to dispossess them of that right ; which they enjoyed not only
as princes, but as founders, patrons, benefactors, protectors of Churches,)

THE pope's supremacy. 347
The emperors for a long time did enjoy the privUege of con
stituting or confirming the Popes : for says Platina, in the Life
of Pelagius II. " nothing was then done by the clergy in
electing a Pope unless the eraperor approved the election.*
He did confirm Pope Gregory I. and Pope Agatho.
" Pope Adrian vrith his whole Synod did deliver to Charles
the Great the right and power of electing the Pope and
ordaining the apostoUc see. — He moreover defined that arch
bishops and bishops in every prorince should receive investiture
irom him ; and that if a bishop were not commended and
invested by the king, he should be consecrated by none ; and
whoever should act against this decree, hira he did noose in
the band of anathema."f
The Uke privUege did Pope Leo VIII. attribute to the
emperor Otho I.J " We give him, (says he) for ever power to
ordain a successor and bishop of the chief apostoUc see, and
change archbishops," &c. And Platina, in his Life, says,
" That being weary of the inconstancy of the Romans, he
transferred aU anthority to choose a Pope from the clergy and
people of Rome to the emperor." §
Now I pray if this power of confirraing bishops do by
Dirine institution belong to the Pope, how could he part vrith
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 .ind confirmation of bishops. ||
So the second General Synod did confirm the ordination of
* Nihil a clero in eUgendo Pontifice actum erat nisi ejus electionem Im
perator approbasset. Plat, in Pelagio II. (p. 154.) [p. 81. Colon. 1568.]
—Distinct. 63. Plat. p. 155. Tid. Joh. Diac. et Anastas. Dist. 63.
cap. 21.
t Hadrianus autem Papa cum universa Synodo tradiderunt jus et potes
tatem eligendi Pontificem, et ordinandi ApostoUcam Sedem. — -Insuper
Archiepiscopos et Episcopos per singulas IVovincias ab eo investituram
accipere definivit ; et nisi a Rege laudetor et investiatur Episcopus, a ne
mine consecretur ; et quicunque contra hoc decretum ageret, anathematis
viucnlo eum innodavit. Distinct. 63. cap. 22. [Corp. Jur. Can. vol. 1.
Paris. 1695.]
t Largimnr [Domino Othoni] in perpetuuin facultatem successorem,
atque summae Sedis ApostoUcae Pontificem ordinandi, ac per hoc Archi
episcopos sen Episcopos, &c. Distinct. 63. cap. 23. [Idem. vol. 1.]
§ Qui statim Romanorum ineonstantiae pertaesus authoritatem omnem
eligendi Pontificis a clero populoque Romano ad Imperatorem transtuUt.
Plat, m Leo VIII. p. 291. [p. 154. Colon. 1568.]
II Couc. Const. Sess. 40. Cone. Bas. Sess. 37. [p. 98.]

348 A TREATISE OP
Nectarius, bishop of Constantinople, and of Flavianus, bishop
of Antioch* (this ordination, say they, the Synod generally
have admitted) , although the Roraan Church did not approve
the ordination of Nectarius, and for a long time after did
oppose that of Flavianus, So the fifth Synod it seemeth did
confirra the ordination of Theophanius bishop of Antioch. So
the Synod of Pisa did constitute Pope Alexander V., that of
Constance Pope Martin V., that of Basil Pope Felix V.
7. All catholic bishops in old times might and commonly
did confirra the elections and ordinations of bishops, to the
sarae effect as Popes raay be pretended to have done ; that is
by signifying their approbation, or satisfaction concerning the
orthodoxy of their faith, the attestation to their manners, the
legality of their ordination, no canonical irapediment ; and
consequently by adraitting them to coraraunion of peace and
charity, and correspondence in all good offices, which they
express by returning koivovikw. i-maroXal in answer to their
Synodical — coraraunicatory letters.
Thus did St. Cyprian and all the bishops of that age con
firm the ordination of Pope Cornelius, being contested by
Novatian ; as St. Cyprian in terras 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,f
&c, — to confirra thy ordination vrith a greater authority ."J
To which purpose, each bishop did write epistles to other
bishops (or at least to those of highest rank) acquainting them
with his ordination and instalraent, making a profession of
his faith, so as to satisfy them of his capacity of the function.
8. But bishops were coraplete bishops before they did give
such an account of theraselves ; so that it was not in the power
of the Pope, or of any others to reverse their ordination ; or
dispossess them of their places.§ There was no confirmation
importing any such matter : this is plain ; and one instance
vrill serve to shew it ; that of Pope Honorius, and of Sergius
* "Hvrrtp ivBtapov x^ipi^rov'iav iSk^aro rb rqg avvoSov koivov. —
Theod. 5. 9, [Cantab. 1720.]
f Ciim locus Petri et gradus Cathedrae Sacerdotalis vacaret, quo occu-
patio de Dei voluntate, atque omnium nostrum consensione firmato.
Cypr. Ep. 52. (ad Anton.) [Ep. 51. p. 59. Paris. 1836.]
X Ad comprobandam ordinationem tuam factam auctoritate majore
Ep. 45. ad Corn. [Ep. 44.]
§ 'Qt; a dKoijg Kai povqg ptpaBqKaptv rqg 'ItpoaoXvpiTiav xfipo-
TovqBt'ig rrpotSpog' oiirrw ydp Td ii iBovg avrob avvpSiKa pkxpi rov vvv
'tStidptBa. Syn. VI, Act. 12. 198.

THE pope's supremacy. 349
bishop of Constantinople, who speak of Sophronius patriarch
of Jerusalem ;* that he was constituted bishop before their
knowledge, and receipt of his synodical letters.
9. If the designation of any bishop should belong to the
Pope, then especially that of metropoUtans, who are the chief
princes ofthe Church ; but this anciently did not belong to him.
In Africa the most ancient bishop of the prorince (without
election) did succeed into that dignity. Where the metropoles
were fixed, all the bishops of the province did convene, and
vrith the consent of the clergy, persons of quality, and the
commonalty did elect hira.f So was St. Cyprian bishop of
Carthage elected. So Nectarius of Constantinople, Flarianus
of Antioch, and Cyril of Jerusalera, as the Fathers of
Constantinople tell us. So Stephanus and Bassianus, rival
bishops of Ephesus, did pretend to have been chosen, as we saw
before. And for confirmation, there did not need any, there is no
mention of any ; except that confirraation of which we spake,
a consequent approbation of thera fromaU their fellow-bishops,
as haring no exception against thera. rendering thera unworthy
of communion. In the Synod of Chalcedon it was defined
that the bishop of Constantinople should have equal privileges
vrith the Bishop of Rorae ; yet it is expressly cautioned there,
that he shall not meddle in ordination of bishops in any pro
rince, that being left to the metropoUtan. J For a good tirae,
even in the Western parts, the Pope did not meddle vrith the
constitution of metropolitans, learing the Churches to enjoy
their liberties. § Afterwards vrith all other rights he snatched
the collation, confirmation, &c. of nietropoUtans.
VII. Sovereigns have a power to censure and correct all
inferior magistrates in proportion to their offences : and in case
• Nuvi Si dKovoutv 'EmaKorrov KaBtariaTog rrig 'ItpoaoXvpiriav.—
?. Honor. Ibid. p. 198.
t MetropoUtano defuncto, ciim in locum ejus aUus fuerit subrogandus,
Provinciales Episcopi ad Civitatem Metropolitanam convenire debebunt, ut
onmium Clericorum atque omnium civium voluntate discussa ex Presby
teris ejusdem Ecclesiae, vel ex Diaconibus optimus eUgatur. P. Leo.
Ep. 88. — The MetropoUtan being dead, vphen another is to be put in his
place, the provincial bishops ought to meet in the metropolitan city, that
by the votes of the whole clergy and citizens, out of the priests or deacons
of the same Church, the fittest person may be chosen.
t MqS'tv irriKoivovvTog raXg iKtivwv xtiporoviaig rob baiordrov 'Ap-
XitmaKoirov Tqg ^aaiXiSog. — Act. 16. p. 464.
^ Vid. ConcU. Aur. Can. 7. Apud ad Marc. VI. 4. § 8.

350 A TUEATISE OF
of great misdemeanour or of incapacity they can wholly dis
charge and remove them from their office.
This prerogative, therefore, he of Rome doth claim as most
proper to hiraself, by Divine sanction.*
" God Almighty alone can dissolve the spiritual raarriage
between a bishop and his Church. Therefore these three things
premised," (the confirmation, translation, and deposition of
bishops,) " are reserved to the Roraan bishop, not so much by
canonical constitution, as by Divine institution."f
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 he
infiected and corrupted to the advantage of Papal interest.J
But such a power anciently did not by any rale, or custom
in a peculiar manner belong to the Roman bishop. §
Premising what was generally touched about jurisdiction;
in reference to this branch we remark,
1 . The exercising of judgment and censure upon bishops
(when it was needful for general good) was prescribed to be
done by Synods, Provincial or Patriarchical (Diocesan). In
them causes were to be discussed, and sentence pronounced
against those who had deriated from faith, or comraitted mis
demeanours. So it was appointed in the Synod of Nice ;|| as
the African Synod (wherein St. Augustine 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 metropolitan's charge, for they
* Vid. Gelas. Ep. 13. (p. 640.)
t Et ideo tria hjec quae praemisimus non tam Constitutione Canonica,
qnam Institutione Divina soU sunt Romano Pontifici reservata. P. Innoc.
III. in Gregor. Decret. lib. 1. tit. 7. cap. 2. [Corp. Jur. Can. vol. 2.
Paris. 1695.]
X Causae criminales graviores contra Episcopos, etiam hseresis quod
absit, quse depositione aut privatione dignae sunt, ab ipso tantum summo
Romano Pontifice cognoscantur, et terminentur. Cone. Trid. Sess. 24.
cap. 5. [p. 277. Paris. 1837.]
§ 'EiaKOrrog KaBaiptX rrdvraKXqpiKbv diiov 'ovra KaBaipkaeiag, rrXrjv
'EmaKorrov, povog ydp ovx ^"^^^ re. Const. Ap. 8. 28.
II Syn. Nie. Can. 5.
i[ Decreta Nicena sive inferioris gradus Clericos, sive ipsos Episcopos
suis MetropoUtanis apertissime commiserunt : prudentissimd enim justis-
sim^que viderunt quaecunque negotia iu suis locis ubi orta sunt finienda ;
uec unicuique Provinciae gratiam S. Spiritus defuturam. Syn. Afr. Ep. ad
P. Celest. I. [Lab. vol. 2. p. 1675. Paris. 1671.]

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 351
have most prudently and justly discerned that all matters
whatsoever ought to "be determined in the places where they do
first begin ; and that the grace of the Holy Spirit would not
be wanting to every particular province." The sarae law was
enacted by the Synod of Antioch,* by the Synods of Constan
tinople, Chalcedon, &c.
Thus was Paulus Samosatenus,f for his error against the
Dirinity of our Lord, and for his scandalous demeanour, de
posed by the Synod of Antioch. Thus was Eustathius bishop
of Antioch (being accused of SabelUanism 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 un
couth garb, and fond conceits against marriage) was discarded
by the Synod of Gangra. || Thus did a Synod of Constanti
nople abdicate MarceUus bishop of Ancyra, for heterodoxy in
tbe point concerning our Lord's Divinity. For the Uke cause
was Photinus bishop of Sirraium, deposed by a Synod there,
"gathered by the eraperor'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
(although raost injuriously) deposed by a Synod at Constanti
nople.** 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 a Uttle finger. All the proceedings did go on supposition of
the rule, and laws, that such judgments were to be passed by
Synods. St. Chrysostom SeKarrivre 'EmaKorrovg KaOeiXev.-ff — deposed
fifteen bishops.
2. In sorae case a kind of deposing of bishops was assuraed
by particular bishops, as defenders of the faith, and executors
• Syn. Ant. Can. 15.
t (Ann. 269.) Euseb. 7. 30. [Cantab. 1720.]
t Socr. 1. 24. [Cantab. 1720.] — 'Ravx-y nqv avKOipavriav r^vtyKt.
Soz. 2. 19. [Cantab. 1720.]
§ Socr. 2. 43. [Cantab. 1720.]
II Soz. 3. 14, [Cantab. 1720.] Socr. 1. 36. [Idem.]
IF Socr. 2. 29. [Idem.] Socr. 1. 28. [Idem.]
*• Theod. 2. 10. [Cantab. 1720.]
tt Act. U. Syn. Chalc. p. 411. [Lab. vol. 4. p. 684.. Paris. 1671.]

352 A TREATISE OF
of canons ; * their deposition consisting in not allowing those
to be bishops, whom for erroneous doctrine, or disorderly be
haviour (notoriously incurred) they deemed incapable of the
office,f presuming their places ipso facto void.
This Pope Gelasius I. proposed for a rule, J — and upon this
account did the Popes for so long tirae quarrel with the see of
Constantinople, § because they did not expunge Acacius from
the roll of bishops who had coraraunicated with heretics. So
did St. Cyprianll reject Marcianus, bishop of Aries, for ad
hering to the Novatians. So Athanasius was said to have
deposed Arian bishops,^ and substituted others in their places,
So Acacius** and his complices deposed Macedonius and
divers other bishops. And the bishops of those times KaBetXov
dXXqXovg, factiously applying a rule taken for granted then,
" deposed one another."f f So Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem,
deposed Athanasius. JJ So Eusebius of Nicomedia threatened
to depose Alexander of Constantinople, if he would not admit
Arius to coraraunion. Acacius and his complices did extrude
Maximus, bishop of Jerusalem. §§ He also deposed andexpeUed
Cyril of Jerusalera ; || || and deposed many other bishops at Con
stantinople.^^ Cyril deposed Nestorius, and Nestorius deposed
Cyril and Memnon.*** Cyril and Juvenalis deposed John
of Antioch. John of Antioch with his bishops, deposed Cyril
and Memnon.f ff Yea, after the Synod of Ephesus, John
of Antioch, gathering together many bishops, did depose Cyril.
Stephanus concerning Bassianus ; " because he had entered into
the Church with swords, therefore he was expelled out of it
* Haec § cum 4. jungenda.
f rivwaKt drrb rrdaqg KaBoXiKrjg 'EKKXqaiag aKoiviavqrov tlvai
aeavTov, Kai dvtvkpyqrov rrpbg rrdv briovv riav 'ei avBevriag 'itpa-
TiKiig, P. Celest. in Nest. Sent. Eph. Act. p. 195. [Lab. vol. 3. Act. 2.
p. 614. Paris. 1671.]
X Quod non solum praesuU ApostoUco, &c.
§ 'Errti ovv ixpqv rbv irri KaKoSoiig, ^wpaaBkvra pqr' erkpag dpxtiv
'EKKXqa'iag, q SiSaaKaXov ovopa rrtpi^kptiv. Cone, sub Men. (p. 10)
II Cypr. Ep. 67. [Ep. 68. p. 186. Lipsiffi, 1838.]
IT Soz. 3. 31. •* Socr. 2. 42
tt Uportpov KaBtXiav. Socr. 2. 24.
tt Evatfiiog TroXXd Siqrrt'iXei avnp, Xtywv 'baov oiSkrrw KaBaipqativ
avrbv, ei pq tig Koivwviav Sk^qrai rbv" Aptiov. Socr. 1. 37.
§§ 'EiwBqaavreg. Socr. 2. 38.
Ill Theod. 2. 26. ^ %% Sozom. 4. 24. [Cantab. 1720.]
*** Socr. 7. 34. — K-vpiKKXog Si tipa Kai 'Iovj3evaXiip, dpvvoptvog rov
'Iwdvvqv KaBaiptX Kai avrov. Ibid.
ttt 'H ayta avvoSog — rovrov piv KaBaiptX Sid rdrrpoeipqpkva rrdvra,
Mipvova Si wg avvtpybv avrov. Act. Syn. Eph. p. 380. — 'Qg riav
KaKwv qyepovag KaBtXeXv qvayKaaBqptv. Ibid. p. 320.

THE pope's supremacy. 353
again by the holy Fathers, both by Leo of Rome the imperial
dty, and by Flavianus ; hy the bishop of Alexandria, and also
by tbe bishop of Antioch. AnatoUus of Constantinople did
reject Timotheus of Alexandria. Acacius, bishop of Constan
tinople, did reject Petrus FuUo."*
3. St. Cyprian doth assert the power of censuring bishops,
upon needfid and just occasion, to belong to aU bishops, for
maintenance of common faith, discipUne and peace.
"Therefore (saith he, writing to Pope Stephanus himself)
dear brother, the body of bishops is copious, being coupled by
the gjue of concord mid tlie band of unity, that if any of onr
college shaU attempt to frame a heresy, or to tear and spofl the
flock of Christ, the rest may succour, and hke useful and mer
ciful shepherds, may gather together the sheep of our Lord
into the flock."f
The Uke doctrine is that of Pope Celestine I. in his epistie
to tbe Ephesine Synod.J
In matter of faith any bishop inight interpose judgment —
TheophUus did proceed to condemn the Origenists vrithout re
gard to the Pope.§
Epiphanus did demand satisfaction of John of Jerusalem.
4. This common right of bishops in some cases is confirmed
by the nature of snch censures, wMch consisted in disclaiming
* Imoiviic Si icaraXaf3wv rqv 'Avrioxeuiv cai -rroXXoig awayayuiv
'BcKrcoirovg KaBatpti 'KvpiXXov, rjSq KaretXrj^bra rqv 'AXe^dvSpeiav.
SoCT. 7. 34. — 'ErrtiSdv aiirbg in-naijX9e T-y dyiiaTary 'EeicXijoigi fLtrd
iMv — eiwoBq Std rovro rrapd riav dy'iiav Ilarkpiav rrapd rt row offio-
Torou rqg ^aaiXevovaqg 'Piapqg Akovrog, Kai rov paKaptordrov ^Xav-
lovoii — Kai rrapd row iv 'AXtiavSpeif, Kai irapd Toii iv 'Avrioxtitf.
Sjn. Chalced. Act. 11. (p. 405.) [Lab. vol. 4. p. 692. Paris- 1671.]— 'O
poKapiog iv dyioif iXavtavog iieiaaro airov. Ibid. p. 406. (Ib. p. 693.]
—Baron. Ann. 457. § 34.— P. FeUx III. Ep. 4.
t Iddrcb enim, firater charissinie, copioaum corpus est Sacerdotum,
concordise mntme glutino atque nnitatig vinculo copulatum, ut siquis ex
CoU^o nostro haeresin facere, et gregem Christi lacerare, et vastare ten
taverit, subveniant caeteri, et quasi pastores utiles et misericordes oves
Dominicas in gr^em coIUgant. Cypr. Ep. 67. (ad Steph.) [p. 101-
Riris. 1836.]
t AcouEffOw ravra vapd rravnav sig rb Koivbv, Kvpioe a^cX^ot — ev
Tavry ry tppovriSi atjuyyopitBa oi rravraxoH Kai ava rrdaav oiKOvp^yifv
ry iceiviav SiaSoxy rb ovopa cvpiov jcijpurro»^€c — &c. Cone. Eph.
Act. 2. p. 324. — 'toiyapobv rrepiarrovSaaTov ian, Kai -^paxreoy orrtag
Kapirip EoiV{> rd ipmartvBkvra, cat Sid rijg 'ATTOOroXicqj SiaSoxrjg
iiag Tov vvv avayeBivTa. ^vXa^iauev. Ibid. p. 323. [Lab. vol. 3. p. 614.
P»ris,1671.] * *" ** e I V
§ Tid. Hier. 67, et 7S.
VOL. I. 2 A

354 A TEEATISE OP
persons notoriously guilty of heresy, schisra, or scandal; and
in refusing to entertain coraraunion vrith them ; which every
bishop, as entitled to the common interests of faith and peace,
might do.*
5. Indeed in such a case every Christian had a right (yea,
an obUgation) to desert his own bishop; So John of Jerusalemf
haring given suspicion of error in faith, St. Epiphanius did
write letters to the monks of Palestine not to " communicate
vrith him, till they were satisfied of his orthodoxy.''^ Upon
which account St. Jerome living in Palestine did decline com
raunication with the Patriarch thereof; asking him, if it "were
anywhere said tjO 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 kmd
of universal jurisdiction.
6. If any Pope did assurae more than was allowed in this
case by the canons, or was coraraon to' other bishops of his
rank, it was an irregularity and an usurpation. Nor would
examples, if any were producible, serve to justify him ; or to
ground a right thereto, any more than the extravagant proceed
ings of other pragmatical and factious bishops in the same kind
(whereof so raany instances can be alleged) can assert such a
power to any bishop. II
7. When the Pope hath attempted in this kind, his power
hath been disavowed, as an illegal, upstart pretence.^
8. Other bishops have taken upon them, when they appre-
* Cypr. Ep. 67. "Oo'oi Trapd Tobg 'trri T-y rriarei riav Uartpiav Tv-
rrovg Siarrpdrrovrai, iavroXg irrdyovai Td Ib riov Kavovwv inripia.
Thalass. in Syn. Chalc. Act. 1. p. 191. — 'Expqv ydp rrjv iptrkpav^i-fo-
rrqv pepvqpkvqv riav rrarpiKiav rrapaSoatwv pqS'tva (Tuy%(i)p6ii' ri
KtKw'Xvp'eva TroiEiv, dXXd Kai ei ng roXpqpbg ipaveiq rrday Svvapu
ivavriobaBai, P. Agapet. ad Petr. Hier. (p. 24.)
t EiKorwg qptXg imardptvoi rrjv riav §tcwv Kavoviav tKSiKqaiv if-
Xieptvaiv ^dvov dpporreiv, rqvSe rijg opBqg rriartwg oi (iovox «pii"
ptvoig, dXXd Kai rravri 'OpBoSoiw Xpianavip. Menas (tom. 4. p. 10.)
—Plebs, &c. Deum metuens.— Cypr. Ep. 68— Vid. P, Nich. I. Ep. 8.
(p. 506.)
X Cunctis monachis ab eodem Epiphanio scripta venerunt, ut absque
satisfactione fidei nullus ei temere communicaret. Hier. Ep. 61. (ad Pam
mach. (cap. 15.) [Ep. 38. vol. 4. p. 332. Paris. 1706.]
§ Alicubine dictum, aut tibi alicubi mandatum est, qubd sine satisfac
tione tidei commnnionem tuam subiremus .' Ibid. [p. 331.] — Quodtibi
non communicemus, fidei est. Ibid. cap. 16.
II Theophilus, John of Antioch, Dioscorus.
i Novam legem, &c. Vid. de Cone. Sard.

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 355
hended cause, to discard and depose Popes. So did the Orien
tal faction at Sardica depose Pope Julius for transgressing,* as
they supposed, the laws of the Church, in fostering heretics,
and criminal persons conderaned by Synods.f So did the
Sped of Antioch threaten deposition to the same Pope. So
did the patriarch Dioscorus make show to reject Pope Leo from
communion.| So did St. HUary anathematize Pope Liberius.§
9. Popes, when there was great occasion, and they had a
great mind to exert their utraost power, have not yet presumed
by themselves, " without joint authority of Synods," || to con
demn bishops ; so Pope Julius did not presume to depose
Eusebius of Nicomedia, his great adversary, and so much ob-
norious by his patroniring Arianism. Pope Innocent did not
censure Theophilus and his compUces, who so irregularly and
vsTongfiiUy had extruded St. Chrysostom, although much dis
pleased with thera; but endeavoured to get a General Synod
to do the business. Pope Leo I. (though a raan of spirit and
animosity sufficient) would not, vrithout 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 persecuting the orthodox.
Indeed, often we may presume that Popes would have de
posed bishops, if they had thought it regular, or if others com
monly had received that opinion, so that they could have ex
pected 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 hath been done in this kind by Popes jointly vrith
others, or in Synods,^ (especially upon advantage, when the
cause was just and plausible) is not to be ascribed to the autho
rity of Popes as such. It might be done with their influence,
• Sou. 3. 11. [Cantab. 1720.] t Soz. 3. 8.
t Evag. 2. 4. § Hilar, fragm.
II An qui in hominem Imperatorem peccasse dicebatur, null^ interve
niente Synodo dejici debuenmt ? P. Gelas. I. Ep. 13. [Lab. vol. 4.
p. 1199. Paris. 1671.]
H 'H dyia 'Pwpaiwv avvoSog favepd rtrvrrwKe. Cyril, ad Joh. Ant.
Cone. Eph, — ^p. 197. 332. Syn. p. 11. 60. ' ArroaroXiKbg Sporog, Kai ij
avvoSog airob. Const. Sacra, in Syn. VI. p. 11. — 'AydBwv 'ETriffKOTroe
aiv rrdaaig rdig avvbSoig raXg dvqKovaaig r-y avvbSip rov 'Arroaro
XiKov dpovov. Ibid. p. 60. — 'Arrdaqg Kard Svaiv avvbSov. Act. Eph.
p. 332. — Sit haec in te fixa damnatio a me, et ab his qui sub me constituti
Episcopales Sedes gubernare noscuntur. — P. Felix ad Petrum Antioch.
apud Baron. Ann. 483. § 68.
2 A 2

356 A TKEATISE OF
not by their authority : so the Synod of Sardica (not Pope
JuUus) cashiered the eneraies of Athanasius ; so the Synod of
Chalcedon (not Pope Leo) deposed Dioscorus ; so the Roman
Synod (not Pope Celestine), checked Nestorius ; and that of
Ephesus deposed him. The whole Western Synod (whereof
he was president) had a great sway.
1 1 . If instances were arguments of right, there would be
other pretenders to the deposing power. Particular bishops
would have it, as we before shewed.
12. The people would have the power ; for they have some
tiraes deposed Popes themselves, vrith effect.
So of Pope Constantine Platina telleth us, " at length he is
deposed by the people of Rome, being very much provoked by
the indignity of the matter."*
13. There are many instances of bishops being removed or
deposed by the imperial authority. This power was indeed
necessarily annexed to the iraperial dignity; for all bishops
being subjects of the emperor, he could dispose of their per
sons, so as not to suffer them to continue in a place, or to put
them from it, as they demeaned theraselves, to his satisfaction
or othervrise, in reference to pubUc utiUty. It is reasonable,
if they were disloyal or disobedient to hira, that he should not
suffer thera to be in places of such influence, whereby they
might pervert the people to disaffection. It is fit that he should
deprive them of temporaUties.
The example of Solomon deposing Abiathar.f
" Constantine M. commanded Eusebius and Theogonius to
depart out of the cities over which they presided as bishops." J
Constantius deposed Paulus of Constantinople. §
Constantius ejected all that would not subscribe to the creed
of Ariminum.ll
• Tandem a Sede dejicitur a populo Romano irS, et indignitate rei per-
cito. Plat. p. 223. P. Leo VIII. p. 291. Anastasius. Plat. p. 131.
t 1 Kings ii. 35.
X Eva'efiiov Si Kai QEoyoyiov ftvytiv rrpoa'traiev &g imaKorrovv
-rroXeig. Soz. lib. 1. cap. 21. Tore p'tv ovroi KaByp'tBqaav, Koi rSiv
rroXtwv i^qXdBqaav. Theodor. 1. 20. He threatened Athanasius to
depose him — idv ydp yvia wg KtKwXvKag Tivdg avriav rrig 'EKKXiiaiag
perarroiovp'tvovg, q drre'ipi,ag rrig tiabSov, drroareXia rrapaxpijpa rov
KaBaipqaovrd ae ii ipiig KeXevaewg, Kai riav rorrwv peraarqaovra.
Socr. 1. 27. Athanas. Apol. 2. p. 778.
§ Tbv IlavXov axoXdZtiv irroiqatv. Socr. 2. 7.
II Tqv S itKSoaiv rijg dvayvoaBt'iaqg iv 'Apipivip rriartiag iK'tXevatv
eig rdg rrepi 'IraXiav 'EKKXqaiag iKrrkprrtaBai, rrpoardiag rovg pq
^ovXopkvovg vrroypd^tiv airy, i^tCjaBai riav 'EKKXqaiiov, Kai eig rovg
rvrrovg avriav irkpovg avriKaBiaraaBai, Socr. 2. 37.

THE pope's supremacy. 367
The emperor Leo deposed Timotheus .^lurus, 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 XII.
Justinian deposed Pope Silverius, and banished Pope Vigi-
lius.f Justinian banished Anastasius bishop of Antioch, extruded
Anthimus of Constantinople, and Theodosius of Alexandria. J
Neither indeed was any great patriarch effectually deposed
vrithout their power or leave.
Flarianus was supported by Theodosius against the Pope.
Dioscorus subsisted by the power of Theodosius Junior.
The deposition of Dioscorus in the Synod of Chalcedon was
voted vrith a reserve of, " If it shall please our most sacred and
pious Lord."§
In effect the emperors deposed all bishops which were or
dained beside their general laws ; as Justinian haring pre
scribed conditions and quahfications concerning the ordinations
of bishops, subjoineth : " But if any bishop be ordained vrith
out using our forementioned constitution, we command you that
by aU means he be removed from his bishopric."||
14. The instances aUeged to prove the Pope's anthority in
this case are inconcludent and invaUd.
They aUege the case of Marcianus, bishop of Aries, concern
ing whom (for abetting Novatianism) St. Cyprian doth exhort
Pope Stephanus, that he woiUd direct letters to the bishops of
Gaul, and people of Aries, that he being for schismatical
behariour removed from coraraunion, another should be sub
stituted in his roora. ^
The epistle, grounding this arguraent, is questioned by a
great critic ; but I vrilUngly admit it to be genuine, seeing it
bath the style and spirit of St. Cyprian, and suiteth his age,
*Ev^. 2. 11. Liber cap. 15. P. Leo I. Epist. 99.
t Liber cap. 22. X Evag. 4. 41. Evag. 4. 11.
§ Ei rrapaaraiq np SieioTonp, Kai ivat^tardrip qpiav Starrory.
Act. 2. p. 202.
II Si quis autem citra memoratam observationem Episcopus ordinetur,
jubemus hunc omnibus modis Episcopatu depelli. Justin. Novell. 123.
cap. 1. [1567.]
IT Cypr. Ep. 67. Dungantur in Provinciam et ad plebem Arelate con-
sistentem literse, quibus abstento Marciano alius in ejus locum substituatur.
[Ep. 66. p. 100. Paris. 1836. vel Ep. 68. p. 187. Lipsia, 1838,]

358 A treatise or
and I see no cause why it should be forged ; wherefore, omit-
tmg that defence, I answer, that the whole matter bemg seri
ously weighed, doth make rather against the Pope's cause than
for it : for if the Pope had the sole or sovereign authority of
rejecting bishops, why did the Gaulish bishops refer the
matter to St. Cyprian ? why had Marcianus hiraself a recourse
to hira ?
St. Cyprian doth not ascribe to the Pope any pecular au
thority of judgment or censure, but a coraraon one, which
himself could exercise, which all bishops might exercise: "It
is (saith he) our part to provide and succour in such a case ;
for therefore is the body of priests so numerous, that— by joint
endeavour they may suppress heresies and schisras."*
The case being such, St. Cyprian earnestly doth move Pope
Stephanus to concur in exercise of discipline on that schis
matic ; and to prosecute effectually the business by his letters ;
persuading his fellow bishops in France, " that they would not
suffer Marcianus to insult over the college of bishops ;"f (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
interest, but for his particular concernment in the case, that
schisra having been first advanced against his predecessors.!
St. Cyprian also (if we mark it) covertly doth tax the Pope
of negligence, in not having soon enough joined vrith himself
and the community of bishops in censuring that delinquent.^
We may add, that the Church of Aries and Gaul, being
near Italy, the Pope may be aUowed to have some greater sway
there, than other-where 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 objection 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
* Cui rei nostrum est consulere, et subvenire. — Idcircb copiosum est
corpus Sacerdotum.— Quando ipse est ab universis Sacerdotibus judicatus.
t Facere te oportet plenissimas literas ad co-episcopos nostros in Gal-
liis constitutos, ne ultra Marcianum CoUegio nostro insultare patiantur.
[Ep. 66. p. 103. ut supra.] X Multo magis tu.
§ Quod nedum videatur a nobis abstentur.

the pope's SUPREMACr. 359
do shew) do signify no more, than quibus efficiatur ut abstento,
which may procure hira to be excommunicated, not quee con-
tineant abstentionem, which contain excomraunication, as P.
de Marca glosseth ; although admitting that sense, it would not
import much, seeing only thereby the Pope would have sig
nified his consent with other bishops ; wherefore de Marca hath
no great cause to blame us, that we do " not deprehend any
magnificent thing in this place for the dignity of the papal
see ;"* indeed he hath, I must confess, better eyes than I,
who can see any such raighty things there for that purpose.
As for the substitution of another in the room of Marcianus,
that was a consequent of the excomraunication, and was to be
the work of the clergy and people of the place ; for when by
common judgraent of Catholic bishops any bishop was rejected,
the people did apply themselves to choose another.
I adjoin the resolution of a very learned writer of their com
munion in these words :
"In this case of Marcianus, bishop of Aries, if the right of
excommunication did belong solely to the bishop of Rome,
wherefore did Faustinus, bishop of Lyons advertise Cyprian,
bishop of Cathage, 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 more
over of all bishops the chief? It must either be said that this
was done because of Stephen's negligence ; or what is raore
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 coun
sels for the welfare of the Church, and that Christian reUgion
might not receive the least daraage in any of its affairs what
soever : hence it was that in the case of Marcianus, bishop of
Aries, the bishop of Lyons writ letters to the bishops of Rorae
and Carthage ; and again that the bishop of Carthage as being
most remote, did write to the bishop of Rome as being his
brother and colleague, who by reason of his propinquity raight
more easily know and judge of the whole raatter. "f
* Marc. 7. 1. 6.
t In hac Marciani Episcopi Arelatensis causa si jus abstinendi sive ex-
communicandi competebat soli Episcopo Romano, cur Faustinus Episco
pus Lugdunensis Cypriano Episcopo Carthaginiensi longe dissito semel
atque iterum signiiicat ea de Marciano, quffi jam utique ipse Faustinus et
alii ejusdem Provincise Episcopi nunciaverant Stephano proximiori, et om-

360 A TREATISE OF
The other instances are of a later date (after the Synod of
Nice), and therefore of not so great weight ; yea their haring
none more ancient to produce, doth strongly make against the
antiquity of this right ; it Iseing strange that no memory
should be of any deposed thereby for above three hundred
years. But however such as they are, they do not reach home
to the purpose.
They allege Flarianus, bishop of Antioch,* deposed by Pope
Damasus, as they aflirra. But it is wonderful they should have
the face to mention that instance ; the story in short being
this, the great Flarianus (a most worthy and orthodox prelate,
whom St. Chrysostom in his statuary orations doth so highly
commend and celebrate) being substituted in the place of
Meletius, by the choir of bishops ;f a party did adhere to
Paulinus ; and after his decease they set up Evagrius, ordam-
ing him (as Theodoret, who was best acquainted vrith passages
on that side of Christendom, reporteth) against many canons
of the Church. J
Yet with this party, the Roman bishops, " not wilUng to
know any of these things," (three of them in order, Damasus,
Siricius, Anastasius) did conspire, instigating the emperor
against Flarianus, and reproaching him as " supporter of a
tyrant against the laws of Christ." §
But the emperor haring called Flavianus to him, and received
much satisfaction in his deraeanour and discourse, did remand
and settle him in his place. " The emperor," saith Theodoret,
" wondering at his courage, and his vrisdom, did command him
to return horae, and to feed the Church coraraitted to him ;"
nium Episcoporum principi .' Dicendum igitur factum id fuisse aut per
negUgentiam Stephani ; aut quod magis videtur, per disciplinam quse tunc
in Ecclesia vigebat, ut omnes quidem in circumpositis locis, sed prffisertim
Urbium clarissimarum Episcopi in commune consulerent Ecclesise, ride-
rentque ne quid detrimenti res Christiana Catholica caperet. Itaque super
isto Marciani Arelatensis facinore, Lugdunensem Episeopum ad Roma
num et Carthaginiensem dedisse literas, istum verb ut remotissimum de-
disse vicissim suas ad Romanum, ut fratrem et CoUegam, qui in propinquo
faciHiis posset de negotio et cognoscere et statuere. Rigalt. in Cypr. Ep.
67. [Paris. 1666.]
* BeU. de Pont. R. 2. 18. [p. 368. vol. 1. Praga;, 1721.]
t T^ ptydXip 0XaPiavip vaXETraiVoireE. Theod. [lib. 5. cap. 23.
Cantab. 1720.]
X Theod. 5. 23. Socr. 5. 15. Soz. 83 .
§ 'AXX' 'bpwg TOVTWV ovSiv t'lSivai Srqaavrtg rqv Eiayp'iov p'tv Koi
vwviav qarrdZovTo, Kard iXaBiavob rdg BaaiXwdg 'tKivqaav aKoag.
Theod. ib.

THE pope's supremacy. 361
at which proceeding, when the Romans afterward did grumble,
the emperor gave them such reasons and advices that they
compUed, and did entertain coraraunion with Flavianus.*
It is true, that upon their suggestions and clamours, the
emperor was moved at first to order that Flavianus should go
to Rome, and give the Western bishops satisfaction : but after
that he understood the quaUty of his plea, he freed him
of that trouble, and vrithout their allowance settled him in
his see.
Here is nothing of the Pope's deposing Flarianus ; 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 vrith whom he must communicate, and consequently
must disclaim the other ; in which choice the Pope had no
good success; not deposing Flarianus, but vainly opposing
him ; wherefore this aUegation is strangely impertinent, and
weU may be turned against them.
Indeed in this instance, we may see how falUble that see was
in their judgment of things, how rash in taking parties and
fomenting discords ; how pertinacious in a bad cause, how
peevish against the coraraon sense of their brethren ; (especially
considering, that before this opposition of Flarianus the Fathers
of Constantinople had in their letter to Pope Daraasus and the
Occidental bishops approved, and coramended him to them ;
highly asserting the legitimateness of his ordination). In fine,
how little their authority did avail vrith wise and considerate
persons, such as Theodosius M. was.f
De Marca representeth the matter soraewhat otherwise out
of Socrates ; J but take the matter as Socrates hath it and it
signifieth no raore, than that both Theophilus and Damasus
would not entertain communion vrith Flarianus, as being in
capable of the episcopal order, for having violated his oath,
and caused a dirision in the Church of Antioch : what is this
to judicial deposition? and how did Damasus more depose
them than Theophilus, who upon the same dissatisfaction did
in Uke manner forbear communion? whenas indeed a wiser
* -4Aroi Bai r-qv dvSpt'iav Kai r-qv ao^iav Sravpdaag b PaaiXtig,r^v
iveyKovaav KaraXaPeXv, Kai rrjv iyxeipiaBtXaav rroipaivtiv 'EKKXqaiav
iKtXtvaev. Theod. Ibid.
t Theod. 5. 9. O'tre rrjg irrapxiag, "ai rrjg dvaroXiKqg SioiKqaeiag
avvSpapovrtg KavoviKiag ixtiporovqaav — rjvrrtp ivBtapov ^etporoviav
id'e^aro Kai to rqg avvoSov koivov.
X Socr. 5. 15. [Cantab. 1720.] Marc. 3. 14. § 1.

362 A TREATISE OP
and better man than either of them, St, Chrysostom, did hold
communion with hira, and did at length (saith Socrates, not
agreeing vrith Theodoret) reconcUe him to them both.
They allege the deposition of Nestorius. But who knoweth
not, that he was for heretical doctrine deposed in and by a
General Synod. Pope Celestine* did indeed threaten to with
draw his communion, if he did not renounce his error. But
had not any other bishop sufficient authority to desert a per-
verter of the faith ? Did not his own clergy do tbe same,
being comraended by Pope Celestine for it ?f Did not Cyril|
in writing to Pope Celestine hiraself affirm, that he might
before have declared, that he could not communicate with
hira ? Did Nestorius adrait the Pope's judgment? no, as the
Papal legates did complain, " He did not admit the constitu
tion ofthe apostoUcal chair ."§ Did the Pope's sentence obtain
effect ? No, not any ; for notvrithstanding his threats, Nes
torius did hold his place till the Synod ; the emperor did
severely rebuke Cyril for his fierceness (and impUcitly the
Pope), and did order that no change should be raade, tUl the
Synod should determine in the case ; not regarding the Pope's
judgment : so that this instance may well be retorted, or used
to prove the insignificancy of Papal authority then.
They allege also Dioscorus of Alexandria deposed by Pope
Leo : but the case is very like to that of Nestorius, and ar
gueth the contrary to what they intend ; he was, for his mis
demeanours, and violent countenancing of heresy, solemnly in
a General Synod accused, tried, condemned, and deposed;
the which had long before been done, if in the Pope, his pro
fessed and provoked adversary, there had heen sufficient power
to effect it.
BeUarmine also allegeth Pope Sixtus III. deposing Poly-
* PivwaKtrw, 'on avrbg rqv -qptrkpav Koivwviav ixtiv ov Svvqaerai,
qv p-q. — P. Celest. ad Cyril, in Cone. Eph. Act. p. 281. — UavreXiag drro
TOV avveSpiov qpwv, Kai rqg rwv XpiaTiaviav avvoSov drrtKXtiaQqg, idv
pq tvBkwg rd Kaxwg tipqpkva vrrb aov SiopBwBri. Ibid. Epist. ad Nest.
p. 186. — 'Ajro riig -qptr'tpag Koivwv'iag drroxwp'iZoptv. (ad Joh. Ant.
p. 196.)
f MaKap'ia Si 'bpwg q dytXqg y rrapkaxtv b Kvpiog Kp'ivtiv rrtpi riji
iS'iag voprjg. P. Celest. ad Clerum, &c. Const. Act. Eph. p. 190.
X Eyu Si bpoXoyia Kai toi fiovXqBtig avvoSiKip ypdppari favtpiiv
avnp Karaarqaai, 'on ravra Xtyovri Kai ippovobvn KoivwveXv oi Svva-
ptBa. Cyril. Ep. ad Celest. Act. Eph. p. 77.
§ Tbv rvrrov riig 'ArroaroXiKrjg KaBtSpag ovk iSk^aro. Couc. Eph.
Act. 3. p. 331.— Vid. Theodos. 2. Epist. in Cone. Eph. p. 224, et 225.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 363
chronius bishop of Jerusalem : but no such Polychronius is
to be found in the registers of bishops then, or in the his
tories of that busy time, between the two great Synods of
Ephesus and Chalcedon ; and the Acts of Sixtus, upon which
this allegation is grounded, have so many inconsistencies, and
smeU so rank of forgery, that no conscionable nose could en
dure them ; and " any prudent man (as Binius himself con
fesseth) would assert them to be spurious."* Wherefore
Baronius hiraself doth reject and despise thera ; who gladly
would lose no advantage for his master. Yet Pope Nicholas I.
doth precede Bellarmine in citing this trash ; no wonder, that
being the Pope, who did avouch the wares of Isidore Mer-
cator. They aUege Timotheus the usurper of Alexandria deposed
by Pope Damasus ;f and they have indeed the sound of words
attesting to them : " These are heads upon which the B.
Damasus deposed the heretics Apolinarius, Vitalius and Timo-
tiieus."J The truth is, that Apolinarius, vrith divers of his disciples,
in a great Synod at Rome, at which Petrus bishop of Alex
andria, together vrith Daraasus was present, was conderaned
and disavowed for heretical doctrine ; whence Sozoraen saith
that " the ApoUnarian heresy was by Daraasus and Peter, at
a Synod in Rome, voted to be excluded from the cathoUc
Church." §
On which account, if we conclude that the Pope had an
authority to depose bishops, we may by like reason infer that
every patriarch and metropolitan had a power to do the like ;
there being so raany instances of their haring conderaned and
disclaimed bishops supposed guilty of heresy ; as particularly
John of Antioch, vrith his convention of Oriental bishops, || did
• Baron. Ann. 433. ^ 38, 39. P. Nich. I. Epist. 8. (ad Mich.)
t Fac. Herm. p. 150.
X Taird ian rd KtipdXaia i^' olg b rpiapaKapiog Adpaaog KaBeXXev
ArroXtvdpiov, Kai SirdXiov, Kai TipbBeov roig a'lperiKovg. Orient, ad
Rufum. apud Bin. p. 396.
§ 'M.aBwv ovv ravrqv rqv aipeaiv eig rroXXoig 'iprreiv rrpiaTog Adpa
aog 0 Pwpaiwv 'Err'iaKorrog, Kai Ukrpog 6 'AXtiavSpt'iag, avvoSov ytvo-
p'evqg iv 'Piapy dXXorpiav rrjg KaBoXov 'EKKXqaiag iii/qib'iaavro. Soz.
6. 25. [Cantab. 1720.]
II To ydp TOvrovg iKKO-ipai oiSiv ertpov ianv q opBoSo^iav arrjaat.
Relat. Orient, ad Imp. in Act. Eph. p. 380. "OBtv Kai viv r-qv yvwpi-
aBtXaav rrapd Tqg Evatfieiag vpiav THearopiov, Kai KvpiXXov, Kai
Mkpvovog KaBaipeaiv iSe^dptBa. Act. p. 385.

364 A TREATISE OF
pretend to depose Cyril and Memnon as guilty of the same
ApoUnarian heresy ; aUeging that " to exscind them was the
same thing as to settle orthodoxy." The which deposition
was at first admitted by the eraperor.
The next instance is of Pope Agapetus (in Justinian's time,
for so deep into tirae is BeUarmine fai» dive for it) depos
ing Anthimus bishop of Constantinople. But this instance
being scanned vrill 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 held irregular
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.f Things standing thus. Pope Agapetus (as
an agent from Rome, to crave succour against the Goths
pressing and menacing the city) did arrive at Constantinople.
Whereupon the empress desired of him to salute and consort
vrith Anthimus. But he, by petitions of the monks, &c., un
derstanding how things stood, did refuse to do so, *' except
Anthimus would return to his own charge, and profess the
orthodox doctrine." J Thereupon the emperor joined vrith him
to extrude Anthimus from Constantinople, and to substitute
Menas. § " He (say the monks in their libel of requestto 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 dirine canons." || The act of Aga
petus was (according to his share in the common interest) to
declare Anthimus in his judgment incapable of catholic com
munion and of episcopal function by reason of his heretical
opinions, and his trangression of ecclesiastical orders ;^ which
moved Justinian effectually to depose and extrude him : " You,
(say they) fulfilling that which he justly and canonically did
judge, and by your general edict confirming it ; and forbiddmg
* Ann. 536. Vict. Tun. t Evag. 4. 10.
X Denique petentibus Principibus, ut Anthimum Papa in salutatioue et
communicatione susciperet ; iUe fieri inquit posse, si se libeUo probaret
orthodoxum, et ad Cathedram suam reverteretur. Lib. c. 21. — Td Kara
rqg 'EKKXqaiag dBkapwg roXpwpeva paBwg. — LibeU. Monach. p. 7.
§ 'AXXd TOVTOV SiKa'iwg iiwBqaag roij rqgSt rrjg rrbXtwg 'itpariKOV
Bpovov, avvtrrapvvovaqg, Kai avvemaxvovaqg r-yre KaBoXiKy ninTti
Kai rdig Sie'ioig Kavoai rqg vptrkpag tvae(3eiag. — Ibid.
II Et Syn. deer. p. 43. Imper. Sanct. p. 128.
^ ' Arro^rfvdpevog—pqrt KaBoXiKob pqrt lepE(i)£ avrbv ix^v to
bvopa. Synodi deer. p. 43.

THE pope's supremacy. 365
that hereafter such things should be attempted."* And Aga
petus himself, saith, that it was done by " the apostolical
authority and the assistance of the most faithful eraperors."f
The which proceeding was completed by decree of the Synod
under Menas, and that again was confirraed by the imperial
sanction. Whence Evagrius reporting the story, doth say con
cerning Anthimus and Theodosius of Alexandria, that " because
tbey did cross the emperor's commands, and did not admit the
decrees of Chalcedon they both were expelled from their sees ." J
It seemeth by some passages in the acts, that before Aga-
petus's intermeddUng, the monks§ and orthodox bishops|i
had condemned and rejected Anthimus ; according to the
common interest, which they assert aU Christians to have in
regard to the common faith.
As for the substitution of Menas, it was performed "by the
choice and suffrage of the emperor, the clergy, nobles, and
people conspiring;"^ the Pope only (which another bishop
might have done) ordaining or consecrating him : " Then
(saith Liberatus) the Pope by the emperor's favour did or
dain Menas bishop, consecrating him with his hand."**
And Agapetus did glory in this, as being the first ordina
tion made of an Eastern bishop by the hands of a Pope :f f
"And this (said the Pope) we conceive doth add to his dignity,
because the Eastern Church never since the tirae of the Apostle
Peter did receive any bishop beside hira by iraposition of hands
of those who sat in this our chair."JJ
* Td ovv rrap' iKtivov SiKa'iwg Kai KavoviKiiig KtKpipkva rrXr^povvreg,
eai Sid yeviKqg vpiav vopoBea'iag Kvpovvreg, Kai rd Toiaira rob XotTToD
ToXpdaBat drrayopfbovrtg.
t Tqg Se iv KwvaravrivovrroXet KaBtSpag r-qv v^piv (3oqBovvrog roir
0£Oi/, ry 'ATToffToXiBJi avBtvriif, Kai riav maTOrdrwv jiaaiXtwv r-y /3o))-
Beif SiopBwaapev. p. 24.
II "Opiag S' ovv wg dvriKpi riav (1. dvri riav rov) (iaaiXkwg KeXtvapd-
Tiav iovreg, Kai pij Sexoptvoi rd iv XaXKqSovi avvreBtipkva dpipi twv
ouceiiav eieXaBkrqv Srpbvwv. Evag. 4. 11.
§ P. 10._ II P. 16.
If Kar' tKXoyrjv Kai i/'jj^oj' ribv evatfieaTarwv -qpiav §aaiXtwv, Kai
roi tiayovg rqgSt Trjg dyiwrdrqg 'EKKXqaiag KXqpe.
** Tunc Papa Principis favore Menam pro eo ordinavit Antistitem, con-
secrans eum manu sua. Liber, cap. 21.
tt 'Qrtj/t riav yaXqvordrwv (iaaiXkwv irreykXaaev q imXoyq. Act.
p. 24.
tt Kai roiiro Si martvoptv rj avrov d^iq. rrpoariBkvai, 'on rrep' e/c
TWV Kpovwv TOV 'ArToaToXov Herpov ovSkva dXXov o'laSeirrore 'EkkXj;-
a'la 'AvaToXiK-q iSk^aro 'ErriaKorrov ralg x«p<rt rrjg qperkpag KaBeSpag
XEipoTovijSsvra. — p. 24.

366 A TREATISE OF
If we compare the proceedings of Agapetus against Anthi
mus vrith those of Theophilus against St, Chrysostom, they
are (except the cause and quaUties of persons) in all main
respects and circumstances so like, that the sarae reason, which
would ground a pretence of universal jurisdiction to one, would
infer the same to the other.
Baronius* aUegeth Acacius, bishop of Constantinople, de
posed by Pope FeUx III. But Pope Gelasiusf asserteth, that
any bishop raight, in execution of the canons, have disclaimed
Acacius, as a favourer of heretics. J And Acacius did not only
refuse to subrait to the Pope's jurisdiction, but slighted it.
And the Pope's act was but an atterapt, not effectual; for
Acacius died in possession of his see.§
VIII. If Popes were sovereigns of the Church, they could
effectually, whenever they should see it just and fit, absolve,
restore any bishop|| excoraraunicated from the Church, or de
posed from his office by ecclesiastical censure ; for relief of the
oppressed, or clemency to the distressed, are noble flowers in
every sovereign crown.
Wherefore the Pope doth assume this power, and reserveth
it to himself, as his special prerogative : " It is (says Baronius)
a privUege of the Church of Rome only, that a bishop de
posed by a Synod, raay without another Synod of a greater
number be restored by the Pope ;"^ and Pope Gelasius I.
says, " That the see of St. Peter the Apostle has a right of
loosing whatever the sentences of another bishop have
bound** — That the apostoUc see,ff according to frequent an
cient custom, had a power, no Synod preceding, to absolve
• Baron. Anno 484. % 19. t Vid. P. Felic. III. Ep. 6.
X P. Gelas. Ep. 4.
§ Ad cujus prsecipue vocatus examen vel venire vel mittere non curarit.
Gelas. Ep. 13.
II When a bishop was unjustly censured upon malice or mistake — ^when
he did repent of his error or miscarriage — when the case would upon
any account bear favour or pity.
IT Privilegium quidem solius Ecclesiae Romanae esse reperitur, ut depo
situs a Synodo Episcopus absque alia Synodo majoris numeri restitui possit
per Romanum Pontificem. — Baron. Ann. 449. § 127. [vol. 6. sect. 127.
Romae, 1607.]
** Quorumlibet Sententiis ligata Pontificum Sedes P. Petri ApostoHjus
habet resolvendi. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 13. [Lab. vol. 4. p. 1203. Paris. 1671.]
tt Sedes Apostolica frequenter more majorum, etiam sine uUa Synodo
praeeedente et absolvendi quos Synodus inique damnaverat et damnandi
nulla existente Synodo quos oportuit habuit facultatem. Ibid.

THE pope's supremacy. 367
those whom a Synod had unjustly condemned, and without a
CouncU to condemn those who deserved it."
It was an old pretence of Popes, that bishops were not con
demned, except the Pope did consent, renouncing coraraunion
with thera. So Pope Vigilius saith of St. Chrysostora and
Flarianus, that " although they were riolently excluded, yet
were they not looked upon as conderaned, because the bishop
of Rome always inriolably kept coraraunion with them."*
And before him Pope Gelasius saith, that " the Pope by
not consenting to the condemnation of Athanasius, Chry
sostom, Flarianus, did absolve them."f
By such a power of old did not belong to him. For,
1. There is not extant any ancient canon of the Church,
nor apparent footsteps of custom allowing such a power to
him. 2. Decrees of Synods (provincial in former tiraes, and dio
cesan afterwards) were inconsistent vrith, or repugnant to such
a power, for judgraents concerning episcopal causes were
deemed irrevocable, appointed to be so by decrees of divers
Synods ; and consequently no power was reserved to the Pope
of thwarting them by restitution of any bishop condemned in
them. 3. The ApostoUcal canons (which at least serve to prove
or Ulustrate ancient custom) and divers synodical decrees did
prohibit entertaining communion vrith any person condemned
or rejected by canonical judgment ; J vrithout exception or re
servation of power of infringing or relaxing that prohibition ;
and the Pope Gelasius himself says, " That he who had pol
luted himself by holding communion vrith a condemned
person, did partake of his condemnation." §
4. Whence in elder times Popes were opposed and checked
when they offered to receive bishops rejected in particular
Synods. So St. Cyprian || declared the restitution of BasiUdes
* Qui licet violenter exclusi sunt, non tamen pro damnatis sunt habiti,
eb quod semper inviolatam eorum commnnionem Rom. Pontifices serva-
verant. P. Vigilius iu Constit. Athan. &c.
t Quem (Joannem Chrys.) Sedes Apostolica etiam sola, quia non con-
sensit, absolvit. P. Gelas. Ep. 13.
t Can. Apost. 10, 11, 12, 31. Cone. Nie. Can. 5. Sard. 16, 17. Cod.
Afr. 9. Cone. Antioch. 6. 15. Evag. 2. 4.
§ Damnati hominis communione pollutus, damnationis ejus factus est par
ticeps. P. Gelas. Ep. 13. (p. 640.) [Lab. vol. 4. p. 1203. Paris. 1671.]
II Cypr. Ep. 68. [ad clerum et plebem de Basilide, p. 104. Paris. 1836.
vel Ep. 67. p. 180. Lipsise, 1838.]

368 A TREATISE OF
by Pope Stephanus to be nuU. So the Fathers of the An-
tiochen Synod did reprehend Pope Julius for admitting Atha
nasius and Marcellus to communion, or avowing them fot
bishops after their conderanation by Synods. And the Oriental
bishops of Sardica did excommunicate the same Pope for
communicating vrith the same persons. Which instances do
shew, that the Pope was not then undoubtedly, or according
to comraon opinion endowed vrith such a power.
But whereas they do allege sorae instances of such a povrer,
I shall premise sorae general considerations apt to clear the
business, and then apply answers to the particular allegations.
1 . Restitution coraraonly doth signify no raore than acknow
ledging a person (although rejected by undue sentence) to be
de jure worthy of coraraunion, and capable of the episcopal
office ; upon which raay be consequent an obUgation to com
municate vrith hira, and to allow hira his due character ; ac
cording to the precept of St. Paul, " Follow righteousness,
faith, charity, peace vrith them that call upon the Lord with a
pure heart."*
This raay be done, when any man notoriously is persecuted
for the truth and righteousness. Or when the iniquity and
malice of pretended judges are apparent, to the oppression of
innocence. Or when the process is extremely irregular ; as in
the cases of Athanasius, of St. Chrysostom. And this is not
an act of jurisdiction, but of equity and charity ; incumbent
on all bishops : and there are promiscuous instances of bishops
practising it. Thus Socrates saith, that Maximus bishop of
Jerusalem "did restore coraraunion and dignity to Athana8ius."f
And so CyrU of Alexandria and John of Antioch, being recon
ciled and reduced to a good understanding of each other, " did
restore to each other their sees ;"J rescinding the censures,
which in heat they had denounced each on other. Which
sheweth that restitution is not always taken for an act of juris
diction ; 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 con
siderable influence toward the effects of restoring a person to
communion or office ; no judicial act being exercised about the
* 2 Tim. ii. 22.
t ' Arr oS'iSiaa I Kai airbg r-fjv Koivwviav 'ABavaaiip Kai rijv diiav.
Socr. 2. 24. [Cantab. 1720.]
X 'AXXqXoigToig dpovovg drriSoaav. Socr. 7. 33. [Cantab. 1720.]

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 369
case. " The emperor writing that Paulus and Athanasius
should be restored to their sees, availed nothing."* That was
a restitution vrithout effect.
Thus a Pope's avovring 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 soraetimes much conduce to
restore a person j and might obtain the name of restitution by
an ordinary scheme of speech.
3. Sometimes persons said to be restored by Popes are also
said to be restored by Synods, with regard to such instance or
testimony of Popes in their behalf. In which case the judicial
restitution, giring right of recovery and completion thereto,
was tbe act of the Synod.f
4. When cases were driven to a legal debate. Popes could
not effectually resolve vrithout a Synod, their single acts not
being held sufficiently valid. So notvrithstanding the declara
tion of Pope Julius m favour of Athanasius, for the effectual
resolution of his case the great Synod of Sardica was convened.
So whatever Pope Innocent I. did endeavour, he could not
restore St. Chrysostora without a general Synod. Nor could
Pope Leo restore Flarianus, deposed in the second Ephesine
Synod, without convocation of a general Synod, the which he
did so often sue for to the eraperor Theodosius, for that pur
pose. Pope SimpUcius affirmed, that " Petrus Moggus haring
been by a common decree condemned as an adulterer," or
usurper of the Alexandrian see, " could not without a coraraon
CouncU be freed frora condemnation ."J
5. Particular instances do not ascertain right to the person,
who assumeth any power ; for busy bodies often vrill exceed
their bounds.
6. Emperors did soraetiraes restore bishops. Constantine,
as he did banish Eusebius of Nicodemia and others, so he did
revoke and restore them. So says Socrates, "They were
recaUed from banishment by the emperor's coraraand, aud
* Ppdtj/avrog roi ^aaiXkwg, wart drroSoBqvai HavXqj Kai 'ABava
aiip Toig oiKtiovg rorrovg, ovSiv rrXkov qvvero. Socr. 2. 20. [Cantab.
1720.] t It is an ordinary style of votes in Synods for the restitution of n
bishop, Irestore. Vid. Cone. Chalc. Act. 1. p. 165. That is, I give my
vote for his restitution.
X Oportebat communi decreto damnatum tanquam adulterum communi
concilio damnatione liberari. Liber cap. 18.
VOL. I. 2 B

370 ^ A TREATISE OP
received their churches."* Theodosius did assert to Flarianus
his right, whereof the Popes did pretend to deprive him;
which did amount to a restitution ; (at least to the Romanists
who do assert Flavianus to be deposed by the Popes). Instan-
tius and PriscUlianus were by " the rescript of the emperor
Gratianus restored to their Churches."f Justinian did order
Pope Silverius to be restored, in case he could prove hia umo-
cence. 7. Coraraonly restitution was not effectual vrithout the
eraperor's consent ; whence Theodoret, although allowed by
the great Synod, did acknowledge his restitution especially
due to the emperor ; as we shall see in reflecting on his case.
Now to the particular instances produced for the Pope, vfe
answer :
1 . They pretend, that Pope Stephanus did restore BasiUdes
and Martialis, Spanish bishops, who had been deposed ; for
which they quote St. Cyprian's epistle, where he says,"BasiHdes
going to Rome, imposed upon our colleague Stephen, who
lived a great way off, and was ignorant of the truth of the
matter ; seeking unjustly to be restored to his bishopric from
which he had justly been deposed."J
But we answer : the Pope did attempt such a restitution
by way of influence and testiraony, not of jurisdiction; where
fore the result of his act in St, Cyprian's judgment was null,
and blameable ; which could not he so deemed, if he had acted
as a judge ; for a favourable sentence, passed by just authority,
is valid, and hardly liable to censure. The clergy of those
places, notvrithstanding that pretended restitution did conceive
those bishops incapable ; and did request the judgment of St.
Cyprian about it ; which argueth the Pope's judgment not to
have been peremptory and prevalent then in such cases. § St.
* ' AveKX-qBqadv re rqg i%op'iag iK j3aaiXtKov rrpoardyparog, Kairiig
'EKKXqaiag iavriav drrkXapov. Socr. 1. 14. — Theod. 5. 23.
f Rescriptum eHciunt, quo calcatis quae prius decreta eraut, restituiEc-
clesiis jubebantur; hocfreti Instantius et PrisciUianus repetivere Hispanias.
Sulp. Sev. 2. 63. Revocari Romam Silverium jussit, et de literis illis judi
cium fieri, ut— si falsae fuissent probatae, restitueretur Sedi suae. Libera*,
Breviar. cap. 22.
J Romam pergens Stephanum CoUegam nostrum longe positum, et
gestae rei ac tacitae veritatis ignarum fefellit, ut exambiret reponi se injuste
in Episcopatum, de quo fuerat juste depositus. Cypr. Ep. 68. [Ep. 67.
Paris. 1836. vel Ep. 67. p. 183. Lipsis, 1838.]
§ Quare etsi aliqui de CoUegis nostris extiterunt, qui Deificam discipli
nam negligendam putant. — (Nee censurae congruit Sacerdotum mobihs
atque inconstantis animi levitate reprehendi. Cypr. Ep. 55.) [Ep. 59. p-

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 371
Cyprian denieth the Pope or any other person to have power
of restoring in such a case ; and exhorteth the clergy to persist
in decUning the coraraunion of those bishops.* Well doth
Bigaltius ask, why they should write to St. Cyprian, if the
judgment of Stephanus was decisive ;f and he addeth, that
indeed, " the Spaniards did appeal from the Roman bishop to
bim of Carthage." J No wonder, seeing the Pope had no
greater authority, and probably St. Cyprian had the fairer
reputation for vrisdom and goodness. Considering which
things, what can they gain by this instance ? which indeed
doth considerably make against them.
2. They aUege the restitution of Athanasius, and of others
hnked in cause with him, by Pope JuUus : " He (says Sozomen),
as having the care of all by reason of the dignity of his see,
restored to each his own Church. "§
I answer, the Pope did not restore them judicially, but
declaratively ; that is, declaring his approbation of their right
and innocence, did admit them to communion. JuUus in his
own defence did aUege, that Athanasius was not legally rejected;
so that without any prejudice to the canons he might receive
him ; and the doing it upon this account, plainly did not
require any act of judgment.!
Nay it was necessary to avow those bishops, as suffering in
the cause of the common faith. Besides, the Pope's proceeding
was taxed, and protested against as irregular ; nor did he
defendit by virtue of a general power that he had judicially to
rescind the acts of Synods. And lastly, the restitution of
Athanasius and the other bishops, had no complete effect, tUl
it was confirmed by the Synod of Sardica, backed by the im-
145. Lipsiee, 1838.] — Episcopatum gerere, et sacerdotium Dei adminis
trare non oportere. Desiderastis soUcitudinem vestram vel solatio vel
aaxilio sententiae nostrae sublevari. Nee personam in ejusmodi rebus
accipere, aut aUquid cuiquam largiri potest humana indulgentia ; ubi in-
tercedit et legem tribuit divina prsscriptio.
* Quantum possumus adhortamur, ne vos cum profanum immaculatis
sacerdotibus communicatione sacrilega misceatis.
f Sed cur ad Cyprianum si potestas infinita penes Romanum ? Rigalt.
ibid. t DatJs ad Cyprianum Uteris appellavere Carthaginiensem adversus
Romanum. Id.
% Ola Si rrdvrwv KqStpoviag avnp rrpoaqKOvaqg Sid rqv diiav rov
Spoj/ou, tKdarip rqv iSiav 'EKKXqaiav drrkSwKt. Soz. 3. 8.
II 'Qfi opoSo^ovg avroig eig Koivwviav rrpoaqKaro. Soz. 3. 8. —
Jnlu Epist. apud Ath. in Apol. 2.
2 B 2

372 A TREATISE OP
perial authority ; which in effect did restore them. This
instance, therefore is in raany respects deficient as to their
purpose. 3. They produce MarceUus being restored by the same Pope
Julius.* But that instance, beside the forementioned defects
hath this, that the Pope was grievously mistaken in the case ;
whence St. Basilf much blameth him for his proceeding
therein. 4. They cite the restitution of Eustathius (bishop of Se
bastia) by Pope Liberius, out of an epistle of St. BasU, where
he says, " What the most blessed bishop Liberius proposed to
hira, and to what he consented we know not; only that he
brought a letter to be restored, and upon shevring that to the
Synod at Tyana was restored to his see."J
I answer, that restitution was only from an invaUd deposi
tion by a Synod of Arians at Meletine; § iraporting only an ac-
knowledgraent of hira, upon approbation of his faith professed
by hira at Rome ; the which -had such influence to the satisfac
tion of the Diocesan Synod at Tyana, that he was restored.
Although indeed the Roraans were abused by him, he not
being sound in faith ; for " He now (saith St. BasU) doth
destroy that faith, for which he was received." ||
5. They adjoin, that Theodoret was restored by Pope Leo I.
for in the Acts of the Synod of Chalcedon it is said, that " 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 Theodoret did profess to hold ; and a recep
tion of hira to communion thereupon ; which he might weU do,
seeing the ground of Theodorel's being disclaimed was a mis
prision, that he (having opposed Cyril's writings, judged ortho
dox) did err in faith, consenting with Nestorius.**
Theodoret's state before the second Ephesine Synod, is thus
represented in the words of the emperor, " Theodoret bishop
of Cyrus, whom we have before commanded to mind only his
* Socr. 1. 36. t Bas. Ep. 10.
X Tiva piv ianv d rrpotrkBq avnp rrapd tov paKapwrdrov 'EmaKo
rrov Ai^tpiov, riva Si avrbg avvkBtro dyvovptv rrXqv 'on imaro-
Xqv tKopiatv drroKaBiariaaav avrbv, rjv imStiiag T-y Kard Tvava av
voSip drroKarkarq np romp. Bas. Ep. 74. [p. 263. p. 588.]
§ Soz. 4. 24.
II OvTog vvv -iropBeX t-^v rrianv, 'tif y iSkxBq. Basil, ibid. [Id.]
IT Tbv oiKeXov drroXa[3wv rorrov rrapd toU dyiwrdrov dp;^i£7rnTK07roy
rijg peyaXwvvpov 'Piapqg. Act. 1. p. 53.
** Elf Koivioviav iSkKaro. Syn, Chalc, Act, 8, p, 368.

THE pope's supremacy. 373
own Church, we charge uot to corae to the holy Synod, before
the whole Synod beiug met, it shaU seem good to them that
he come and bear his part iu it."*
He was not perfectiy deposed ;f as others were who had
others substituted in their places. He was deposed by the
Ephesine Synod. J
The Pope was indeed ready enough to assurae 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 Eutychian
party) was ready enough to allow what the Pope did in favour
of him. Yet a good part of the Synod (the bishops of Egypt,
of Palestine, of lUyricum), notwithstanding the Pope's restitu
tion (that is, his approbation in order thereto), did stickle
against his admission into the Synod ; " crying out. Have pity
on us, the faith is destroyed, the canons proscribe this man,
cast him out, cast out Nestorius his master." § So that the
imperial agents were fain to comproraise the business, perrait
ting hira to sit in the Synod, as one whose case was dependent,
but not in the notion of one absolutely restored : " Theodoret's
presence shaU prejudice no raan, each one's right of irapleading
being reserved both to you and him."||
He therefore was not entirely restored, till upon a clear and
satisfactory profession of his faith he was acquitted by the
judgraent of the Synod. The effectual restitution of him pro
ceeded from the emperor, who repealed the proceedings against
him; as hiraself doth acknowledge :•[ " All these things (says
he) has the most just emperor evacuated — to these things he
* QeoSwpqrov pkv rot rbv 'ErriaKorrov rqg Kvpov rroXewg, bv rjSq
tKtXtvaaptv r-y iSig. avrov povy 'EKKXqaii^ axoXdZtiv, StarriZoptv pq
Tportpov iXBtXv tig rqv dyiav avvoSov, i'iv p-q rrdaydyig, avvbSip avvtX-
Bovay Sbiy Kai avrbv rrapaytvkaBai, Kai Koivwvbv ytvkaBai rqg avTrjg
dyiag avvbSov. Imp. Theod. Epist. ad Diosc. in Syn. Chalc. Act. I.p. 53.
t Pro Theodoreto autem et Eusebio nullus ordinatus est, Liberat. 12.
{ Vid. Cone. Chalc. part. 3. p. 490. Excludi vero ab Episcopatu, &c.
in Imperatoris Theod. rescripto.
§ 'Eit(S6qaav, iXe-qaart, 7/ rriang drroXXvrai, ot Kavovtg rovrov iK-
paXXovaiv, toUtov iiw ^d'Xt, rbv SiSdaKaXov ^tOTopiip ii,w 0aXe.
Ibid. p. 54.
II IlpoKpipa drrb rov rraptXvai QtoSiapqrov oiSevi yevqatrai, ipvXar-
TOptvov SqXovbn ptrd ravra rravrbg Xbyov Kai vpXv, Kai iKeivip. Ibid.
% 'AXXd Tavra rrdvra XkXvKev b SiKaiorarog (SaaiXevg. Theod. Ep.
139. (ad Asparem.) — IlportBtiKt rovroig riig -qptrtpag dSiKiag rqv
laaiv. Ep. 138. (ad Anatol.)

374 A TREATISE OF
premised the redressing my injuries ;" and the imperial
judges in the Synod of Chalcedon join the emperor in the re-
sf;itution—" Let the raost reverend Theodoret enter and bear
his part hi the Synod, since the most holy archbishop Leo, and
sacred emperor have restored his bishopric to him."* Hence
it may appear that the Pope's restitution of Theodoretus
was only opinionative, dough-baked, incomplete ; so that it
is but a slira advantage, which their pretence can receive
from it.
IX. It belongeth to sovereigns to receive appeals fi-om all
lower judicatures, for the final deterraination of causes ; so
that no part of his subjects can obstruct resort to him, or pro
hibit his rerision of any judgraent.
This power therefore the Pope doth most stiffly assert to
hiraself. At the Synod of Florence, this was the first and
great branch of authority, which he did deraand of the Greeks
expUcitly to avow : " He will (said his three cardinals to the
emperor) have all the privUeges of the Church, and that ap
peals be made to him."f When Pope Alexander III. was
advised not to receive an appeal in Becket's case, he replied
in that profane allusion : " This is my glory, which I wUl not
give to another." J He hath been wont to encourage all
people, even upon the slightest occasions, iter arripere (as the
phrase is obrious in their canon law) to run vrith all haste to
his audience : " Concerning appeals for the smaUest causes
we would have yon hold, that the same deference is to he
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. 2. quest. 6.|| where many Papal decrees (most
indeed drawn out of the spurious epistles of ancient Popes,
but ratified by their successors, and obtaining for current law)
are made for appeals to the see of Rorae.
It was indeed one of the most ancient encroachments, and
* Eiairw Kai b tiXafS'tararog QtoSwpqrog KOivwvqawv ry avvoSip,
irrtiSdv Kai drrtKartarqatv ainp rqv 'EmaKorrqv b dyiwrarog 'Apjfi-
trriaKorrog Akwv, Kai Srtiorarog ^aaiXtvg. Act. 1. p. 53.
t 0eX£i rd rrpovopia rrdvra rrig 'EKKXqaiag avrov, Kai B'tXti ixtiv
Tqv iKKXqrov. — Syn. Flor. Sess. 25. p. 846.
X Hsec est gloria mea, quam alteri non dabo.
^ De appellationibus pro minimis causis volumus te tenere, qubd eis pro
quacunque levi causa tiant, non minus est, quam si pro majoribus fieient,
deferendum. Alex. III. Ep, ad Vigorn. Episc, in decret. Greg. lib. 2. tit.
28. cap. 11. [Corp. Jur. Can. et Pitha:o, vol. 2. p. 120. Paris. 1595,]
II Caus. 2. qu. 6. Caus. 3. qu. 6. Caus. 9. qu. 3. cap. 16.

THE pope's supkemacy. 375
that which did serve most to introduce the rest ; inferring
hence a title to an universal jurisdiction : " They are the canons
(says Pope Nicholas I.) which will that all appeals of the
whole Church be brought to the examination of this see, and
have decreed that no appeal be made frora it, and that thus
she judge of the whole Church, but herself goes to be judged by
none other."* 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 deter
mined by us."f As the Synod has appointed and usage re
quires, let greater and difficult cases be always referred to the
apostolic see (says Pope Pelagius II. )J "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 tiraes ; upon accounts not only blaraing
the horrible abuse of appeals, but iraplying the great mischiefs
inseparably adherent to thera.
The Synod of BasU thus excellently declared concerning
them :|1 "Hitherto many abuses of intolerable vexations have
prevaUed, whUst many have too often been called and cited
irom the most remote parts to the court of Rome, and that
sometimes for sraall and trifling matters, and vrith charges and
trouble to be so wearied, that they sometimes think it their
best way to recede from their right, or buy off their trouble
vrith great loss, rather than be at the cost of suing in so re
mote a country."^
* Ipsi sunt Canones, qui appeUationes totius Ecclesise ad hujus sedis
examen voluere deferri ; ab ipsa verb nusquam prorsus appellari debere
sanxerunt ; ac per hoc Ulam de tota Ecclesia judicare, ipsam ad nulUus
commeare judicium. P. Nich. Papse I. Ep. 8. [Lab. vol. 8. p. 293.
Paris. 1671.]
t Sacra statuta, et veneranda decreta Episcoporum eausas, utpote ma
jora negotia nostrse definiendas censurae mandarunt. P. Nich. I. Ep. 38.
[ut supra.]
t Majores verb et difficiles quaestiones (ut sancta Synodus statuit, et
beata consuetude exigit) ad Sedem ApostoUcam semper referantur. P.
Pelag. II. Epist. 8. [vol. 5. p. 948. ut supra.]
§ Ipsi sunt canones qui appeUationes totius Ecclesiae ad hujus sedis
examen voluere deferri. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 4. [vol. 4. p. 1168, ut supra.]
II ConsU. Basil. Sess. 31. (p. 86.)
f Inoleverunt autem hactenus intolerabiUum vexationum abusus per-
multi, dum nimium frequenter a remotissimis etiam partibus ad Romanam

376 A TKEATISE OP
St. Bernard complaineth of the mischiefs of appeals in his
tiraes, in these words,* "How long will you be deaf to the
complaints of the whole world, or make as if you were «o ?
Why sleep you ? When will the consideration of so great
confusion and abuse in appeals awake in you ? They are made
vrithout right or equity, without due order and against custom.
Neither place, nor raanner, nor tirae, nor cause, nor person are
considered : they are every where raade Ughtly and for the
raost part unjustly :"t with much more passionate language to
the same purpose.
But in the priraitive 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 remedy, if Rorae had been such a place of refuge, it
would have been very faraous for it ; and we should find history
ftdl of such exaraples ; whereas it is very sUent about them.
2. The most ancient customs and canons ofthe Churcb are
flatly repugnant to such a power : for they did order causes
finally to be decided in each prorince.
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, " raost eridently did
commit both clergymen of inferior degrees and bishops to their
metropolitans."]; So Theophilus in his epistle : " I suppose you are not igno
rant what the canons of the Nicene Council command, ordain
ing that a bishop should judge no cause out of his own dis
trict." §
Curiam, et interdum pro parvis et minutis rebus ac negotiis quamplurimi
citari, et evocari consueverunt, atque itk expensis et laboribus fatigari, nt
nonnunquam commodius arbitrentur juri suo cedere, aut vexationem suam
gravi damno redimere, qu&m in tam longinqua regione litium subire dis-
pendia, &e. Vid. Opt. [Lab. vol. 12. sess. 31. p. 601. Paris. 1671.]
* Bern, de Consid. Ub. 3. cap. 2.
+ Quousque murmur universe terrse aut dissimulas, aut non advertis.
[Praeter jus et fas praeter morem et ordinem (appeUationes) Hunt. Non
locus, non modus, non tempus, non causa discemitur aut persona.]— &c,
[Bernard, vol. 4. p. 11. Lugdun. 1687.]
:t Decreta Nicena sive inferioris gradus Clericos, sive Episcopos suis
MetropoUtanis apertissime commiserunt. Syn. Afr. in Ep. ad P. Celest.
[Lab. vol. 2. p. 1675. Paris. 1671.]
% Arbitror te non ignorare quid praecipiant Niceni Concihi Canones,
sancientes Episeopum non judicare causam citra terminos suos — nam—
Pallad, cap. 7.

THE pope's SUPUEMACY. 377
3. Afterward when the diocesan adrainistration was intro
duced, the last resort was decreed to the Synods of them (or to
the primates in thera), all other appeals being prohibited, "as
^dishonourable to the bishops of the diocese ; reproaching the
canons, and subverting ecclesiastical order." To which canon
the emperor Justinian referred ; " for it is decreed by our an
cestors that against the sentence of these prelates there should
be no appeal."* So Constantius told Pope Liberius, " that
those things which had a form of judgment passed on them
conld not be rescinded. "f This was the practice (at least in the
Eastern parts ofthe Church) in the times of Justinian ; as is evi
dent by the constitutions extant in the Code and in the Novels. J
4. In derogation to this pretence divers prorincial Synods
expressly did prohibit all appeals from their decisions. §
That of Milevis : " Let them appeal only to African Councils
or the priraates of provinces ; and he who shall think of appeal
ing beyond sea, let him be admitted into coraraunion by none
in Africa." II
" For if the Nicene Council took this care of the inferior
clergy, how rauch more did they mtend it should relate to
bishops also ?"^
5. AU persons were forbidden to entertain communion vrith
bishops condemned by any one Church, which is inconsistent
"with their being allowed reUef at Rorae.
6. This is erident in the case of Marcion, hy the assertion
of the Roman Church at that time.
• Note, That tbe Synod of Constantinople (Can. 6.) mentioning ap
peals to the Emperor, secular judicatories, a General Synod, saith, 'An-
pdaag Toig Tqg SioiKriaewg 'EmaKorrovg, &c. Syn. Const. Can. 6.
Concil. Constantinop. Can. 2, 6. Concil. Chalced. Can. 9, 17. [Lab.
vol. 4. Paris. 1671.]
+ Nam contra horum Antistitum Sententias non esse locum AppeUa-
tioni a majoribus nostris constitutum est. Cod. lib. 1. tit. 4. cap. 29.
[1567-]— Td ?/5)j rvrrov iaxqKora dvaXvtaBat ov Svvarai. Theod. 11.
16. [Cantab. 1720.]
X Nov. 123. cap. 22.— Cod. Lib. 1. tit. 4. § 29. [1567.] Vid. Grsec.
§ Can. 12. Cone. Ant. Can. 15.— Cone. Carth. Can. 31.
II Non provocent nisi ad Africana ConcUia, vel ad Primates Provincia
rum ; ad transmarina autem qui putaverit appellandum, a nullo infra
Africam in commnnionem suscipiatur. Cone. MUev. cap. 22. [Lab. vol. 3.
p. 385. Venet. 1728.] Cone. Afr. Can. 72.
H Nam si de inferioribus Clericis in ConcUio Niceno hoc prEecaveruut ;
quanto magis de Episcopis voluit observari ? Cone. Atr. Can. 105. (vel
Epist.) [Lab. vol. 3. Epist. Cone. Afric. ad Papam Celest. p. 1675.
Venet. 1728.]

378 A TREATISE OF
7. When the Pope hath offered to receive appeals, or to
meddle in cases before decided, he hath found opposition and
reproof. Thus when Felicissimus and Fortunatus, haring been
censured and rejected frora communion in Africa,* did abply
themselves to Pope CorneUus, with supplication to be admitted
by him ; St. Cyprian maintaineth that fact to be irregular and
unjust, and not to be countenanced, for divers reasons. Like
wise, when BasiUdes and MartiaUs,f being for their crimes de
posed in Spain, had recourse to Pope Stephanus for restitution,
the clergy and people there had no regard to the judgment of
the Pope; the which their resolution St. Cyprian did commend
and encourage.
When Athanasius, MarceUus, Paulus, &c. having been con
deraned by Synods, did apply themselves for relief to Pope
Julius; the Oriental bishops did highly tax this course as
irregular ; disclaiming any power in hira to receive them, or
meddle in their cause. Nor could Pope JuUus by any law or
instance disprove their plea ; nor did the Pope assert to him
self any peculiar authority to rerise the cause, or otherwise
justify his proceeding than by right coramon to all bishops of
rindicating 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 arbitrator ; which signifieth that he had no
ordinary right ; but afterward, either fearing their cause or his
prejudice, they started, and stood to the canonicalness of the
former decision.
The contest ofthe African Church vrith Pope Celestine, in the
cause of Apiarius 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. J
St. Cyprian allegeth these : —
1 . Because there was an ecclesiastical law against them.
2. Because they contain iniquity ; as prejudicing the right
of each bishop granted by Christ, in governing his flock.
3. Because the clergy and people should not be engaged to
run gadding about.
* Cypr. Ep. 55. (ad ComeUum.) t Cypr. Ep. 68.
X Refer ad ^ 7. Vid. supr. Oportet utique cos quibus praesuihus non
circumcursare, nee Episcoporum concordiam cohserentem suii subdolS et
fallaci temeritate coUidere, sed agere illic causam suam, ubi et accusatorcs
habere, et testes sui criminis possint. Cypr. Ep. 55. [Ep. 54. p. 75.
Paris. 1836,]

THE pope's supremacy. 379
4. Because causes might better be decided there, where wit
nesses of fact might easily be had.
5. Because there is everywhere a competent authority, equal
to any that might be had otherwhere.
6. Because it did derogate from the gravity of bishops to
alter their censure.
Pope Liberius desired »f Constantius that the judgment of
Athanasius might be made in Alexandria for such reasons ;
" because there the accused, the accusers, and their defender
were."* St. Chrysostom's argument against TheophUus meddUng in
his case may be set against Rome as well as Alexandria.
9. St. Augustine in matter of appeal, or rather of reference
to candid arbitration (more proper for ecclesiastical causes) ,
doth conjoin other apostolical Churches vrith that of Rome :
" For the business (says he), was not about priests and dea
cons or the inferior clergy, but the coUeagues (bishops), who
may reserve their cause entire for the judgment of their col
leagues, especially those of the apostolical Churches. "f He
would not have said so, if he had apprehended that the Pope
had a pecuUar right of revising judgments.
10. Pope Damasus (or rather Pope Siricius) doth affirm
hunself incompetent to judge in a case, which had been afore
determined by the Synod of Capua : — " But," says he, " since
the Sj-nod of Capua has thus determined it, we perceive we
cannot judge it." J
11. Anciently there were no appeals (properly so called or
jurisdictional) in the Church ; they were, as Socrates telleth us,
introduced by Cyril of Jerusalem ; who " first did appeal to a
greater judicature, against ecclesiastical rule and custom." §
• 'EvBa b iyKciXovpevog, Kai ol iyKaXoUvreg etai, Kai b dvrirrotov-
(Hvoe ou-wv.— Theod. 11. 16. [Cantab. 1720.]
t Neque enim de Presbyteris aut Diaconis, aut inferioris ordinis Clericis,
sed de CoUegis agebatur qui possunt aliorum CoUegarum judicio, prseser-
timApostoUcarum Ecclesiarum, causam suam integram reservare. Aug.
Ep. 162. [vol. 2. Ep. 162. aUas 43. p. 91. Paris. 1679.]
} Sed cilm hujusmodi fuerit Concilii Capuensis judicium — advertimus
qubd a nobis judicandi forma competere non possit.
§ ToiJro p'tv ovv povog Kai Trpwroc Trapd rb avvqBtg np 'EKKXq-
aiaanKip Kavovi KvpiXXog irroiqatv, iKKXqrotg wg iv Sqpoaiip SiKa-
•""IP'V XPI""/"*""?- Socr, 2, 40. [Cantab. 1720.] KaBaipiOiig S'
ovv ^pwg iKKXqrov (SijiXiov roig KaBeXovai Starrtp^dptvog ptXZov
fTntoXfoaro SiKaariipiov. Ibid. — Being deposed he sent a libel of ap
peal to them who deposed him, appeaUng to a greater judicatuie.

380 A treatise of
This is an arguraent, that about that tirae (a little before the
greatJSynod of Constantinople) greater judicatories, or Diocesan
Synods were estabUshed ; when as before Provincial Synods
were the last resorts.
12. Upon many occasions appeals were not made to the
Pope, as in all likelihood they would have been, if it had been
supposed that a power of receiving ^era did belong to him.*
Paulus Saraosatenus did appeal to the eraperor. The Donatists
did not appeal to the Pope, but to the eraperor. Their cause
was by the emperor referred not to the Pope singly (as it ought
to have been, and would have been by so just a prince, if it
had been his right), but to hira and other judges as the
eraperor's comraissioners.f Athanasius did first appeal to
the eraperor. St. Chrysostora did request the Pope's succour,
but he did not appeal to hira as judge, although he knew him
favourably disposed, and the cause sure in his hand ; but he
appealed to a General CouncU, the which Innocent himself
did conceive necessary for decision of that cause, J
(There are in history innuraerable instances of bishops being
condemned and expeUed from their sees, but few of appeals ;
which is a sign that was no approved reraedy in common
opinion.) Eutyches did appeal to all the patriarchs. § Theodoret did
intend to appeal to all the Western bishops. ||
13. Those very canons of Sardica (the most unhappy that
ever were made to the Church), which did introduce appeals
to the Pope, do yet upon divers accounts prejudice his claim «
to an original right ; and do upon no account favour that use
of them, to which (to the overthrow of all ecclesiastical liberty
and good discipline) they have been perverted. For,
1. They do pretend to confer a privilege on the Pope;
which argueth that he before had no claim thereto.
2. They do qualify and restrain that privUege to certain
cases and forms ; which is a sign, that he had no power there
in flovring from absolute sovereignty ; for it is strange, that
* Illos verb ab Ecclesiastico judicio provocasse, &c. Aug. Ep. 162.
[vol. 2. Epist. aUas 43. p. 90. Paris. 1679.]— Ad Imperatorem appella-
verunt. Aug. de Unit, Eccl. cap. 16.
t Quid quod nee ipse usurpavit ; rogatus Imperator judices misit
Episcopus qui cum ipso sederent, et de tota Ula causa quod justum vide
retur statuerent. Aug. Ep. 162. [ut supra.]
X ' AvayKa'ia ian Sidyvwaig avvoSiKq. Sozom. 8. 26. [Cantab,
1720,] § Infra, l| Intra.

THE pope's SUPUEMACY. 381
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,
qualified according to certain. conditions, to revise a special sort
of causes concerning the judgment and deposition bf bishops.
Which considerations do "Subvert his pretence to original and
universal jurisdiction upon appeals.
14. Some Popes did challenge jurisdiction upon appeals,
as ^ven them by the Nicene canons, meaning thereby those of
Sardica ; which sheweth they had no better plea, and there
fore no original right. And otherwise we shall consider, what
validity those canons may be aUowed 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 priraate of
each diocese, or to the patriarch of Constantinople. That this
was the last resort doth appear, frora that othervrise they
would have mentioned the Pope.*
16. Appeals in cases of faith, or general discipline were
indeed sometimes made to the consideration of the Pope ; but
not only to him, but to all other patriarchs and primates, as
concerned in the common maintenance of the common faith,
or ^cipline. So did Eutyches appeal 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 Hincmarus bishop of
Rheims.f 18. Christian states, to prevent the intolerable vexations
and mischiefs arising from this practice, have been constrained
to make laws against them. Particularly England.J
,, J, In'the twelfth age. Pope Paschal II. complained of King
Jfenry I., "that he deprived the oppressed of the benefit of
jappealingto the apostolic see."§ 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 judgraents we
* Can. 9. 17.
t Baion. Ann. 865.— P. Nich. I. Ep. 37, &c.
} Vid. Matt. Paris. Ann. 1094. Statutes of Provisors, Premunire, &c.
§ Vos oppressis Apostolicse Sedis appellationem subtrahitis. Eadm. p.
113. II NuUus inde clamor, nullum indS judicium ad Sedem Apostolicam
destinantur. Eadm. p. 113.

382 A treatise of
utterly reraove.*— There let the cause be tried where the crime
was coraraitted." It was one of the grievances sent to Pope
Innocent IV., " that EngUshraen were drawn out of the
kingdora by the Pope's authority, to have their causes heard."f
Nor in after tiraes were appeals by law in any case per
mitted without the king's leave ; although sometimes by the
faciUty of princes, or difficulty of tiraes, the Roman court (ever
importunate and rigUantfor its profits) did obtain a relaxation
or neglect of laws inhibiting appeals.
1 9. There were appeals frora Popes to General Councils
very frequently. Vid. The senate of Paris after the Concor
dats between Louis XII. and Pope Leo X.
20. By many laws and instances it appeareth, that appel
lations have been made to the emperors in the greatest
causes ;J and that vrithout Popes reclaiming or taking it in
bad part. St. Paul did appeal to Csesar.^ Paulus Saraosatenus
did appeal to AureUanus.|| So the Donatists did appeal to
Constantine. Athanasius to Constantine,^ The Egyptian
bishops to Constantine.** PriscUlianus to Maxiraus.ff Idacius
to Gratian. So that canons were raade to restrain bishops
from recourse ad Comitatum.XX
21. Whereas they do allege instances for appeal, those well
considered do prejudice their cause ; for they are few, in com
parison to the occasions of them, that ever did arise ; they
are near all of them late, when Papal encroachments had
grown ; some of them are very impertinent to the cause ; some
of them may strongly be retorted against them; aU of them
are invalid.
^ If the Pope originally had such a right (known, unquestion
able, prevalent) there raight have been producible raany, andent,
clear, proper, concluding instances.
All that BeUarmine (after his own search, and that of his
predecessors in controversy) could muster, are these following ;
upon which we shall briefly reflect : (adding a few others, which
may be alleged by them.)§§
* Peregrina judicia modis omnibus submovemus. Henr. I. Leg. cap. 31.
— Ibi semper causa agatur, ubi crimen admittitur. Ibid.
t Quod AngUci extra regnum in causis auctoritate ApostoUci trahuntur.
Matt. Paris, p. 699. 10. X Haffa 4'vxq. E,om. 13. 1.
^ Acts xxv.
jl Ad Imperatorem appeUaverunt. Aug. de Unit. Eccl. cap. 16.
t Apol. 2. p. 804. ** Ath. Apol. 2. p. 797, 798.
tt Ad Principem provocavit. Sulp. Sev. 2. 64, Sulp. Sev. 2. 63. Cone.
Ant. Can. Xt P. de Marca, 4. 4. §§ BeU 2.21.

THE pope's SUPllEMACY. 383
He aUegeth Marcion, as appeaUng to the Pope.*
The truth was, that Marcion, for haring corrupted a maid,
was by his own father, bishop of Sinope, " driven from the
Church ;" whereupon he did thence fly to Rome, there
"begging admittance to communion, but none did grant it;"f
at which he expostulating, they repUed : " We cannot vrithout
the permission of thy honourable father do this ; for there is
one faith, and one concord ; and we cannot cross thy father,
our good feUow-minister :"|; this was the case and issue;
and is it not strange this should be produced for an appeal,
which was only a suppUcation of a fugitive criminal to be
admitted to communion ; and wherein is utterly disclaimed
any power to thwart the judgment of a particular bishop or
judge, npon account of unity in common faith and peace ?
should the Pope return the same answer to every appellant,
what would become of his pririlege ? So that they must give
us leave to retort this as a pregnant instance agjunst their pre
tence. He aUegeth the forementioned address of FeUcissimus and
Fortunatus to Pope CorneUus ; the which was but a factious
drcumcnrsation of desperate wretches; the which, or any Uke
it,§ St. Cyprian argueth the Pope in law and equity obUged
not to regard ; because a definite sentence was aheady passed
on them by their proper judges in Africa, from whom in
consdence and reason there could be no appeal. So BeUar
mine would filch from us one of our invincible arguments
against him.
He also aUegeth the case of BasiUdes ; which also we before
did shew to make against him ; his appUcation to the Pope
being disavowed by St. Cyprian, and proring ineffectual. ||
These are aU the instances which the first three hundred
years did afford ; so that aU that time this great privUege lay
dormant. He aUegeth the recourse of Athanasius to Pope JuUus ;^ 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 counte-
* Ann. 142.
+ Epiph. hser. 42. 'Eieovrai riig 'EKKXqaiag. 'ArroSiSpdaKti Kai
avetaiv eig rijv 'Piapqv.
X Oi SwdfieBa avev rqg imrporrqg rov Tip'iov Harpbg aov Tobro
voiijaai- pia ydp 'tan rriang, Kai pia bpovoia, Kai ov SvvdpeBa
'svavTuaBrivai Tip KoXip avXXtirovpyip Barpi np aip.
% Cypr. Ep. 55. Ann. 252. H Cypr. Ep. 68. f Ann. 350.

384 A TRE.VTISE OP
nance against persecutors of him, chiefly for his orthodoxy.*
The Pope did undertake to examine his plea, partly as arbi
trator upon reference of both parties, partly for his own con
cern to satisfy himself whether he might admit him to com
munion. And having heard and weighed things, the Pope
denied that he was condemned in a legal way by competent
judges, and that therefore the pretended Sentence was null ;
and consequently he did not undertake the cause as upon ap
peal. 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.f Unto which charge he doth not answer directly by
asserting to himself any such authority by law or custom ; but
othervrise excusing himself. In the issue, the Pope's sentence
was not peremptory ; until upon exaraining 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 consequently this instance is deficient. J
He allegeth St. Chrysostora, as appealing to Pope Inno
cent I.,§ but if you read his epistle to that Pope, you vrill find
no such raatter ; he doth only complain, and declare to him
the iniquity of the process against hira, not as to a judge, but
as to a friend and fellow-bishop concerned, that such injurious
and raischievous dealings should be stopped ; requesting from
hira not judgraent 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 assume 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 pririlege, did suffice ? why, indeed, did not
Pope Innocent (being well satisfied in the case, yea, passion
ately touched with it) presently sumraon Theophilus and his
* AiSdaKovrtg irri KaraXvaewg rqg rriartwg rdg KaBaip'eatig ytvk
aBai. Socr. 2. 20. t Socr. 2. 20.
X "Dote (Athanasius et Paulus) rd Kar' avroig Kai rd rijg n'lartiag
irri OiKovptviKqg avvoSov rkXog Xa(3tXv. Socr. 2. 20.
$ Tom. 7. Epist. 122, 123. Ilpbg rqv vptr'tpav dvaSpaptXv dyairriv.
UapaKaXia Tqv vptrkpav dydrqv Siavaarrjvai, Kai avvaXyqaai, Kai
rrdvra rroiriaai, wart arqvai Tavra rd KaKa.
II OiKovptviKqv drreKaXtX rb avvoSov. Soz. 8. 17. — 'AX\' diroiriDi'
-qpiav Kai avvoSov irriKaXovpkvwv. Theod. 5. 34. — -OiKovptviKriv oi
avvoSov avvaytXpai arrovSaZwv. Soz. 8. 26. — 'AvayKaia ian Sidyvia
aig avvoSiKq. Ibid.

THE pope's suprkmacv. 385
adherents, undertaking the trial? did Pope Nicholas I. proceed
so m the case of Rhotaldus ? why was he content only " to
write consolatory letters to him, and to his people ;"* not pre
tending to undertake the decision of his cause ? If the Pope
had been endowed with such a privUege, it is moraUy impossi
ble that it should not have shone forth clearly upon this occa
sion : it could hardly be that St. Chrysostom himself should
not in plain terms avow it ; that he should not formaUy apply
to it as the most certain and easy way of finding reUef ; that
he should not eamestiy 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
snch foreign judicatures to be unreasonable and unjust ; for
the aigument which he darteth at TheophUus doth as well
reach the Papal jurisdiction upon appeals ; for "it was (saith
he) not congruous that an Egyptian shonld judge those in
Thrace :"f why not an Egyptian as weU as an Italian ? and
" If (saith he) this custom should prevaU, and it become law
ful for those who vriU 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 wUl go to wreck."j — "WTiy may not this be said of a
Boman as weU as of an Alexandrian ? St, Chrysostom also
(we may observe) did not only apply himself to the Pope, but
to other Western bishops ; particulsirly to the bishops of
MUan and AquUeia ; whom he caUed Beatissimi Domini : did
he appeal to them ?§
He aUegeth Flavianus bishop of Constantinople appealing
to Pope Leo:|i but let us consider the story. Flarianus
for his orthodoxy (or upon other accounts) very injuriously
* 'I-vvoKtvnog Si 6 'Piapqg, Kai ^a(3iavbg 'Avnoxtiag ovk iKoivwvq-
aav Ty iK^oXy 'Iwdvvov, dXXd Sia ypappdrwv riig rrbXewg rbv eX^pov
rapepuBqaaVjKai iSvaxtpaivov roXg roXptipaai. Theoph. Soz. 8. 26.
t Oi ydp dKoXovBov qv rbv ii, Aiyvrrrov roXg iv QpdKy SiKaZeiv.
t Ei ydp T-oiJTO Kparqaeu rb iBog Kai iibv ykvoiTO roXg fiovXopkvoig
tig dXXorpiag dmivai rrapoiKiag, Kai tK roaovrwv Siaarqpdrwv, Kai iK-
^dXXciv oBj av iBiXoi ng, Kar' iiovaiav iSiav rrpdrrovrag iirrep av
iBiXiaaiv, lare 'on rrdvra oixqatrai. Epist. 122.
§ Scripsimus ista et ad Venerium Mediolanensem, et ad Chromatium
Aqnil^ensem Episeopum. Pallad. cap. 2.
II Flavianus autem contra se prolata sententia per ejus legates Sedem
ApostoUcam appellavit Ubello. Liber, cap. 12.
VOL. I. 2 C

386 A TREATISE OF
treated and oppressed by Dioscorus, who was supported by
the favour of the imperial court ;* haring in his case no other
remedy, did appeal to the Pope ; who alone among the patri
archs had dissented from those proceedings. ' The Pope was
himself involved in the cause, being of the same persuasion ;
haring been no less affronted and hardly treated (considering
their power, and that he was out of their reach), and con
demned by the same adversaries.
To him therefore as to the leading bishop of Christendom,
in the first place interested in defence of the common faith, to
gether with a Synod, not to hira as sole judge did Flarianus
appeal. " He (saith Placidia in her letter to Theodosius) did
appeal to the apostoUc see, and to all the bishops of these
parts ;"f that is, to the rest of Christendora, which were not
engaged in the party of Dioscorus ; and to whom else could
he have appealed ?
Valentinian in his epistle to Theodosius in behalf of Pope
Leo saith, that he did appeal "according to the manner of
Synods ;" J 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 ?
But what his appeal did iraport is best interpretable by the
proceeding consequent ; which was not the Pope's assuming to
himself the judicature either immediately or by delegation of
judges, but endeavouring to procure a General Synod for it ;
the which endeavour doth appear in many epistles to Theo
dosius and to his sister Pulcheria, soliciting that such a Synod
might be indicted by his order : " AU the bishops (saith Pope
Leo) vrith sighs and tears do suppUcate your grace, that be
cause our agents did faithfully reclaim, and bishop Flavianus
did present them a libel of appeal, you would command a
General Synod to be celebrated in Italy." §
* Necessitate coactus fiiit ita agere, eb quod reUqui Patriarchae ades-
sent. — Marc. 7. 7.
+ 'Qg Trpoqyovptvwv. Placidia. — Ilpoe rbv ' A-rroaroXiKbv hpovov
Kai rrpbg rrdvrag 'Emaiiorrovg riav ptpwv rovrwv. Syn. Chalc. Act. 1.
p. 26.
X Kard rb iBog riav avvoSwv. p. 25.
j Omnes mansuetudini vestrae cum gemitibus et lachrymis supplicant
Sacerdotes, ut quia et nostri fideliter reclamlrunt, et eisdem libellum ap-
peUationis Flavianus Episcopus dedit, generalem Synodum jubeatis intra
ItaUam celebrari. — P. Leo Epist. 25.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 387
Dioscorus and his party would scarce have been so silly as
to condemn Flarianus, if they had known (which, if it had
been a case clear in law, or obvious in practice, they could
not but have known) that the Pope, who was deeply engaged
in the same cause, had a power to reverse (and revenge) their
proceedings. Nor would the good emperor Theodosius so
pertinaciously have maintained the proceedings of that Ephe
sine Synod, if he had deemed the Pope duly sovereign go-
venor and judge ; or that a right of ultimate decision upon
appeal did appertain to him. Nor had the Pope needed to
have taken so much pains in procuring a Synod, if he could
have judged vrithout it. Nor would Pope Leo (a man of so
much spirit and zeal for the dignity of his see) have been so
wanting to the maintenance of his right, as not immediately
to bave proceeded unto trial of the cause, vrithout 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 abstracting from the sound of words must regard the
reason of things. His words are these, " I expect the suffrage
of your apostoUc see, and beseech and eamestiy entreat your
hoUness to succour me who appeal to your right and just
judicature."* He never had been particularly or personally judged, and
therefore did not need to appeal as to a judge ; nor therefore
is his appUcation to the Pope to be interpreted for such; but
rather as to a charitable succourer of him in his distress, by
his countenance and endeavour to reUeve him.f
He only was supposed erroneous in faith, and a perilous
abettor of Nestorianism, because he had smartly contradicted
CyrU ; which prejudice did cause him to be prohibited from
* 'Eyii Si TOV 'AirocroXucoi! vpiav Spovoti rrepipkvw rrjv ijiq^ov, Kai
itenvw Kai djrijSoXw rqv aqv dyiorqra iirapiivai poi rb bpBbv vpiav
Kai SiKaiov tmKoXovpkvip Kpirijpiov. Theod. Ep. 113. (ad P. Leonem.)
t Vid. Ep. 112. ad Domnum. 'AXXd xdpii rbv drrovra bpo'iwg Ka-
^pip Kar'tafaitv, ovrt KaXiaag tig SiKaarqpiov, ovre rrapbvra Kp'ivag
— ptrd Toaovrovg 'iSpHrag Kai rrovovg /t)J Sucaadpevog KareKp'iBqv. —
01 Sk SiKoioraroi SiKaarai rbv drrbvra Kar'tKpivav ov SiKaaavreg,
paXXov Si Kai Xiav irraiv'eaavreg rd SrjBev eig Karqyop'iav q/iiav irri-
SoB'ivra avyypdfiitara. Epist 138.
2 C 2

388 A TREATISE OF
coming to the Synod of Ephesus ; and there in his absence to
be denounced heterodox.*
His appeal then to the Pope (having no other recourse, in
whom he did confide, finding him to concur with himself in
opinion against Eutychianism)f was no other than (as the
word is often used in comraon speech, when we say, I appeal to
your judgraent in this or that case) a referring it to the Pope's
consideration, whether his faith was sound and orthodox;
capacitating him to retain his office : the which upon the ex
plication and profession thereof (presented in terms of ex
traordinary respect and deference) the Pope did approve;
thereby (as a good dirine rather than as a formal judge) ac
quitting hira of heterodoxy : the which approbation (in regard
to the great opinion then had of the Pope's skiU in those
points, and to the favour he had obtained by contesting
against the Eutychians) did bear great sway in the Synod;
so that (although not vrithout opposition of raany, and not
upon absolute terms) he was permitted to sit among the
Fathers of Chalcedon. Observations.
1 . We do not read of any formal trial the Pope made of
Theodoret's case ; that he was cited, that his accusers did
appear, that his cause was discussed ; but only a simple ap
probation of him.
2. We may observe, that Theodoret did write to Flarianus
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 observe, that Theodoret expecting this favour
of Pope Leo, and thence being moved to coraraend the Ro
man see to the height, and to reckon its special advantages,
doth not yet mention his supremacy of power, or universaUty
* EaaiXiKoXg ydp qpdg ry K-vpKpip rrpoaS-qaavrtg ypdppaaiv, —
Epist. 145. Vid. Theod. Epist. supra et Epist. 127, 129. Kai pt vopog
ivBdSe KaBt'ipyti jiaaiXiKog. BaaiXiKoXg ypdppaai KwXvBkvrtg Kara-
Xapeiv rqv Eiptaov. Ep. 138, lS9.—MaBtXv avrifioXia rrap' vpHiv
tire xp-q H-^ arkpiai rrjv dSiKov ravrqv KaBaipeaiv, fl pri. Epist. 113.
— '-'QaTt Kai rdg Tqg dvaroXrig 'EKKXqaiag rqg vperkpag dffoXaiiffai
KqSepov'iag. Epist. 118.
t Td ydp rrap' vpiav KpiBqaoptva arkp^opev brroXa av q.
X Tijv aiv ayiwavvqv rrapaKaXovptv rrjg rroXtpovpkvqg rriartiag
vrrtppaxijaai, Kai nav rrarqB'evrwv vrr tpaywv'iaa aBai Kavoviav.
Theod. Epist. 86.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 389
of jurisdiction: for those words, " it befitteth you to be prirae
in all things,"* are only general words relating to the advan
tages which he subjoineth; of which he saith, "for your
throne is adorned vrith raany advantages,"f in a florid enuraer-
ation whereof he passeth over that of pecuUar jurisdiction ;
he naraeth the magnitude, splendour, majesty, and populous-
ness of the city ; the early faith praised by St. Paul, the
sepulchres of the two great Apostles, and their decease there :
but the Pope's being universal sovereign and judge (which
was the main advantage whereof that see could be capable) he
doth not mention. Why ? Because he was not aware thereof,
else surely he would not have passed it in silence. J
4. We may also observe, that whatever the opinion of Theo
doret was now concerning the Pope's power, he not long before
did hardly take him for such a judge, when he did oppose
Pope Celestine, concurring vrith Cyril, at the first Ephesine
Synod. He then indeed looking on Pope Celestine as a pre
judiced adversary, did not write to him, but to the other
bishops of the West, as we see by those words in his epistle to
Domnus : " And we have written to the bishops of the West
about these things, to him of MUan, I say, to him of Aqui
leia and him of Ravenna, testifjring,"^ &c.
5. Tea, we may observe, that Theodoret did intend with
the emperor's leave to appeal or refer his cause to the whole
body of Western bishops, as himself doth express in those
words to AnatoUus : || "I do pray your magnificence, that you
* Aid rrdvra ydp vpXv rrpwrtvtiv dppdrrti.
t HoXXoIff ydp 6 vptrtpog Bpovog KoaptXrai rrXeoveKrripnai.
X "Extt ydp b rravdyiog Bpovog iKtXvog nav Kard rriv oiKovpkvqv
'EKKXqaiwv r-qv riyepov'iav, Sid TroXXd, Kai rrpb nav dXXwv drrdvrwv,
'on aiperiKrig ptpkvqKt SvawS'iag dpvqrog, Kai ovStig rdvavria kpovwv
eig iKeXvov iKaBiaev, dXXd rqv ' ArroaroXiK-qv x^pi^ dKqpaTOV Sie^v-
Xaie. Theod. Ep. 116. (ad Renatum Presb.)--That holy See has the
principality over the Churches iu aU the world for many reasons ; but
especiaUy because she continued free irom the taint of heresy, and none
otherwise minded ever sat in her, she having kept the apostoUc state
always unmixed.
fj Kai roXg ^eoipiXeardroig Si rrig Svatwg 'EmaKorroig, rip MtSioXd-
vov 0i;fii, Kai Tip 'AKvXit'iag, Kai nf 'PajSkvvqg rrtpi rovrwv iypd^j/a-r
pev, Siapaprvpbptvoi iig rqg ' A-rroXivap'iov ravra Kaivorop'iag rrtrrXq-
pwrai. Theod. Epist. 112.
II 'AvnfioXw T-qv vperipav peyaXo-rrp'errtiav, ravrqv alrqaai rqv
xdpiv r-qv KaXX'iviKOv Kopvip-qv, ware pt r-qv earrepdv KaraXapeXv, Kai
irapd Toie iv ixeivy Sreo^tXeardroig Kai dyiwrdroig 'EmaKorroig SiKd-
aaaBai. Theod. Ep. 119. (ad Anatol.;

390 A TREATISE OP
would request this favour of our dread sovereign, that I may
have recourse to the West, and may be judged by the most
religious and holy bishops there."
Bellarmine farther doth allege the appeal of Hadrianus
bishop of Thebes to Pope Gregory I., the which he received
and asserted by excommunicating the archbishop of Justini-
ana Priraa, for deposing Hadrianus vrithout regard to that
appeal.* I answer,
1 . The example is late, when the Popes had extended their
power beyond the ancient and due Umits : those maxims had
got in before the time of that worthy Pope ; who thought he
might use the power of which he had found himself possessed.
2. It is impertinent, because the bishop of Justiniana had
then a special dependence upon the Roman see ; from whence
an universal jurisdiction upon appeal cannot be inferred.
3. It might be an usurpation ; nor doth the opimon or
practice of Pope Gregory suffice to determine a question of
right, for good men are liable to prejudice, and its conse
quences. To these instances produced by Bellarmine, some add the
appeal of Eutyches to Pope Leo ; to which it may be exceptedj
that if he did appeal, it was not to the Pope solely, but to
him vrith the other patriarchs ; so it is expressly said in the Acts
of the Chalcedon Synod : " His deposition being read, he did
appeal to the holy Synod of the most holy bishop of Rome, and
of Alexandria, and of Jerusalem, and of Thessalonica ;"f the
which is an argument, that he did not apprehend the right of re
ceiring appeals did solely or peculiarly belong to hira of Rome.
Liberatus saith, that " Johannes Talaida went to Calendion
patriarch of Antioch, and taking of hira intercessory synodical
letters, appealed to SimpUcius bishop of Rome, as St. Atha
nasius had done, and persuaded him to write in his behalf to
Acacius bishop of Constantinople." J
In regard to any more instances of this kind we might gene
rally propose these foUowing considerations.
* Greg. lib. 2. Indict. 11. Ep. 6.
t ' AvayiviaaKopkvqg rijg KaBaipkaewg, irreKaXiaaro rqv dyiav avvo
Sov Tob dyiwrdrov 'EmaKorrov 'Piapqg, Kai 'AXtiavSptiag, Kai 'Itpo-
aoXvpwv, Kai QtaaaXoviKqg. Syn. Chalc. Act. 1.
X Ingressus est ad Calendionem Antiochenum Patriarcham, et sumptis
ab eo intercessionis Synodicis Literis Romanum Pontificem Simplicium
appeUavit, sicut B. fecerat Athanasius, et suasit scribere pro se Apacio
Constantinopolitano Episcopo. Liber, cap. 18. Baron. Ann. 483. § 1.

THE pope's SUPEEMACY. 391
1 . It is no wonder that any bishop being condemned, espe
ciaUy in causes relating to faith or common interest, should
have recourse to the Roman bishop, or to any other bishop of
great authority for refuge or for relief; which they may hope
to be procured by them by the influence of their reputation,
and their power among their dependants.
2. Bad men, being deservedly corrected, wiU assuredly resort
any whither vrith mouths full of clamour and calumny ; if
not vrith hope of reUef, yet vrith design of revenge ; as did
Marcion, as did FeUcissimus, as did Apiarius to the Pope.
3. Good men being abused vriU express some resentment, and
complain of their wrongs, where they may presume of a fair
and favourable hearing: so did Athanasius, Flarianus, St.
Chrysostom, Theodoret, apply themselves to the same bishops,
flourishing in so great reputation and wealth.
So did the monks of Egypt (Ammonius and Isidorus) from
the persecutions of Theophilus fly to the protection and suc
cour of St. Chrysostom ; which gave occasion to the troubles
of that incomparable personage ; the which is so iUustrious an
instance, that the words of the historian relating it deserve
setting down.
"They jointly did endeavour, that the trains against them
Slight be examined by the emperor as judge, and by the
bishop John ; for they conceived that he having conscience of
using a just freedom, would be able to succour them according
to right ; bnt he did receive the men appljdng to him courte
ously, and treated them respectfuUy, and did not hinder them
from praying in the Church. — He also writ to TheophUus to
render communion to them, as being orthodox ; and if there
were need of judging their case by law, that he would send
whom they thought good to prosecute the cause."*
K 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 wheu men, either good or bad, do resort in this
• Koivy re earrovSaZov n'apd ^aaiXtl Kpiry Kai 'Iwdvvy np 'Em
aKomp iXkyxtaBai rdg Kar' avnav imj3ovXdg' ipovro ydp ivSiKov
rrappqa'iag avrbv impeXovptvov SvvdaBai rd S'lKaia ^oqBeiv avroig'
b Si rrpoatXBovrag avnp roig dvSpag iptXoippovwg iSkiaro, Kai iv ripy
elxe, icai evxeaBai irri 'EKKXqa'iag ovk iKwXvae — iypa^pe Si Qeo^iXip
Koivwviav avroXg drroSovvai, wg bpBiag rrtpi Qtov SoidZovaiv' ti Si
SiKy Skoi Kp'ivtaBai rd Kar avroig, drroartXXeiv bv avnp SoKtX SiKaao-
pevov. Sozom. 8. 13.

392 A TREATISE OF
manner to great friends, it is no wonder if they accost them
in highest terras of respect, and with exaggerations of their
eminent advantages ; so inducing them to regard and favour
their cause.
5. Neither is it strange, that great persons favourably
should entertain those, who make such addresses to them,
they always coraing crouching in a suppliant posture, and
vrith fair pretences ; it being also natural to men to delight in
seeing their power acknowledged ; and it being a glorious
thing to relieve the afflicted : "for eminence is wont to inchne
towards infirmity, and vrith a ready good vrill to take part
with those who are under."* So when BasiUdes, when Mar
cellus, when Eustathius Sebastenus, when Maxiraus the Cynic,
when Apiarius were condemned, the Pope was hasty to en
gage for them ; more liking their application to him than
weighing their cause.
6. And when any person doth continue long in a flourishing
estate, so that such addresses are frequently raade to him, no
wonder that an opinion of lawful power to receive them, doth
arise both in him and others ; so that of a voluntary friend he
become an authorized protector, a patron, a judge of such
persons in such cases.
X. The sovereign is fountain of all jurisdiction ; and aU in
ferior 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 su
preme, or to governors as sent by hira."f
Accordingly the Pope doth challenge this advantage to him
self that he is the fountain of ecclesiastical jurisdiction ; pre
tending all episcopal power to be derived from him.
" The rule of the Church (saith Bellarmine) is monarchical:
therefore all authority is in one, and from hira is derived to
others ;"J the which aphorisra he well proveth frora the form
of creating bishops, as they call it :§ " We do provide such a
Church with such a person ; and we do prefer him to be
* ^tXeX pdXiara KaprrrtaBai to rrpotxov rrpbg rb daBtvig, Kai Si'
tbvoiag tKOvaiov np iXarrwpkvip rrpoariBtaSai. Greg. Naz. Orat. 23.
t 1 Pet. u. 13.
X Regimen Ecclesise est Monarchicum, ergo omnis auctoritas est in
uno, et ab illo in alios derivatur. Bell. 4. 24. [p. 495. vol. 1. Pragte,
1721.] ^ Providemus Ecclesias tali de tali persona, et prseficimus eum in Patrem,
et Pastorem et Episeopum ejusdem Ecclesise, committentes ei administra-
tionem in temporalibus et spirituaUbus ; in nomine, &c. Ibid.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 393
father and pastor and bishop of the said Church, committing
to him the adrainistration in temporals and spirituals, in the
name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost."
Pope Pius II. in his bull of retractation, thus expresseth the
sense of his see : " In the militant Church, which resembleth
the triumphant, there is one moderator and judge of all, the
ricar of Jesus Christ, from whom, as from the head, all power
and authority is derived to the subject raembers, the which doth
immediately flow into it from the Lord Christ."*
A congregation of cardinals appointed by Pope Paulus III.
speaking after the style and sentiments of that see, did say to
him, " Your hoUness doth so bear the care of Christ's Church,
that you have very many ministers, by which you manage that
care, these are aU the clergy, on whom the serrice of God is
charged, especiaUy priests, more especiaUy curates, and above
all bishops."f
Durandus, bishop of Mimat, according 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 caUs to a participation of his care, but admits
not into the fulness of his power."J
This pretence is seen in the ordinary titles of bishops, who
style themselves bishops of such a place : " By the grace of
God and of the apostolic see."§ O shame !
The men of the Tridentine convention (those great betrayers
of the Church to perpetual slavery, and Christian truth to the
prevalency of falsehood, tUl God pleaseth) do upon divers
occasions pretend to qualify and empower bishops to perforin
important matters, originaUy belonging to the episcopal func
tion, as the Pope's delegates. ||
But contrariwise according to the doctrine of holy Scrip-
* In Ecclesia mUitanti, quas instar triumphantis habet, unas est om
nium moderator et arbiter Jesu Christi vicarius, a quo tanquam capite
omnis in subjecta membra potestas et authoritas derivatur, qu83 a Christo
Domino sine medio in ipsum influit. P. Pius II. in BuU. Retract.
t Sanctitas vestra itJi gerit curam Ecclesiae Christi, ut ministros plurimos
habeat per quos curam exerceat ; hi autem sunt clerici omnes, quibus
mandatus est cultus Dei ; Preshyteri prsesertim, et maxime curati, et prse
omnibus Episcopi — apud Cham, de Pont. Oilcum. 10. 13.
X Summus Pontifex caput est omnium Pontificum, a quo ilU tanquam a
capite membra descendunt, et de cujus plenitudine omnes accipiunt quos
ipse vocat in partem solicitudinis, non in plenitudinem potestatis. Durand.
Mimat. Offic. 2. 1. 17.
§ N. Dei et ApostoUcae sedis gratia Episcopus Colon.
II This was an expedient. Vid. ConcU.

394 A TREATISE OF
ture, and the sense of the priraitive Church, the bishops and
pastors of the Church do iramediately receive their authority
and commission from God, being only his ministers.
The Scripture caUeth them " the rainisters of God, and of
Christ (so Epaphras, so Tiraothy in regard to their ecclesias
tical function are named), the stewards of God, the servants of
God, fellow-servants 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 ;"f that is, to all effects and purposes concern
ing their office : for " the work of the ministry "J compriseth
all the duty charged on them, whether in way of order or of
governance ; as they now do precariously and groundlessly in
reference to this case distinguish. And " edifying the body"
doth import all the designed effects of their office ; particularly
those which are consequent on the use of jurisdiction ; the
which St. Paul doth affirm was appointed for edification : " ac
cording (saith he) to the anthority which God hath given me
for edification, and not for destruction."! They do "preside
in the Lord." || They aUow no other head but our Lord,
" from whom all the body," &c.^
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 representative) that therefore
"we must be subject to him as unto Jesus Christ."**
St. Cyprian affirraethff " each bishop to be constituted by
* Col. i. 7. iv. 7. 1 Thess. in. 2. I Tim. iv. 6. Tit. i. 7. 2 Tim.ii. 24.
t Acts XX. 28. Naz. Or. 30. Eph.iv. 11. 1 Cor. xii. 29.
X Ordo confertur a Deo immediate, jurisdictio mediate. BeU. 4. 25.
i 2 Cor. X. 8. xiu. 10.
II Upoiardptvoiiv Kvpiip. 1 Thess. v. 12. 1[ Eph.iv. 16.
•* IIpoKaBqptvov to5 'ETrio'icoTroi' tig rorrov Qtov. Ign. ad Magnes.
[p. 180. cap. 6. Patrum ApostoUcorum Opera, Tubingae, 1847.]— Tiv
ovv 'ErriaKorrov SrjXov 'on tag avrbv rbv K-vpiov Set rrpoa^Xtrreiv.
Ign. ad Eph. "Orav 'EmaKompvrrordaaeaBe wg 'Iqaov Xpianp. Ign.
ad TraU. fid. p. 190. cap. 2.]
tt De Dei et Christi ejus judicio. Cypr. Ep. 52, et alibi ssepe. Unusin
Ecclesia ad tempus Sacerdos, et ad tempus Judex, vice Christi. Cypr. Ep.
55. Sed expeetemus universi judicium Domini nostri Jesu Christi, qui
unus et solus habet potestatem et prseponeudi nos in Ecclesise suse guber
natione, et de actu nostro judicandi. Cypr. in Con. Carthag.

THE POPE S SUPREMACY. 395'
the judgment of God, and of Christ; and that in his Chnrch
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 governraent of his Church, and to
judge of our acting."
St. Basil : " A prelate is nothing else hut one that sus-
taineth 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."f
" It behoveth us aU who by Dirine authority are constituted
in the priesthood to prevent," &c. J
Wherefore the ancient bishops did aU of them take them
selves to be ricars of Christ, not of the Pope, and no less than
the proudest Pope of them aU ; whence it was ordinary for
them in their addresses and compellations to the bishop of
Rome, and in their speech about him to call him their brother,
tbeir coUeague, their feUow-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 tiraes did most stand on their pre
sumed pre-eminence, did yet vouchsafe to caU other bishops
their feUow-bishops and fellow-ministers.
Those bishqps of France vrith good reason did complain of
Pope Nicholas I. ' ' for caUing them his clerks ; when as, if
his pride had suffered him, he should have acknowledged them
for his brethren and fellow-bishops." ||
In fine, the ancient bishops did not allege any commission
from the Pope to warrant their jurisdiction, but from God :^
" 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
* '0 ydp KaBqyovptvovg ovS'tv 'ertpov ianv, fj o rob awrqpog irre-
Xiav rrpoawrrov. Bas. Const. Mon. cap. 22. [p. 818. vol. 2. Paris.
1839.] t 'HpeXg to'ivvv rrpta^tiag dvtSt^dpeOa Xbyov Kai rJKopev rrapd tov
Qtob, robro ydp eari rb rfig 'EmaKorriic d^iwpa. Chrys. in Coloss.
Orat. 3.
" X Oportsre nos omnes, qui Deo auctore sumus in Sacerdotio constituti
illius certaminibus obviare, &c. Anatol. in Syu. Chalc. p. 512.
§ Leo. Ep. 84.
II Sci^sque nos non tuos esse ut te jactas et extolUs clericos, quos ut
fratres et co-episcopos recognoscere si elatio permitteret, debueras. Ann.
Pith. f 'H/ttlc Toivvv. S. Chrys. sup.

396 A TREATISE QF
throne so ? we succeed hira, from that we speak, since Christ
has committed to us the ministry of reconcUiation."*
" That which is committed to the priest, it is only in God's
power to give."f
" Since we also by the mercy of Christ our King and God
were raade ministers of the Gospel."{
This is a modern dream born out of ambition and flattery,
which never carae into the head of any ancient Dirine.
It is a ridiculous thing to iraagine, that Cyprian, Athanasius,
Basil, Chrysostom, Augustine, &c. did take themselves forthe
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 prolUng shew any passage in them
iraporting any such acknowledgment ; but are fain to infer it
by far-fetched sophisms, from allegations plainly impertinent,
or frivolous ?
The Popes indeed in the fourth century began to practise a
fine trick, very serviceable to the enlargement of their power ;
which was to confer on certain bishops, as occasion served, or
for continuance, the title of their ricar or lieutenant ; thereby
pretending to impart authority to them ; whereby they were
enabled for perforraance of divers things, which otherwise by
their own episcopal or raetropolitical power they could not
perform. By which device they did engage such bishops to
such a dependence on them, whereby they did promote the
Papal authority in provinces, to the oppression of the ancient
rights and liberties of bishops and Synods ; doing what they
pleased 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 Constantinople.
Pope Felix, Acacius of Constantinople.
* Et 6 M.wakwg Sipovog ovrwg ijv aiStaipog, wg Si' iKtXvov aKoveaBat,
rroXXip pdXXov b Xpiarov Spovog ; iKtXvov qpeig SieSe^dpeBa, arrb
TOVTOV ^BeyyopeBa, dip' ov Kai o Xpiarbg iBero iv qpXv rqv SiaKoviav
Tijg KaraXXayrjg. Chrys. in Coloss. Orat. 3. [p. 403. vohll. Paris,
1838.] t "A ydp iyKtxeipiarai b itpeig, Qtob povov iari SwptXaBai, Sie,
Chrys. in Joh. Orat. 83.
X 'Errtl ovv Kai qptXg 'tXtti rov aovpjiaaiXkwg {I. rrap^aaiXewg) qpBv
Xpiarov TOV Qtov 'itpovpyoi rov evayytXiov iKXqpwBqpev. Flavian, in
Chalc. Act. 1. p. 4. ^ Evagr. Act. Eph. p, 134.

TIIE POPE S SUPREMACY. 397
, Pope Hormisdas, Epiphanius of Constantinople.*
Pope SimpUcius, to Zeno bishop of SeriUe, " We thought
it convenient that you should be held up by the vicariat
authority of our see."f
So did Siricius and his successors constitute the bishops of
Thessalonica to be their ricars in the diocese of lUyricum,
wherein being then a member of the Western empire they had
caught a special jurisdiction ; to which Pope Leo did refer in
those words, which sometimes are impertinently alleged vrith
reference to all bishops, but concern only Anastasius bishop of
Thessalonica : " We have entrusted thy charity to be in our
stead, so that thou art called into part of the solicitude, not
into plenitude ofthe authority." J
So did Pope Zozimus bestow a like pretence of vicarious
power upon the bishop of Aries, which city was the seat of the
tempord exarch in Gaul.§
So to the bishop of Justiniana Prima in Bulgaria (or Darda
nia Europsea) the Uke privUege was granted (by procurement
ofthe emperor Justinian, native of that place.)
Afterwards temporary or occasional vicars were appointed
(such as Augustine in England, Boniface in Germany), who in
rirtue of that concession did usurp a paramount authority ; and
by the exercise thereof did advance the Papal interest ; depress
ing the authority of metropoUtans, and prorincial Synods.
So at length legates, upon occasion dispatched into all
countries of the West, came to do there what they pleased,
using that pretence to oppress and abuse both clergy and
people very intolerably.
Whence divers countries were forced to make legal pro
risions for excluding such legates, finding by rauch experience
that their business was to rant and domineer in the Pope's
name, to suck money from the people, and to raaintain luxurious
pomp upon expense of the countries where they carae. ||
Of this John XXII. doth sorely complain : and decrees that
all people should admit his legates, under pain of interdicts.^
• Act. Cone, sub Menna. p. 70.
t Congruum duximus vicarii sedis nostrse te auctoritate fulcui. Baron.
An, 482. § 46.
X Vices enim nostras ita tuse credidimus charitati, ut in partem sis voca
tus solicitudinis, non in plenitudinem potestatis. P. Leo. Ep. 84. (ad
Anastas. Thessah) § P, Joh. VIII. Ep. 93.
II P. Pasch. II. Epist. apud Eadm. p. 113, &c.
1[ Extrav. commun. 1. 1. (p. 310.) — Occulti inimici regni. Matt. Par.
p. 524.

398 A TREATISE OP
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 coraraand, are not thought worthy
any adraittance or reception within your jurisdiction: none
complains thence, none appeals thence for judgment to the
apostolic see."*
The Pope obserring what authority and reverence the arch
bishops of Canterbury had in this nation, whereby they might
be able to check his attempts, did think good to constitute
those archbishops his legates of course (Legatos wa<o«), that so
they raight seem to exercise their jurisdiction by authority
derived from him ; and ovring to him that mark of favour, or
honour, vrith enlargement of power, might pay him more
devotion and serve his interests.
Bellarmine doth from this practice prove the Pope's sovereign
power, but he might from thence better have demonstrated
their great cunning. It might frora such extraordinary desig
nation of ricegerents with far raore reason be inferred, that
ordinarily bishops are not his rainisters. f
XI. It is the privilege of a sovereign, that he cannot be
called to account, or judged, or deposed, or debarred of com
munion, or anyvrise censured and punished ; for this implieth
a contradiction or confusion in degrees, subjecting the superior
to inferiors ; this were making a river run backwards ; this
were to dam up the fountain of justice ; to behead the state ;
to expose majesty to contempt.
Wherefore the Pope doth pretend to this pririlege, according
to those maxims in the canon law, drawn from the sayings of
PopesJ (either forged or genuine, but all alike), obtaining
authority in their court.§
And according to what P. Adrian let the eighth Synod know,
" Because (says he) the apostolic Church of Rome stoops not
to the judgment of lesser Churches." II They cite also three
• Sedis ApostoUcas nuncii vel literaj prseter jussum Regies MajestalJs
nuUam in potestate tua susceptionem aut aditum promerentur, nuUus hide
clamor, nuUum judicium ad sedem ApostoUcam destinantur. P. Pasch. II,
Eadm. p. 113. t Bell. 2. 10.
X BeU. 2. 26. de Cone. 2. 17.
§ Grat. Dist. 40. cap. 6. Dist. 21. c. 7. Caus. 9. qu. 3. cap. 10.—
Extrav. comm. Ub, 1. tit. 8. cap. 1. P. Leo IX. Ep. 1. cap.' 10.— 17. P.
Nich I. Ep. 8. (p. 504.) P. Joh. VIII. Ep. 75. (p. 31.) P. Gelas. Ep.4.
(p. 625, 626.) Ep. 13. (p. 640. ) P. Greg. VII. Ep. 8. Ep. 21.
II Aid 7-6 7-))»/'A7roo'To\iici)i/'EKKX))(Tia»'rqc 'Piapqg ry rHv iXarToviav,
fiij u;roKt;jrT(ii' Kpiati. P. Adrian, in Syn. VIII. Act. 7. p. 963.

TIIE pope's SUPREMACY. 399
old Synods (of Sinuessa, of Rome nnder Pope SUvester, of
Rome under Sixtus III.) but they are palpably spurious, and
the learned among them confess it.
But antiquity was not of this mind, for it did suppose hini
no less obnoxious to judgment and correction than other
bishops, if he should notoriously deriate from the faith, or
riolate canonical discipUne.
The canons generally do obUge bishops vrithout exception
to duty, and (upon defailance) to correction : why is not he
excepted, if to be excused or exempted ?
It was not questioned of old, bnt that a Pope, in case he
should notoriously depart from the faith, or notably infringe
discipline, might be excommunicated ; the attempting it upon
divers occasions do shew their opinion, although it often had
not effect because the cause was not just and plausible ; the
truth and equity ofthe case appearing to be on the Pope's side.
St. Isidore Pelusiota denieth of any bishop's office that it is
a'px') dvvTcv%vog, an uncontrollable government.
" In the tiraes of Polycrates and Pope Victor the whole
Eastern Church did forbear communion vrith the Pope.*
FirmiUan told Pope Stephanus, that by conceiting he might
excomraunicate all other bishops, he had excommunicated
himself. The Fathers of the Antiochene Synod did threaten
to excommunicate and depose Pope Julius : " They did pro
mise to Julius peace and communion, if he did admit the
deposition of those whom they had expelled, and the consti
tution of those whom they had ordained ; but if he did resist
their decrees, they denounced the contrary ."f The Oriental
bishops at Sardica did excommunicate and depose him. J St.
Hilary did anathematize Pope Liberius upon his defection to
the Arians. § Dioscorus did attempt to excomraunicate Pope
Leo. II Acacius of Constantinople renounced the coraraunion
* 'Ev rt xpivoigltoXvKpdrovg Kai BiKrwpog Hig q dvaroXrj rrpbg rrjv
Svaiv Siaipepopkvq £ip7^viKd Trap' dXX-qXwv oiK iS'exovro. Epiph. ha?r.
70. Audianorum. — Dum enim putas omnes abs te abstineri posse, solum te
ab omnibus abstuiuisti. Firm, apud Cypr. Ep,
t Atxopevip piv 'IouXi(p rrjv KaBaipeaiv riav rrpbg airiav iXqXapk-
vwv, Koi ri)v Kardaraaiv ribv drr' avriav x^'-pori'vqBkvrwv, e'lpqvqv,
icai KOivwv'iav irrqyy'tXXovro- dvBiarapkvip Si roXg SeSoypivoig rdvav
ria rrpoqy&pevaav. Sozom. 3. 8. [Cantab. 1720.]
X Sozom. 3. 11. [Id.]
§ Anathema tibi. Papa Liberi. HU. fragm.
II 'ErbXpqae Si Kai dKoivwvqalav vrrayoptvaai Kard rov dpxiem-
ffKOTTOU rijg ptydXqg 'Piapqg Akovrog. Evag. 2. 4.

400 A TREATISE OF
of Pope Felix.* Timotheus .iElurus cursed tbe Pope.f The
African bishops did synodically excoramunicate Pope Vigiljus.t
Pope Anastasius was rejected by his own clergy.§ Pope Con-
stantine by the people,|| and so was Pope Leo VIII.^ Divers
bishops of Italy and Illyrieura did abstain from the Pope's
coraraunion for a long tirae, because they did admit the fifth
Synod.** Photius did excomraunicate and depose Pope Ni
cholas I.ff Maurus, bishp of Ravenna did anathematize Pope
Vitalianus. JJ The emperor Otho II. haring vrith good ad
rice laboured to reclaim Pope John XII. vrithout effect, did
" indict a Council, calling together the bishops of Italy, hy
the judgment of whom the life of that wicked man should he
judged ;" 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
eraperor Justinian did banish him for not complying vrith the
decrees of it. The sixth and seventh General Synods did ana
thematize Honorius by narae, when he was dead, because his
heresy was not before confuted, and they would have served
hira so, if he had been alive. ^^ Divers Synods (that of Worms,
of Papia, of Brescia, of Mentz, of Rome, &c.) did reject Pope
Gregory VII. Pope Adrian himself in the eighth Synod (so
called) did confess, that a Pope being found deviating from the
faith raight be judged as Honorius was. Gerbertns (after
ward Pope Silvester II.) did maintain that Popes might be
held as Ethnicks and Publicans, if they " did not bear the
Church."*** The Synod of Constance did judge and depose
three Popes. The Synod of BasU did depose Pope Eugenius :
• Niceph. 16. 17. Baron. Ann. 484. § 35.
t Baron. A. 457. ^ 25.
X Africani Antistites Vigilium Rom. Episc. damnatorem Capitulorum
Synodaliter a CathoUca communione, reservato ei pcenitentiae loco, reclu-
dunt. (1. excludunt.) Vict. Tun. post Cons. Basilii V. C. Ann. 10.
§ Plat. p. 131. et Dist. 19. cap. 21, 22. || Plat. p. 223.
IT Plat. p. 291. ** P. Pelag. II. Ep. 3. 13.
tt KaBaipeaiv wg ivopiat Kai dvaBtpanapbv irr' obStvi Xoyip rroulrai
"SiKoXdov, Vit. Ignatu Patr. apud Bin. p. 892. Baron. Ann. 863.
XX Baron. Ann. 669. § 2. Communi totius Sancti Concilii consensu
depositus. Luitprand. 6. 6.
§§ ConciUum indicit, convocatis Episcopis ItaUae, quorum judicio rita
sceleratissimi hominis dijudicaretur. Plat, in Joh. XIII. (pro XII.) vid.
Baron. Ann. 960. et Binium.
nil Grat. Caus. 2. qu. 7. cap. 41.
ft Ann. 1076. Vid. Baron. Ann. 1033. § 3.
*** Baron. Ann. 992. § 44.— Cone. Bas. Sess. 38. (p. 101.)

THE pope's supremacy. 401
affirming that " the cathoUc Church hath often corrected and
judged Popes when they either erred from the faith, or by
their iU manners became notoriously scandalous to the
Church."* The practice of Popes to give an account of their faith
(when they entered upon their office) to the other patriarchs
and chief bishops, approving themselves thereby worthy and
capable of comniunion, doth imply them liable to judgment.f
Of the neglect of which practice Euphemius bishop of Con
stantinople did complain.^
Of this we have for example the Synodical epistles of Pope
Gregory I.§
XII. To the sovereign in ecclesiastical affairs it would
belong to define and decide controversies in faith, discipline,
moral practice, so that aU were bound to admit his definitions,
decisions, interpretations. He would be the supreme inter
preter ofthe Divine law, and judge of controversies. No
point or question of moment should be decided vrithout his
cognizance. This he therefore doth pretend to, taking upon
him to define points, and requiring from aU submission to his
determinations. Nor doth he aUow any Synods to decide
questions. But the ancients did know no snch thing. In case of con
tentions, they had no recourse to his judgment ; they did not
stand to his opinion, his authority did not avail to quash dis
putes. They had recourse to the holy Scriptures, to ca
thoUc tradition, to reason, they disputed and discussed points
by dint of argument.
Irenseus, TertulUan, Vincentius Lirinensis and others dis
coursing of the methods to resolve points of controversies, did
not reckon the Pope's authority for one. Divers ofthe Fa
thers did not scruple openly to dissent from the opinions of
Popes, nor were they wondered at, or condemned for it.
So St. Paul did vrithstand St. Peter. || So Polycarpus dis
sented from Pope Eleutherius. So Polycrates from Pope
Victor. So St. Cyprian from Pope Stephen. So Dionysius
* Ecclesia CathoUca ssepenumerb summos Pontifices sive a fide deU-
lautes, sive pravis moribus notorie Ecclesiam scandalizantes correxit, et
judicavit. Cone. Bas. Sess, 12.
t Mos est RomaniE Ecclesise sacerdoti noviter constituto formam fidei
suae ad sanctas Ecclesias praerogare. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 1 . ad Laur.
X Gelas. Ep. 9. Baron. Ann. i'J2. § 10.
h Vid. tract, de Unit. Eccl. |{ Gal. ii. II. dvriarqv.
VOL. I. 2d

402 a treatise of
Alex, from Pope Stephen : aU which persons were renovfned
for vrisdom and piety, in their tiraes.
Highest controversies were appeased by Synods out of the
holy Scripture, cathoUc tradition, the analogy of faith, and
coramon reason, vrithout regard to the Pope, Divers Synods
in Africa and Asia defined the point about rebaptization vrith
out the Pope's leave, and against his opinion. The Synod of
Antioch condemned the doctrine of Paulus Samosatenus,
vrithout intervention of the Pope, before they gave him notice.
In the Synod of Nice the Pope had very small stroke. The
General Synod of Constant, declared the point of the divinity
of the Holy Ghost against Macedonius, without the Pope, vpho
did no more than afterward consent : this the Synod of Chal
cedon in their compeUation to the eraperor Marcian did ob
serve. " The Fathers met in Sardica to suppress the rehcs
of Arianism, coraraunicated their decrees to the Eastem
bishops ; and they who here discovered the pestUence of Apo-
hnarius, raade known theirs to the Western."*
The Synod of Africa 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 Stephanus (in part). Pope Liberius, Pope
Felix, Pope VigiUus, Pope Honorius, &c. And in our opinion
all Popes for many ages.
It is observable how the Synod of Chalcedon in their allo
cution to the emperor Marcian do excuse Pope Leo for ex
pounding the faith in his epistle (the which it seeras some did
reprehend as a novel method disagreeable to the canons) :f
" Let not them (say they) object to us the epistle of the mar
vellous prelate of Rome, as obnoxious to imputation of novelty;
but if it be not consonant to the Scriptures, let them confute
• Kai 01 piv tK SapSiKqg Kard riav 'Aptiov Xti-^dvwv dyiaviaapcvot
TOig iv 'AvaroXy rqv Kp'iaiv iZkrrtprrov, ol Si ivravBa rqv 'Airo\iva-
piov Xvpqv ipwpdaavTtg roXg iv Svati rrjv ^rjipov iyviIiptZov. Cone.
Chalced. ad Mare. Orat, p. 468.
t 'Qg ikvqv nvd Kai roig Kavoaiv ov vevoptapkvqv rijg 'emaroXriQ
Sia^dXXy rqv avvra^iv. Act. Syn. Chalc. p. 465. — Mi; roii'iii' iipiv
TOV davpaarov rrjg 'Pwpqg TrposJpou rqv 'EmaroXqv, wg Kaivoropias
iyKXqpa, rrpoaipepkrwaav dXXd ei pij avpipwvog ralg ypafaig, 'i\tyyf-
rwaav ti pij ToXg rrpoXa^ovai rrarpdaiv bpoSo^og' eiprj rrpbg SvaatpSiv
Karqyop'iav ytyevqrai.

THE pope's supremacy. 403
it; or if it be not consentaneous to the Fathers who have pre
ceded ; or if it be not apt to confute the irreligious," &c.
It was not his judicial authority, which they did insist Upon,
to maintain his epistle, but the orthodoxy and intrinsic useful
ness 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 infalli
ble; for why othervrise should he undertake confidently to
pronounce in aU 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 Papal 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 countenanceth
them, may be presumed to be of that mind.*
Pighius said bouncingly, " The judgment of the apostolic
see vrith a councU of domestic priests, is far more certain than
the judgment of an universal council of the whole earth, vrith
out the Pope."f
This is the syUogism we propose :
The supreme judge must be infalUble ;
The Pope is not infallible ; therefore.
The major the Jesuits, canonists and courtiers are obUged
to prove, it being their assertion ; and they do prove it very
vrisely and strongly.
The minor ik asserted by the French doctors, and they do
vrith clear evidence maintain it.
The conclusion we leave them to infer who are concerned.
It is in effect Pope Gregory's argumentation : no bishop can
be universal bishop (or universal pastor and judge of the
Church), because no bishop can be infallible; for that the lapse
of such a pastor would throw down the Church into ruin, by
error and irapiety. " Therefore the universal Church, J which
• BeU. Ub. 4.
t Longe certius est unius ApostoUcae Sedis cum ConciUo domesticorum
Sacerdotum judicium, qu^m sine Pontifice judicium universaUs Concilii
totius orbis terrarum. — Pighius de Hier. Ub. 6.
X Universa ergb Ecclesia, quod absit, k statu suo corruit, quando is qui
vocatur Universalis cadit. Greg. M. Epist. 4. 32. Totius famiUae Domini
status et ordo nutabit, si quod requiritur in corpore, non inveniatur in
capite. P. Leo. Ep. 87.
2 D 2

404 A TREATISE OF
God forbid, faUs when he faUs who is called universal."— "The
state and order of our Lord's family vriU decay, when that
which is required in the body is not to be found in the head."
But that he is not infallible, much experience and history do
abundantly shew.
The ancients knew no such pretender to infallibility : other
vrise they would have left disputing, and run to his oracular
dictates for information. They would have only asserted this
point against heretics. We should have had testimonies ofit
innumerable. It had been the most famous point of aU.*
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,f first asserting the coraraunion of infants
for needful. Nor Pope VigiUus dodging vrith the fifth Synod.
Nor Pope Honorius condemned by so many CouncUs and Popes
for MonotheUtism. t But surely Pope Leo and Pope Gelasius
were strangely deceived, when they conderaned " partaking in
one kind." Pope Gregory was foully out, when he condemned
the "worship of iraages ;" and when he so declaimeth against
the title of " universal bishop ;" and when he avowed hiraself
a subject to the emperor Mauritius ; and when he denied the
books of Maccabees to be canonical ; and when he asserted
the perfection of holy Scripture. f Pope Leo II. was mistaken,
when he did charge his infalUble predecessor Honorius of
MonotheUtism. § Pope Nicholas was a little deceived, when
he determined the " attrition of Christ's body."|| Pope
Urban II. was out, when he allowed it lawful for good Catho
Ucs to commit murder on persons excommunicate.^ Pope
Innocent IV. erred, when he caUed kings "the Pope's slaves."**
Surely those Popes did err, who confirmed the Synods of
Constance and BasU ; not excepting the determinations in
* In nuUo aUter'sapere quam res se habet angelica perfectio est. Aug. de
Bapt. c. Don. 2. 5. — Not to think of a thing otherwise than it is, is an
angeUcal perfection.
t P. Gelas. I. Ep. 9. p. 636.
t De Consecr. dist. 2. cap. 12. Greg. Ep. 7. 110. Ep. 2. 62. Ep.4. 32,
36, 38. 6. 30. In Job. lib. 19. cap. 13. In Job. lib. 18. cap. 14.
§ If many Popes had been writers, we should have had more errors to
charge them vrith.
II Grat. de Consecr. dist. 2. cap. 42.
If Grat. Caus. 23. qu. 5. cap. 47.
** Mancipia Papse. Matt. Paris. Anno 1253.

THE pope's supremacy. 405
favour of General CouncUs being superior to Popes. All those
Popes have deviUshly erred who have pretended to dispose of
kingdoms, to depose princes, to absolve subjects of their oaths.
Pope Adrian II. did not take the Pope to be infallible, when
he said he might not be judged, excepting the case of heresy ;
and thereby excuseth the Orientals for anathematising Hono
rius, he being accused of heresy.*
There is one heresy, of which, if all histories do not lie
grievously, divers Popes have been guUty ; a heresy defined
by divers Popes ; the heresy of simony .f How many such
heretics have sat in that chair? of which how many Popes
are proclaimed guilty vrith a loud voice in history 1 " The
hand," says Saint Bemard,J; " does all the Papal business ;
shew me a man in aU this greatest city who would admit thee
to be Pope vrithout the mediation of a bribe ?" Yea, how few
for some ages have been giultless of this heresy ? It may be
answered, they were no Popes because their election was null ;
but then the Church hath often and long been vrithout a head.
Then numberless acts have been void ; and creations of cardi
nals have been null ; and consequently there hath not probably
been any true Pope for a long time.
In the judgment of so many great dirines, which did consti
tute the Synod of BasU, many Popes (near all surely) have
been heretics ; who have foUowed or countenanced the opi
nion, that Popes are superior to General CouncUs ; 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 skUled in dirinity,
as Pope Innocent X. was wont to profess concerning himself
(to wave discourse about theological points), he therefore can
not pronounce, in use of ordinary means, but only by miracle,
* Joh. 22. Gerson. Serm. in Pasch. Occam. Celestinus. — Alph. a Cas
tro. Hser. 1. 4. Bin. tom. 7. p. 994.
t P. Greg. VII. Ep. Ub. 3. 7. Simoniaca hseresis.— P. Jul. II. Cone.
Lat. Sess. 5. (p. 57.) — Idem electus non Apostolicus, sed Apostaticus, et
tanquam haeresiarcha, &o. Ibid. Tract. 4. § 12. et % 16. — Decemimus,
qubd — sed etiam contra dictum sic electum vel assumptum a Simoniaca
labe opponi et excipi possit sicut de veik et indubitata hseresi.
X Omne Papale negotium manus agunt ; quem dabis mihi de tota
maxima urbe, qui te in Papam receperit pretio non interoedente ? Bern.
de Consid. 4. 2.
, § A fide devius, pertinax haereticos. — ConcU. BasU. Sess. 34. p. 96. et
p. 107.

406 A TREATISE OF
as Balaam's ass. So Pope Innocent X. said, that " the Vicar
of Jesus Christ was not obliged to examine all things by dis
pute ; for that the truth of his decrees depended only on Divine
inspiration :"* what is this but downright quakerism, enthu
siasm, imposture ?
Pope Clemens V. did not take hiraself to be infallible, when
in his great Synod of Vienna, the question, whether beside
reraission of sin, also rirtue were conferred to infants, he
resolved thus very honestly: "The second opinion, which says
that informing grace and rirtues are in baptism conferred both
upon infants 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 dirinity of the modem
doctors."f Which of the two Popes were in the right. Pope Nicholas IV.
who decided that our Lord was so poor that he had right to
nothing, or Pope John XXII. who declared this to be a heresy,
charging our Lord with injustice? J
XIV. A sovereign is in dignity and authority superior to
any number of subjects, however conjoined or congregated ; as
a head is above all the merabers, however compacted; he ia
not supreme who is any wise subject or inferior to a senate, or
any assembly in his territory.
Therefore the Pope doth claim a superiority over all Councils;
pretending that their determinations are invalid without his
consent and confirmation ; that he can rescind or make void
their decrees ; that he can suspend their consultations, and
translate or dissolve them.§
And Baronius reckons this as one error in Hincmarusjl bishop
of Rheiras, that " he held as if the canons of Councils were
* Le Pape respondit, che le Vicaire de J. C. ne estoit point oblige
d'examiner toutes choses par la dispute ; que le verite de ses decrets de-
pendoit seulement de I'Inspu-ation divine. Memor. Hist, de 5. Propos.
t Opinionem secundam, quts dicit tam parvuUs quam adultis conferri
in baptismo informantem gratiam et virtutes, tanquam probabihorem ac
Doctorum modernorum Theologise magis consonam et concordem sacro
approbante OoncUio duximus eligendam. Clementin. tit. 1.
X BeU. 4. 14. (p. 1318) [p 475. vol. 1. Pragse, 1721.]— Confer. Sext.
Ub. 5. tit. 12. cap. 3.— Extrav. Joh. XXII. tit. 14. cap. 3, 4, 5.
§ BeUarm. de ConcU. 2. 17. [p. 56. Bd. ut supra.]
II Plane significat majoris esse auctoritatis in Ecclesia Dei Canones Con
ciliorum decretis Pontiticum ; hsec quam sint absurda et ab omni ratione
penitus aliena, &c. Baron, ad Ann. 992. ^ 56.— ConcU. Later. V. Sess,
11, p. 152.— Th. Cajet. Orat. in Cone. Lat. p. 36.

THE pope's supremacy. 407
of greater authority in the Church of God than the decrees of
Popes, which," says he, " how absurd and unreasonable an
opinion it is," &c.
"That the authority of the apostolic see in aU Christian
ages has been preferreji before the universal Church, both
the canons of our predecessors and manifold tradition do
confirm."* This is a question stiffly debated among Bomanists ; but the
most (as .^neas Sylvius, afterward Pope Pius II. did acutely
observe) vrith good reason do adhere to the Pope's side, be
cause the Pope disposeth of benefices, but CouncUs give none.
But in truth anciently the Pope was not understood supe
rior to CouncUs : for " greater is the authority of the world
than of one city," says St. Jerorae. t He was but one bishop,
that had nothing to do out of his precinct. He had but his vote
in them ; he had the first vote, as the patriarch of Alexandria
the second, of Antioch the third, — but that order neither gave
to him or them any advantage, as to decision ; but common
consent, or the suffrages of the majority did prevail. He was
conceived subject to the canons no less than other bishops.
CouncUs did examine matters decreed by him, so as to follow
or forsake them as they saw cause. The Popes themselves
did profess great veneration and observance of conciUar de
crees. Pope Leo I. did oppose a canon of the Synod of
Chalcedon (not pretending his superiority to Councils, but the
inriolabiUty of the Nicene Canons), but it notwithstanding that
opposition did prevaU.
Even in the dregs of times, when the Pope had clambered so
high to the top of power, this question in great numerous
Synods of bishops was agitated, and positively decided against
him ; both in doctrine and practice. J
The Synod of Basil affirmeth the matter of these decrees to
be a " verity of the Christian faith, which whoever doth perti
naciously resist, is to be deemed a heretic," — Those Fathers
say that " none of the skilful did ever donbt of this truth, that
the Pope in things belonging to faith, was subject to the judg
ment of the same General GouncUs — that the Council has an
authority immediately from Christ which the Pope is bound to
* ApostoUciB verb sedis auctoritas, quod cunctis seculis Christianis
Ecclesise prselata sit universse, et canonum aerie patemorum, et multipUci
traditione firmatur. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 8. (O impudentiam !)
t Major est auctoritas orbis quam urbis. Hier. ad Evag.
t ConcU. Const. Sess. 4. (p. 1003.) -Condi. Bas. Sess. 2. et Sess. 33.

408 A TREATISE OF
obey."* Those Synods were confirmed by Popes, without ex
ception of those determinations.
Great Churches, most faraous universities, a raighty store of
learned doctors of the Roman communion have reverenced
those Councils, and adhered to their doctrine. Insomuch that
the Cardinal of Lorraine did affirra hira to be an heretic in
France, who did hold the contrary.
These things sufficiently deraonstrate that the Pope cannot
pretend to supremacy by universal tradition, and if he cannot
prove it by that, how can he prove it? not surely by Scripture,
nor by decrees of ancient Synods, nor by any clear and con
rincing reason.
XV. The sovereign of the Church is by all Christians to be
acknowledged the chief person in the world, inferior and sub
ject to none, above all commands ; the greatest eraperor being
his sheep and subject.
He therefore now doth pretend to be above all princes, di
vers Popes have affirmed this superiority. They are aUowed and
most favoured by him, who teach this doctrine. In their Missal
he is preferred above all kings, being prayed for before them.t
But in the priraitive tiraes this was not held ; for St. Paul
requires " every soul to be subject to the higher powers."!
Then the emperor was avowed the first person, next to God:
" To whom (says Tertullian) they are second, after whom they
are first, before all and above all Gods. Why ? &c. — we wor
ship the emperor as a man next to God, and less only than
God."§ And Optatus, — " 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 raan." " For the king is
• Veritas CathoUcse fidei, cui pertinaciter repugnans est censendus hsre-
ticus. Concil. Bas. Sess. 33. — Nee unquam aliquis peritorum dubitarit
summum Pontificem in his quse fidem concemunt judicio eorundem Con
ciliorum universaUum esse subjectum. Cone. Basil, decret. p. 117. — Con
cUium habet potestatem immediate a Christo, cui Papa ohedue tenetur.
Cone. Bas. Sess. 38. p. 101.
t As in Israel Saul was the head. 1 Sam. xv. 17. I Rom. xiii. 1.
§ — a quo sunt secundi, post quem primi ante omnes, et super omnes
Deos : quidni ? ciim super omnes homines, qui utique vivunt. Tertull.
Apol. cap. 30. — Colimus Imperatorem ut hominem k Deo secundum, et
solo Deo minorem. Tertull. ad Scap. cap. 2.
II Ciim super Imperatorem non sit nisi solus Deus, qui fecit Imperato
rem. Opt. 3. Vid. Tr. 5. § 14. — Dum se Donatus super Imperatorem ex
toUit, jam quasi hominum excesserat modum, ut se ut Deum non hominem
ajstimaret. Id. ibid.

THE pope's supremacy. 409
the top and head of all things on earth :"* then even " Apostles,
Evangelists, Prophets, aU men whoever were subject to the
eraperor ."f The emperors did command them, " even the
blessed bishops and patriarchs of old Rome, Constantinople,
Alexandria, TheppoUs and Jerusalem.''^ Divers Popes did
avow themselves subject to the emperor.
XVI. The confirmation of magui;rates, elected by others, is
a branch of supremacy which the Pope doth assume. §
Baronius saith that this was the ancient custom ; and that
Pope SimpUcius did confirm the election of Calendion bishop
of Antioch. II
" Meletius confitrmed the most holy Gregory in the bishopric
of Constantinople."^
Bnt the truth is, that ancientiy bishops being elected did
only give an acconnt of their choice unto all other bishops ;
espedaUy to those of highest rank, desiring their approbation
and friendship, for preservation of due coraraunion, correspon
dence and peace. So the Synod of Antioch gave account to the
bishops of Rome and Alexandria, "and aU their feUow-
ministers thronghout the world," &c. of the election of Dom
nus afler Paulus Samosatenus.** So the Fathers of Constanti
nople acquainted Pope Daraasus and the Western bishops vrith
the constitution of Nectarius, Flavianus, &c.
This was not to request confirmation, as if the Pope or other
bishops could reject the election if regular, but rather to assure
whom they were to communicate vrith. " W; 'nave (say the
Fathers of the Synod against Paulus Sa,_^os!ttenus) signified
-this (our choosing of Domnus into Paulus's room) that you
may write to him, and receive letters of communionfrom him."ff
¦^And St. Cyprian: "That you and our coUeagues raay
* BaaiXevg ydp Kopv^q Kai KeipaXri rwv irri rrjg -^rig ianv drrdvrwv.
Chrys. x"^?- ^- P- 463.
t Chris, in Rom. xiii. 1.
X Jubemus igitnr beatissimos Episcopos et Patriarchas hoc est senioris
Romse, et Constautinopoleos, et Alexandriae, et Theopoleos et Hierosoly-
morum. Justinian. Novel. 123. cap. 3. — P, Greg. M. Ep. 2. 62. — Supra
m praf. § 4. Tract. 5. ^ 14.
§ Vid. § 5. Dist. 63. c. 4. P. Nich. I. Ep. 1| Ann. 482. § 1.
^ 'EptPaiwae np Stiordnp Ppr/yopiip rqv rqg KwvaravnvovrroXewg
rrpotSpiav. Theod. 5. 8.
*• Kai ToXg Kara rqv oiKovpivqv rrdai av'XXtirovpyoig. Euseb. 7.
30. [p. 248. Oxon. 1845. vel p. 359. Cantab. 1720.]
tt 'EJijX<i<ra/«iv Tt vpiv 'orrtag rovnp ypdfqrt, Kai rd Trapd rovrov
coii/u/vca StxqaBe ypdppara. Euseb. ibid.

410 A TUEATISE OF
know to whom they may write, and from whom they may
receive letters.'"'^
Thus the bishops of Rorae themselves did acquaint other
bishops with their election, their faith, &c.f So did Cornelius ;
whom therefore St. Cyprian asserteth as established by the
consent and approbation of his colleagues : " When the place
of Peter and the sacerdotal chair was void, which by God's
wiU being occupied, and with all our consents confirmed, &c.—
and the testimony of our fellow-bishops, the whole number
of which all over the world unanimously consented."J
The eraperor 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 raost religious
empesor knowing these things presently ratified it, and by a
memorial published it, confirming the bishopric; afterwards
he sent his rescript by Eustathius the Silentiary again con
firming it."§
XVII. It is a privilege of sovereigns to grant pririleges, ex
emptions, dispensations.il
This he claimeth ; but against the laws of God and rights of
bishops. Against the decrees of Synods — against the sense of
good men in all times.
XVIII. It is a prerogative of sovereign power, to erect,
translate spiritual presidencies.
Wherefore this the Pope claimeth. dim ex illo, ^c.^
But at first he had nothing to do therein, except in his own
prorince or diocese.
As Christianity did grow and enter into cities, so the neigh
bour bishops did ordain bishops there.
Princes often, as they did endow, so they did erect episcopal
sees, and did, as was suitable, change places.
* Ut scires tu, et Collegse nostri quibus scribere, et Uteras mutub i,
quibus vos accipere oporteret. Cypr. Ep. 55. (ad Cornel.)
t Vid. P. Greg. Tract, de Unit. Eccl.
t Cum locus Petri, et gradus Cathedrae Sacerdotalis vacaret, quo occu
pato de Dei voluntate, atque omnium nostrum consensione firmato.— Cypr.
Ep. 52. — Et co-Episcoporum testimonio, quorum numerus umversus per
totum mundum concordi unanimitate consensit. Ibid.
^ Evoig Si ravra b tiaeft'eararog qpwv EaaiXevg, tiBig rovro airo
i(3t{iaiwat, Kai tvBkwg Sid vrropvqariKOv iSqXwatv iv favtpip, ^epamv
T-qv 'EmaKorr-qv ptrd ravra drr'eareiXt auKpav rrdXiv Sid EiaraBuiV
TOV 'SiXtvTiaplov jitjiaioiiaav rqv 'EmaKorrqv. Cone. Chalced, Act. 11.
(p. 404.) II Vid. Bern.
% P. Innoc. III. in Greg. deer. Lib. 1. tit. 7. cap. 1.— &c.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 411
Pope Paschal II. doth by complaining attest to this, writing
to the archbishop of Poland, "What shaU I say ofthe trans
lations of bishops, which araong you are presuraed to be made,
not by apostolic authority, but the king's coraraand?"*
XIX. It is a great prerogative of sovereignty to impose
taxes on the clergy or people.
'Wherefore the Pope doth assume this ; as for instance that
decree of Pope Innocent IV. in the first Synod of Lyons : " By
the common consent of the CouncU we ordain that all the
clergy, as weU those who are under authority as the prelates,
pay for three years a twentieth part of their ecclesiastical
revenues towards the assistance of the Holy Land, into the
hands of those who shall be thereto appointed by the prudence
of the apostolic see — and let aU know that this they are bound
faithfully to do under pain of excommunication."f
But antiquity knew no such impositions : when the Church,
the clergy, the poor, were maintained and reUeved by voluntary
offerings, or obventions.
Even the inridious splendour of the Roraan bishop was
supported by the oblations of matrons, as Marcellinus ob-
serveth.J This is an encroachment upon the right of princes, unto
whom clergymen are subjects, and bound " to render tribute to
whom tribute belongeth."§
A grand assertion of the Roman party, is this, " that
the Papal supremacy is indefectible and unalterable."
But good reasons may be assigned, why even supposing that
the Pope had an universal sovereignty in rirtue of his succes
sion to St. Peter conferred on him, it is not assuredly conse-

* Quid super Episcoporum translationibus loquar, quse apud vos non
auctoritate ApostoUca, sed nutu Regis prEesumuntiir ? P. Pasch. II. Ep.
6. Praeter authoritatem nostram Episcoporum translationes prsesumitis.
— Eadm, p, 115.
t Caeteriim ex communi ConcUU approbatione statuimus, ut omnes
omnini Clerici, tam subditi quam prselati, vigesimam Ecclesiarum proven-
tuum usque ad triennium conferant in subsidium terrae sanctae, per manus
eorum, qui ad hoc ApostoUca fuerit providentia ordinati. Seiantque se
omnes ad hoc fideUter observandum per excommunicationis sententiam
obUgatos. Lugdun. Concil. 1. (Anno 1245.)
t Ut ditentur Oblationibus Matronarum. MarceU. 27. Vid. Const.
Apost. 2. 25. Nam qui constituerunt vel ftmdarunt sanctissimas Ecclesias
pro sua salute et communis ReipubUcae, reUqueinint iUis substantias, ut
per eas debeant sacrae Uturgiae fieri, et ut in iUis a ministrantibus piis
Clericis Deus colatur. Cod. Lib. 1. tit. 3. § 42. § Rom. xiu. 7.

412 A TREATISE OF
quent, that it must always, or doth now belong to him. For
it might be settled on him not absolutely but upon conditions,
the which failing his authority may expire. It raight be God's
will that it should only continue for a time. And there are
divers ways, whereby according to common rules of justice, he
might be disseised thereof.
1 . If God had positively declared his vriU concerning thia
point, that such a sovereignty was by him granted irrevocably
and irarautably, so that in no case it might be removed or
altered, then indeed it must be admitted for such ; but if no
such declaration doth appear, then to assert it for such is to
derogate from his power and proridence : by exemption of this
case from it. It is the ordinary course of proridence so to confer
power of any kind or nature on men, as to reserve to himself
the liberty of transferring it, qualifying it, extending or con
tracting it, aboUshing it, according to his pleasure, in due
seasons and exigencies of things. Whence no human power
can be supposed absolutely stable, or immovably fixed in one
person or place.
2. No power can have a higher source, or firmer ground,
than that of the ciril government hath, for " all such power is
from heaven," and in relation to that it is said, " There is no
power but from God, the powers that are, are ordained by
God."* But yet such power is Uable to various alterations,
and is like the sea, having ebbs and flows, and ever changing
its bounds, either personal or local.
Any teraporal jurisdiction may be lost by those revolutions
and ricissitudes of things, to which all human constitutions are
subject ; and which are ordered " by the wUl and proridence
of the Most High, who ruleth in the kingdora of men, appoint
ing over it whom he pleaseth ; putting down one and setting
up another."f
Adam by God's appointment was sovereign of the world ;
and his first-born successors derived the sarae power from him:
yet in course of tirae that order hath been interrupted, and
divers independent sovereignties do take place.
Every prince hath his authority from God, or by virtue of
Dirine ordination within his own territory ; and according to
God's ordinance the lawful successor hath a right to the same
authority ; yet by accidents such authority doth often fail totally
or in part, changing its extent.
• John xix. 11. Rom. xui. I. t Dan. v. 21. Psalm Lsiv. 7.

THE pope's supremacy. 413
Why then may not any spiritual power be liable to the
same vicissitudes ? why may not a prelate be degraded as well
as a prince ? why may not the Pope as weU as the eraperor,
lose aU, or part of his kingdom ?
Why raay not the successor of Peter, no less than the heir
of Adara suffer a defailure of jurisdiction ?
That spiritual corporations, persons, and places are subject
to tbe same contingencies with others, as there is Uke reason to
suppose, so there are examples to prove ; God reraoved his
sanctuary from Shiloh : " Go ye now unto ray place, which
was in Shiloh, where I set ray name at first," &c.* He deserted
Jerusalem. He removeth the candlesticks.f He placed Eli
(of the family of Itharaar) in the high priesthood, and dis
placed his race from it : "I said indeed (saith God) that thy
bouse, and the house of thy father should walk before rae for
ever, but now the Lord saith, Be it far from me," &c.|
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 obUged to allow it.
As God first did institute one universal monarchy, but that
form (upon the multiplication of mankind, and peopUng of
the earth) proring incommodious. Providence gave way for
its change, and the setting up of particular governments ; to
which men are bound to submit ; so God might institute a
singular presidency ofthe Church; but when the Church grew
vastly extended, so that such a government would not conve
niently serve the whole, he might order a dirision, in which
we should acquiesce.
4. It hath ever been deemed reasonable, and accordingly
been practised, that the Church in its exterior form and poli
tical administrations should be suited to the state of the world,
and constitution of worldly governments ; that there might be
no clashing or disturbance from each to other.
Wherefore seeing the world is now settled under so many
ciril sovereignties, it is expedient that ecclesiastical discipline
should be so modelled as to comply with each of thera.
And it is reasonable, that any pretence of jurisdiction should
veil to the public good of the Chureh and the world.
That it should be necessary for the Church to retain the
* Jer. vii. 12, 14. t Apoc. n. 5.
t 1 Sam. ii. 30. 1 Kings ii. 27.

414 A TREATISE OP
form of policy or raeasure of power affixed to persons or places,
can no wise be deraonstrated by sufficient proof, and it is not
consistent with experience ; which sheweth the Church to
have subsisted with variations of that kind.
There hath in all tiraes been found rauch reason or necessity
to make alterations as well in the places and bounds of eccle
siastical jurisdiction as of secular erapire.
Wherefore St. Peter's monarchy, reason requiring, might
be cantonized into divers spiritual supremacies; and as other
ecclesiastical jurisdictions have been chopped and changed,
enlarged or diminished, removed and extinguished, so might
that of the Roraan bishop. The Pope cannot retain power in
any state against the will of the prince : he is not bound to
suffer correspondencies with foreigners, especially such who
apparently have interests contrary to his honour and the good
of his people.
5. Especially that might be done, if the continuance of such
a jurisdiction should prove abominably corrupt, or intolerably
grievous to the Church.
6. That power is defectible, which according to the nature
and course of things doth soraetiraes fail.
But the Papal succession hath often been interrupted by
contingencies (of sedition, schism, intrusion, simoniacal elec
tion, deposition &c., as before shewed), and is often interrupted
by vacancies from the death of the incumbents.
7. If leaving their dubious and false suppositions (concern
ing Dirine institution, succession of St. Peter, &c.) we consider
the truth of the case, and indeed the raore grounded plea of
the Pope, that Papal pre-eminence was obtained by the wealth
and dignity of the Roman city, and by the collation or coun
tenance of the imperial authority ; then by the defect of
such advantages it may cease or be taken away ; for when
Rome hath ceased to be the capital city, the Pope may cease
to be head of the Church. When the ciril powers, which
have succeeded the imperial, each in its respective territory,
are no less absolute than it, they raay take it away, if they
judge it fit ; for whatever power was granted by human
authority, by the same may be revoked ; and what the em
peror could have done, each sovereign power now may do for
itself. An indefectible power cannot be settled by man ; because
there is no power ever extant at one tirae greater than there is
at another ; so that whatever power one raay raise, the other

THE pope's supremacy. 415
mav demolish ; there being no bonds whereby the present time
may bind all posterity. However no human law can exempt
any constitution from the proridence of God ; which at pleasure
can dissolve whatever man hath framed. And if the Pope were
divested of aU adventitious power, obtained by human means,
he would be left very bare ; and hardly would take it worth
his whUe to contend for jurisdiction.
8. However or whencesover the Pope had his authority,
yet it may be forfeited by defects and defaults incurred by
him. If the Pope doth encroach on the rights and liberties of
others, usurping a lawless domination, beyond reason and
measure, they may in their own defence be forced to reject
him, and shake off his yoke.
If he wUl not be content to govern otherwise than by in
fringing the sacred laws, and trampling down the inviolable
privUeges of the Churches, either granted by Christ, or estab
lished by the sanctions of General Synods ; he thereby de
priveth hiraself of all authority; because it cannot be adraitted
upon tolerable terras, without greater wrong of many others
(whose right ont-weigheth his) and without great mischief to
the Church, the good of which is to be preferred before his
private advantage.
This was the raaxim of a great Pope, a great stickler for his
own dignity ; for when the bishop of Constantinople was ad
vanced by a General Synod above his ancient pitch of dignity,
the Pope opposing him did say, " that whoever doth affect
more than his due, doth lose that which properly belonged to
bim ;"* the which rule if true in regard to another case, may
be appUed to the Pope, for " with what judgment ye judge ye
shaU be judged, and with what measure ye mete, it shaU be
measured to you again."
On such a supposition of the Papal encroachment, we may
return his words upon him : " It is too proud and immoderate
a thing to stretch beyond one's bounds, and in contempt of
antiquity, to be wilUng to invade other men's right, and to op
pose the primacies of so many metropoUtans, on purpose to
advance the dignity of one."+
" For the pririleges of Churches, being instituted by the
• Propria perdit, qui indebita concupiscit. P. Leo I. Ep. 54.
t Superbum nimis est et immoderatum ultra fines proprios tendere, et
antiquitate calcata aUenum jus veUe praeripere ; atque unius crescat digni
tas, tot MetropoUtanorum impugnare primatus. P. Leo I. Ep. 55.

416 A TREATISE OP
Canons of the holy Fathers, and fixed by the fiecrees of the
venerable Synod of Nice, cannot be plucked up by any wicked
attempt, nor altered by any innovation."*
" Far be it from rae, that I should in any Church infringe
the decrees of our ancestors made in favour of my fellow
priests ; for I do myself injury, if I disturb the rights of mv
brethren."f ''
The Pope surely (according to any ground of Scripture, or
tradition, or ancient law) hath no title to greater principality
in the Church than the Duke of Venice hath in the state.
Now if the Duke of Venice in prejudice to the public right
and liberty, should attempt to stretch his power to an absolute
ness of coraraand, or much beyond the bounds allowed bim
by the constitution of that comraonwealth, he would thereby
surely forfeit his supreraaey (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 deraeanour.
9. The Pope by departing frora 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 narae could presene
it : " The Popes themselves had swerved and degenerated from
the example of Peter."J
" They are not the sons of the saints, who hold the places
of the saints, but they that do their works."§ (Which place
is razed out of St. Jerorae.)
" They have not the inheritance of Peter, who have not the
faith of Peter, which they tear asunder by ungodly division. |
So Gregory Nazianzen saith of Athanasius, " that he was
successor of Mark, no less in piety than presidency : the
which we must suppose to be properly succession :"^| other-
• PrivUegia enim Ecclesiarum, sanctorum Patrum canonibus instituta,
et veuerabilis Nicense Synodi fixa Decretis, nulla possunt improbitate con-
veUi, nuUa novitate mutari. Ibid.
t Absit hoc a me, ut statuta majoram con-sacerdotibus meis iu quail-
bet Ecclesia infringam, quia mihi injuriam facio, si fratrum meorum jura
perturbo. Greg. I. Epist. 2. 37.
X Pontifices ipsi k Petri vestigiis discesserant. Plat, in Joh. 10. (p. 275.)
^ Non Sanctorum FiUi sunt, qui tenent loca Sanctorum, sed qui exer-
cent opera eorum. Hieron. ad HeUod. apud Grat. Dist. 40. cap. 2.
II Non habent Petri haereditatem qui Petri fidem non habent, quam
impia divisione discerpunt. Ambr. de Pcen. 1. 6.
1[ Ovx Vrrov rqg Eiiat^tiag, q rrig rrpotSpiag SidSoxog — qv Sq Kai
Kvpiwg vrroXqrrrkov SiaSoxqv rb piv ydp bpbyvwpov Kai bpoBpovoV
rb Si dvriSoiov Kai dvr'iBpovov. Greg. Naz. Or. 21.

THE pope's supremacy. 417
wise the Mufti of Constantinople is successor to St. Andrew, of
St. Chrysostom, S:c.. the ^Nlufti of Jerusalem to St. James.
If then the bishop of Rome instead of teaching Christian
doctrine doth propagate errors contrary to it ; if instead of
guiding into truth and godliness, he seduceth into felsehood
and impiety ; if instead of declaring and pressing the laws of
God, he deUvereth and imposeth precepts opposite, prejudicial,
dKtmctive of God's laws ; if instead of promoting genuine
piety, he doth (in some instances) riolentiy oppose it ; if iu
st^ of maintaining true reUgion, he doth pervert and corrupt
it by bold defalcations, by superstitions additions, by foul
mistores and aUoys ; if he coineth new creeds, articles of
faith, new Scriptures, new sacraments, new rules of Ufe, obtru
ding them on the consciences of Christians ; if he conformeth
the doctrines of Christianity to the interests of his pomp and
profit ; "making gain godliness;" if he prescribe vain, profane,
superstitions ways of worship, turning devotion into foppery
and pageantry; if instead of preserving order and peace, he
fomenteth discords and Actions in the Chnrch ; being a
make-bate and incendiary among Christians ; if he claimeth
exorbitant power, and exerciseth oppre^on and trrannical
domination over his brethren ; cursing and damning all that
win not submit to his dictates and commands ; if instead of
being a shepherd, he is a wolf, worrying and tearir^ the flock
by cruel persecution :* he by such behaviour, ipso facto, de
priveth hunself 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
bim, to discost fiom him, to reject and disclaim him.
This is the reason ofthe case, this the Holy Scripture doth
prescribe, this is according to the primitive doctrine, tradition,
and practice of the Church. For,
10. In reason, the nature of any spiritnal ofiice consisting in
instmction in truth and guidance in virtne toward attainment
of salvation ; if any man doth lead into pernicious error or
impiety, he thereby ceaseth to be capable of such office : as a
blind man, by being so, doth cease to be a guide ; and much
* Nou fatat Ecd^iastica dignitas Christianam. Hier. — Ecclesiastical
dignity makes not a. Christiaii. — ^Non omnes Episcopi Episcopi sunt. Id.
— ^AU bishops are not bishops. — Ol -rrap' avro'ig KardaKO-sroi, ov ydp
"Brurroffoi. Athan. Const. Ap- S, 2. — They with them are acouts or
qaes, not overseers or bishops.
VOL. I. 2 E

418 A TREATISE OF
more he, that declareth a will to seduce ; for " Who so blind as
he that will not see ?"*
No man can be bound to " follow any one into the ditch ;"f
or to obey any one in prejudice to his own salvation; "to
die iu his iniquity." J Seeing God saith in such a case parriv
aitovrai fie, " In vain do they worship rae, teaching for
doctrines the precepts of men." §
They theraselves do acknowledge that heretics cease to be
bishops ; and so to be Popes. || Indeed they cease to be Chris
tians : for i^earparrrai b rotovrog, " such a one is subverted."
1 1 . According to their principles, the Pope hath tbe same
relation to other bishops and pastors of the Church, which
they have to their people ; he being pastor of pastors : bnt if
any pastor should teach bad doctrine, or prescribe bad practice,
his people may reject and disobey hira ; therefore in pro
portion, the pastors may desert the Pope misguiding or mis
governing them. In such cases any inferior is exempted from
obligation to comply with his superior, either truly or pre-
tendedly such.
12. The case may be that we may not hold communion
with the Pope, but may be obliged to shun hira ; in which case
his anthority doth fail, and no raan is subject to him.
13. This is the doctrine ofthe Scripture. The high priest
and his fellows, under the Jewish economy, had no less au
thority than any Pope can now pretend unto ; they did " sit in
the chair of Moses," ^ andtherefore aU their true doctrines and
lawful directions the people were obUged to leam and observe ;
but their false doctrines, and impious precepts they were bound
to shun ;** and consequently to disclaim their authority so far
as employed in urging such doctrines and precepts : 'A^m
avrovg, " let them alone (saith our Sariour), they are blind
leaders of the bUnd."ff Under the Christian dispensation, the
matter is no less clear ; our Lord comraandeth us " to beware
of false prophets ;" and to " see that no raan deceive ns ¦,"Xt
although he wear the clothing of a sheep, or come under the
name of a shepherd (" coming in his name").§§ St. Panl|||| in-
* Luke vi. 39. Mijrt Svvarai rvipXbg rv^Xbv bSqyeXv;
t Matth. XV. 14. X Ezek. iii. 18. § Matth. xv. 9.
II BeU de P. R. 2. 30. (p. 1083.) If Matth. xxiii. 2. xv. 6.
** Matth. xvi. 6. 'Opart Kai rrpoakxert d-irb rqg Zv prig — drrb r^foi'
Saxtig. Vers. 12.— Beware and take heed ofthe leaven — of the doctrine.
tt Matth. XV. 14. Xi Matth. vu. 15.
§§ Matth. xxiv. 4. |||{ Gal. i. 8, 9.

THE pope's supremacy. 419
formeth us, that if an Apostle, if an angel from heaven doth
preach beside the old apostolical doctrine (introducing any new
Gospel, or a dirinity derised by himself) he is to be held
accursed by us. He affirmeth, that even the Apostles them
selves 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,
bnt for the truth ;"f 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 feUow-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 ErepoSiSaaKaXeiv, teach hetero
doxies, we should standoff from him;l| that, "if any brother
walketh disorderly, and not according to apostolical tradition,
we should withdraw from hira ;"^ that if any one doth '* raise
divisions and scandals beside the doctrine received frora the
Apostles we should decline frora him;"** that we are "to
refuse any heretical person."f f He telleth us that " grievous
wolves should come into the Church, not sparing the flock ;" JJ
that " from among Christians there should arise men speaking
perverse things, to draw disciples after them ;"§§ but no man
surely ought to follow, but to shun them.
These precepts and admonitions are general, without any
respect or exception of persons great or small, pastor or lay
man : nay, they inay in sorae respect raore concern bishops
than others ; for that they decUning from truth, are more
dangerous and contagious.
14. The Fathers (in reference to this case) do clearly accord
both in their doctrine and practice. St. Cyprian telleth us,
that " a people obedient to the Lord's commandments, and
fearing God, ought to separate itself from a sinful bishop," |1||
• 2 Cor. i. 24. t 2 Cor. xiii. 7, 8.
X Nee aliquid contra veritatem, sed pro veritate, plus suis con-sacerdo
tibus potest. Fac. Hermian. 2. 6.
§ Galw u. II. 14. "On oix bpBorroSovai rrpbg r-qv dXrjBeiav rob eiay-
yiXiov. II 1 Tim. vi. 3, 5. tl ng erepoSiSaaKoXei — dfiaraao drrb riav roiov-
riav. IF 2 Thess. iii. 6. arkXXtaBai drrb rravrbg dStXipob.
** Rom, xvi. 17. iKKXiveiv drrb avriav. tt Titus iu. 10.
tt Acts XX. 29. eiaeXevapvrai tig ipdg. ^§ Acts xx. 30.
IIJI Plebs obsequens praeceptis Dominicis et Deum mutuens a peccatore
prajposito separare se debet. Cypr. Ep. 68.
2 E 2

420 A TREATISE OF
that is, frora one guilty of such sins which unqualify him for
Christian coraraunion or pastoral charge; and "Let not
(addeth he) the coraraon people flatter itself, as if it could be
free from the contagion of guUt, if it coramunicate with a
sinful bishop ;"* whose irreligious doctrine or practice doth
render him incapable of coraraunion ; for " how (saith he
other-where) can they preside over integrity and continence, if
corruptions and the teaching of vices do begin to proceed from
thera ?"f
" They who reject the comraandment of God, and labour to
establish their own tradition, let them be strongly and stoutly
refused and rejected by you." J
St. Chrysostom, commenting on St. Paul's words, " If I or
an angel" — saith, that " St. Paul meaneth to shew, that dignity
pf persons is not to be regarded where truth is concerned ;
that, ' if one of the chief angels frora heaven should corrupt
the Gospel, he were to be accursed ; that, not only if they
shall speak things contrary, or overturn all, but if they preach
any small matter beside the apostolical doctrine, altering the
least point whatever, they are liable to an anathema."§
And otherwere, very earnestly persuading his audience to
render due respect and obedience to their bishop, he yet inter-
poseth this exception, " If he hath a perverse opinion, although
he be an angel do not obey him ; but if he teacheth right
things, regard not his life but his words." ||
" Ecclesiastical judges as men are for the most part de
ceived."^ " For neither are catholic bishops to be assented to, if per-
* Nee sibi plebs blandiatur, quasi immunis esse a contagio delicti possit
cum Sacerdote peccatore communicans. Ibid.
f Quomodo enim possunt integritati et continentise praeesse, si ex ipsia
incipiant corruptelse et vitiorum magisteria procedere .' Cyp. Ep. 62.
X Qui mandatum Dei rejiciunt, et traditionem suam statuere conantur,
fortiter a vobis et firmiter respuantur. Cypr. Ep. 40. (p. 73.)
^ 'AXXd StXiat ^ovXbptvog, 'on d%'iwpa rrpoawrrwv ov rrpoaitrai, 'irav
rrtpi dXqBtiag b Xoyog y Chrys. in Gal, 1. 9. — Kg.v ydp rwv jrpm-iiu'
'AyylXwv -y ng riav ii ovpavov, SiaipBtipwv rb K-qpvypa,dvdBtpataTiii.
Ibid. 1. 8. — Kai ovk tlrrtv, idv ivavria KarayykXXwaiv, q dvarpe-iriaai
rb rrdv, dXXd Kfv piKpSv n tiayytXiZwvrai rrap"b tiayytXiaapi9a,
Kav rb rvxbv rrapaKivqawai, dvdBtpa iarwaai. Ibid.
II Ei piv ydp Soy pa l^tt Sitarpappkvov, (c^v "AyyaXoe y, pq rrtiaov'
ti Si bpBd SiSdaKti, pq np jiiip rrpoatxt, dXXd roXg pqpaai. Chrys. in
2 Tim. Orat. 2. [p. 721. vol, II. Paris. 1838.]
H Ecclesiastici Judices ut homines pleruuque falluntur. Aug. c. Cresc.
2. 21. [p. 659, vol. 9. Paris. 1837.]

THE pope's SIPREMACY. 421
adventure in any case they are mistaken, so as to hold any
thing contrary to the canonical Scriptures of God."*
" If there be any Church which rejects the faith, and does
not hold the fundamentals of the apostoUcal doctrine, it ought
to be forsaken, lest it infect others with its heterodoxy."+
If in such a case we must desert any Church, then the
Boman ; if any Church, then much more auy bishop, par
ticularly him of Home.
This hath been the doctrine of divers Popes.
'Whidi not only the apostoUcal prelate, but any other
I may do, rir. discriminate and sever any men, and any
place firom the CathoUc communion, accorduig to tlie rule of
that fore-condemned heresy." J
" Faith is universal, common to all, and belongs not only to
dergymen but also to laics, and even to aU Christians." §
" Therefore the sheep which are committed to the cure of
their pastor, ought not to reprehend him, unless he swerve aind
go astray from the right faith.'" iJ
15. That this was the current opinion, comraon 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 ;
snch practice haring been approved by General and great
Synods ; as also by divers Popes.
When Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople did introduce
new and strange doctrine, " divers of his presbyters did rebuke
him, and withdrew communion from him ;"^ which proceed
ing is approved in the Ephesine Synod.
• Quia nee CathoUcis Episcopis consentiendum est, sicubi forte fej-
luntuT, ut contra Canonicas Dei Scriptnras aUquid sentiant. August, de
Unit EocL cap. 10. [cap. 11. p. 562. voL 9. Paris. 1838.]
t Si qua est Ecclesia, quse fidem respnat, nee ApostoUca; prsdicationis
nmdamenta possideat, ne quam labem perfidise possit aspergere deserenda
est Ambr. in Luc 9. (p. 85.)
} Quod non solum PraesuU ApostoUco facere Ucet, sed cuicunque Pon
tifici, ut quosUbet et quem Ubet locum, secundum regulam haereseos ipsius
ante danmats, a CathoUca communione discernant. P. Gelas. I. Ep. 4.
4^ Fides, universalis est, omnium communis est, non soliim ad Clericos,
verum etiam ad Laicos, et ad omnes omnino pertinet Christianos. P.
Nidu I. Ep. 8. p. 506.
II Oves ergo quse pastori suo commissse fuerint, eum nee reprehendere,
nisi a recta fide exorbitaverit, debent. — P. Joh. I. Ep. 1. (apud Bin. tom. 3.
p. 812.)
" Ev np avveSpiip rroXXaxig nvig riav tiXa^eardrwy rrpta^VTtpwv
TlXtyiav avrbv, Kai Std Trjv drrtiBtiav avrov rrjg avrob Koivwviag au-
roigiie^ov. Cone. Eph. part. I. p. 220.

422 A TEEATISE OF
Particularly Charisius did assert this proceeding in those
remarkable words presented to the sarae Synod : " It is the
wish and desire of all well-affected persons, to give always due
honour and reverence especially to their spiritual fathers and
teachers : but if it should happen that they who ought to
teach, should instil into those who are set under them such
things concerning the faith, as are offensive to the ears and
hearts of aU raen, then of necessity the order raust be inverted,
and they who teach wrong doctrine raust be rebuked of those
who are their inferiors."*
Pope Celestinel. in that case did coraraend the people of Con
stantinople, deserting their pastor : " Happy flock (said he), to
whora the Lord did afford to judge about its own pasture,"f
St. Jerorae did presume to write very briskly and smartly in
reproof of John, bishop of Jerusalem, in whose prorince he a
simple presbyter did reside.
"Who makes a schism in the Church? we whose whole
house in Bethlehem communicate with the Church, or thou,
who either believest aright, and proudly concealest the truth,
or art of a wrong beUef, and reaUy makest a breach in the
Church ? Art thou only the Church ? and is he who offend-
eth thee excluded from Christ ?"J
Malchion, presbyter of Antioch disputed against Paulus Sa
mosatenus his bishop. §
Beatus, presbyter, confuted his bishop EUpandus of Toledo.
" But if the rector swerve from the faith, he is to be re
proved by those who are under hira." ||
16. The case is the same of the Pope, for if other 1

* Evxq pev &-iraai roig ev dipovovai, ripr'iv dti Kai rrpkrrovaav aiSif
-irvtvpariKoXg pdXiara rrarpaai Kai SiSaaKdXoig drrovkpeiv- ti St mv
avp^r) roig SiSdaKtiv biptiXovTag roiavra roXg -vrrqKooig ivqx^'^ -"if^
rqg rriartwg, ola rdg drrdvrwv aKodg Kai KapSiag Kard^XdrrTti, av-
dyKq rrjv rdiiv avraXXarrtaBai, Kai robg KaKiag SiSdaKtiv iXopivov^
vrrb riav qaaovwv SitXtyxtaBai. Charis. in Cone. Eph. Act. 6. p. 358.
t 'M.aKapiog Si 'bpwg q dy'iXq y rrapkaxtv b Kvpiog Kpivtiv rrtpi Trjg
iSiag voprjg. Celest. I. in Cone. Eph. p. 190.
X Quis scindit Ecclesiam ? nos quorum omnis domus in Bethlehem in
Ecclesia communicat ; an tu qui aut ben^ credis, et superbe de fide taces,
aut male et vere scindis Ecclesiam ? — An tu solus Ecclesia es ; et qui te
ofFenderit a Christo excluditur? Hier. Ep. 61. cap. 16. Ep. 62.
§ Malchion disertissimus Autiochena; Ecclesiae Presbyter, adversog
Paulum Samosatenum, qui Antiochenaj Ecclesise Episcopus dogma Arte-
monis instaurarat disputavit. Hieron. in Catal.
II Quod si a fide exorbitaverit Rector, tunc arguendus erit a subditis.
Isid. Hisp. de OiEc. 3. 39. Vid. Thomam Aq. in 4. Dist. 19. Art. 2. .

THE pope's supkemacy. 423
who are reckoned successors of the Aposties, and Vicars of
Christ within their precinct ; if other patriarchs, who sit in
apostolical sees, and partake of a like extensive jurisdiction,
by incurring heresy or schism, or coramitting notorious dis
order and injustice, may be deprived of their authority, so that
tbeir subjects may be obliged to forsake them, then raay the
Pope lose his : for truth and piety are not afUxed to the chair
of Borne more than to any other ; there is no ground of assert
ing any such pririlege either in holy Scripture or in old tradi
tion ; there can no proraise be aUeged for it, having any pro
bable show (that of oravi pro te, being a ridiculous pretence),
it cannot stand without a perpetual miracle ; there is in fact
no appearance of any such miracle ; from the ordinary causes
of great error and impiety (that is, ambition, avarice, i loth,
loxnry) the papal state is not exempt, yea apparently it is more
subject to them than any other; aU ages have testified and
complained thereof.
17. Most eminent persons have in such cases withdrawn
communion from the Pope ; as other-where we have shewed
by divers instances.
18. -The canon law itself doth admit the Pope may be judged
if he be a heretic. — " Because he that is to judge all persons
is to be judged of none, except he be found to be gone astray
from the faith."*
The supposition doth imply the possibUity ; and therefore
the case may be put that he is such, and then he doth (accord
ing to the more current doctrine ancient and modern) cease to
be a bishop, yea, a Christian ; hence no obedience is due to
him ; yea, no coraraunion is to be held with hira.
19. This in fact was acknowledged by a great Pope; allow
ing the condemnation of Pope Honorius for good, because he
was erroneous in point of faith : " For (saith he, in that which
is caUed the eighth Synod) although Honorius was anathema
tized after his death by the Oriental bishops, it is yet weU known
that he was accused for heresy ; for which alone it is lawful for
inferiors to rise up against superiors."f
' Quia cunctos ipse judicaturus a nemine est judicandus, nisi deprehen-
datur a fide devius. Gra. dist. 40. cap. 6. Vid. P. Innoc. III. apud Laun.
contr. Baron.
t Kai ydp ti Kai np 'Ovwpiip vrrb twv ' AvaroXiKwv ptrd Bdvarov
avoBtfia ippkBq, 'opAag yvwarbv ianv, Sn irri a'tp'tati KarqyopqBq, Si'
qv Kai povov titan roig vrroSttartpovg rwv peiZbvwv KartiaviaraaBai
Syn. VIII. Act. 7- p. 963.

424 A TREATISE OF
Now that the Pope (or Papal succession) doth pervert the
truth of Christian doctrine, in contradiction to the holy Scrip
ture, and primitive tradition ; that he doth subvert the practice
of Christian piety in opposition to the Dirine commands • that
he teacheth falsehoods, and maintaineth impieties, is notorious
in many particulars, sorae whereof we shall touch.
We justly might charge hira with all those extravagant doc
trines and practices which the high-flying doctors do teach, and
which the fierce zealots upon occasion do act ; for the whole
succession of Popes of a long time hath most cherished and
encouraged such folks, looking squintly on others, as not well
affected to them ; but we shall only touch those new and norious
or dangerous positions, which great Synods, raanaged and con
firraed by their authority, have defined ; or which they them
selves have magisterially decreed ; or which are generally
practised by their influence or countenance.
It is manifest, that the Pope doth support and cherish as his
special favourites the ventors of wicked errors ; such as those
who teach the " Pope's infalUbiUty," his " power over temporal
princes," to cashier and " depose" them, to " absolve subjects
frora 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 communicate vrith the maintainers of thera, according to the
principles of ancient Christianity, are guilty of the same crimes.
The holy Scripture and catholic antiquity do teach and
enjoin us " to worship and serve God alone," our Creator ; for
bidding us to worship any creature or fellow-servant ;* even not
angels. " For I who am a creature vrill not endure to worship
one like to me."t
But the Pope and his cUents do teach and charge us to wor
ship angels, and dead men ; yea even to venerate " the relics
and dead bodies ofthe saints." J
The holy Scripture teacheth us " to judge nothing (about
the present or future state of men, absolutely) before the time,
until the Lord come, who vrill bring to Ught the hidden, things
• Matth. iv. 10. Apoc. xix. 10. xxu. 9. Col. u. 18. Rom. i, 25.
t Kriapa ydp wv ovk dvkiopai rbv 'bpoiov rrpoaKvvtXv. Bas. apud
Sozom. 6. 16.
X Similiter et Sanctos una cum Christo regnantes venerandos atque in-
vocandos esse. — Atque horum reUquias esse venerandas. Pu IV. Pi'ofess.
fid. Bonum atque utUe esse eos invocare. — Sanctorum quoque corpora— a
fidelibus veneranda esse. Cone.

THE pope's SUPREMACY. 42.5
of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of hearts, and
then each man shallhave praise of God."*
But the Pope, notoriously (in repugnance to those precepts,
anticipating God's judgment, and arrogating to hiraself a
knowledge requisite thereto) doth presume to determine the
state of men, canonizing them, declaring them to be saints, and
proposing thera to be worshipped; and on the other side, he
damneth, curseth and censureth his fellow-servants.
God in his law doth comraand us not to " bow down our
selves unto any iraage," or worship " the likeness of any thing
in heaven, or earth, or under the earth ;"f the which law
(whether raoral or positive) the Gospel doth ratify and confirra,
charging us to " keep ourselves frora idols," and " to fly wor
shipping of idols,"! *!'''*' isj to observe the second coraraand-
ment ; the vaUdity whereof the Fathers most expressly assert ;
and divers of them were so strict in their opinion aboutrit,
that they deemed it unlawful so much as to raake any image. §
But the Pope and his adherents (in point-blank opposition
to divine law, and primitive doctrine) doth require us to " fall
down before" and to worship images. " Moreover we decree
that the iraages of saints be especially had and retained in
Churches, and that due honour and veneration be iraparted to
them — so that by those images which we kiss, and before which
we uncover the head and fall down, we adore Christ, and vene
rate the saints whose likeness they bear."||
Neither is he satisfied to recommend and decree these un
warrantable venerations, but (vrith a horrible strange kind of
nncharitableness and ferity) doth he " anathematize those who
teach or think any thing opposite to his decrees concerning
them ;"^ so that if the ancient Fathers should live now, they
would Uve 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 re-
* 1 Cor. iv. 5. Rom. xiv. 4.
t Exod. XX. 4. ou rroiqatig atavTip elSwXov, obSi rravrbg bpoiwpa.
1 1 John V. 21. 1 Cor. x. 14, 7. § Clem. Alex. TertuU.
II Imagines porrb — Sanctorum in Tempiis praesertim habendas, et reti-
nendas, eisque debitum honorem et venerationem impertiendam — ^ita ut
per imagines, quas osculamur, et coram quibus caput aperimus, et procum-
bimus, Christum adoremus, et Sanctos quorum illae similitudinem gerunt,
veneremur. Cone. Trid. Sess. 25.
%' Siquis autem his decretis contraria docuerit, aut senserit, anathema
sit. Couc. Trid. Sess. 25.

426 A TREATISE OP
mission of sins, acceptance with God, justification aud salvation;
this is the tenor of the evangelical covenant ; nor did the primi
tive Church know other terms.*
But the Pope doth preach another doctrine, and requireth
other terms as necessary for remission of sins and salvation ;
for he hath decreed the confession of all and each mortal sin,
which a man by recollection can remember, to a priest, to be
necessary thereto; anathematizingaU who shall say the contrary,
although the Fathers (particularly St. Chrysostom frequently)
have affirmed the contrary. f
The which is plainly preaching another Gospel (forged by
himself and his abettors), as offering remission upon other terms
than God hath prescribed ; and denying it upon those which
Christianity proposeth.
He teacheth that no sin is pardoned vrithout absolution of a
priest. He requireth satisfaction imposed by a priest, besides repent
ance and new obedience, as necessary. Which is also another
Gospel.J He dispenseth pardon of sui upon condition of performances
unnecessary and insufficient; such as undertaking "pilgrimages
to the shrines of saints, risiting Churches," making "war
upon infidels or heretics, contributing money, repeating prayers,
undergoing corporal penances," &c.§ Which is likewise to
frame and publish another Gospel.
These doctrines are highly presuraptuous, and well may be
reputed heretical.
* Ezek. xviii. Luke xv. Rom. x. 9. Mark i. 15.
t Si quis dixerit in sacramento poenitentise ad remissionem peccatorum
necessarium non esse jure divino confiteri omnia et singula peccata morta
lia, quorum memoria cum debita et diligenti prtemeditatione habeatur—
anathema sit. Sess. 14. de Poen. Can. 7. — If any one shaU say, that in the
sacrament of penance it is not necessary by divine right to confess all and
singular mortal sins, the remembrance whereof may be had by due and
diUgent premeditation — let him be anathema.
} Si quis negaverit ad integram et perfectam peccatorum remissionem
requiri — contritionem, confessionem, et satisfactionem. Sess. 14. Cau.4. —
If any shaU deny that contrition, confession and satisfaction, is required to
the entire and perfect remission of sin.
§ Et qui Hierosolymam proficiscuntur, et ad Christianam gentem de-
fendendam, et tyrannidem infidelium debeUandum efficaciter auxilium
prsebuerint, quorum peccatorum remissionem concedimus. Cone. Lat I,
Can. 11.— And whoever go to Jerusalem and powerfully afford help to
defend Christian people, and to subdue the tyranny of infidels, to them
we grant forgiveness of their sins.

THE pope's srPREMACT. 427
God hath commanded that " every soul should be subject to
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 the Fathers expound this law to the utmost ex
tent and advantage. " If every soul, then yours, if any attempt
to except you, he goes about to deceive you."*
But the Pope countermandeth, and exempteth all clergymen
from those duties, 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
their judgment, those that henceforth shall presume to do so,
we decree that they shall be separate from the coraraunion of
the faithful."f
The Scriptures do represent the king (or teraporal sovereign)
as suprerae over his subjects, to whora all are obliged to yield
special respect and obedience : the Fathers yield hira the sarae
place, above all, next to God ; and subject to God alone : the
ancient good Popes did acknowledge themselves servants, and
subjects to the emperor. J
But later Popes, Uke "the man of sin" in St. Paul,§ have
advanced themselves above aU ciril power ; claiming to them
selves a supereminency not only of rank but of power over all
Christian princes ; even to depose them. " Christ has com
mitted the rights both of terrestrial and celestial government to
that blessed man who bears the keys of eternal life."!]
"If the secular power be beUevers, God would have them
subject to the priests ofthe Church — Christian emperors ought
to subrait, and not prefer the execution of their laws to the
rulers of the Church."^
* Rom. xiu. 1. — Tit. iu. 1. — 1 Pet k^v drroaroXog. — Chrys. Si omnis
et vestra — si quis tentat excipere, conatur dccipere. Bern. Ep. 42.
t Lex Canonica simpUciter eos eximit. BeU. de Cler. cap. 1. Sane quia
Laici quidam Ecclesiasticas personas et ipsos etiam Episcopos suo judicio
stare compeUunt, eos qui de caetero id prsesumpserint, a communione fide
lium decemimus segregandos. Cone. Lat. III. Can. 14. Cone. Lat. II.
Can. 15. Steph. VI. Ep. 1. (tom. 1. p. 130.) Niehol. I. Ep. 8. (tom. 6.
p. 513.)
X TertuU. Opt CyriU. &c aUbi. Greg. Ep. 2. 62. Agatho, &c.
§ 2 Thess. U. 4.
II Christus beato setemae vitifi clavigero terreni simul et coelestis Im
perii jura commisit. P. Nich. II. apud Grat. dist. 22. cap, 1, Greg. VII.
Ep. 8. 21. Caus. 15. qu. 6. cap. 3.
f SecuU potestates si iideles sunt, Deus Ecclesise Sacerdotibus voluit
esse subjectas. — Imperatores Christiani subdere debent executiones suas

428 A TREATISE OF '
God by indispensable law hath obliged us to retain our
obedience to the king even pagan ; charging us under pain of
damnation to be subject to him, and not to resist him —
But the Pope is ready upon occasion to discharge subjects
frora that obligation, to absolve thera frora their solemn oaths
of allegiance, to encourage insurrection against him ; to pro
hibit obedience — "We observing the decrees of our holy prede
cessors, by our apostolical authority absolve those from their
oath who were bound by their fealty and oath to excommuni
cated persons : and we forbid thera by all means that they
yield them no allegiance, tUl they corae and make satisfac
tion."* Thus doth he teach and prescribe rebeUion, perjury,
together vrith all the murders and rapines consequent on them ;
which is a far greater heresy, than if he should teach adultery,
murder or theft to be lawful. " For they are enjoined by no
authority to perforra the allegiance which they have sworn to
a Christian prince, who is an adversary to God and his saints,
and contemns their comraands."f
Not only the holy Scripture, but comraon sense doth shew
it to be an enorraous presuraption to obtrude for the inspi
rations, oracles and dictates of God, any writings ot propositions,
which are not really such. J
This the Pope doth notoriously, charging us to admit divers
writings (which the greatest part of learned raen in all ages
have refused for such), as sacred and canonical ; anathematiz
ing all those who do not hold each of thera for such. — Even
as they are extant in a translation, not very exact, and framed
partly out of Hebrew, partly out of Greek, upon divers accounts
liable to mistake ; as its author St. Jerome doth avow.§
Ecclesiasticis priEsuUbus, nou prseferre. P. Joh. VIII. apud Grat dist.
96. cap. 11.
* Nos sanctorum prsedecessorum nostrorum statuta tenentes, eos qui
excommunicatis fideUtate aut sacramento constricti sunt, Apostolica
auctoritate a Sacramento absolvimus ; et ne eis fidelitatem observent omni
bus modis prohibemus, quousque ipsi ad satisfactionem veniant. Greg.
VII. in Syn. Rom. Grat. Caus. 15. qu. 6. cap. 4.
t Fidelitatem enim quam Christiano Principi jurarunt, Deo ejusque
Sanctis adversanti, eorum praecepta calcanti, nuUa cohibentur auctoritate
persolvere. — P. Urb. II. apud Grat. Caus. 15. qu. 6. cap. 5.
X Ezek. xiu. 3, &c.
§ Si quis autem libros ipsos integros cum suis pai'tibus, prout in Eccle
sia Catholica legi consueverunt, et in veteri vulgati Latina editione haben
tur, pro Sacris et Canonicis non susceperit — anathema sit. Cone. Trid.

THE pope's supremacy. "^429
According to which decree, all who consent with St. Jerome,
St. Augustine, St. Athanasius, &c,, with common sense, with
the author of the second of Maccabees himself, raust incur a
curse. What can be more uncharitable, more unjust, more
silly than such a definition ?
He pretendeth to infaUibility, or encourageth them who
attributeth it to him ; which is a continual enthusiasm and
profane bold imposture.
The Scripture doth avow a singular reverence due to itself,
as containing the oracles of God.
But the Pope doth obtrude the oral traditions of his Church
(divers of which evidently are new, dubious, vain — ) to be
worshipped with equal reverence as the holy Scripture. "And
also receives and venerates with the like pious respect and
reverence the traditions theraselves — which have been pre
served by continual succession in the Catholic Church."*
Among which traditions they reckon all the tricks and
trumpery of their raass service ; together with all their new
notions about purgatory, extrerae unction, &c. " He also
used several ceremonies, as mystical benediction, lights, in-
censings, garments, and many other such things, frora apos
tolical discipUne and tradition. "f
TJie Scriptures affirra theraselves to be written for coraraon
instruction, corafort, edification in all piety ; they do therefore
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 dili
gently to study the Scriptures, j
But the Pope doth keep thera frora the people, locked up
in languages not understood by them ; prohibiting transla-
Sess. 4. — But if any shall not receive for sacred and canonical, those whole
books with the parts of them, according as they have been wont to be read
in the CathoUc Church, and are had in the old vulgar Latin edition : let
him be anathema,
* Nee non traditiones ipsas — continue successione iu Ecclesia Catholica
conservatas pari pietatis afiectn ac reverentia suscipit, et veneratur. Syn.
Trid. Sess. 4.
t Cseremonias item adhibuit, ut mysticas benedictiones, lumina, thymia-
mata, vestes, aliaque id genus multa ex Apostolica discipUua et traditione.
Cone. Trid. Sess. 22. cap. 5. 11. de sacrif. Miss.
X 2 Tim. iu. 15.— Rom. xv. 4. 1 Cor. ix. 10. x. 1 1. 2 Pet. i. 20. Ik-
jipkipovg. — John v. 39. Acts xvii. 11. — Psa. cxix. — Hier. ad Lset. Epitaph.
Paul. Vit. HUar.— Chrys. in Colos. Or. 9. — Aug. Serm. 55. de temp.

430 A TREATISE or
tions of them to be made, or used,* The Scripture teacheth
and comraon sense sheweth, and the Fathers do assert (nothing
indeed more frequently or raore plainly) that aU necessary
points of faith and good raorality are with sufficient eridence
couched in holy Scripture, so that " a raan of God," or pious
raen raay thence " be perfectly furnished to every work ;"t
but they contrariwise blaspheme the Scriptures as obscure,
dangerous, &c.
Coraraon sense dictateth, that devotions should be performed
with understanding and affection ; and that consequently they
should be in a known tongue ; and St. Paul expressly teacheth,
that it is requisite for private and pubUc edification : " From
this doctrine of Paul it appears, that it is better for the edi
fication 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.
Bnt the Pope wiU not have it so, requiring the pubhc
liturgy to be celebrated in an unknown tongue ; and that most
Christians shall say their devotions Uke parrots. He anathema-
tiseth those, who "think the mass should be celebrated in a
vulgar tongue ;"§ that is all those who are in their right wits,
and think it fit to follow the practice of the ancient Chureh.
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, afiirraingall "power and authority to be derived from
hira into the subject members ofthe Church." ||
* N.P. Pius IV. did authorise certain rules for prohibition and permis
sion of books ; in which it is permitted to bishops to grant a faculty of
reading the Scriptures translated — but to this nUe there is added an ob
servation, "this power was taken fi-om bishops by command of the
Roman Universal Inquisition." Ind. Lib. Prohib. a Clem. VIII.
t 2 Tim. iu. 17.
i 1 Cor. xiv. 14. — Ex hac PauU doctrina habetur, qubd meUus est ad Ec
clesiae aedifieationem orationes publicas, quae audiente populo dicuntur, dici
lingua communi clericis et populo, quam dici Latine. Cajet. in 1 Cor. xiv.
§ Aut Ungua tantum vulgari Missam celebrari debere — anathema sit.—
Sess. 22. Can. 9.
II A quo tanquam capite omnis in subjecta membra potestas et autho
ritas derivetur. P. Pius II. in BuU. Retract.

THE pope's supremacy. 431
" We decree that the Roman Pontiff is the true Vicar of
Christ, and the head ofthe whole Church."*
The Scripture declareth that God did institute marriage
for reraedy of incontinency and prevention of sin ; forbidding
tbe use of it to none, who should think it needful or con
venient for them ; reckoning the prohibition of it among
heretical doctrines ; iraplying it to be imposing a snare upon
men.f But the Pope and his complices do prohibit it to whole
orders of raen, (priests, &c.,) engaging thera into dangerous
vows.J Our Lord forbiddeth any raarriage lawfully contracted to
be dissolved, otherwise than in case of adultery. §
But the Pope coraraandeth priests married to be divorced.
" And that marriages contracted by such persons should be
dissolved ."II
He dissolveth matrimony agreed, by the profession of
monkery of one of the espoused- " If any shall say that ma
trimony confirmed, not consumraate, is no.t dissolved by the
solemn profession of religion of either party, let him be ana-
thema."lf Our Saviour did institute and enjoin us (under pain of
damnation, if we should wilfully transgress his order) to eat
of his body, and drink of his blood, in participation of the
holy supper.**
'The Fathers did accordingly practise, with the whole
Church, tiU late tiraes.
But notwithstanding Christ's institutionff (as they express
it) papal Synods do prohibit all layraen, and priests not cele
brating, to partake of Christ's blood j so raaiming and pervert-
* Definunus Romanum Pontificem — verum Christi Vicarium, totiusque
Ecclesia caput.— Defin. Syn. Flor.
t Matt. xix. 11.— M)) OUK ixopev iZovaiav ; 1 Cor. ix. 5.—KwXv6v-
Tiav yupeiv. 1 Tim. iv. 3. — Ep&xov imlidXXtiv- 1 Cor. vii. 35.
* Vid. tom. 7. Cone. p. 465 — Syn. Trid. Sess. 24. de matr. can. 9.
$ Matth. v. 32. xix. 7. 1 Cor. vu, 10.
|[ Contracta quoque matrimonia ab hujusmodi personis disjungi.— Cone.
Lat. I. cap 21. Lat. IL— Trid. Sess. 24. Can. 9. [p. 256. Paris. 1837.]
II Si quis dixerit matrimonium ratum, non consummatum, per solennem
religionis professionem aiterius conjugum non dirimi, anathema sit. Sess.
24. Can. 6. [Id. p. 255.]
**^IIitTeii airov rrdvTeg. Matth. xxvi. 27. 'Edvprj—rriqre airov
rp aipa; quk ixtrt. Zwqv. John vi. 53.
tt Non obstante. Cone. Const. Sess. 13. Cone. Trid. Sess. 13. cap. 8.
etCan. 3. Sess. 21. cap. 4. et Can, 3. [Id. p. 107.]

432 A TREATISE OF
ing 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 under a curse would oblige us to believe, that one kind doth
contain the other ; or that a part doth contain the whole.f
Whereas our Lord saith, that " whoso eateth his flesh and
drinketh his blood hath eternal life :"J and consequentlv sup
poseth, that bad raen do not partake of his body and blood ;
yet they condemn this assertion under a curse. §
The holy Scripture, and the Fathers after it, commonly do
call the elements of the eucharist, after consecration, bread
and vrine ;|| affirming thera to retain their nature.^
But the Popish cabal anathem atizeth those who say, "that
bread and wine do then remain."**
" If any shall say that in the holy sacrament of tbe eucha
rist the substance of bread and vrine remain — let him be
anatheraa." The nature of the Lord's supper doth iraply communion
and company : but they forbid any man to say that a priest
" raay not communicate alone;" so establishing the belief of
nonsense and contradiction, ff
The holy Scripture teacheth us, that our Lord hath de
parted, and is absent frora us in body ; until 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 hira till the tiraes of the restitution of all things."JJ;
* This P. Leo I. condemneth. De Quadr. Serm. 4. (p. 38.) Sanguinem
redemptionis nostrie haurire declinant. — P. Gelasius calleth the division of
the Sacrament a grand sacrilege. Gratian in De Consecr. dist. 2. cap. 12.
+ Cone. Trid. Sess. 21. Can. 3. [p. 189. Paris. 1837.] Sess. 13. Can, ,3,
[Id. p. 109.] X John vi. 54.
§ Si quis dixerit tantum in usu, &c. — Trid. Cone. Sess. 13. cap. 8. [p.
107.] et Can. 4. [p. 109.]
II "Aprov toUtov. 1 Cor. xi. 26. f Theod. Gelas.
** Si quis dixerit in Sacrosancto Eucharistiae Sacramento remaneresub-
stantiam panis et vini — anathema sit. Trid. Cone, de Euch, Sess. 13. Can.
2. [ut supra, p. 109.]
tt Si quis dixerit Missas in quibus sacerdos solus sacramentaliter com
municat, UUcitas esse, anathema sit. — Sess; 22. de sacr. Miss. Can. 8,
[ut supra, p. 210.] Sess. 13. Can. 8. fid. p. 110.]
XX 2 Cor. V. 6.— .\cts u. 33. Col. lii. I.— Eig rb SiqveKig ««a9i«.
[Barrow misquotes the text. The modem comma is justly put after
SiqveKeg, -and the text runs thus : " After he had offered one sacrifice for
sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God." The " for ever" denotes
the perfection of the sacrifice, not the permanence of Christ's sitting.— Ed.]
Heb. X. 12-— "Ov Set oipavbv SkxtaBai. Acts ui. 21.

THE pope's supremacy. 433
Bnt 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 raan, " per
fectly Uke to us, in all things.""'
But the Pope and his adherents make him extremely dif
ferent from us, as haring a body at once present in innuraer
able places ; insensible, &c. divested of the properties of our
body ; thereby destroying his huraan nature, and in effect
agreeing with Eutyches, ApolUnarius, and other such pestilent
heretics. The Scripture representeth him born once for us ; but they
affirm hira every day made by a priest, uttering the words
of consecration ; as if that which before did exist, conld be
made j as if a raan could make his Maker.
The Scripture teacheth, that our Lord was " once offered for
expiation of our sins ;"f but they pretend every day to offer
him up as " a propitiatory sacrifice."
These derices without other foundation, than a figurative
expression (which they resolve to expound in a proper sense,
although even in that very matter divers figurative expressions
are used, as they cannot but acknowledge), they with all rio
lence and fierceness obtrude upon the beUef as one of the most
necessary and fundamental articles of the Christian religion.
The Scripture teacheth us humbly to acknowledge the re
wards assigned by God to be gratuitous and free ; and that we,
" after we have done all, must acknowledge ourselves unprofit
able servants."J
But the Papists curse those who, although out of humiUty
and modesty, wiU not acknowledge the good works of justified
persons to be truly meritorious ; "deserring the increase of grace,
eternal life, and augmentation of glory :"§ so forcmg us to use
saucy words and phrases, if not irapious in their sense.
The Scripture teacheth one Church diffused over the whole
world ; whereof each part is bound to raaintain charity, peace,
and coraraunion with the rest, upon brotherly terms.
But the Romanists arrogate to themselves the name and
pririlege of the only Church ; condemning all other Churches
teside their own, and censuring all for apostatical who do not
* "Q^eiXt Kard rrdvra roig dStXipoXg bpoiwBqvai. Heb. u. 17.
t Heb. ix. 26. x. 10, 12, 14. iipdrrai. piq, rrpoaipopq,.
t Eph. u. 8, 9. Titus iu. 5. Rom. iii. 24. Luke xvu. 10.
§ Sess. 6. de Justif. Can. 32. [p. 64. Paris. 1837'.]
VOL I. 2 F

434 A TREATISE OP
adhere to them or submit' to their yoke; just like the
Donatists, who said that "the world had apostatized,"* ex
cepting those who upon their own terms did communicate with
them ; " only the coraraunion of Donatus reraained" the true
Church. T'he holy Scripture biddeth us take care of persons pretend
ing to extraordinary inspirations ; charging on the Holy Spmt
their own conceits and derices.
Such have been their Synods, boldly fathering their decrees
on God's Spirit. — And their Pope is infallible, by rirtue of in
spiration coraraunicated to hira, when he pleaseth to set himself
right in his chair. Whence we raay take them for bodies of
enthusiasts and fanatics : the difference only is, that other
enthusiasts pretend singly, they conjunctly and by conspiracy.
Others pretend it in their own direction and defence, these im
pose their dreams on the whole Church.
If they say that God hath proraised his Spirit to his Church ;
it is true, but he hath no less plainly and frequently promised
it to single Christians, who should seek it earnestly of him.f
The ancient Fathers could in the Scriptures hardly discern
more than two sacraments or mysterious rites of religion, by
positive law and institution of our Sariour to be practised.^
But the Popes have devised others, and under uncharitable
curses propound them to be professed for such ; affirming them
to confer grace by the bare performance of them.§
Every clergyman and monk is bound by Pius IV. || to profess
" there are just seven of them ;" and the Tridentine Synod
" anathematizeth all those, who do say there are more or
fewer ;"^ although the ancients did never hit on that number.
" But these our sacraments both contain grace, and also
confer it upon those who worthily receive thera."**
* Orbis terrarum Apostatavit, et sola remansit Donati Communio. Aug,
de Unit. 12. — 1 John iv. I. Jer. xxix. 8.
t Luke xi. 13. James i. 5. 1 John n. 27. Heb. viii. 11. Rom. viii. 9.
Acts V. 32. X Aug, Doctr. Christ. Ep. ad Jen.
§ Si Sacramenta essent pauciora, magna impietas fuisset, et superstitio,
&c. BeU. de Sacr. 2. 25.— If the Sacraments were fewer there would have
been great impiety and superstition, &c.
II Profiteor quoque septem esse proprie et ver^ Sacramenta. Bulla
Pii IV.
IT Siquis dixerit — esse plura vel pauciora quam septem— anathema sit
Syn. Trid. Sess. 7, Can. I. [p. 72. Paris. 1837,]
** Hsec verb nostra et continent gratiam, et ipsam dign^ suscipientibus
conferant. P. Eug. in Instr. Arm.

TIIE pope's SUPREMACY. 435
They require men to beUeve under a curse that each of
those were instituted of Christ, and confer grace by the bare
performance.* Particularly, they curse those, who do not hold " matrimony
for a sacrament, instituted by Christ, and conferring grace."f
What can be raore 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 :f
and why forsooth is not that another sacrament ? And then
they must be comparing the worth of these sacraments, con
demning those heavily, who may conceive them equal, as being
Divine institutions.
" If any shall say that these seven sacraments are so equal
one to another, that one is in no respect of raore worth than
another, let him be anatheraa."§
The first, as it seeraeth, who reckoned the sacraraents to be
seven, was Peter Lora bard ;|| whom the schoolmen did fol
low ; and Pope Eugenius IV. foUowed them ; and afterward
the Trent men forraed it into an article backed with an
anathema. Upon which rash and peremptory sentence touching all
ancient divines, we may note :
1 . Is it not strange that an article of faith should be formed
upon an ambiguous word, or a term of art, used vrith great
variety ?
2. Is it not strange to define a point, whereof it is most plain
that the Fathers were ignorant, wherein they never did agree
or resolve anything ?
3. Yea whereof they speak variously.
4. Is it not odd and extravagant to daran or curse people
for a point of so Uttle consideration or certainty ?
5. Is it not intolerable arrogance and presuraption to define,
nay, indeed to raake an article of faith, without any raanner of
Si quis dixerit per ipsa novae legis Sacramenta ex opere operato non
conferri gratiam -anathema sit. Ibid. Can. 8. [Id. p. 73.]
? Si quis dixerit matrimonium non esse vere ac propria unum ex septem
legis EvangeUcse Sacramentis, a Christo Domino institutum — neque gra
tiam conferre, anathema sit. Sess. 24. Can. 1. [Id. p. 254.]
X Sess. 24. Can. 10.
§ Si quis dixerit hsec septem Sacramenta ita esse inter se paria, ut nuUa
ratione aliud sit aUo dignius, anathema sit. Sess. 7. Can. 3. [Id. p. 72.)
II Novae legis septem sunt Sacramenta, &c. P. Eug. in Instr. Arm. —
Bellarmine could find none before him. Vid. de Saeram. 2. 25. [p, 109.
vol. 3. Pragae, 1721.]
2p2

436 A TREATISE OF
ground or colour of authority either from Scripture or the
tradition of the ancient Fathers ?*
The holy Scripture forbiddeth us " to call any man master
upon earth,"f or absolutely to subject our faith to the dictates
of, any raan; it teacheth us, that the Apostles themselves
are " not lords of our faith," so as to obUge us to be
lieve their own inventions ; it forbiddeth us to swaUow whole
the doctrines and precepts of men, without examination of
thera. It forbiddeth us to admit " various and strange doc-
trines."J But the Pope and Roraan Church exact frora us a submis
sion to their dictates, adraitting thera for true, without any
farther inquiry or discussion, barely upon his authority.
" They who are provided of any benefices whatever, haring cure
of souls, let thera promise and swear obedience to the Roman
Church."§ They require of us without doubt to believe, to profess, to
assert innuraerable propositions, divers of thera new and strange,
no wise deducible from Scripture or apostolical tradition, the
very terms of them being certainly unknown to the primitive
Church, devised by huraan subtlety, curiosity, contentious
ness—divers of them being (in all appearance, to the judginent
of common sense) uncertain, obscure, and intricate; divers of
thera bold and fierce ; divers of thera frivolous and vain ; divers
of them palpably false ; naraely all such propositions as have
been taught by their great junto's, aUowed by the Pope, espe
cially that of Trent.
" Moreover all other things deUvered, defined and declared
by the sacred Canons and CEcuraenical Councils, and especially
by the holy Synod of Trent, I undoubtedly receive and pro
fess ; and also all things contrary thereunto, and all here
sies whatsoever conderaned and rejected, and anathematized
by the Church, I in like manner do condemn, reject, and ana-
* Multa dicuntur a veteribus Sacramenta praeter ista septem. Bell, de
Sacr. 2. 24. — Many things are by the ancients caUed Sacraments besides
these seven.
t Matth. xxui. 8. 2 Cor. i. 24. IThess. v. 21. Col.ii. 8. Matth.
XV. 9.
X AiSaxaXg rroiKiXaig, Kai ^kvaig pii rrtpiiptptaBe. Heb. xiii. 9.
.§ Provisi de beneficus quibuscunque cm-am animarum habentibus— m
Romanae Ecclesiae obedientiam spondeant ac jurent. Cone. Trid. Sess. 24.
cap. 12. de Ref. [p. 283. Paris. 1837.]— Nee non veram obedientiam
summo Pontifici spondeant et profiteantur. Sess. 25. cap. 2, de Ref, [Id,
p. 330.]

THE pope's supremacy. 437
thematize. — This is the true cathoUc faith, out of which there
can be no salvation."*
This usurpation upon the consciences of Christians (none
like whereto was ever known iu the world), they prosecute
with most uncharitable censures, cursing and damning all
who do not in heart and profession subrait to thera, obUging 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 raatters.f
But the Popes with cruel nncharitableness, not only do cen
sure all that cannot assent to their derices, which they obtrude
as articles of faith ; but sorely persecute thera with all sorts
of punishraents ; even with death itself ; a practice inconsis
tent with Christian meekness, with equity, vrith reason ; and
of which the Fathers have expressed the greatest detestation.
" They have unwoven and altered all theology from head to
foot, and of Divine have made it sophistical." J
The Pope with his pack of mercenary clients at Trent, did
indeed estabUsh a scholastical or sophistical, rather than a
Christian theology ; framing points, devised by the idle wits
of later times, into definitions, and peremptory conclusions,
backed with curses and censures : concerning which conclusions
it is erident.
That the Apostles theraselves would not be able to under
stand many of them.§
That the ancient Fathers did never think any thing about
them. II
That divers of thera consist in application of artificial terras
and phrases devised by human subtlety.^
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 judgraent.
* Caetera item omnia a Sacris Canonibus et CEcumenicis ConciUis, ac
prsecipue a Sacrosancta Tridentina Synodo tradita, definita, et declarata,
indubitanter recipio atque profiteor ; simulque contraria omnia, atque
haereses quascunque ab Ecclesia damnatas et rejectas et anathematizatas
ego pariter damno, respuo, et anathematize, P. Pii IV. profess. Hane
veram CathoUcam fidem, extra quam nulla salus esse potest. Ibid. [Bulla
S.D. N.D. PII. p. 419. ConcU. Trid. Canones et Decreta. Paris. 1837.]
t Rom. xiv. 1. XV. 1, 7.
t Totam Theologiam a capite usque ad calcem retexuerunt, et ex divina
Sophisticam fecerunt. Erasm. praef. ad Hieron.
§ FormaUter justos. Sess. 6, Can. 10. [p. 59. Paris. 1837.]
II Ex opere operato. Sess. 7. Can. 8. [Id. p. 73.]
IF Character. Sess. 7. Can. 9.

438

A TREATISE OP

That there was po need of defining raany of them.
That they blind y lay about thera, condemning and cursing
they know not who' Fathers, Schoolmen, Divines, &c., who
have expressly affirmed points so damned by them.
That many truths are uncharitably backed with curses
which disparageth thera ; (seeing a raan raay err pardonablv—
ev rroXXolg iTTaLojXEv arravTeg) " in many things we offend all."
For instance ; what need was there of defining, what need
of cursing those, who think concupiscence to be truly and
properly sin, upon St. Paul's authority, calUng it so ?*
That " Adara presently upon his transgression did lose the
sanctity and justice in which he was constitiited,"f
What need of cursing those, who say that raen are justified
" by the sole reraission of sins," according to St. Paul's notion,
aud use of the word justification ? J
What need of cursing those, who say " the grace of God by
which we are justified, is only the favour of God,"§ whereas it
is plain enough that God's grace there in St. Paul, doth signify
nothing else, applied to that case.
Gr that faith is " nothing else, but a reliance in God's
raercy, reraitting sins for Christ ;" || seeing it is plain St. Paul
doth by faith chiefly raean the belief of thatprincipal p oint of
the Gospel.
Or that good works " do not cause an increase of justifi
cation ;"^ seeing St. Paul doth exclude justification by works;
and it is a free work of God — incapable of degrees.
Or that after reraission of sin in justification, " a gUllt of
paying temporal pain doth abide."**
Or that a man cannot " by his works merit increase of
grace, and glory, and eternal life :"ff seeing a mania not to be
blamed, who doth dislike the use of so saucy a word ; the
which divers good raen have disclairaed.
What need of cursing those, who do not take the sacraments
to be precisely seven ? or who conceive that some one of their
"* Sess. 5. Can. 5. [Id. p. 31.] Rom. vii.
t Cum mandatum Dei in paradiso fuisset transgressus, statim sanctita-
tem et justitiam in qua constitutus fuerat amisisse. Ibid. Can. I.
t Sess. 6. Can. 11. [Id. p. 59.]
§ Sess. 6. Can. 11. Aut etiam gratiam qua justificamur essetantilm
favorem Dei. || Sess. 6. Can. 12. [Id. p. 60.]
1[ Sess. 6. Can. 24.
** Non autem ipsius augendse causam. — Ut nullus remaneat reatns
poenae temporaUs exolvendae. — Sess. 6. Can. 30. Sess. 14. de poenit.
Can. 15. tt Sess. 6. Can. 32. [Id. 64.]

THE pope's supremacy. 431)
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. Augustine
Signum rei sacris ; and that before Peter Lombard ever did
mention that number.*
What need of damning those, who do conceive the sacraments
equal in dignity ?f
What need of defining, that sacraments do confer grace ex
opere operato; which is an obscure scholastical phrase. J
What need of cursing those who say that a " character is
not impressed in the soul"§ of those who take baptism, confir
mation, or orders ; seeing what this character is (or this
spiiitual and indelible mark) they do not themselves well
understand or agree.
What need of cursing those, who do not think that the
yaUdity of sacraments (and consequently the assurance of our
heing Christians) dependeth on the intention ofthe minister ?1|
What need of cursing those, who think that a pastor of the
Church may change the ceremonies of administering the sacra
ments ; seeing St. Cyprian often teacheth that every pastor
hath fuU authority in such cases within his own precinct ?^
What need of defining the second book of Maccabees to be
canonical,** against the common opinion ofthe Fathers (most
expressly of St. Augustine hiraself) of the most learned in all
ages, of Pope Gelasius hiraself (in decret.) which the author
himself (calling his work an epitorae, and asking pardon for
his errors) disclairaeth ? and which common sense therefore
disclaimeth.ff Their new creed of Pius IV. containeth 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
' De Sacramentis. Si quis dixerit — esse plura vel pauciora quam sep
tem. Sess. 7. Can. 1.
t Sess 7. Can. 3. [Id. p. 72.]
X Sess. 7. Can. 8. Nonimprimi eharacterem in anima.
§ Sess 7. Can. 9. Hoc est signum quoddam spirituale, et indelebUe.
Ibid. Il Sess. 7. Can. 11.
H Sess. 7. Can. 13. •* Sess. 4.
tt Fidem minutis dissecant ambagibus
Ut quisque Ungua nequior.
Solvunt Ugdntque quzestiouum viucula
Per syllogismos plectUes. Prudent, in Apotheos.

440 TREATISE OF THE POPE's SUPREMACY.
one kind. 6. Purgatory. 7. Invocation of Saints. 8. Ve
neration of Relics. 9. Worship of Images. 10. The Ro
man Church to be the Mother and Mistress of all Churches.
11. Swearing Obedience to the Pope. 12. Beceiring the
Decrees of all Synods and of Trent.

INDEX.

Antioch, bishops of, as good title to supremacy aa the bishopsof Rome, 148 ;
Roman see not proved to be superior to, 148 ; its prerogatives as good
as those of Rome, 149 ; dignity of, 242^ — 244.
Apostles, strife among, 54 ; aU equal, 56 ; texts shewing their equaUty,
57 ; equaUty of, does not impugn ecclesiastical jurisdiction, 58 ; inde
pendent of each other in jurisdiction, 75 ; asserted by the Fathers to
have been equal in power, 86 ; all foundations, 93 ; are equaUy in
vested, 97 ; to feed the sheep aa much as Peter, 101 ; were oecumenical
rulers, 101 ; had no teacher save God, 104 ; not Peter's curates or
vicars, or surrogates, 105 ; order of recording names no argument,
107 ; necessary elements in office of, and qualification for, 117 ; did
not profess to communicate their office, 118; and bishops^ offices in
compatible, 124; their names given to churches, 137 ; not required to
reside as bishops, 138.
ApostoUc Office, the highest iu Primitive Chureh, 53 ; personal and
temporary, and so not successive, 116.
Appeals, Pope claims to receive, 374 ; to Pope condemned by Synod of BasU,
Bernard, &c. 375, 376 ; not the prerogative of Pope in early Church,
376 ; instances of prohibitions of, 377 ; condemned by the Fathers,
378 ; when, and in what sense, and for what reason ever made to the
Popes, 380, 381 ; from Popes to Councils, 382; BeUarmine's instances
of, examined, 383—390 ; instance of Eutyches, 390,
Bishops, then: oath, 33 ; differ from kings, 58 ; signify duty, not dominion,
59 ; in what sense successors of Aposties, 119 ; aU successors of Peter,
120 ; of Churches never visited by Apostles caUed their suceessoi's,
121 ; caUed successors of Apostles because placed by Aposties in their
charges, 122 ; two more, see condemned, 131 ; Peter and Paul both of
one see, 134 ; both Peter and Paul of one see or neither of them, 132 ;
Church committed to aU equaUy, 144; aU equaUy successors of the
Apostles, 146 ; subordination of a human ordinance, 245 ; metropoUtan
had more power in theii- provinces than the Pope in the whole Chm-eh,
321 ; independent of each other, 328 ; judged by Synods, 328 ; elec
tion of, 332 ; in remote cities, election and consecration of, 333 ;
people share in election of, 334 ; election and consecration of, decreed
m Nicene Synod, 336 ; Pope's meddling in election and consecration
of, 341 ; instances of meddling in ordination of other bishops, 342 ;

442 INDEX.
anciently censured by Synods, 350 ; how anciently censm'ed by other
bishops, 350 ; power of censuring belongs to all bishops, 353 ; heretical
to be deserted by the laity, 354 ; not condemned by Popes of old
without Synods, 355.
Constantiuople, precedency of, 241 .
CouncUs caUed by Emperors, 281 — 287.
Censure, power of, 353 ; nature of, 354 ; usurped claim to, by Popes, 364 ;
Pope's claim to, disavowed, 354.
Church, laws of, and the Pope, 322.
Churches, independent, 326.
Confii-mation of bishops claimed by Pope, 409
CouncU superior to Pope, 407.
Deacons, election of, 332.
Decretal epistles, their influence, 325.
Dispensing with laws by Pope not known in early Church, 323.
Dispensing power of old in Emperors, 325.
DiscipUne over bishops exercised independent of Pope, 328.
Ecclesiastical discipline different in different countries, 413-414.
Ecclesiastical influence confined to civU and secular governors, 243.
Election and ordination of bishops conflrmed by other bishops, 348.
Emperor avowed as his lord by Gregory I., 17 ; by Pope Agatho, 17; called
prototype son of the Chiu-ch by Leo II ., 1 7 ; commands of, obeyed by
Pope Constantine, 18 ; Ai'cadius aUeged to have been excommunicated
by Gregory VII., 18 ; Gi'egory the Great denounces kings and, 18 ;
had anciently the power of dispensing with ecclesiastical laws, 325,
Emperors commanded Popes, 330 ; oftener than bishops interposed in
constitution of bishops, 346 ; deposed Popes, 357 ; consent requisite
to restoration, 370 ; held by the Fathers to be above the Pope, 408.
Episcopal power, its ancient character, 327 ; connected with lay decision,
327 ; originally equal, 327.
"Feed my sheep," addressed to all Christian Bishops and Governors of
Church, 102.
Foundations, aU Apostles so caUed in Scripture, 93.
Greeks, repudiated Papal decrees, 325.
Head of Romish Church, its definition, 2.
Heresy, in Popes, 405 ; a disqualification for spiritual office, 417; waiTsnts
separation fi-om prelate or priest, 418 ; taught in Church of Kome,
424 ; proofs of, 424—440.
Imperial Laws about ecclesiastical aifairs aUowed by Popes, 326.

INDEX. 443
IndefectibiUty of Pope disproved, 412 ; of Pope, grounds ou which it raa
be seen to have failed, if granted to have been given at first, 413 —
416.
Infallibility of Pope, 403 ; not known to the ancients, 406 ; of Popes
falhble, 404.
IrresponsibiUty claimed by Pope, 398.
James more likely to have the supremacy than Peter, 114 ; mentioned first
in the ApostoUcal constitutions, 115; Bishop of Jerusalem not an
Apostie, 140; if an Apostie, his episcopacy a special case, 141.
John equaUy favoured with Peter, 106.
Keys, and Peter, 96 ; received by aU Apostles, 97 ; Origen, Jerome, Opta"
tus, Theophylact, Chrysostom, on, 97.
MetropoUtan Bishops, their power, 321.
MetropoUtans, confirmation of, did not ancientiy belong to Pope, 348.
Names of other Aposties often placed before Peter's, 107.
Papal authority, disagreement on, 2 ; Almain on, 2 ; CouncU of Trent sUeut
on, 3 ; represented by some as subject to Church or Synod, 35 ; sub
jected to canons according to some, 36 ; as dukedom of Venice in
senate, 36.
Papal supremacy contested by some Romish divines, 35 ; causes of its
growth, 263—280.
Patriarchs, human institution, 261 .
Paul received the most eulogistic tifles ; caUed by Gregory I. " Head of
the Nations, 113 ; joined with Peter in authority, 113.
People, their part in election of bishops, 334 — 339 ; have deposed Popes,
356.
Peter, epithets given to, by Fathers, 48 ; first in age, 49 ; particular re
spect shewn to, by the Lord, 50 ; his faith and confession a ground of
precedence, 50 ; name in front of catalogues of Apostles, 50 ; no
superiority in power, jurisdiction, 51 ; no divine commission of supe
rior jurisdiction to, in Scriptures, 51 ; no time of receiving such
jurisdiction stated in Scriptures, 52 ; his office no where in Scriptm-es
described as superior to that of Apostles, 53; no peeuUar administra
tion committed to, 61 ; a rock, 61 ; the keys, 62 ; binding and loos
ing, 62 ; and feeding sheep, 62 ; the same trust and gifts as other
Apostles, 63 ; had no singular or pecuUar prerogative, 64 ; his de
scription of himself, 64 ; did not call himself vicar of Christ, 65 ; did
not exercise any supremacy, 65 ; warm and forward in speaking, 65 ;
did not alone appoint the new Apostle, 65; did not appoint deacons,
66 ; not appealed to by Paul and Barnabas in a new dispute, 66 ; did.
not preside in apostolical Synod, 67 ; knew his place, 68 ; not de-

444 INDEX.
ferred to specially, 68 ; his conduct questioned, 69 ; obeyed orders of
brethren, 69 ; his judgment neither appealed to in Scripture or treated
as decisive in controversies, 70 ; no where intermeddles as a judge,
7 1 ; ApoUos and Cephas regarded by the Corinthians as equal 71 •'
his alleged supremacy not hinted at by St. Paul, 72 ; no licence irom
received by other Apostles, 72 ; visited by St. Paul at Jerusalem from
respect, 73 ; unfit and unable to manage any such as alleged juris
diction, 73 ; so treated by Paul as proves no superiority, 75 ; with
stood by Paul, 78 ; not recognized by Cyprian as Paul's superior, 81 ¦
opposed by Paul seemingly as decided by Origen, 81 ; his dispute
with Paul as explained by Chiysostom, 82 ; Jews committed to, Paul
claims for himself authority over the Gentiles, 83 ; did not outlive the
rest of the Apostles, and so the Church left without head if Peter
were head, 84 ; his modern prerogative not mentioned hy the Fa
thers, 88 ; his supremacy not warranted by any argument, 88 ; Matth.
xvi. 18. does not prove the supremacy of, 89 ; not distinctively
the rook, as explained by Fathers, Popes, &c. 90 ; not understood by
Apostles as supreme, 91 ; and keys, 96 ; received no special jurisdic
tion in receiving the keys, 98 ; received the keys, as thought by
sorae Fathers, eis a representation of each pastor, 98 ; at very ut
most, a prime man in preaching the Gospel, 99 ; did not open the
kingdom of heaven to the rest of Apostles, 99 ; no more peculiar
jurisdiction from opening kingdom of heaven than from " catohing
men," 99 ; not constituted superior by the words " Feed my sheep,"
100 ; equaUy with rest of Apostles to feed sheep, 101 ; his charge
not more extensive than rest of Apostles, 101 ; to feed sheep is the
people, not the Apostles, 1 04 ; not received as a teacher of the
Apostles, 104 ; assigned as impracticable charge by Romanista, 105 ;
prerogatives of, as enumerated by Romanists, 106 ; his primacy with
out any stronger reasons than John's, 106 j his name placed some
times before other of the Apostles no evidence of primacy, 107 ; titles
given him by the Fathers were oratorical flourishes, 108 ; does not
receive such eulogies from the more ancient Fathers, 109 ; the patristic
titles he receives applicable to any sort of primacy, 109; his receiring
such titles no more evidence that he was head of the Apostles, than
that Socrates, called by men Prince of phUsophers, was the head of
philosophers, and Sulpitius head of lawyers, because called Piince of
lawyers, 110; his titles given hira for his gifts and rirtues, 110;
his titles given by Fathers who affii-m his equaUty with other Apostles,
110 ; his titles given him by the Pope of no value, 111 ; his titles not
more eulogistic than those given to other Apostles, 111 ; joined with
Paulin authority, 113; and Paul caUed Princes of the Churches,
Ringleaders of Apostles ; and Paul called equal in merit by Ambrose ;
less Ukely than James to be supreme, 114 ; conformed to ordera of
James, 114 ; his primacy personal and not derivable, 115 ; hispn-
raacy grounded on personal acts, 115 ; meanuig of our Lord's charges
to Peter, 116; office expired with his person, 119; privileges not all
derived by Popes, 119 ; Popes not successors of, in aU things, 119;
aUeged supremacy not expressed in any authentic record, as it would
have been if real, 123; not bishop of Rome, 124 ; taking the bishopric
of Rome, as if the Queen should take the office of Mayor, or Bishop
of London vicar of St. Pancras, 125 ; his special mission to the scat-

INDEX. 445
tered Jews incompatible with episcopal duties at Rome, 125 ; hia
wandering and unsettled life rendered him mcapahle of a bishopric
at Rome, 125 ; hia aUeged time of going to Rome rejected by many,
126 ; need not be consecrated bishop, as apostolic office included it,
127 ; if bishop of Rome, gave a bad example of non-residence, 127 ;
if bishop of Rome, broke good ecclesiastical rules, aa uncanonical to
desert one church and go to another, 128 ; if bishop of Some, left a
poorer and lesser for a richer bishoprio, 128 ; not bishop of Rome,
132 ; if bishop of Rome, eeased to be so hy ordaining Lanus, 134 ;
included and excluded by Linus iu lists of Roman bishops, 136 ;
in what sense bishop of Rome, 135 ; authority, great or Uttie, not
necessarily transmissible, 142; equaUy bishop of Antioch aa of Rome,
148 ; Popes not the best claim to be successors to, 149 ; his pretended
suceessoi's at Rome not canonicaUy elected, 150.
Pope, some give boundless power to, 3 ; Augustinus Triumphus on, 4 ;
Tliomas Aquinas on, 4 ; ZabareU's reason of, 5 ; Lateran orators on, 5 ;
Baronius on, 5 ; BeUaiinine's definition of, 6 ; Pope's claims of, 6 ;
BuU of Sixtus V. on. 6 ; Pius V. on, 7 ; Clement VI. on, 8 ; Clement
V. on, 8 ; Boniface VIII. on, 8 ; confirmed hy the Lateran, 9 ; Inno
cent IV. on, 9 ; Iimooent III. on, 10 ; Lateran CouncU IV. on, 10 ;
Paschal II. on, 11 ; Urban II. on, 11 ; Gregoiy VII. Author and
Apostle of, 11 ; Leo IX., Stephanus VI., John VIII. on, 15 ; Nicho
las I. on, 15 ; Zachary on, 15 ; Adrian I. on, 15 ; Gregory II. on, 15 ;
Felix III. and Gelasius on, 16 ; regaUa, 31 ; according to some may
he discarded hy a General CouneU, 36 ; subjection to Synod held by
Synod of Pisa and Constanoe,''BasU, 37 ; absolute supremacy, the true
Romish doctrine, 38 ; supremacy based on Peter's supposed primacy,
40; claims, tities, prerogatives, power assumed by, 60 ; his title to
Peter's authority not evident, 155 ; supremacy of, contrary to Scrip-
tm'e, 183 ; titles of, blasphemous, 185 ; prerogatives of, clash with
those of Christ, 185; pretences of, alter the constitution of the Church
of Christ, 187; pretence of, desfa'oys brotherly co-ordination and
equaUty, 189 ; pretence of, eonfa-ary to Scripture, 191 ; claims of, do
wrong to princes, 193 ; claims of, against tradition, 193 ; claims of,
condemned by Puller, 194 — 196 ; pretence of, against reason, 197 —
200 ; pretence of, injurious to discipline, 201 — 204 : claim of, throws
the Church into bondage, 205 ; distorts and degrades Christ, and
vexes spiritual and civfl things, 205 ; supremacy of, hasted to errors
of doctrine and miscarriages of praotioe, 212 ; claims of, hasted to cor
ruption of manners, 213 ; claims of, have perpetuated coiTuption of
manners, 214 ; authority of, injurious to him that wields, 214 ; wicked
ones, 215 ; supremacy of, disturbs society, and destroys temporal au
thority, 216 ; claims of, incompatible with authority ofprinoes, 217 —
220; claims of, have enUsted pi-inces against Christianity, 221; au
thority and claim of, useless and needless, 222 ; incompatible with
authority given by the ancients to each Bishop, 224 ; progress of,
pretensions of, 257 — 259 ; his claim refused by Eastern Churches,
260 : history of, rise and progress, 263 ; if supreme, would have
power to call. Synods, which Emperors alone did, 280; if supreme
presided in Synods, hut the Emperors or persona delegated by them
generally did so, 293 ; supremacy of, would imply that all legislative

446 INDEX.
power belongs to bim, 303 ; legislative power of, not recoo-nised in
divine law, ancient canon, or primitive use, 304 ; confirmation of
canons by, not admitted, 305 ; proofs that the confirmation of is not
necessary, 306 — 309 ; consent of, never asked for, 309 ; his refusal of
confirmation, what and why, 315 ; if supreme, bis proclamation about
laws would have been always observed, 318 ; claims for decrees the
force of laws, 318; his claims to make laws unwarranted 319-
proofs of, claim heing usurped and unwarranted, 320 ; Julius con
demned for communicating with persons condemned by Synods 322 •
subject to laws of Church, 322 ; no power of dispensing with laws'
323 ; in later times did not dai'e to claim power over universal
canons, 323 ; their pretensions in later times limited by own pro
vinces, 323 ; proclaim the decisions of provincial Synods, and did not
institute decrees by their own authority, 324 ; decrees of, contested
324 ; decrees of, not admitted by Greeks, 325 ; sovereign judicial
power of, not known in beginning, 329 ; bis sovereign power de
clared, 329 ; judged for miademeanors, 329 ; same right as other
bishops to the privUege of judicature, 330 ; commanded by Em
perors, 330 ; alleged sovereignty of, over aU bishops, 331 ; claims
aU autliority over inferiors as sovereign in himself, 392 ; papal defi
nitions of, 393 ; hia claima condemned in Scriptm-e, 394 ; his claims
condemned by the Fathers, 394 ; tricks of, in fourth century in order
to enlarge their power, 396 ; claims exemption from deposition and
respoiisibiUty, 398 ; this claim contrary to antiquity, 399 ; instances
of deposition of, 400 ; claima to decide aU controversies infaUibly and
finally, 40 1 ; such a claim not admitted by Synods and Fathers, 402 ;
infalUhiUty of, 403 ; claims superiority to Councils, 406 ; this claim
of, not ancient, 407 ; claims to be above all princes, these being his
sheep, 408 ; this claim of, not ancient, 408 ; claims confumationof all
bishops, 409 ; claims to grant privileges, 410 ; claims to erect and
translate spiritual presidencies, 410; such claims not ancient, 410;
claims to impose taxes, 411 ; his power aUeged to be indefectihle,
411; thia indefectibiUfy disproved, 412; hie departure from Peter's
doctrine proof of failure of succession, 416 ; a heretical, may be
judged according to the canon law, 423.
Popes, ancient, did not excommuiucate princes, 19 ; JuUus, Liberius, Da
masus, Leo. I. SimpUcius, &o. did not excommunicate, 19; universal
power of true, always believed, 20 ; a vital tenet, 20 ; advocated by
authors cun-ying pontifical favour, 22 ; biahop's oath on, 22 ; constantly
held by all Romanieta, 23 ; approved by CouncUs of Trent, Lateran,
24 ; not disclaimed by any Synod, 24 ; dissent from is violation of
unity, 24 ; disbeUevera in, cannot communicate with beUevers on, 24 ;
denied by some, 25 ; BeUarmine and Bai-oniua on, 25 ; extent of, un
settled, 26 ; interest concerned in, 26 ; Pope pi'phibite disputes on,
26 ; Popea varied their declaration of with circumstances, 27 ; Popes
varied theii- definition of, according to times, 28; their pretension to
civil sword vain, 29 ; spiritual supremacy of, .30 ; defined by Ekiren-
tine CouncU, 30 ; by Leo X., 31 ; accepted by aUapuitual priests, 32;
their pretensions of confirming bishops, 342 ; checked on interfering
beyond their bounds, 344 ; examples of interfermg in constitution of
bishops in number by that of Emperors, 345 ; and Synods jomtly
condemned by bishops, 355 ; deposed by the people, 356 ; deposed

INDEX. 447
by Emperors, 356 ; authority of,, in deposing not proved by in
stances quoted, 357 — 366 ; if sovereign, could restore deposed and
excommunicated bishops if they should see fit, 306 ; instances of tiieir
infalUbihty, 404 ; heresy of, 405 ; against Popes, 406.
Primacy of Peter, 43 ; primacy of worth, as expounded by the Fathera,
43, 44 ; instances of zeal, boldness, affection, &o. 45 ; primacy of
repute, 46 ; doubtful of mean precedence in meetings, 46 ; primacy,
Cyprian's account of, 47 ; age, a cause of confidence, 49.
PrivUeges claimed hy the Pope, 410.
Restoration by Synods, Popes, Emperors, 869, 370.
Eoek, as explained by Fathers, 92.
Kome, bishops of, no universal jurisdiction, 142 ; hiahops of, often fafled,
156 ; bishop of, has no patent, no credentials as sovereigns, 158 ;
supremacy of, not aUuded to or contemplated in Scripture, 160 ;
supremacy of, not found in ancient tradition, 161 ; supremacy of, not
in Eusebius, 161 ; supremacy of, in no ancient Creed, 162 ; supremacy
defined by no ancient Synod, 162; deniers of sovereignty of, not
regarded as heretics, 163 ; supremacy of not aUuded to by the
Pagans, 164; supremacy of, not accepted or understood by emperors,
167; supremacy of, not in ancient canons and constitutions, 167 ;
supremacy of not mentioned by Dionysius or Ignatius, 168; supre
macy of, not understood or claimed by its early bishops, 170 ; supre
macy of, not recognized by BasU, Chrysostom, &o. 173—176; supre
macy of, not appealed to in diaputes -with early heretioa, 177 ; supre
macy of, not declared by Popes in putting down heretics, 180 ; supre
macy of, not declared in any code of CathoUc Church, 182; biahop
of, not invested with pecuUar jurisdiction in any canon, 257.
Sees, change of, condemned, 129 ; ti-anslation fi-om lesser to greater not
sanctioned by Peter, 130.
Semi-Bomish views on supremacy repudiated, 39.
Separation from heretical teachers warranted by the Scriptures and Fathers,
418 — 420 ; warranted hy Popes, 421 ; instancea of, 421.
Sheep committed to aU pastors, as held by Ambrose, Chrysostom, BasU,
Augustine, Cyril, 103.
Simony of Popes, 405.
Sovereign power, 326 ; its extent, 326 ; not ancientiy possessed by
Popes; 326 ; jurisdiction over aU inferior bishops given to Pope, 350;
power to restore and absolve excommunicated bishops claimed hy
the Pope as hia special prerogative, 166 ; of this kind not aUowed
in ancient canons or Synodical decrees, 367 ; aUeged instancea of,
examined, 368; jurisdiction claimed by Pope, 392.
Sovereigns, their power of correcting inferior magistrates, 350.
Sovereignty, no prescribed derivation of, as raight he expected, 154;
claimed hy Pope, 331.
Stephanus, aUeged restoration of BasiUdes, Athanasius, Eustathius, Theo
doret, &c. 370-374.

448 INDEX.
Supremacy, as likely to belong to John as James, 86.
Synods, Ust of, not presided over by Popea, 293—302 ; Provincial, more
ancient than General, 322 ; power of, evidence of subjection of Pope
323 ; have jurisdiction over Popes, 828 ; have assumed to themselves
the constitution and confirmation of bishops, 347 ; anciently censured
bishops, 350 ; restored those aaid to be i-eatored by Popes, 369 ; Popes
could not restore without, 369.
Votes of the plurality of bishops decisive, 322.

Ki. NORMAN, PRINTER, MAIDEN LANE, COVENT OAEDEN.

3 9002 08561 2886